IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0073714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Transcription Factor Competition on the Relationship between Occupancy and Affinity

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolae Radu Zabet
  • Robert Foy
  • Boris Adryan

Abstract

Transcription factors (TFs) are proteins that bind to specific sites on the DNA and regulate gene activity. Identifying where TF molecules bind and how much time they spend on their target sites is key to understanding transcriptional regulation. It is usually assumed that the free energy of binding of a TF to the DNA (the affinity of the site) is highly correlated to the amount of time the TF remains bound (the occupancy of the site). However, knowing the binding energy is not sufficient to infer actual binding site occupancy. This mismatch between the occupancy predicted by the affinity and the observed occupancy may be caused by various factors, such as TF abundance, competition between TFs or the arrangement of the sites on the DNA. We investigated the relationship between the affinity of a TF for a set of binding sites and their occupancy. In particular, we considered the case of the transcription factor lac repressor (lacI) in E.coli, and performed stochastic simulations of the TF dynamics on the DNA for various combinations of lacI abundance and competing TFs that contribute to macromolecular crowding. We also investigated the relationship of site occupancy and the information content of position weight matrices (PWMs) used to represent binding sites. Our results showed that for medium and high affinity sites, TF competition does not play a significant role for genomic occupancy except in cases when the abundance of the TF is significantly increased, or when the PWM displays relatively low information content. Nevertheless, for medium and low affinity sites, an increase in TF abundance (for both cognate and non-cognate molecules) leads to an increase in occupancy at several sites.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolae Radu Zabet & Robert Foy & Boris Adryan, 2013. "The Influence of Transcription Factor Competition on the Relationship between Occupancy and Affinity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-12, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0073714
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0073714
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0073714&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0073714?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. Yue Zhao & David Granas & Gary D Stormo, 2009. "Inferring Binding Energies from Selected Binding Sites," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(12), pages 1-8, December.
    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. Claudia Coronnello & Ryan Hartmaier & Arshi Arora & Luai Huleihel & Kusum V Pandit & Abha S Bais & Michael Butterworth & Naftali Kaminski & Gary D Stormo & Steffi Oesterreich & Panayiotis V Benos, 2012. "Novel Modeling of Combinatorial miRNA Targeting Identifies SNP with Potential Role in Bone Density," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Shuxiang Ruan & Gary D Stormo, 2017. "Inherent limitations of probabilistic models for protein-DNA binding specificity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Vishaka Datta & Sridhar Hannenhalli & Rahul Siddharthan, 2019. "ChIPulate: A comprehensive ChIP-seq simulation pipeline," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-32, March.

    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:pone00:0073714. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.