Boolean networks with biologically relevant rules show ordered behavior

It was found recently that natural gene regulatory systems are governed by hierarchically canalyzing functions (HCFs), a special subclass of Boolean functions. Here we study the HCF class in detail. We present a new minimal logical expression for all HCFs. Based on this formula, we calculate the cardinality of the HCF class. Moreover, we define HCF subclasses and calculate their cardinality as well. Using the well-known critical connectivity condition 2K(c)p(1-p)=1, we discuss order-chaos transitions of Boolean networks (BNs) regulated by functions of given HCF subclasses. Finally, analysing real gene regulatory rules we show that nearly all of the biologically relevant functions belong to the simplest HCF subclasses. This restriction is important for reverse engineering of transcription regulatory networks and for ensemble approach studies in systems biology. It is shown that Boolean networks with functions belonging to the biologically realized HCF subclasses show ordered behavior.

[1]  Carsten Peterson,et al.  Random Boolean network models and the yeast transcriptional network , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  S. Huang,et al.  Genomics, complexity and drug discovery: insights from Boolean network models of cellular regulation. , 2001, Pharmacogenomics.

[3]  L. Glass,et al.  Ordered and disordered dynamics in random networks , 1998 .

[4]  Z. Szallasi,et al.  Modeling the normal and neoplastic cell cycle with "realistic Boolean genetic networks": their application for understanding carcinogenesis and assessing therapeutic strategies. , 1998, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[5]  Karen O. Egiazarian,et al.  Spectral methods for testing membership in certain post classes and the class of forcing functions , 2004, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[6]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  The origins of order , 1993 .

[7]  Andrew Wuensche,et al.  A model of transcriptional regulatory networks based on biases in the observed regulation rules , 2002, Complex..

[8]  Ron Shamir,et al.  Chain functions and scoring functions in genetic networks , 2003, ISMB.

[9]  Reinhart Heinrich,et al.  Mathematical models of protein kinase signal transduction. , 2002, Molecular cell.

[10]  U. Alon,et al.  Detailed map of a cis-regulatory input function , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  O. Yli-Harja,et al.  Stability of functions in Boolean models of gene regulatory networks. , 2005, Chaos.

[12]  Patrik D'haeseleer,et al.  Genetic network inference: from co-expression clustering to reverse engineering , 2000, Bioinform..

[13]  S Miyano,et al.  Algorithms for inferring qualitative models of biological networks. , 2000, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[14]  S Bornholdt,et al.  Robustness as an evolutionary principle , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[15]  U. Alon,et al.  Plasticity of the cis-Regulatory Input Function of a Gene , 2006, PLoS biology.

[16]  Ilya Shmulevich,et al.  Eukaryotic cells are dynamically ordered or critical but not chaotic. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  B. Derrida,et al.  Random networks of automata: a simple annealed approximation , 1986 .

[18]  Satoru Miyano,et al.  Identification of Genetic Networks from a Small Number of Gene Expression Patterns Under the Boolean Network Model , 1998, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[19]  W. Just,et al.  The number and probability of canalizing functions , 2003, math-ph/0312033.

[20]  S. Kauffman,et al.  Genetic networks with canalyzing Boolean rules are always stable. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Albert,et al.  Dynamics of complex systems: scaling laws for the period of boolean networks , 2000, Physical review letters.

[22]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  The ensemble approach to understand genetic regulatory networks , 2004 .

[23]  Dietrich Stauffer.  On forcing functions in Kauffman's random Boolean networks , 1987 .

[24]  Jesper Tegnér,et al.  Reverse engineering gene networks using singular value decomposition and robust regression , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  S. Kauffman.  Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets. , 1969, Journal of theoretical biology.

[26]  Nicolas E. Buchler,et al.  On schemes of combinatorial transcription logic , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Gabriel S. Eichler,et al.  Cell fates as high-dimensional attractor states of a complex gene regulatory network. , 2005, Physical review letters.

[28]  S. Kauffman.  A proposal for using the ensemble approach to understand genetic regulatory networks. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[29]  Ilya Shmulevich,et al.  On Learning Gene Regulatory Networks Under the Boolean Network Model , 2003, Machine Learning.

[30]  Jaakko Astola,et al.  The role of certain Post classes in Boolean network models of genetic networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  D Thieffry,et al.  Qualitative analysis of gene networks. , 1998, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[32]  S Fuhrman,et al.  Reveal, a general reverse engineering algorithm for inference of genetic network architectures. , 1998, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.