4.8 Article

Iterative experiment design guides the characterization of a light-inducible gene expression circuit

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1423947112

关键词

stochastic kinetic models; optimal experiment design; in vivo control; parameter inference; light-induced gene expression

资金

  1. European Commission under the Network of Excellence HYCON2 (highly-complex and networked control systems)
  2. SystemsX.ch under the SignalX Project
  3. People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7 under REA (Research Executive Agency) [291734]
  4. Human Frontier Science Program Grant [RP0061/2011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Systems biology rests on the idea that biological complexity can be better unraveled through the interplay of modeling and experimentation. However, the success of this approach depends critically on the informativeness of the chosen experiments, which is usually unknown a priori. Here, we propose a systematic scheme based on iterations of optimal experiment design, flow cytometry experiments, and Bayesian parameter inference to guide the discovery process in the case of stochastic biochemical reaction networks. To illustrate the benefit of our methodology, we apply it to the characterization of an engineered light-inducible gene expression circuit in yeast and compare the performance of the resulting model with models identified from nonoptimal experiments. In particular, we compare the parameter posterior distributions and the precision to which the outcome of future experiments can be predicted. Moreover, we illustrate how the identified stochastic model can be used to determine light induction patterns that make either the average amount of protein or the variability in a population of cells follow a desired profile. Our results show that optimal experiment design allows one to derive models that are accurate enough to precisely predict and regulate the protein expression in heterogeneous cell populations over extended periods of time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据