Origin and Consequences of the Relationship between Protein Mean and Variance

Cell-to-cell variance in protein levels (noise) is a ubiquitous phenomenon that can increase fitness by generating phenotypic differences within clonal populations of cells. An important challenge is to identify the specific molecular events that control noise. This task is complicated by the strong dependence of a protein's cell-to-cell variance on its mean expression level through a power-law like relationship (σ2∝μ1.69). Here, we dissect the nature of this relationship using a stochastic model parameterized with experimentally measured values. This framework naturally recapitulates the power-law like relationship (σ2∝μ1.6) and accurately predicts protein variance across the yeast proteome (r2 = 0.935). Using this model we identified two distinct mechanisms by which protein variance can be increased. Variables that affect promoter activation, such as nucleosome positioning, increase protein variance by changing the exponent of the power-law relationship. In contrast, variables that affect processes downstream of promoter activation, such as mRNA and protein synthesis, increase protein variance in a mean-dependent manner following the power-law. We verified our findings experimentally using an inducible gene expression system in yeast. We conclude that the power-law-like relationship between noise and protein mean is due to the kinetics of promoter activation. Our results provide a framework for understanding how molecular processes shape stochastic variation across the genome.

[1]  Ertugrul M. Ozbudak,et al.  Regulation of noise in the expression of a single gene , 2002, Nature Genetics.

[2]  Adam P. Arkin,et al.  HIV Promoter Integration Site Primarily Modulates Transcriptional Burst Size Rather Than Frequency , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[3]  Achim Tresch,et al.  Dynamic transcriptome analysis measures rates of mRNA synthesis and decay in yeast , 2011, Molecular systems biology.

[4]  D. Botstein,et al.  Genomic expression programs in the response of yeast cells to environmental changes. , 2000, Molecular biology of the cell.

[5]  Hana El-Samad,et al.  Cellular noise regulons underlie fluctuations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2012, Molecular cell.

[6]  R. Segev,et al.  GENERAL PROPERTIES OF THE TRANSCRIPTIONAL TIME-SERIES IN ESCHERICHIA COLI , 2011, Nature Genetics.

[7]  Jeffrey W. Smith,et al.  Stochastic Gene Expression in a Single Cell , 2022 .

[8]  Paul J. Choi,et al.  Quantifying E. coli Proteome and Transcriptome with Single-Molecule Sensitivity in Single Cells , 2010, Science.

[9]  Johan Paulsson,et al.  Models of stochastic gene expression , 2005 .

[10]  Alexander van Oudenaarden,et al.  Variability in gene expression underlies incomplete penetrance , 2009, Nature.

[11]  Farren J. Isaacs,et al.  Phenotypic consequences of promoter-mediated transcriptional noise. , 2006, Molecular cell.

[12]  N. Barkai,et al.  Nucleosome organization affects the sensitivity of gene expression to promoter mutations. , 2012, Molecular cell.

[13]  B. Pugh,et al.  Identification and Distinct Regulation of Yeast TATA Box-Containing Genes , 2004, Cell.

[14]  F. Cross,et al.  Nucleosome-depleted regions in cell-cycle-regulated promoters ensure reliable gene expression in every cell cycle. , 2010, Developmental cell.

[15]  Irene K. Moore,et al.  The DNA-encoded nucleosome organization of a eukaryotic genome , 2009, Nature.

[16]  Bin Wu,et al.  Real-Time Observation of Transcription Initiation and Elongation on an Endogenous Yeast Gene , 2011, Science.

[17]  A. Oudenaarden,et al.  Nature, Nurture, or Chance: Stochastic Gene Expression and Its Consequences , 2008, Cell.

[18]  Ido Golding,et al.  Genetic Determinants and Cellular Constraints in Noisy Gene Expression , 2013, Science.

[19]  Young-Joon Kim,et al.  Intrinsic variability of gene expression encoded in nucleosome positioning sequences , 2009, Nature Genetics.

[20]  Esteban O. Mazzoni,et al.  Stochastic spineless expression creates the retinal mosaic for colour vision , 2006, Nature.

[21]  H. J. Beaumont,et al.  Experimental evolution of bet hedging , 2009, Nature.

[22]  Nir Friedman,et al.  Exploring transcription regulation through cell-to-cell variability , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  J. François,et al.  Cell-to-Cell Stochastic Variation in Gene Expression Is a Complex Genetic Trait , 2008, PLoS genetics.

[24]  Naama Barkai,et al.  Divergence of nucleosome positioning between two closely related yeast species: genetic basis and functional consequences , 2010, Molecular systems biology.

[25]  Nacho Molina,et al.  Mammalian Genes Are Transcribed with Widely Different Bursting Kinetics , 2011, Science.

[26]  E. O’Shea,et al.  Global analysis of protein expression in yeast , 2003, Nature.

[27]  T. Elston,et al.  Stochasticity in gene expression: from theories to phenotypes , 2005, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  Johan Paulsson,et al.  Non-genetic heterogeneity from stochastic partitioning at cell division , 2011, Nature Genetics.

[29]  Hannah H. Chang,et al.  Transcriptome-wide noise controls lineage choice in mammalian progenitor cells , 2008, Nature.

[30]  J. Raser,et al.  Control of Stochasticity in Eukaryotic Gene Expression , 2004, Science.

[31]  Kunihiko Kaneko,et al.  Evolution of Robustness to Noise and Mutation in Gene Expression Dynamics , 2007, PloS one.

[32]  P. Sharp,et al.  The codon Adaptation Index--a measure of directional synonymous codon usage bias, and its potential applications. , 1987, Nucleic acids research.

[33]  J. Derisi,et al.  Single-cell proteomic analysis of S. cerevisiae reveals the architecture of biological noise , 2006, Nature.

[34]  S. Leibler,et al.  Bacterial Persistence as a Phenotypic Switch , 2004, Science.

[35]  Naama Barkai,et al.  Expression noise and acetylation profiles distinguish HDAC functions. , 2012, Molecular cell.

[36]  Nicholas T. Ingolia,et al.  Genome-Wide Analysis in Vivo of Translation with Nucleotide Resolution Using Ribosome Profiling , 2009, Science.

[37]  G. Vinnicombe,et al.  Fundamental limits on the suppression of molecular fluctuations , 2010, Nature.

[38]  Mads Kærn,et al.  Noise in eukaryotic gene expression , 2003, Nature.

[39]  R. Mitra,et al.  TATA is a modular component of synthetic promoters. , 2010, Genome research.

[40]  Robert H. Singer,et al.  Transcription of functionally related constitutive genes is not coordinated , 2010, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[41]  E. O’Shea,et al.  Noise in protein expression scales with natural protein abundance , 2006, Nature Genetics.

[42]  Peter M. A. Sloot,et al.  Promoter Sequence Determines the Relationship between Expression Level and Noise , 2013, PLoS biology.