Nonlinearity, fluctuations, and response in sensory systems

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 108, Issue 25, 2012, Pages

  Celani, Antonio ^a   Vergassola, Massimo ^a  

^a INSTITUT PASTEUR   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALLOSTERIC MODEL; BACTERIAL CHEMOTAXIS; BIOLOGICAL SENSING; COMBINED EFFECT; CORRELATION TIME; ENVIRONMENTAL STIMULI; FLUCTUATION RELATIONS; NON-LINEAR RESPONSE; NON-LINEARITY; NONEXPONENTIAL DECAYS; RELIABLE MODELS; SENSING UNIT; SENSORY SYSTEM; SIGNALING UNITS; STEADY STATE PROBABILITIES; TIME-SCALES; WHOLE CELL;

BIOCHEMISTRY; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS;

EXPERIMENTS;

EID: 84862508198     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: 10797114     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.258102     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. B. Alberts, Molecular Biology of the Cell (Garland Science, New York, 2007), 5th ed..
2. H.C. Berg, E. coli in Motion (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003).
3. D. Greenfield, A.L. McEvoy, H. Shroff, G.E. Crooks, N.S. Wingreen, E. Betzig, and J. Liphardt, PLoS Biol. PBLIBG 1544-9173 7, e1000137 (2009). 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000137
4. D. Bray, and T.A.J. Duke, Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 33, 53 (2004). ABBSE4 1056-8700 10.1146/annurev.biophys.33.110502.132703 (Pubitemid 38829951)
5. D. Bray, M. Levin, and C. Morton-Firth, Nature (London) 393, 85 (1998). NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/30018 (Pubitemid 28240260)
6. P. Cluzel, M.G. Surette, and S. Leibler, Science 287, 1652 (2000). SCIEAS 0036-8075 10.1126/science.287.5458.1652 (Pubitemid 30127766)
7. J.E. Segall, S.M. Block, and H.C. Berg, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 83, 8987 (1986). PNASA6 0027-8424 10.1073/pnas.83.23.8987
8. J.B. Masson, G. Voisinne, J. Wong-Ng, A. Celani, and M. Vergassola, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 1802 (2012). PNASA6 0027-8424 10.1073/pnas. 1116772109
9. H. Park, W. Pontius, C.C. Guet, J.F. Marko, T. Emonet, and P. Cluzel, Nature (London) 468, 819 (2010). NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature09551
10. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.108.258102 for examples and detailed derivations.
11. B.A. Mello and Y. Tu, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102, 17354 (2005). PNASA6 0027-8424 10.1073/pnas.0506961102 (Pubitemid 41740870)
12. J.E. Keymer, R.G. Endres, M. Skoge, Y. Meir, and N.S. Wingreen, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 1786 (2006). PNASA6 0027-8424 10.1073/pnas. 0507438103 (Pubitemid 43228771)
13. N. Vladimirov, L. Løvdok, D. Lebiedz, and V. Sourjik, PLoS Comput. Biol. 4, e1000242 (2008). PCBLBG 1553-7358 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000242
14. T.S. Shimizu, Y. Tu, and H.C. Berg, Mol. Syst. Biol. 6, 382 (2010). MSBOC3 1744-4292 10.1038/msb.2010.37
15. D.T. Gillespie, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 58, 35 (2007). ARPLAP 0066-426X 10.1146/annurev.physchem.58.032806.104637 (Pubitemid 46877584)
16. G. Aquino, D. Clausznitzer, S. Tollis, and R.G. Endres, Phys. Rev. E 83, 021914 (2011). PRESCM 1539-3755 10.1103/PhysRevE.83.021914
17. N. Wax, Selected Papers on Noise and Stochastic Processes (Dover, New York, 1954), pp. 319-337.
18. R. Chetrite, and S. Gupta, J. Stat. Phys. 143, 543 (2011). JSTPSB 0022-4715 10.1007/s10955-011-0184-0
19. The predicted level of fluctuations at the single receptor level is ∼ 0.2. This implies for the single cell fluctuations around N c - 1 / 2 1 %. FRET data from Ref. show a fluctuation level of 10% and hundreds of cells are considered. To elucidate the origin of this discrepancy we analyzed unpublished data and found that fluctuations are mainly due to shot noise and not to internal noise. This is evident from the delta-like peak observed in the activity autocorrelation at zero delay. Single-cell experiments [Y. Tu, and G. Grinstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 208101 (2005)] show a fluctuation level in the motor response of the order of 10%, which is consistent with the previous 1% due to the tenfold amplification of the motor response. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.208101
20. T.S. Shimizu (unpublished).