Dataset Information

Dynamics of protein noise can distinguish between alternate sources of gene-expression variability.

ABSTRACT: Within individual cells, two molecular processes have been implicated as sources of noise in gene expression: (i) Poisson fluctuations in mRNA abundance arising from random birth and death of individual mRNA transcripts or (ii) promoter fluctuations arising from stochastic promoter transitions between different transcriptional states. Steady-state measurements of variance in protein levels are insufficient to discriminate between these two mechanisms, and mRNA single-molecule fluorescence in situ hybridization (smFISH) is challenging when cellular mRNA concentrations are high. Here, we present a perturbation method that discriminates mRNA birth/death fluctuations from promoter fluctuations by measuring transient changes in protein variance and that can operate in the regime of high molecular numbers. Conceptually, the method exploits the fact that transcriptional blockage results in more rapid increases in protein variability when mRNA birth/death fluctuations dominate over promoter fluctuations. We experimentally demonstrate the utility of this perturbation approach in the HIV-1 model system. Our results support promoter fluctuations as the primary noise source in HIV-1 expression. This study illustrates a relatively simple method that complements mRNA smFISH hybridization and can be used with existing GFP-tagged libraries to include or exclude alternate sources of noise in gene expression.

SUBMITTER: Singh A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3435505 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dynamics of protein noise can distinguish between alternate sources of gene-expression variability.

Singh Abhyudai A Razooky Brandon S BS Dar Roy D RD Weinberger Leor S LS

Molecular systems biology 20120101

Within individual cells, two molecular processes have been implicated as sources of noise in gene expression: (i) Poisson fluctuations in mRNA abundance arising from random birth and death of individual mRNA transcripts or (ii) promoter fluctuations arising from stochastic promoter transitions between different transcriptional states. Steady-state measurements of variance in protein levels are insufficient to discriminate between these two mechanisms, and mRNA single-molecule fluorescence in sit ...[more]

PMID: 22929617

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSystematic processing noise, which includes batch effects, is very common in microarray experiments but is often ignored despite its potential to confound or compromise experimental results. Compromised results are most likely when re-analysing or integrating datasets from public repositories due to the different conditions under which each dataset is generated. To better understand the relative noise-contributions of various factors in experimental-design, we assessed several Illumina and Affymetrix datasets for technical variation between replicate hybridisations of Universal Human Reference (UHRR) and individual or pooled breast-tumour RNA.ResultsA varying degree of systematic noise was observed in each of the datasets, however in all cases the relative amount of variation between standard control RNA replicates was found to be greatest at earlier points in the sample-preparation workflow. For example, 40.6% of the total variation in reported expressions were attributed to replicate extractions, compared to 13.9% due to amplification/labelling and 10.8% between replicate hybridisations. Deliberate probe-wise batch-correction methods were effective in reducing the magnitude of this variation, although the level of improvement was dependent on the sources of noise included in the model. Systematic noise introduced at the chip, run, and experiment levels of a combined Illumina dataset were found to be highly dependent upon the experimental design. Both UHRR and pools of RNA, which were derived from the samples of interest, modelled technical variation well although the pools were significantly better correlated (4% average improvement) and better emulated the effects of systematic noise, over all probes, than the UHRRs. The effect of this noise was not uniform over all probes, with low GC-content probes found to be more vulnerable to batch variation than probes with a higher GC-content.ConclusionsThe magnitude of systematic processing noise in a microarray experiment is variable across probes and experiments, however it is generally the case that procedures earlier in the sample-preparation workflow are liable to introduce the most noise. Careful experimental design is important to protect against noise, detailed meta-data should always be provided, and diagnostic procedures should be routinely performed prior to downstream analyses for the detection of bias in microarray studies.

Dataset Information

Dynamics of protein noise can distinguish between alternate sources of gene-expression variability.

Publications

Dynamics of protein noise can distinguish between alternate sources of gene-expression variability.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets