4.6 Article

Enzyme Sequestration as a Tuning Point in Controlling Response Dynamics of Signalling Networks

期刊

PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004918

关键词

-

资金

  1. School of Life Sciences, University of Warwick
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) [EP/H04986X/1]
  3. EPSRC [EP/H04986X/1, EP/I017445/1, EP/I017445/2] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/I017445/1, EP/H04986X/1, EP/I017445/2] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Signalling networks result from combinatorial interactions among many enzymes and scaffolding proteins. These complex systems generate response dynamics that are often essential for correct decision-making in cells. Uncovering biochemical design principles that underpin such response dynamics is a prerequisite to understand evolved signalling networks and to design synthetic ones. Here, we use in silico evolution to explore the possible biochemical design space for signalling networks displaying ultrasensitive and adaptive response dynamics. By running evolutionary simulations mimicking different biochemical scenarios, we find that enzyme sequestration emerges as a key mechanism for enabling such dynamics. Inspired by these findings, and to test the role of sequestration, we design a generic, minimalist model of a signalling cycle, featuring two enzymes and a single scaffolding protein. We show that this simple system is capable of displaying both ultrasensitive and adaptive response dynamics. Furthermore, we find that tuning the concentration or kinetics of the sequestering protein can shift system dynamics between these two response types. These empirical results suggest that enzyme sequestration through scaffolding proteins is exploited by evolution to generate diverse response dynamics in signalling networks and could provide an engineering point in synthetic biology applications.

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

4.6
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