Role of DNA binding sites and slow unbinding kinetics in titration-based oscillators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic oscillators, such as circadian clocks, are constantly perturbed by molecular noise arising from the small number of molecules involved in gene regulation. One of the strongest sources of stochasticity is the binary noise that arises from the binding of a regulatory protein to a promoter in the chromosomal DNA. In this study, we focus on two minimal oscillators based on activator titration and repressor titration to understand the key parameters that are important for oscillations and for overcoming binary noise. We show that the rate of unbinding from the DNA, despite traditionally being considered a fast parameter, needs to be slow to broaden the space of oscillatory solutions. The addition of multiple, independent DNA binding sites further expands the oscillatory parameter space for the repressor-titration oscillator and lengthens the period of both oscillators. This effect is a combination of increased effective delay of the unbinding kinetics due to multiple binding sites and increased promoter ultrasensitivity that is specific for repression. We then use stochastic simulation to show that multiple binding sites increase the coherence of oscillations by mitigating the binary noise. Slow values of DNA unbinding rate are also effective in alleviating molecular noise due to the increased distance from the bifurcation point. Our work demonstrates how the number of DNA binding sites and slow unbinding kinetics, which are often omitted in biophysical models of gene circuits, can have a significant impact on the temporal and stochastic dynamics of genetic oscillators.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".