Cargando…

Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks

BACKGROUND: A gene-regulatory network (GRN) refers to DNA segments that interact through their RNA and protein products and thereby govern the rates at which genes are transcribed. Creating accurate dynamic models of GRNs is gaining importance in biomedical research and development. To improve our u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Swain, Martin T, Mandel, Johannes J, Dubitzky, Werner
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2949891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840745
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-459
_version_ 1782187605096398848
author Swain, Martin T
Mandel, Johannes J
Dubitzky, Werner
author_facet Swain, Martin T
Mandel, Johannes J
Dubitzky, Werner
author_sort Swain, Martin T
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A gene-regulatory network (GRN) refers to DNA segments that interact through their RNA and protein products and thereby govern the rates at which genes are transcribed. Creating accurate dynamic models of GRNs is gaining importance in biomedical research and development. To improve our understanding of continuous deterministic modeling methods employed to construct dynamic GRN models, we have carried out a comprehensive comparative study of three commonly used systems of ordinary differential equations: The S-system (SS), artificial neural networks (ANNs), and the general rate law of transcription (GRLOT) method. These were thoroughly evaluated in terms of their ability to replicate the reference models' regulatory structure and dynamic gene expression behavior under varying conditions. RESULTS: While the ANN and GRLOT methods appeared to produce robust models even when the model parameters deviated considerably from those of the reference models, SS-based models exhibited a notable loss of performance even when the parameters of the reverse-engineered models corresponded closely to those of the reference models: this is due to the high number of power terms in the SS-method, and the manner in which they are combined. In cross-method reverse-engineering experiments the different characteristics, biases and idiosynchracies of the methods were revealed. Based on limited training data, with only one experimental condition, all methods produced dynamic models that were able to reproduce the training data accurately. However, an accurate reproduction of regulatory network features was only possible with training data originating from multiple experiments under varying conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The studied GRN modeling methods produced dynamic GRN models exhibiting marked differences in their ability to replicate the reference models' structure and behavior. Our results suggest that care should be taking when a method is chosen for a particular application. In particular, reliance on only a single method might unduly bias the results.
format Text
id pubmed-2949891
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29498912010-11-03 Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks Swain, Martin T Mandel, Johannes J Dubitzky, Werner BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: A gene-regulatory network (GRN) refers to DNA segments that interact through their RNA and protein products and thereby govern the rates at which genes are transcribed. Creating accurate dynamic models of GRNs is gaining importance in biomedical research and development. To improve our understanding of continuous deterministic modeling methods employed to construct dynamic GRN models, we have carried out a comprehensive comparative study of three commonly used systems of ordinary differential equations: The S-system (SS), artificial neural networks (ANNs), and the general rate law of transcription (GRLOT) method. These were thoroughly evaluated in terms of their ability to replicate the reference models' regulatory structure and dynamic gene expression behavior under varying conditions. RESULTS: While the ANN and GRLOT methods appeared to produce robust models even when the model parameters deviated considerably from those of the reference models, SS-based models exhibited a notable loss of performance even when the parameters of the reverse-engineered models corresponded closely to those of the reference models: this is due to the high number of power terms in the SS-method, and the manner in which they are combined. In cross-method reverse-engineering experiments the different characteristics, biases and idiosynchracies of the methods were revealed. Based on limited training data, with only one experimental condition, all methods produced dynamic models that were able to reproduce the training data accurately. However, an accurate reproduction of regulatory network features was only possible with training data originating from multiple experiments under varying conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The studied GRN modeling methods produced dynamic GRN models exhibiting marked differences in their ability to replicate the reference models' structure and behavior. Our results suggest that care should be taking when a method is chosen for a particular application. In particular, reliance on only a single method might unduly bias the results. BioMed Central 2010-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC2949891/ /pubmed/20840745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-459 Text en Copyright ©2010 Swain et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Swain, Martin T
Mandel, Johannes J
Dubitzky, Werner
Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
title Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
title_full Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
title_fullStr Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
title_short Comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
title_sort comparative study of three commonly used continuous deterministic methods for modeling gene regulation networks
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2949891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840745
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-459
work_keys_str_mv AT swainmartint comparativestudyofthreecommonlyusedcontinuousdeterministicmethodsformodelinggeneregulationnetworks
AT mandeljohannesj comparativestudyofthreecommonlyusedcontinuousdeterministicmethodsformodelinggeneregulationnetworks
AT dubitzkywerner comparativestudyofthreecommonlyusedcontinuousdeterministicmethodsformodelinggeneregulationnetworks