Distinguishing the rates of gene activation from phenotypic variations

BMC Systems Biology

Tiejun Li¹  Fangting Li²  Cheng Lv³  Ye Chen¹ 

[1] LMAM and School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, No. 5 Yiheyuan Road, Beijing 100871, China;Center for Quantitative Biology, Peking University, No. 5 Yiheyuan Road, Beijing 100871, China;School of Physics, Peking University, No. 5 Yiheyuan Road, Beijing 100871, China

关键词: Flow cytometry experiment;    Energy landscape;    Positive feedback;    Gene expression;   

Others  :  1233554
DOI  :  10.1186/s12918-015-0172-0

 received in 2014-12-22, accepted in 2015-05-29,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Stochastic genetic switching driven by intrinsic noise is an important process in gene expression. When the rates of gene activation/inactivation are relatively slow, fast, or medium compared with the synthesis/degradation rates of mRNAs and proteins, the variability of protein and mRNA levels may exhibit very different dynamical patterns. It is desirable to provide a systematic approach to identify their key dynamical features in different regimes, aiming at distinguishing which regime a considered gene regulatory network is in from their phenotypic variations.

Results

We studied a gene expression model with positive feedbacks when genetic switching rates vary over a wide range. With the goal of providing a method to distinguish the regime of the switching rates, we first focus on understanding the essential dynamics of gene expression system in different cases. In the regime of slow switching rates, we found that the effective dynamics can be reduced to independent evolutions on two separate layers corresponding to gene activation and inactivation states, and the transitions between two layers are rare events, after which the system goes mainly along deterministic ODE trajectories on a particular layer to reach new steady states. The energy landscape in this regime can be well approximated by using Gaussian mixture model. In the regime of intermediate switching rates, we analyzed the mean switching time to investigate the stability of the system in different parameter ranges. We also discussed the case of fast switching rates from the viewpoint of transition state theory. Based on the obtained results, we made a proposal to distinguish these three regimes in a simulation experiment. We identified the intermediate regime from the fact that the strength of cellular memory is lower than the other two cases, and the fast and slow regimes can be distinguished by their different perturbation-response behavior with respect to the switching rates perturbations.

Conclusions

We proposed a simulation experiment to distinguish the slow, intermediate and fast regimes, which is the main point of our paper. In order to achieve this goal, we systematically studied the essential dynamics of gene expression system when the switching rates are in different regimes. Our theoretical understanding provides new insights on the gene expression experiments.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Chen et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Figure 7.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Swain PS, Elowitz MB, Siggia ED: Intrinsic and extrinsic contributions to stochasticity in gene expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002, 99:795-12800.
• [2]Eldar A, Elowitz MB: Functional roles for noise in genetic circuits. Nature 2010, 467:167-73.
• [3]Balázsi G, van Oudenaarden A, Collins JJ: Cellular decision making and biological noise: From microbes to mammals. Cell 2011, 144:910-25.
• [4]Kussell E, Leibler S: Phenotypic diversity, population growth, and information in fluctuating environments. Science 2005, 309:2075-8.
• [5]Acar M, Mettetal JT, van Oudenaarden A: Stochastic switching as a survival strategy in fluctuating environments. Nat Genet 2008, 40:471-5.
• [6]Choi PJ, Cai L, Frieda K, Xie XS: A stochastic single-molecule event triggers phenotype switching of a bacterial cell. Science 2008, 322:442-6.
• [7]Norman TM, Lord ND, Paulsson J, Losick R: Memory and modularity in cell-fate decision making. Nature 2013, 503:481-6.
• [8]Maamar H, Raj A, Dubnau D: Noise in gene expression determines cell fate in bacillus subtilis. Science 2007, 317:526-9.
• [9]Gandhi SJ, Zenklusen D, Lionnet T, Singer RH: Transcription of functionally related constitutive genes is not coordinated. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2010, 18:27-34.
• [10]Stewart-Ornstein J, Weissmanemail JS, El-Samademail H: Cellular noise regulons underlie fluctuations in saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell 2012, 45:483-93.
• [11]Raser JM, O’Shea EK: Control of stochasticity in eukaryotic gene expression. Science 2004, 304:1811-4.
• [12]Munsky B, Neuert G, van Oudenaarden A: Using gene expression noise to understand gene regulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2012, 336:183-7.
• [13]Assaf M, Roberts E, Luthey-Schulten Z: Determining the stability of genetic switches: explicitly accounting for mrna noise. Phys Rev Lett 2011, 106:248102.
• [14]Wang J, Zhang K, Wang E: Kinetic paths, time scale, and underlying landscapes: A path integral framework to study global natures of nonequilibrium systems and networks. J Chem Phys 2010, 133:125103.
• [15]Lv C, Li X, Li F, Li T: Constructing the energy landscape for genetic switching system driven by intrinsic noise. PLoS ONE 2014, 9:88167.
• [16]Mariani L, Schulz EG, Lexberg MH, Helmstetter C, Radbruch A, Löhning M, Höfer T: Short-term memory in gene induction reveals the regulatory principle behind stochastic il-4 expression. Mol Syst Biol 2010, 6:359.
• [17]Hao N, Budnik BA, Gunawardena J, O’Shea EK: Tunable signal processing through modular control of transcription factor translocation. Science 2013, 339:460-4.
• [18]de la Serna IL, Ohkawa Y, Imbalzano AN: Noise contributions in an inducible genetic switch: A whole-cell simulation study. Nat Rev Genet 2006, 7:461-73.
• [19]Feng H, Han B, Wang J: Adiabatic and non-adiabatic non-equilibrium stochastic dynamics of single regulating genes. J Phys Chem B 2011, 115:1254-61.
• [20]Ackers GK, Johnson AD, Shea MA: Extinction of metastable stochastic populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1982, 79:1129-33.
• [21]Paulsson J, Berg OG, Ehrenberg M: Stochastic focusing: Fluctuation-enhanced sensitivity of intracellular regulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000, 97:7148-153.
• [22]Bodenstein M: Eine theorie der photochemischen reaktionsgeschwindigkeit. Z Phys Chem 1913, 85:329-97.
• [23]Chapman DL, Underhill LK: The interaction of chlorine and hydrogen. the influence of mass. J Chem Soc Trans 1913, 103:496-508.
• [24]Metzlera R, Wolynes PG: Number fluctuations and the threshold model of kinetic switches. Chem Phys 2002, 284:469-79.
• [25]Sasai M, Wolynes PG: Stochastic gene expression as a many-body problem. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:2374-379.
• [26]Paulsson J: Summing up the noise in gene networks. Nature 2004, 427:415-8.
• [27]Thattai M, van Oudenaarden A: Intrinsic noise in gene regulatory networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001, 98:8614-619.
• [28]Waddington CH, Kacser H: The Strategy of the Genes: A Discussion of Some Aspects of Theoretical Biology. George Allen and Unwin, London; 1957.
• [29]Qian H, Reluga TC: Nonequilibrium thermodynamics and nonlinear kinetics in a cellular signaling switch. Phys Rev Lett 2005, 94:028101.
• [30]Kampen NGV: A power series expansion of the master equation. Can J Phys 1961, 39:551.
• [31]Kampen NGV: The expansion of the master equation. Adv Chem Phys 1976, 34:245.
• [32]Kubo R, Matsuo K, Kitahara K: Fluctuation and relaxation of macrovariables. J Stat Phys 1973, 9:51-96.
• [33]Lv C, Li X, Li F, Li T: Energy landscape reveals that the budding yeast cell cycle is a robust and adaptive multi-stage process. PLoS Comput Biol 2015, 11:1004156.
• [34]Heymann M, Vanden-Eijnden E: The geometric minimum action method: A least action principle on the space of curves. Comm Pure Appl Math 2008, 61:1052-117.
• [35]Assaf M, Meerson B: Extinction of metastable stochastic populations. Phys Rev E 2010, 81:021116.
• [36]Zhang K, Sasai M, Wang J: Eddy current and coupled landscapes for nonadiabatic and nonequilibrium complex system dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013, 110:14930-35.
• [37]Zhang B, Wolynes PG: Stem cell differentiation as a many-body problem. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2014, 111:10185-90.
• [38]Walczak AM, Onuchic JN, Wolynes PG: Absolute rate theories of epigenetic stability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102:18926-31.
• [39]Wang J, Xu L, Wang E: Potential landscapes and flux framework of nonequilibrium networks: robustness, dissipation, and coherence of biochemical oscillations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:12271-76.
• [40]Freidlin MI, Wentzell AD: Random Perturbations of Dynamical Systems. Springer, New York; 1998.
• [41]Ao P: Potential in stochastic differential equations: novel construction. J Phys A: Math Gen 2004, 37:25-30.
• [42]Xu S, Jiao S, Jiang P, Ao P: Two-time-scale population evolution on a singular landscape. Phys Rev E 2014, 89:012724.
• [43]Fritzsch FSO, Dusny C, Frick O, Schmid A: Single-cell analysis in biotechnology, systems biology, and biocatalysis. Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng 2012, 3:129-55.
• [44]Wang D, Bodovitz S: Single cell analysis: the new frontier in ‘omics’. Trends Biotechnol 2010, 28:281-90.
• [45]Han Q, Bagheri N, Bradshaw EM, Hafler DA, Lauffenburger DA, Love JC: Polyfunctional responses by human t cells result from sequential release of cytokines. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2012, 109:1607-12.