IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007929.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discriminating between negative cooperativity and ligand binding to independent sites using pre-equilibrium properties of binding curves

Author

Listed:
  • Federico Sevlever
  • Juan Pablo Di Bella
  • Alejandra C Ventura

Abstract

Negative cooperativity is a phenomenon in which the binding of a first ligand or substrate molecule decreases the rate of subsequent binding. This definition is not exclusive to ligand-receptor binding, it holds whenever two or more molecules undergo two successive binding events. Negative cooperativity turns the binding curve more graded and cannot be distinguished from two independent and different binding events based on equilibrium measurements only. The need of kinetic data for this purpose was already reported. Here, we study the binding response as a function of the amount of ligand, at different times, from very early times since ligand is added and until equilibrium is reached. Over those binding curves measured at different times, we compute the dynamic range: the fold change required in input to elicit a change from 10 to 90% of maximum output, finding that it evolves in time differently and controlled by different parameters in the two situations that are identical in equilibrium. Deciphering which is the microscopic model that leads to a given binding curve adds understanding on the molecular mechanisms at play, and thus, is a valuable tool. The methods developed in this article were tested both with simulated and experimental data, showing to be robust to noise and experimental constraints.Author summary: When two successive events occur, it may make sense to know if they affect somehow each other, particularly if the properties of the second event are modified by the occurrence of the first one. Two scenarios lead to the same overall outcome: first, the two events are identical but they interfere with each other, and second, the two events are independent but non identical. The interference caused in the first scenario produces the same result as having a second event with different properties. Now, let’s name these events as bindings, the interference as negative cooperativity, and the non-identical events as independent binding. In this work we focus on the dynamic process by which the two scenarios produce the same result. We selected a relevant but not characterized before property of the binding process, called its dynamic range, and found it behaves differently in these two scenarios and controlled by different parameters of interest. Based on this feature, we developed and algorithm to distinguish between negative cooperativity and independent binding based on the time evolution of the dynamic range. This tool allows to discover the microscopic model behind the data and may be useful in other similar problems in cell signaling.

Suggested Citation

  • Federico Sevlever & Juan Pablo Di Bella & Alejandra C Ventura, 2020. "Discriminating between negative cooperativity and ligand binding to independent sites using pre-equilibrium properties of binding curves," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007929
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007929
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007929
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007929&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007929?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joshua F Apgar & Jared E Toettcher & Drew Endy & Forest M White & Bruce Tidor, 2008. "Stimulus Design for Model Selection and Validation in Cell Signaling," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(2), pages 1-10, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Samuel Bandara & Johannes P Schlöder & Roland Eils & Hans Georg Bock & Tobias Meyer, 2009. "Optimal Experimental Design for Parameter Estimation of a Cell Signaling Model," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Andrew White & Malachi Tolman & Howard D Thames & Hubert Rodney Withers & Kathy A Mason & Mark K Transtrum, 2016. "The Limitations of Model-Based Experimental Design and Parameter Estimation in Sloppy Systems," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-26, December.
    3. Katja Rateitschak & Felix Winter & Falko Lange & Robert Jaster & Olaf Wolkenhauer, 2012. "Parameter Identifiability and Sensitivity Analysis Predict Targets for Enhancement of STAT1 Activity in Pancreatic Cancer and Stellate Cells," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Juliane Liepe & Sarah Filippi & Michał Komorowski & Michael P H Stumpf, 2013. "Maximizing the Information Content of Experiments in Systems Biology," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, January.
    5. Thembi Mdluli & Gregery T Buzzard & Ann E Rundell, 2015. "Efficient Optimization of Stimuli for Model-Based Design of Experiments to Resolve Dynamical Uncertainty," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Afnizanfaizal Abdullah & Safaai Deris & Sohail Anwar & Satya N V Arjunan, 2013. "An Evolutionary Firefly Algorithm for the Estimation of Nonlinear Biological Model Parameters," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-16, March.
    7. Filippo Menolascina & Gianfranco Fiore & Emanuele Orabona & Luca De Stefano & Mike Ferry & Jeff Hasty & Mario di Bernardo & Diego di Bernardo, 2014. "In-Vivo Real-Time Control of Protein Expression from Endogenous and Synthetic Gene Networks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    8. Mark K Transtrum & Peng Qiu, 2016. "Bridging Mechanistic and Phenomenological Models of Complex Biological Systems," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-34, May.
    9. Jeffrey P Perley & Judith Mikolajczak & Marietta L Harrison & Gregery T Buzzard & Ann E Rundell, 2014. "Multiple Model-Informed Open-Loop Control of Uncertain Intracellular Signaling Dynamics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007929. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.