DOCSLIB.ORG

Modularity, Criticality, and Evolvability of a Developmental Gene Regulatory Network

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modularity, Criticality, and Evolvability of a Developmental Gene Regulatory Network This is a repository copy of Modularity, criticality, and evolvability of a developmental gene regulatory network. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/149741/ Version: Published Version Article: Verd, B., Monk, N.A.M. orcid.org/0000-0002-5465-4857 and Jaeger, J. (2019) Modularity, criticality, and evolvability of a developmental gene regulatory network. eLife, 8. e42832. ISSN 2050-084X https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.42832 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. This licence allows you to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the authors for the original work. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ RESEARCH ARTICLE Modularity, criticality, and evolvability of a developmental gene regulatory network Berta Verd1,2,3,4†*, Nicholas AM Monk5, Johannes Jaeger1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9‡* 1EMBL/CRG Systems Biology Research Unit, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain; 2Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain; 3Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research (KLI), Klosterneuburg, Austria; 4Department of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; 5School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United States; 6Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; 7Center for Systems Biology Dresden (CSBD), Dresden, Germany; 8Complexity Science Hub (CSH), Vienna, Austria; 9Centre de Recherches Interdisciplinaires (CRI), Paris, France Abstract The existence of discrete phenotypic traits suggests that the complex regulatory processes which produce them are functionally modular. These processes are usually represented *For correspondence: by networks. Only modular networks can be partitioned into intelligible subcircuits able to evolve [email protected] (BV); relatively independently. Traditionally, functional modularity is approximated by detection of [email protected] (JJ) modularity in network structure. However, the correlation between structure and function is loose. Many regulatory networks exhibit modular behaviour without structural modularity. Here we Present address: †Department partition an experimentally tractable regulatory network—the gap gene system of dipteran of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United insects—using an alternative approach. We show that this system, although not structurally Kingdom; ‡Department of modular, is composed of dynamical modules driving different aspects of whole-network behaviour. Molecular Evolution and All these subcircuits share the same regulatory structure, but differ in components and sensitivity Development, University of to regulatory interactions. Some subcircuits are in a state of criticality, while others are not, which Vienna, Vienna, Austria explains the observed differential evolvability of the various expression features in the system. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.42832.001 Competing interests: The authors declare that no competing interests exist. Funding: See page 22 Introduction Received: 14 January 2019 Systems biology aims to understand the function and evolution of complex regulatory networks. This Accepted: 05 June 2019 requires some sort of hierarchical decomposition of these networks into manageable and intelligible Published: 06 June 2019 subsystems, whose properties and behaviour can be analysed and understood in relative isolation (Simon, 1962; Riedl, 1975; Lewontin, 1978; Bonner, 1988; Raff, 1996; West-Eberhard, 2003; Reviewing editor: Lee Altenberg, The KLI Institute, Schlosser and Wagner, 2004; Callebaut et al., 2005). If each subsystem possesses a clearly delim- United States ited and discernible function, the network can be subdivided into functional modules (Raff, 1996; von Dassow and Munro, 1999; Hartwell et al., 1999; Wagner et al., 2007; Mireles and Conrad, Copyright Verd et al. This 2018). In the Introduction of our paper, we provide a careful argument showing that the most com- article is distributed under the mon approach to identify functional modules has severe limitations, and propose an alternative terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which method, which we then use to dissect and analyse a specific pattern-forming network, the gap gene permits unrestricted use and system of the vinegar fly, Drosophila melanogaster. redistribution provided that the The most common strategy to identify functional modules is to partition the graph representing a original author and source are network into simple motifs (Shen-Orr et al., 2002; Alon, 2007) or subcircuits (also called subnet- credited. works or communities; (Girvan and Newman, 2002; Oliveri and Davidson, 2004; Babu et al., Verd et al. eLife 2019;8:e42832. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.42832 1 of 40 Research article Computational and Systems Biology Developmental Biology 2004; Levine and Davidson, 2005; Newman, 2006; Davidson and Erwin, 2006; Oliveri and Davidson, 2007; Erwin and Davidson, 2009; Davidson, 2010). Network motifs are small subgraphs that are identified through their statistical enrichment (Alon, 2007; Alon, 2006), while subcircuits are characterised by a high connection density among their component nodes contrasting with sparse connections to the outside (Girvan and Newman, 2002; Radicchi et al., 2004; New- man, 2006; Wagner et al., 2007; Fortunato, 2010). In both cases, subsystems are defined in terms of the regulatory structure or network topology: they are structural modules. This approach presup- poses a strong connection between functional and structural modularity (see, for example, Lim et al., 2013). Strictly interpreted, structural modules are mutually exclusive: they are disjoint subgraphs of a complex regulatory network that do not share nodes between each other (Girvan and Newman, 2002; Radicchi et al., 2004; Palla et al., 2005). And yet, such modules can never be fully isolated: their context within the larger network influences behaviour and function. The structural approach therefore relies on the assumption that context-dependence is weak, and structural modularity is generally pronounced enough, to preserve the salient properties and behaviour of a motif or subcir- cuit in its native network context. Structural modularity is widely regarded as a necessary condition for the evolvability of complex networks. ‘Evolvability,’ in the general sense of the term, is defined as the ability to evolve (Daw- kins, 1989; Wagner and Altenberg, 1996; Hendrikse et al., 2007; Pigliucci, 2008). More specifi- cally, evolvability refers to the capacity of an evolving system to generate or facilitate adaptive change (Wagner and Altenberg, 1996; Pigliucci, 2008). Structural modularity can boost this capac- ity in several ways. Entire modules can be co-opted into new pathways during evolution, generating innovative change (Raff, 1996; von Dassow and Munro, 1999; True and Carroll, 2002; Davidson and Erwin, 2006; Erwin and Davidson, 2009; Monteiro and Podlaha, 2009; Wag- ner, 2011). Furthermore, each module can vary relatively independently, and it has been argued that this accounts for the individuality, origin, and homology of morphological characters as well as their trait-specific variational properties (Wagner and Altenberg, 1996; Wagner et al., 2007; Wag- ner, 2014). Finally, structural modularity allows for a fine-tuned response to specific selective pres- sures by minimizing off-target pleiotropic effects (Wagner and Altenberg, 1996; Pavlicev et al., 2008; Wagner and Zhang, 2011). The identification and analysis of structural modules has been very successful in many cases. For example, it has been used to understand the regulatory principles of segment determination in Dro- sophila (von Dassow et al., 2000; Ingolia, 2004), the origin and evolution of butterfly wing spots (Carroll et al., 1994; Brakefield et al., 1996; Keys et al., 1999; Beldade et al., 2002; Monteiro et al., 2003; Monteiro et al., 2006) and beetle horns (Moczek, 2006), and the mecha- nism and evolution of larval skeleton formation in sea urchins and sea stars (Hinman et al., 2003; Hinman and Davidson, 2007; Oliveri et al., 2008; Gao and Davidson, 2008). Other examples abound in the literature (see Raff, 1996; Schlosser and Wagner, 2004; Callebaut et al., 2005; Peter and Davidson, 2015 for comprehensive reviews). In spite of its usefulness, structural modularity has a number of serious limitations. Some model- ling studies suggest that it is not necessary for evolvability (see, for example, Crombach and Hoge- weg, 2008). Furthermore, it is notoriously difficult to identify structural modules and delimit their boundaries with any precision. One reason for this may be that the definition of (sub)system bound- aries is fundamentally context- and problem-dependent (see, for example, Chu et al., 2003; Chu, 2011). More to the point, even the simplest subcircuits tend to exhibit a rich dynamic reper- toire comprising a range of different behaviours depending on context (boundary conditions), quan- titative strength of parameter values (determining genetic interactions as well as production and decay
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Interactions of the Drosophila Gap Gene Giant with Maternal and Zygotic Pattern-Forming Genes
    Development 111, 367-378 (1991) 367 Printed in Great Britain © The Company of Biologists Limited 1991 Interactions of the Drosophila gap gene giant with maternal and zygotic pattern-forming genes ELIZABETH D. ELDON* and VINCENZO PIRROTTA Department of Cell Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Medical Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA 'Present address: Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Institute of Molecular Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Medical Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA Summary The Drosophila gene giant (gt) is a segmentation gene other gap genes. These interactions, typical of the cross- that affects anterior head structures and abdominal regulation previously observed among gap genes, segments A5-A7. Immunolocalization of the gt product confirm that gt is a member of the gap gene class whose shows that it is a nuclear protein whose expression is function is necessary to establish the overall pattern of initially activated in an anterior and a posterior domain. gap gene expression. After cellular blastoderm, gt Activation of the anterior domain is dependent on the protein continues to be expressed in the head region in maternal bicoid gradient while activation of the posterior parts of the maxillary and mandibular segments as well domain requires maternal nanos gene product. Initial as in the labrum. Expression is never detected in the expression is not abolished by mutations in any of the labial or thoracic segment primordia but persists in zygotic gap genes. By cellular blastoderm, the initial certain head structures, including the ring gland, until pattern of expression has evolved into one posterior and the end of embryonic development.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamical Gene Regulatory Networks Are Tuned by Transcriptional Autoregulation with Microrna Feedback Thomas G
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Dynamical gene regulatory networks are tuned by transcriptional autoregulation with microRNA feedback Thomas G. Minchington1, Sam Grifths‑Jones2* & Nancy Papalopulu1* Concepts from dynamical systems theory, including multi‑stability, oscillations, robustness and stochasticity, are critical for understanding gene regulation during cell fate decisions, infammation and stem cell heterogeneity. However, the prevalence of the structures within gene networks that drive these dynamical behaviours, such as autoregulation or feedback by microRNAs, is unknown. We integrate transcription factor binding site (TFBS) and microRNA target data to generate a gene interaction network across 28 human tissues. This network was analysed for motifs capable of driving dynamical gene expression, including oscillations. Identifed autoregulatory motifs involve 56% of transcription factors (TFs) studied. TFs that autoregulate have more interactions with microRNAs than non‑autoregulatory genes and 89% of autoregulatory TFs were found in dual feedback motifs with a microRNA. Both autoregulatory and dual feedback motifs were enriched in the network. TFs that autoregulate were highly conserved between tissues. Dual feedback motifs with microRNAs were also conserved between tissues, but less so, and TFs regulate diferent combinations of microRNAs in a tissue‑dependent manner. The study of these motifs highlights ever more genes that have complex regulatory dynamics. These data provide a resource for the identifcation of TFs which regulate the dynamical properties of human gene expression. Cell fate changes are a key feature of development, regeneration and cancer, and are ofen thought of as a “land- scape” that cells move through1,2. Cell fate changes are driven by changes in gene expression: turning genes on or of, or changing their levels above or below a threshold where a cell fate change occurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Comparison of Sea Urchin and Sea Star Developmental Gene Regulatory Networks Explains How Novelty Is Incorporated in Early Development
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20023-4 OPEN Systematic comparison of sea urchin and sea star developmental gene regulatory networks explains how novelty is incorporated in early development Gregory A. Cary 1,3,5, Brenna S. McCauley1,4,5, Olga Zueva1, Joseph Pattinato1, William Longabaugh2 & ✉ Veronica F. Hinman 1 1234567890():,; The extensive array of morphological diversity among animal taxa represents the product of millions of years of evolution. Morphology is the output of development, therefore phenotypic evolution arises from changes to the topology of the gene regulatory networks (GRNs) that control the highly coordinated process of embryogenesis. A particular challenge in under- standing the origins of animal diversity lies in determining how GRNs incorporate novelty while preserving the overall stability of the network, and hence, embryonic viability. Here we assemble a comprehensive GRN for endomesoderm specification in the sea star from zygote through gastrulation that corresponds to the GRN for sea urchin development of equivalent territories and stages. Comparison of the GRNs identifies how novelty is incorporated in early development. We show how the GRN is resilient to the introduction of a transcription factor, pmar1, the inclusion of which leads to a switch between two stable modes of Delta-Notch signaling. Signaling pathways can function in multiple modes and we propose that GRN changes that lead to switches between modes may be a common evolutionary mechanism for changes in embryogenesis. Our data additionally proposes a model in which evolutionarily conserved network motifs, or kernels, may function throughout development to stabilize these signaling transitions. 1 Department of Biological Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • An Automatic Design Framework of Swarm Pattern Formation Based on Multi-Objective Genetic Programming
    JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, AUGUST 2015 1 An Automatic Design Framework of Swarm Pattern Formation based on Multi-objective Genetic Programming Zhun Fan, Senior Member, IEEE, Zhaojun Wang, Xiaomin Zhu, Bingliang Hu, Anmin Zou, and Dongwei Bao Abstract—Most existing swarm pattern formation methods predetermined trajectory and maintain a specific swarm pattern depend on a predefined gene regulatory network (GRN) structure in the execution of tasks. For example, Jin [11] proposed a that requires designers’ priori knowledge, which is difficult to hierarchical gene regulatory network for adaptive multi-robot adapt to complex and changeable environments. To dynamically adapt to the complex and changeable environments, we propose pattern formation. In this work, the swarm pattern is designed an automatic design framework of swarm pattern formation as a band of circle, which encircles targets in a dynamic based on multi-objective genetic programming. The proposed environments. In the latter case of using adaptive formation, framework does not need to define the structure of the GRN- swarm robots follow an adaptive pattern to encircle targets in based model in advance, and it applies some basic network motifs the environment. For example, Oh et al. [12] have introduced to automatically structure the GRN-based model. In addition, a multi-objective genetic programming (MOGP) combines with an evolving hierarchical gene regulatory network for morpho- NSGA-II, namely MOGP-NSGA-II, to balance the complexity genetic pattern formation in order to generate adaptive patterns and accuracy of the GRN-based model. In evolutionary process, which are adaptable to dynamic environments. an MOGP-NSGA-II and differential evolution (DE) are applied to In addition, swarm pattern formation has been widely ex- optimize the structures and parameters of the GRN-based model plored in recent years, which can be divided into four cate- in parallel.
    [Show full text]
  • Temporal Flexibility of Gene Regulatory Network Underlies a Novel Wing Pattern in Flies
    Temporal flexibility of gene regulatory network underlies a novel wing pattern in flies Héloïse D. Dufoura,b, Shigeyuki Koshikawa (越川滋行)a,b,1,2,3, and Cédric Fineta,b,3,4 aHoward Hughes Medical Institute, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706; and bLaboratory of Molecular Biology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706 Edited by Denis Duboule, University of Geneva, Geneva 4, Switzerland, and approved April 6, 2020 (received for review February 3, 2020) Organisms have evolved endless morphological, physiological, and Nevertheless, it does not explain how the new expression of behavioral novel traits during the course of evolution. Novel traits the coopted toolkit genes does not interfere with the develop- were proposed to evolve mainly by orchestration of preexisting ment of the tissue. Some authors have suggested that the reuse genes. Over the past two decades, biologists have shown that of toolkit genes might only happen during late development after cooption of gene regulatory networks (GRNs) indeed underlies completion of the early function of the redeployed genes (21, 22, numerous evolutionary novelties. However, very little is known 29). However, little is known about the properties of a GRN that about the actual GRN properties that allow such redeployment. allow the cooption of one or several of its components/genes Here we have investigated the generation and evolution of the without impairing the development of the tissue. complex wing pattern of the fly Samoaia leonensis. We show that In this study, we use the complex wing pigmentation pattern of the transcription factor Engrailed is recruited independently from the fly species Samoaia leonensis as a model to address how the the other players of the anterior–posterior specification network to generate a new wing pattern.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Regulatory Networks
    Gene Regulatory Networks 02-710 Computaonal Genomics Seyoung Kim Transcrip6on Factor Binding Transcrip6on Control • Gene transcrip.on is influenced by – Transcrip.on factor binding affinity for the regulatory regions of target genes – Transcrip.on factor concentraon – Nucleosome posi.oning and chroman states – Enhancer ac.vity Gene Transcrip6onal Regulatory Network • The expression of a gene is controlled by cis and trans regulatory elements – Cis regulatory elements: DNA sequences in the regulatory region of the gene (e.g., TF binding sites) – Trans regulatory elements: RNAs and proteins that interact with the cis regulatory elements Gene Transcrip6onal Regulatory Network • Consider the following regulatory relaonships: Target gene1 Target TF gene2 Target gene3 Cis/Trans Regulatory Elements Binding site: cis Target TF regulatory element TF binding affinity gene1 can influence the TF target gene Target gene2 expression Target TF gene3 TF: trans regulatory element TF concentra6on TF can influence the target gene TF expression Gene Transcrip6onal Regulatory Network • Cis and trans regulatory elements form a complex transcrip.onal regulatory network – Each trans regulatory element (proteins/RNAs) can regulate mul.ple target genes – Cis regulatory modules (CRMs) • Mul.ple different regulators need to be recruited to ini.ate the transcrip.on of a gene • The DNA binding sites of those regulators are clustered in the regulatory region of a gene and form a CRM How Can We Learn Transcriponal Networks? • Leverage allele specific expressions – In diploid organisms, the transcript levels from the two copies of the genes may be different – RNA-seq can capture allele- specific transcript levels How Can We Learn Transcriponal Networks? • Leverage allele specific gene expressions – Teasing out cis/trans regulatory divergence between two species (WiZkopp et al.
    [Show full text]
  • A Computational Model Inspired by Gene Regulatory Networks
    Rui Miguel Lourenço Lopes A Computational Model Inspired by Gene Regulatory Networks Doctoral thesis submitted to the Doctoral Program in Information Science and Technology, supervised by Full Professor Doutor Ernesto Jorge Fernandes Costa, and presented to the Department of Informatics Engineering of the Faculty of Sciences and Technology of the University of Coimbra. January 2015 A Computational Model Inspired by Gene Regulatory Networks A thesis submitted to the University of Coimbra in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctoral Program in Information Science and Technology by Rui Miguel Lourenço Lopes [email protected] Department of Informatics Engineering Faculty of Sciences and Technology University of Coimbra Coimbra, January 2015 Financial support by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, through the PhD grant SFRH/BD/69106/2010. A Computational Model Inspired by Gene Regulatory Networks ©2015 Rui L. Lopes ISBN 978-989-20-5460-5 Cover image: Composition of a Santa Fe trail program evolved by ReNCoDe overlaid on the ancestors, with a 3D model of the DNA crystal structure (by Paul Hakimata). This dissertation was prepared under the supervision of Ernesto J. F. Costa Full Professor of the Department of Informatics Engineering of the Faculty of Sciences and Tecnology of the University of Coimbra In loving memory of my father. Acknowledgements Thank you very much to Prof. Ernesto Costa, for his vision on research and education, for all the support and contributions to my ideas, and for the many life stories that always lighten the mood. Thank you also to Nuno Lourenço for the many discussions, shared books, and his constant helpfulness.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction Using Bayesian
    1 Gene regulatory network reconstruction using Bayesian networks, the Dantzig selector, the Lasso and their meta-analysis Matthieu Vignes1∗, Jimmy Vandel1, David Allouche1, Nidal Ramadan-Alban1, Christine Cierco-Ayrolles1, Thomas Schiex1, Brigitte Mangin1, Simon de Givry1 1 SaAB Team/BIA Unit, INRA Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan, France ∗ E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Modern technologies and especially next generation sequencing facilities are giving a cheaper access to genotype and genomic data measured on the same sample at once. This creates an ideal situation for multifactorial experiments designed to infer gene regulatory networks. The fifth \Dialogue for Reverse Engineering Assessments and Methods" (DREAM5) challenges are aimed at assessing methods and as- sociated algorithms devoted to the inference of biological networks. Challenge 3 on \Systems Genetics" proposed to infer causal gene regulatory networks from different genetical genomics data sets. We in- vestigated a wide panel of methods ranging from Bayesian networks to penalised linear regressions to analyse such data, and proposed a simple yet very powerful meta-analysis, which combines these inference methods. We present results of the Challenge as well as more in-depth analysis of predicted networks in terms of structure and reliability. The developed meta-analysis was ranked first among the 16 teams participating in Challenge 3A. It paves the way for future extensions of our inference method and more accurate gene network estimates in the context of genetical genomics. Introduction Inferring gene regulatory networks. Gene regulatory networks (GRN) are simplified representa- tions of mechanisms that make up the functioning of an organism under given conditions. A node in such a network stands for a gene i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Drosophila: the Genetics of Segmentation (WR Lecture 2)
    Drosophila: the genetics of segmentation (WR lecture 2) In the previous lecture we covered the Drosophila life cycle from developing oocyte to the newly-cellularized blastoderm. At this stage (left), the embryo is shaped like a slightly bent rugby ball with about 6000 cells distributed around the surface. There are very few recognizable surface or internal features, but the future body plan is already mapped out through the expression of a set of genes known as the segmentation genes. This expression pattern - which defines a series of 15 stripes around the embryo - is a "molecular blueprint" that specifies the larval and adult segments. In this lecture we learn about the molecular events that subdivide the embryo into stripes (known as parasegments in the embryo). The key players in this process were identified during a genetic screen that was carried out by Christiane Nusslein-Volhart, Eric Wieschaus and their collaborators. Their groundbreaking effort was rewarded in 1995 by the award of the Nobel prize in Physiology and Medicine, which they shared with Ed Lewis for his work on homeotic mutants (next lecture). All animals, whether flies or humans, are constructed according to a fundamental repeated pattern so this work in Drosophila lays the foundation for understanding development of all animals. 1. Three sets of maternal effect genes define the anterior-posterior axis. These are the anterior group, the posterior group and the terminal group genes (the latter determine structures at the extreme front and back ends of the fly - the telson at the back and the acron at the front). The main player in the anterior group is bicoid, mRNA for which is localized at the anterior end of the oocyte and is translated into protein (a homeodomain transcription factor) that diffuses posteriorly to set up an anterior-posterior (high-low) concentration gradient.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Non-Genetic' Inheritance: Insights from Molecular-Evolutionary Crosstalk
    Adrian-Kalchhauser et al / Understanding NGI: Insights from Molecular-Evolutionary Crosstalk / EcoEvoRxiv 20200501 Understanding 'Non-genetic' Inheritance: Insights from Molecular-Evolutionary Crosstalk Irene Adrian-Kalchhauser1, Sonia E. Sultan2, Lisa Shama3, Helen Spence-Jones4, Stefano Tiso5, Claudia Isabelle Keller Valsecchi6, Franz J. Weissing5 Addresses 1Centre for Fish and Wildlife Health, Department for Infectious Diseases and Pathobiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, Länggassstrasse 122, 3012 Bern, Switzerland 2Biology Department, Wesleyan University, Middletown CT 06459 USA 3Coastal Ecology Section, Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Wadden Sea Station Sylt, Hafenstrasse 43, 25992 List, Germany 4Centre for Biological Diversity, School of Biology, University of St Andrews, UK 5Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 7, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands 6Institute of Molecular Biology (IMB), Ackermannweg 4, 55128 Mainz, Germany Corresponding author: Adrian-Kalchhauser, I. ([email protected]) Keywords epigenetics, epiallelic variation, methylation, transgenerational effects, inherited gene regulation, gene regulatory network model Abstract Understanding the evolutionary and ecological roles of 'non-genetic' inheritance is daunting due to the complexity and diversity of epigenetic mechanisms. We draw on precise insights from molecular structures and events to identify three general features of 'non-genetic' inheritance systems that are central to broader investigations: (i) they are functionally interdependent with, rather than separate from, DNA sequence; (ii) each of these mechanisms is not uniform but instead varies phylogenetically and operationally; and (iii) epigenetic elements are probabilistic, interactive regulatory factors and not deterministic 'epi-alleles' with defined genomic locations and effects. We explain each feature and offer research recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Algorithmic Information Theory Applications in Bright Field Microscopy and Epithelial Pattern Formation
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2015 Algorithmic Information Theory Applications in Bright Field Microscopy and Epithelial Pattern Formation Hamid Mohamadlou Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Computer Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Mohamadlou, Hamid, "Algorithmic Information Theory Applications in Bright Field Microscopy and Epithelial Pattern Formation" (2015). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 4539. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4539 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ALGORITHMIC INFORMATION THEORY APPLICATIONS IN BRIGHT FIELD MICROSCOPY AND EPITHELIAL PATTERN FORMATION by Hamid Mohamadlou A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Computer Science Approved: Dr. Nicholas Flann Dr. Gregory Podgorski Major Professor Committee Member Dr. Xiaojun Qi Dr. Minghui Jiang Committee Member Committee Member Dr. Haitao Wang Dr. Mark R. McLellan Committee Member Vice President for Research and Dean of the School of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2015 ii Copyright c Hamid Mohamadlou 2015 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Algorithmic Information Theory applications in Bright Field Microscopy and Epithelial Pattern Formation by Hamid Mohamadlou, Doctor of Philosophy Utah State University, 2015 Major Professor: Dr. Nicholas Flann Department: Computer Science Algorithmic Information Theory (AIT), also known as Kolmogorov complexity, is a quantitative approach to defining information.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Representation of Developmental Genetic Regulatory Networks
    Developmental Biology 283 (2005) 1 – 16 www.elsevier.com/locate/ydbio Review Computational representation of developmental genetic regulatory networks William J.R. Longabaugha, Eric H. Davidsonb,1, Hamid Bolouria,b,* aInstitute for Systems Biology, Seattle, WA 98103-8904, USA bDivision of Biology, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA Received for publication 12 February 2005, revised 30 March 2005, accepted 16 April 2005 Available online 23 May 2005 Abstract Developmental genetic regulatory networks (GRNs) have unique architectural characteristics. They are typically large-scale, multi- layered, and organized in a nested, modular hierarchy of regulatory network kernels, function-specific building blocks, and structural gene batteries. They are also inherently multicellular and involve changing topological relationships among a growing number of cells. Reconstruction of developmental GRNs requires unique computational tools that support the above representational requirements. In addition, we argue that DNA-centered network modeling, separate descriptions of network organization and network behavior, and support for network documentation and annotation are essential requirements for computational modeling of developmental GRNs. Based on these observations, we have developed a freely available, platform-independent, open source software package (BioTapestry) which supports both the process of model construction and also model visualization, analysis, documentation, and dissemination. We provide an overview of the main features of BioTapestry. The BioTapestry software and additional documents are available from http://www.biotapestry.org.We recommend BioTapestry as the substrate for further co-development for and by the developmental biology community. D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Genetic regulatory networks; Computational modeling; Visualization; Documentation Introduction can be fully and unambiguously verified by well-established experimental procedures.
    [Show full text]