Literature DB >> 21281659

A comparison of two cell regulatory models entailing high dimensional attractors representing phenotype.

Keith Baverstock1.   

Abstract

Two models for mammalian cell regulation that invoke the concept of cellular phenotype represented by high dimensional dynamic attractor states are compared. In one model the attractors are derived from an experimentally determined genetic regulatory network (GRN) for the cell type. As the state space architecture within which the attractors are embedded is determined by the binding sites on proteins and the recognition sites on DNA the attractors can be described as "hard-wired" in the genome through the genomic DNA sequence. In the second model attractors arising from the interactions between active gene products (mainly proteins) and independent of the genomic sequence, are descended from a pre-cellular state from which life originated. As this model is based on the cell as an open system the attractor acts as the interface between the cell and its environment. Environmental sources of stress can serve to trigger attractor and therefore phenotypic, transitions without entailing genotypic sequence changes. It is asserted that the evidence from cell and molecular biological research and logic, favours the second model. If correct there are important implications for understanding how environmental factors impact on evolution and may be implicated in hereditary and somatic disease.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21281659     DOI: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2011.01.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol        ISSN: 0079-6107            Impact factor:   3.667


  8 in total

Review 1.  Epigenetic memories: structural marks or active circuits?

Authors:  Floriane Nicol-Benoît; Pascale Le-Goff; Yves Le-Dréan; Florence Demay; Farzad Pakdel; Gilles Flouriot; Denis Michel
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 9.261

2.  Essentials in the life process indicated by the self-referential genetic code.

Authors:  Romeu Cardoso Guimarães
Journal:  Orig Life Evol Biosph       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 1.950

3.  What mechanisms/processes underlie radiation-induced genomic instability?

Authors:  Andrei V Karotki; Keith Baverstock
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2012-09-06       Impact factor: 9.261

4.  Genes without prominence: a reappraisal of the foundations of biology.

Authors:  Arto Annila; Keith Baverstock
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 5.  The evolutionary origin of form and function.

Authors:  Keith Baverstock; Mauno Rönkkö
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2014-06-01       Impact factor: 5.182

6.  Chromatin remodeling system, cancer stem-like attractors, and cellular reprogramming.

Authors:  Yue Zhang; Hisashi Moriguchi
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2011-09-10       Impact factor: 9.261

7.  Systems biology and cancer.

Authors:  Ana M Soto; Carlos Sonnenschein; Philip K Maini; Denis Noble
Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.667

8.  Comments on Rithidech, K.N.; et al. Lack of genomic instability in bone marrow cells of SCID mice exposed whole-body to low-dose radiation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10, 1356-1377.

Authors:  Keith Baverstock
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 3.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.