Noise in eukaryotic gene expression

Transcription in eukaryotic cells has been described as quantal, with pulses of messenger RNA produced in a probabilistic manner. This description reflects the inherently stochastic nature of gene expression, known to be a major factor in the heterogeneous response of individual cells within a clonal population to an inducing stimulus. Here we show in Saccharomyces cerevisiae that stochasticity (noise) arising from transcription contributes significantly to the level of heterogeneity within a eukaryotic clonal population, in contrast to observations in prokaryotes, and that such noise can be modulated at the translational level. We use a stochastic model of transcription initiation specific to eukaryotes to show that pulsatile mRNA production, through reinitiation, is crucial for the dependence of noise on transcriptional efficiency, highlighting a key difference between eukaryotic and prokaryotic sources of noise. Furthermore, we explore the propagation of noise in a gene cascade network and demonstrate experimentally that increased noise in the transcription of a regulatory protein leads to increased cell–cell variability in the target gene output, resulting in prolonged bistable expression states. This result has implications for the role of noise in phenotypic variation and cellular differentiation.

[1]  A. Novick,et al.  ENZYME INDUCTION AS AN ALL-OR-NONE PHENOMENON. , 1957, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[3]  W H Lamers,et al.  The initiation of hepatocyte-specific gene expression within embryonic hepatocytes is a stochastic event. , 1989, Developmental biology.

[4]  M. Ko,et al.  The dose dependence of glucocorticoid‐inducible gene expression results from changes in the number of transcriptionally active templates. , 1990, The EMBO journal.

[5]  G. Nolan,et al.  Single cell assay of a transcription factor reveals a threshold in transcription activated by signals emanating from the T-cell antigen receptor. , 1990, Genes & development.

[6]  M. Ko,et al.  A stochastic model for gene induction. , 1991, Journal of theoretical biology.

[7]  I. Ross,et al.  Transcription of individual genes in eukaryotic cells occurs randomly and infrequently , 1994, Immunology and cell biology.

[8]  M. Groudine,et al.  Enhancers increase the probability but not the level of gene expression. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  M. Strubin,et al.  Stimulation of RNA polymerase II transcription initiation by recruitment of TBP in vivo , 1995, Nature.

[10]  K. Struhl,et al.  Connecting a promoter-bound protein to TBP bypasses the need for a transcriptional activation domain , 1995, Nature.

[11]  K. Struhl,et al.  Chromatin Structure and RNA Polymerase II Connection: Implications for Transcription , 1996, Cell.

[12]  M. Ptashne,et al.  Transcriptional activation by recruitment , 1997, Nature.

[13]  J. Gralla,et al.  Transcription reinitiation rate: a special role for the TATA box , 1997, Molecular and cellular biology.

[14]  A. Arkin,et al.  Stochastic mechanisms in gene expression. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  S. Hahn.  Activation and the role of reinitiation in the control of transcription by RNA polymerase II. , 1998, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[16]  S. Frost,et al.  Effect of Alternative Glycosylation on Insulin Receptor Processing* , 1999, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[17]  H. Blau,et al.  Transcriptional control: rheostat converted to on/off switch. , 2000, Molecular cell.

[18]  J. Hasty,et al.  Noise-based switches and amplifiers for gene expression. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  D. Hume,et al.  Probability in transcriptional regulation and its implications for leukocyte differentiation and inducible gene expression. , 2000, Blood.

[20]  G. Crabtree,et al.  Cell signaling can direct either binary or graded transcriptional responses , 2001, The EMBO journal.

[21]  B. Séraphin,et al.  Positive feedback in eukaryotic gene networks: cell differentiation by graded to binary response conversion , 2001, The EMBO journal.

[22]  M. Thattai,et al.  Intrinsic noise in gene regulatory networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  M. Green,et al.  SAGA is an essential in vivo target of the yeast acidic activator Gal4p. , 2001, Genes & development.

[24]  L. A. Stargell,et al.  The Stability of the TFIIA-TBP-DNA Complex Is Dependent on the Sequence of the TATAAA Element* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[25]  T. Kepler,et al.  Stochasticity in transcriptional regulation: origins, consequences, and mathematical representations. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[26]  F. Winston,et al.  The S. cerevisiae SAGA complex functions in vivo as a coactivator for transcriptional activation by Gal4. , 2001, Genes & development.

[27]  P. Swain,et al.  Intrinsic and extrinsic contributions to stochasticity in gene expression , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[29]  M. Thattai,et al.  Attenuation of noise in ultrasensitive signaling cascades. , 2002, Biophysical journal.

[30]  Ralf Kemkemer,et al.  Increased noise as an effect of haploinsufficiency of the tumor-suppressor gene neurofibromatosis type 1 in vitro , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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