Logarithmic and Power Law Input-Output Relations in Sensory Systems with Fold-Change Detection

PLoS Computational Biology

Volumn 10, Issue 8, 2014, Pages

  Adler, Miri ^a   Mayo, Avi ^a   Alon, Uri ^a  

^a WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOCHEMISTRY; PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS;

CHANGE DETECTION; INPUT AND OUTPUTS; INPUT-OUTPUT RELATIONS; LOGARITHMIC LAW; LOGARITHMIC RELATIONSHIP; POWER-LAW; POWER-LAW RELATIONSHIP; PROPERTY; SENSORY SYSTEM; WEBER-FECHNER LAWS;

AUDITION;

BIOLOGY; CHEMOTAXIS; EUKARYOTE; HEARING; HILL COEFFICIENT; HUMAN; SENSORY SYSTEM; STIMULUS; VISION; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; PHYSIOLOGY; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

ANIMALS; CHEMOTAXIS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EUKARYOTA; FEEDBACK, PHYSIOLOGICAL; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 84927974251     PISSN: 1553734X     EISSN: 15537358     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003781     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Ernst Heinrich Weber (1905) Tatsinn and Gemeingefuhl. Verl Von Wilhelm Englemann Leipz Ger
2. Stanley Smith Stevens (1957) On the psychophysical law. Psychol Rev 64: 153–181.
3. Thoss F, (1986) Visual threshold estimation and its relation to the question: Fechner-law or Stevens-power function. ACTA NEUROBIOL EXP 46: 303–310.
4. Krueger LE, (1989) Reconciling Fechner and Stevens: Toward a unified psychophysical law. Behav Brain Sci 12: 251–320.
5. Nizami L, (2009) A Computational Test of the Information-Theory BasedEntropy Theory of Perception: Does It Actually Generate the Stevens and Weber-Fechner Laws of Sensation? Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering Vol. 2. Available: http://iaeng.org/publication/WCE2009/WCE2009_pp1853-1858.pdf. Accessed 16 October 2013.
6. Chater N, Brown GD, (1999) Scale-invariance as a unifying psychological principle. Cognition 69: B17–B24.
7. Copelli M, Roque AC, Oliveira RF, Kinouchi O, (2002) Physics of psychophysics: Stevens and Weber-Fechner laws are transfer functions of excitable media. Phys Rev E 65: 060901 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.060901
8. Billock VA, Tsou BH, (2011) To honor Fechner and obey Stevens: Relationships between psychophysical and neural nonlinearities. Psychol Bull 137: 1.
9. Tzur G, Berger A, Luria R, Posner MI, (2010) Theta synchrony supports Weber–Fechner and Stevens' Laws for error processing, uniting high and low mental processes. Psychophysiology 47: 758–766 doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.00967.x
10. Goentoro L, Shoval O, Kirschner MW, Alon U, (2009) The incoherent feedforward loop can provide fold-change detection in gene regulation. Mol Cell 36: 894–899.
11. Shoval O, Goentoro L, Hart Y, Mayo A, Sontag E, et al. (2010) Fold-change detection and scalar symmetry of sensory input fields. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107: 15995–16000.
12. Lazova MD, Ahmed T, Bellomo D, Stocker R, Shimizu TS, (2011) Response rescaling in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108: 13870–13875.
13. Masson J-B, Voisinne G, Wong-Ng J, Celani A, Vergassola M, (2012) Noninvasive inference of the molecular chemotactic response using bacterial trajectories. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109: 1802–1807.
14. Cohen-Saidon C, Cohen AA, Sigal A, Liron Y, Alon U, (2009) Dynamics and variability of ERK2 response to EGF in individual living cells. Mol Cell 36: 885–893.
15. Goentoro L, Kirschner MW, (2009) Evidence that fold-change, and not absolute level, of β-catenin dictates Wnt signaling. Mol Cell 36: 872–884.
16. Skataric M, Sontag E (2012) Exploring the scale invariance property in enzymatic networks. Decision and Control (CDC), 2012 IEEE 51st Annual Conference on. pp. 5511–5516. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6426990. Accessed 16 October 2013.
17. Takeda K, Shao D, Adler M, Charest PG, Loomis WF, et al. (2012) Incoherent feedforward control governs adaptation of activated Ras in a eukaryotic chemotaxis pathway. Sci Signal 5: ra2.
18. Hart Y, Mayo AE, Shoval O, Alon U, (2013) Comparing Apples and Oranges: Fold-Change Detection of Multiple Simultaneous Inputs. PloS One 8: e57455.
19. Mangan S, Alon U, (2003) Structure and function of the feed-forward loop network motif. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100: 11980–11985.
20. Wang P, Lü J, Ogorzalek MJ, (2012) Global relative parameter sensitivities of the feed-forward loops in genetic networks. Neurocomputing 78: 155–165.
21. Widder S, Solé R, Macía J, (2012) Evolvability of feed-forward loop architecture biases its abundance in transcription networks. BMC Syst Biol 6: 7.
22. Levchenko A, Iglesias PA, (2002) Models of Eukaryotic Gradient Sensing: Application to Chemotaxis of Amoebae and Neutrophils. Biophys J 82: 50–63 doi:10.1016/S0006-3495(02)75373-3
23. Alon U (2007) An Introduction to Systems Biology: Design Principles of Biological Circuits (Mathematical and Computational Biology Series vol 10). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall. Available: http://www.lavoisier.fr/livre/notice.asp?ouvrage=1842587. Accessed 9 April 2013.
24. Kaplan S, Bren A, Zaslaver A, Dekel E, Alon U, (2008) Diverse two-dimensional input functions control bacterial sugar genes. Mol Cell 29: 786–792 doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2008.01.021
25. Alon U, Surette MG, Barkai N, Leibler S, (1999) Robustness in bacterial chemotaxis. Nature 397: 168–171 doi:10.1038/16483
26. Barkai N, Leibler S, (1997) Robustness in simple biochemical networks. Nature 387: 913–917 doi:10.1038/43199
27. Hironaka K, Morishita Y, (2014) Cellular Sensory Mechanisms for Detecting Specific Fold-Changes in Extracellular Cues. Biophys J 106: 279–288 doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2013.10.039
28. Tu Y, Shimizu TS, Berg HC, (2008) Modeling the chemotactic response of Escherichia coli to time-varying stimuli. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105: 14855–14860 doi:10.1073/pnas.0807569105
29. Tu Y, (2013) Quantitative modeling of bacterial chemotaxis: Signal amplification and accurate adaptation. Annu Rev Biophys 42: 337–359 doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-083012-130358
30. Keller EF, Segel LA, (1971) Model for chemotaxis. J Theor Biol 30: 225–234.
31. Stryer L (1999) Biochemistry. W.H. Freeman. 1064 p.
32. Whitford D (2005) Proteins: structure and function. John Wiley & Sons. Available: http://www.google.com/books?hl=iw&lr=&id=qbHLkxbXY4YC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Whitford,+David:+Proteins:+structure+and+function,+2005,+John+Wiley+%26+Sons&ots=c4FElgKd5u&sig=aWYtFIGAp5WW9jzBIfMBfcTOhs8. Accessed 15 June 2014.
33. Wartlick O, Mumcu P, Kicheva A, Bittig T, Seum C, et al. (2011) Dynamics of Dpp signaling and proliferation control. Science 331: 1154–1159.
34. Wartlick O, Gonzalez-Gaitan M, (2011) The missing link: implementation of morphogenetic growth control on the cellular and molecular level. Curr Opin Genet Dev 21: 690–695.
35. Wartlick O, Mumcu P, Jülicher F, Gonzalez-Gaitan M, (2011) Understanding morphogenetic growth control—lessons from flies. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 12: 594–604.
36. Segel LA, (1988) On the validity of the steady state assumption of enzyme kinetics. Bull Math Biol 50: 579–593.
37. Glover DM, Jenkins WJ, Doney SC (2011) Least squares and regression techniques, goodness of fit and tests, and nonlinear least squares techniques. Modeling Methods for Marine Science. Cambridge University Press. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975721.004.