Quantitative analysis of robustness and fragility in biological networks based on feedback dynamics

MOTIVATION It has been widely reported that biological networks are robust against perturbations such as mutations. On the contrary, it has also been known that biological networks are often fragile against unexpected mutations. There is a growing interest in these intriguing observations and the underlying design principle that causes such robust but fragile characteristics of biological networks. For relatively small networks, a feedback loop has been considered as an important motif for realizing the robustness. It is still, however, not clear how a number of coupled feedback loops actually affect the robustness of large complex biological networks. In particular, the relationship between fragility and feedback loops has not yet been investigated till now. RESULTS Through extensive computational experiments, we found that networks with a larger number of positive feedback loops and a smaller number of negative feedback loops are likely to be more robust against perturbations. Moreover, we found that the nodes of a robust network subject to perturbations are mostly involved with a smaller number of feedback loops compared with the other nodes not usually subject to perturbations. This topological characteristic eventually makes the robust network fragile against unexpected mutations at the nodes not previously exposed to perturbations.

[1]  R Thomas,et al.  Dynamical behaviour of biological regulatory networks--I. Biological role of feedback loops and practical use of the concept of the loop-characteristic state. , 1995, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[2]  Denis Thieffry,et al.  Genetic control of flower morphogenesis in Arabidopsis thaliana: a logical analysis , 1999, Bioinform..

[3]  Wei Liu,et al.  SigFlux: A novel network feature to evaluate the importance of proteins in signal transduction networks , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[4]  S. Huang,et al.  Shape-dependent control of cell growth, differentiation, and apoptosis: switching between attractors in cell regulatory networks. , 2000, Experimental cell research.

[5]  H. Kitano Towards a theory of biological robustness , 2007, Molecular systems biology.

[6]  Kristen K. Dang,et al.  Sexual reproduction selects for robustness and negative epistasis in artificial gene networks , 2006, Nature.

[7]  J. W. Little,et al.  Robustness of a gene regulatory circuit , 1999, The EMBO journal.

[8]  U Alon,et al.  Generation of oscillations by the p53-Mdm2 feedback loop: a theoretical and experimental study. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Stephen J. Tapscott,et al.  Positive autoregulation of the myogenic determination gene MyoD1 , 1989, Cell.

[10]  F. Jeanplong,et al.  The Myostatin Gene Is a Downstream Target Gene of Basic Helix-Loop-Helix Transcription Factor MyoD , 2002, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[11]  J. Doyle,et al.  Robust perfect adaptation in bacterial chemotaxis through integral feedback control. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  P. J. Miller,et al.  Cdc42p GTPase is involved in controlling polarized cell growth in Schizosaccharomyces pombe , 1994, Molecular and cellular biology.

[13]  El Houssine Snoussi Necessary Conditions for Multistationarity and Stable Periodicity , 1998 .

[14]  Kwang-Hyun Cho,et al.  Boolean dynamics of biological networks with multiple coupled feedback loops. , 2007, Biophysical journal.

[15]  J. Doyle,et al.  Robustness as a measure of plausibility in models of biochemical networks. , 2002, Journal of theoretical biology.

[16]  Prahlad T. Ram,et al.  Formation of Regulatory Patterns During Signal Propagation in a Mammalian Cellular Network , 2005, Science.

[17]  A. Levine,et al.  The p53 pathway: positive and negative feedback loops , 2005, Oncogene.

[18]  H. Kitano Cancer as a robust system: implications for anticancer therapy , 2004, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[19]  L. Strong,et al.  Germ line p53 mutations in a familial syndrome of breast cancer, sarcomas, and other neoplasms. , 1990, Science.

[20]  Alexander van Oudenaarden,et al.  A system of counteracting feedback loops regulates Cdc42p activity during spontaneous cell polarization. , 2005, Developmental cell.

[21]  Hiroaki Kitano,et al.  Biological robustness , 2008, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[22]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Robustness Can Evolve Gradually in Complex Regulatory Gene Networks with Varying Topology , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[23]  A. Wagner DOES EVOLUTIONARY PLASTICITY EVOLVE? , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[24]  Zhiyong Shao,et al.  The Caenorhabditis elegans rhy-1 Gene Inhibits HIF-1 Hypoxia-Inducible Factor Activity in a Negative Feedback Loop That Does Not Include vhl-1 , 2006, Genetics.

[25]  M. Jewett,et al.  Human HIF‐3α4 is a dominant‐negative regulator of HIF‐1 and is down‐regulated in renal cell carcinoma , 2005 .

[26]  Nicholas T Ingolia,et al.  Topology and Robustness in the Drosophila Segment Polarity Network , 2004, PLoS biology.

[27]  U. Alon Network motifs: theory and experimental approaches , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  C. Espinosa-Soto,et al.  A Gene Regulatory Network Model for Cell-Fate Determination during Arabidopsis thaliana Flower Development That Is Robust and Recovers Experimental Gene Expression Profilesw⃞ , 2004, The Plant Cell Online.

[29]  S. Powers,et al.  Diaphragm contractile dysfunction in MyoD gene-inactivated mice. , 2002, American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology.

[30]  Kwang-Hyun Cho,et al.  Coupled feedback loops form dynamic motifs of cellular networks. , 2008, Biophysical journal.

[31]  Chandra L. Theesfeld,et al.  Opposing roles for actin in Cdc42p polarization. , 2005, Molecular biology of the cell.

[32]  J. Doyle,et al.  Metabolic syndrome and robustness tradeoffs. , 2004, Diabetes.

[33]  Madalena Chaves,et al.  Robustness and fragility of Boolean models for genetic regulatory networks. , 2005, Journal of theoretical biology.

[34]  J. Pringle,et al.  CDC42 and CDC43, two additional genes involved in budding and the establishment of cell polarity in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 1990, The Journal of cell biology.

[35]  H. Kitano,et al.  Robustness trade-offs and host–microbial symbiosis in the immune system , 2006, Molecular systems biology.

[36]  M. Blagosklonny Do VHL and HIF-1 mirror p53 and Mdm-2? Degradation-transactivation loops of oncoproteins and tumor suppressors , 2001, Oncogene.

[37]  Andre Levchenko,et al.  Dynamic Properties of Network Motifs Contribute to Biological Network Organization , 2005, PLoS biology.

[38]  John Doyle,et al.  Complexity and robustness , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.