bioRxiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2023.07.20.549956

The timing of cellular events: a stochastic vs deterministic perspective

Ham, L.·Coomer, M. A.·Öcal, K.·Grima, R.·Stumpf, M. P. H.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Changes in cell state are driven by key molecular events whose timing can often be measured experimentally. Of particular interest is the time taken for the levels of RNA or protein molecules to reach a critical threshold defining the triggering of a cellular event. While this mean trigger time can be estimated by numerical integration of deterministic models, these ignore intrinsic noise and hence their predictions may be inaccurate. Here we study the differences between deterministic and stochastic model predictions for the mean trigger times using simple models of gene expression, post-transcriptional feedback control, and enzyme-mediated catalysis. By comparison of the two predictions, we show that when promoter switching is present there exists a transition from a parameter regime where deterministic models predict a longer trigger time than stochastic models to a regime where the opposite occurs. Furthermore, the ratio of the trigger times of the two models can be large, particularly for auto-regulatory genetic feedback loops. Our theory provides intuitive insight into the origin of these effects and shows that deterministic predictions for cellular event timing can be highly inaccurate when molecule numbers are within the range known for many cells.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

systems biologyPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ham, L., Coomer, M. A., Öcal, K., Grima, R., Stumpf, M. P. H.. 2023-07-21. The timing of cellular events: a stochastic vs deterministic perspective. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.20.549956

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Parsimonious Creatures: Building Gene Regulatory Networks Robust to Somatic Evolution

For early multicellular life to have formed and maintained cellular organization, preventing loss of controlled cell replication due to somatic evolution was of critical importance, and remains important to this day for control of cancer. We study how gene regulatory networks (GRNs) can be designed to slow the divergence of somatic clonal lineages in the context of early multicellular life. We model the mutation of GRNs within simplified 12-celled organisms we term "parsimonious creatures", who must replicate from a single cell to 12 cells and then prevent replication past 12 cells to maximize fitness. We found two minimal motifs can achieve these goals, but both are prone to breakdown through somatic evolution: The feedforward motif, which is loosely regulating but relatively robust, and the simple step motif, which uses strong interactions and feedback to form memoryless ultrasensitivity, but is fragile. These simple motifs may be duplicated to form redundant networks via one of two structures: averaging redundancy, which averages multiple sources of information, and min redundancy, which adopts the most conservative source. Averaging redundancy uniformly slows somatic evolution, while min redundancy stalls somatic evolution until neutral mutations accumulate. Either may be superior dependent on life history. However, averaging redundancy slowly increases fitness as the network becomes larger, but large min redundancy networks eventually become "paralyzed", increasing the probability of senescence and reducing fitness. These GRN designs are idealized, yet provide imperfect solutions with fundamental tradeoffs, offering insight as to why somatic evolution remains an incompletely solved problem for multicellular life.

systems biology↗
bioRxiv2026

Homogeneous network inference for subtype-stratified master regulator analysis in cancer

Master-regulator analysis of 34 TCGA tumour cohorts (cancer x molecular subtype; n between 27 and 562 tumours) requires one regulatory network per cohort. Mutual-information (MI) networks inferred with ARACNe3 are the usual choice, but they are not available for the smallest cohorts; filling the gap with correlation networks would mix two methods inside the very comparison between subtypes that the analysis is meant to make. We therefore infer every network with a single procedure, fixed-size Spearman regulons (FSR): rank correlation between regulator and target, a fixed effect-size threshold rho >= 0.2, the per-target data-processing-inequality (DPI) pruning implemented in corto, bootstrap support, and truncation to the 100 best-supported targets per regulator. We quantify what this choice concedes and what it provides, labelling each claim as a standard result, a heuristic, or an empirical result. Rank correlation is more powerful than the MI estimators we simulated for n < 200 but cannot see non-monotone dependence, which in a synthetic worst case costs at most about 0.05-0.10 of the master regulators recovered; the per-target DPI is a heuristic with a measurable disagreement rate with the MI-based one; and pairwise dependence is not direct interaction, for MI and correlation alike. Where both methods are feasible (n >= 95) they overlap in 0.7 of the top-20 regulators, the same as two filterings of the same ARACNe3 network, although the rank correlation of the full score vector shows a measurable method effect in the tail. Subsampling large real cohorts indicates that networks inferred from fewer than 60 tumours do not reliably reproduce their own cohort's master regulators, that 60-100 is a grey zone, and that a cancer-wide network does not rescue small subtypes. We present FSR as an adequate and uniform choice for multi-cohort analysis, not as a statistically superior one.

systems biology↗
bioRxiv2026

Low-fidelity simulator selection for multi-fidelity inference of epithelial vertex models

Vertex models link cell division, neighbour exchange, and intercellular forces to epithelial tissue form through parameters such as junctional line tension and perimeter contractility. Bayesian inference of these parameters from data quantifies their uncertainty, but for stochastic models of proliferating tissues it requires many costly simulations. Multi-fidelity simulation-based inference reduces this cost by training on many runs of a cheaper, less accurate ('low-fidelity') simulator before refining with a few full ('high-fidelity') runs. Low-fidelity versions can be constructed in several ways, for example by stopping simulations early, coarsening the timestep, or averaging fewer replicates, but it is unclear which to choose before committing to costly training. To address this, we introduce PRISM (Paired Ranking Index for Simulator Matching), a screen that compares each candidate with the full simulator on paired runs, scoring agreement in cell-packing statistics against cost. For a vertex model of a proliferating tissue, PRISM flags stopping early as unreliable before training; once trained, this choice can produce confidently wrong parameter estimates. By contrast, a coarser timestep, within the range tested, is cheap and accurate; while fewer replicates are accurate but too costly. Using a screened low-fidelity simulator, multi-fidelity inference outperforms approximate Bayesian computation and neural-network inference trained on full simulations alone, at matched cost and with well-calibrated uncertainty. The same pattern recurs for a second vertex model fitted to published Drosophila pupal-wing imaging data, although there stopping halfway proves safe. Together, our findings suggest that which approximations are safe depends on the model, and that screening them before training makes multi-fidelity inference of tissue mechanics practical.

systems biology↗