xs-systems: extended s-systems & algebraic differential automata for modeling cellular behavior
DESCRIPTION
HiPC 2002 12 19 2002. xS-systems: eXtended S-systems & Algebraic Differential Automata for Modeling Cellular Behavior. ¦ Bud Mishra Professor (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) Professor of CS & Mathematics (Courant, NYU) With M. Antoniotti, A. Policriti and N. Ugel. Why Systems Biology?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»1
xS-systems:eXtended S-systems
& Algebraic Differential Automata for Modeling Cellular Behavior
HiPC 200212 19 2002
¦Bud Mishra
Professor (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Professor of CS & Mathematics (Courant, NYU)
With M. Antoniotti, A. Policriti and N. Ugel
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»2
Why Systems Biology?• It is not uncommon to assume certain biological problems to
have achieved a cognitive finality without rigorous justification. • Rigorous mathematical models with automated tools for
reasoning, simulation, and computation can be of enormous help to uncover – cognitive flaws,– qualitative simplification or– overly generalized assumptions.
• Some ideal candidates for such study would include: – prion hypothesis– cell cycle machinery – muscle contractility– processes involved in cancer (cell cycle regulation, angiogenesis,
DNA repair, apoptosis, cellular senescence, tissue space modeling enzymes, etc.)
– signal transduction pathways, and many others.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»3
Systems BiologyThe SYSTEMS BIOLOGY
Interpretive BiologyIntegrative
BiologyBioinformatics
Computational Biology
Numerlogy
Astrology
Combining the mathematical rigor of numerology with the predictive power of astrology.
Numeristan
AstrostanInfostan
BioSpice
HOTzone
Cyberia
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»4
Computational/Systems Biology
How much of reasoning about biology can be automated?
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»5
Graphical Representation
X1 X2Reversible Reaction
Divergence Branch Point: Degradation processes of X1 into
X2 and X3 are independent
X1
X2
X3
Convergence Branch Point: Degradation processes of X1 and
X2 into X3 are independent
X1
X2
X3
X1
X2 Single splitting reaction
generating two products X2 and X3, in
stoichiometric proportion.
X3
X1
X2
Single synthetic reaction
involving two source components X1 and X2, in stoichiometric
proportion.
X3
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»6
Graphical Representation
The reaction between X1 and X2 requires coenzyme X3 which is converted to X4
X1 X2
X3 X4
X1 X2
X3
The conversion of X1 into X2 is modulated by X3
X1 X2
X3
- The conversion of X1 into X2 is modulated by an inhibitor
X3
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»7
GlycolysisGlycogen
Glucose-1-PGlucose
Glucose-6-P
Fructose-6-P
P_i
Phosphorylase a
PhosphoglucomutaseGlucokinase
Phosphoglucose isomerase
Phosphofructokinase
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»8
An Artificial Clock
• Three proteins:– LacI, tetR & cI– Arranged in a cyclic
manner (logically, not necessarily physically) so that the protein product of one gene is rpressor for the next gene.
LacI! : tetR; tetR! TetRTetR! : cI; cI ! cI cI! : lacI; lacI! LacI
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»9
Cycles of Repression
• The first repressor protein, LacI from E. coli inhibits the transcription of the second repressor gene, tetR from the tetracycline-resistance transposon Tn10.
• Protein product in turn TetR from tetR inhibits the expression of a third gene, cI from phage.
• Finally, CI inhibits lacI expression,completing the cycle.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»10
Biological Model
• Standard molecular biology: Construct– A low-copy plasmid
encoding the repressilator and
– A compatible higher-copy reporter plasmid containing the tet-repressible promoter PLtet01 fused to an intermediate stability variant of gfp.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»11
Cascade Model: Repressilator?
dx2/dt = 2 X6g26X1
g21 - 2 X2h22
dx4/dt = 4 X2g42X3
g43 - 4 X4h44
dx6/dt = 6 X4g64X5
g65 - 6 X6h66
X1, X3, X5 = const
x1 x2-
x3 x4-
x5 x6-
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»12
SimPathica System
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»13
Modal Logic Queries
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»14
SimPathica:Trace Analysis System
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»15
SimPathica
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»16
Canonical Forms
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»17
Systems of Differential Equations
• dXi/dt = (instantaneous) rate of change in Xi at time t = Function of substrate concentrations,
enzymes, factors and products:dXi/dt = f(S1, S2, …, E1, E2, …, F1, F2,…, P1, P2,
…)• S-systems result in Non-linear Time-
Invariant DAE System.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»18
General Form
• dXi/dt = Vi+(X1, X2, …, Xn) – Vi
-(X1, X2, …, Xn):– Where Vi
+(¢) term represents production (or accumulation) rate of a particular metabolite and Vi
-
(¢) represent s depletion rate of the same metabolite.
• Generalizing to n dependent variables and m independent variables, we have:
dXi/dt =Vi
+(X1, X2, …, Xn, U1, U2, …, Um) – Vi
-(X1, X2, …, Xn, U1, U2, …, Um):
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»19
Canonical Forms
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»20
S-System Automaton AS
• S-System Automata Definition:– Combine snapshots of the IDs (“instantaneous descriptions”) of the
system to create a possible world model– Transitions are inferred from “traces” of the system variables:
• Definition:Given an S-systems S, the S-system automaton AS associated to S is 4-tuple AS = (S, , S0, F), where S µ D1 £ £ D is a set of states, µ S £ S is the binary transition relation, and S0, F ½ S are initial and final states respectively.
• Definition: A trace of an S-system automaton AS is a sequence s0, s1, …, sn,…, such that s0 2 S0, (si, si+1), 8 i = 0.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»21
Trace Automaton
Simple one-to-one construction of the“trace” automata AS for an S-system S
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»22
Collapsing Algorithm
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»23
Collapsed Automata
The effects of the collapsing construction of the“trace” automata AS for an S-system S
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»24
Purine Metabolism
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»25
Purine Metabolism
• Purine Metabolism– Provides the organism with building blocks for the synthesis
of DNA and RNA.– The consequences of a malfunctioning purine metabolism
pathway are severe and can lead to death.• The entire pathway is almost closed but also quite
complex. It contains– several feedback loops,– cross-activations and – reversible reactions
• Thus is an ideal candidate for reasoning with computational tools.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»26
Simple Model
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»27
Biochemistry of Purine Metabolism
• The main metabolite in purine biosynthesis is 5-phosphoribosyl-a-1-pyrophosphate (PRPP). – A linear cascade of reactions converts
PRPP into inosine monophosphate (IMP). IMP is the central branch point of the purine metabolism pathway.
– IMP is transformed into AMP and GMP.– Guanosine, adenosine and their
derivatives are recycled (unless used elsewhere) into hypoxanthine (HX) and xanthine (XA).
– XA is finally oxidized into uric acid (UA).
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»28
Biochemistry of Purine Metabolism
• In addition to these processes, there appear to be two “salvage” pathways that serve to maintain IMP level and thus of adenosine and guanosine levels as well.
• In these pathways, adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT) and hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (HGPRT) combine with PRPP to form ribonucleotides.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»29
Purine Metabolism
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»30
XML Description
<?xml version="1.0" ?> - <map xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="map.xsd">- <substrate> <id>1</id> <concentration>5</concentration> <name>PRPP</name> </substrate>- <substrate> <id>2</id> <concentration>100</concentration> <name>IMP</name> </substrate>- <substrate> <id>3</id> <concentration>2500</concentration> <name>Ado</name> </substrate>- <substrate> <id>4</id> <concentration>425</concentration> <name>GMP</name> </substrate>-
<synthesis> <reactant1>1</reactant1> <reactant2>8</reactant2> <product>2</product> <power_function1>1.1</power_function1> <rate1>12.570</rate1> <power_function2>0.48</power_function2> <rate2>12.570</rate2> - <modulation> <enzyme>2</enzyme> <power_function_enzyme>-0.89</power_function_enzyme> </modulation> </synthesis>- <output> <reactant>11</reactant> <power_function>2.21</power_function> <rate>0.00008744</rate> </output> </map>
.
.
.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»31
Queries
• Variation of the initial concentration of PRPP does not change the steady state.(PRPP = 10 * PRPP1) implies steady_state()
This query will be true when evaluated against the modified simulation run (i.e. the one where the initial concentration of PRPP is 10 times the initial concentration in the first run – PRPP1).
• Persistent increase in the initial concentration of PRPP does cause unwanted changes in the steady state values of some metabolites.
• If the increase in the level of PRPP is in the order of 70% then the system does reach a steady state, and we expect to see increases in the levels of IMP and of the hypoxanthine pool in a “comparable” order of magnitude.
Always (PRPP = 1.7*PRPP1) implies steady_state()
•TRUETRUE
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»32
Queries
• Consider the following statement:
Eventually(Always (PRPP = 1.7 * PRPP1)
implies steady_state() and Eventually
(Always(IMP < 2 * IMP1))and Eventually (Always
(hx_pool < 10*hx_pool1)))where IMP1 and hx_pool1 are the
values observed in the unmodified trace. The above statement turns out to be false over the modified experiment trace..
• In fact, the increase in IMP is about 6.5 fold while the hypoxanthine pool increase is about 60 fold.
• Since the above queries turn out to be false over the modified trace, we conclude that the model “over-predicts” the increases in some of its products and that it should therefore be amended
False
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»33
Final Model
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»34
Purine Metabolism
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»36
Query
• This change to the model allows us to reformulate our query as shown below:Always(PRPP > 50 * PRPP1implies(steady_state() and Eventually(IMP > IMP1) and Eventually(HX < HX1) and Eventually(Always(IMP = IMP1)) and Eventually(Always(HX = HX1))
• An (instantaneous) increase in the level of PRPP will not make the system stray from the predicted steady state, even if temporary variations of IMP and HX are allowed. TRUE
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»48
Related Publications• “Simulating Large Biochemical and Biological Processes and
Reasoning about their Behavior." (with M. Antoniotti, F. Park, A. Policriti and N. Ugel), ICSB, Sweden, 2003.
• "Foundations of a Query and Simulation System for the Modeling of Biochemical and Biological Processes." (with M. Antoniotti, F. Park, A. Policriti and N. Ugel), The Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing (PSB 2003), Hawaii, January 3-7, 2003.
• "Model Building and Model Checking for Biochemical Processes," (with M. Antoniotti, A. Policriti and N. Ugel), Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics (CBB), Humana Press, 2003, (In press)
• "A Symbolic Approach to Modelling Cellular Behaviour," International Conference On High Performance Computing, HiPC 2002, December 18-21, Bangalore, India, 2002. (In Press)
• "Wild by Nature," (with M. Wigler), Science, 296: 1407-1408, 24 May 2002.
11/25/2002 ©Bud Mishra, 2002 Cell Talk»49
The End
Websiteshttp://cs.nyu.edu/faculty/
mishra/ http://bioinformatics.cat.nyu.e
du/