Biology is more theoretical than physics

Leveraging the model-experiment loop: Examples from cellular slime mold chemotaxis

Interplay between models and experimental data advances discovery and understanding in biology, particularly when models generate predictions that allow well-designed experiments to distinguish between alternative mechanisms. To illustrate how this feedback between models and experiments can lead to key insights into biological mechanisms, we explore three examples from cellular slime mold chemotaxis. These examples include studies that identified chemotaxis as the primary mechanism behind slime mold aggregation, discovered that cells likely measure chemoattractant gradients by sensing concentration differences across cell length, and tested the role of cell-associated chemoattractant degradation in shaping chemotactic fields. Although each study used a different model class appropriate to their hypotheses - qualitative, mathematical, or simulation-based - these examples all highlight the utility of modeling to formalize assumptions and generate testable predictions. A central element of this framework is the iterative use of models and experiments, specifically: matching experimental designs to the models, revising models based on mismatches with experimental data, and validating critical model assumptions and predictions with experiments. We advocate for continued use of this interplay between models and experiments to advance biological discovery.

From Gregor Mendel to Eric Davidson: Mathematical Models and Basic Principles in Biology

Mathematical models have been widespread in biology since its emergence as a modern experimental science in the 19th century. Focusing on models in developmental biology and heredity, this article (1) presents the properties and epistemological basis of pertinent mathematical models in biology from Mendel's model of heredity in the 19th century to Eric Davidson's model of developmental gene regulatory networks in the 21st; (2) shows that the models differ not only in their epistemologies but also in regard to explicitly or implicitly taking into account basic biological principles, in particular those of biological specificity (that became, in part, replaced by genetic information) and genetic causality. The article claims that models disregarding these principles did not impact the direction of biological research in a lasting way, although some of them, such as D'Arcy Thompson's models of biological form, were widely read and admired and others, such as Turing's models of development, stimulated research in other fields. Moreover, it suggests that successful models were not purely mathematical descriptions or simulations of biological phenomena but were based on inductive, as well as hypothetico-deductive, methodology. The recent availability of large amounts of sequencing data and new computational methodology tremendously facilitates system approaches and pattern recognition in many fields of research. Although these new technologies have given rise to claims that correlation is replacing experimentation and causal analysis, the article argues that the inductive and hypothetico-deductive experimental methodologies have remained fundamentally important as long as causal-mechanistic explanations of complex systems are pursued.

The case for biophysics super-groups in physics departments

Increasing numbers of physicists engage in research activities that address biological questions from physics perspectives or strive to develop physics insights from active biological processes. The on-going development and success of such activities morph our ways of thinking about what it is to 'do biophysics' and add to our understanding of the physics of life. Many scientists in this research and teaching landscape are homed in physics departments. A challenge for a hosting department is how to group, name and structure such biophysicists to best add value to their emerging research and teaching but also to the portfolio of the whole department. Here we discuss these issues and speculate on strategies.

Complexity-aware simple modeling

Mathematical models continue to be essential for deepening our understanding of biology. On one extreme, simple or small-scale models help delineate general biological principles. However, the parsimony of detail in these models as well as their assumption of modularity and insulation make them inaccurate for describing quantitative features. On the other extreme, large-scale and detailed models can quantitatively recapitulate a phenotype of interest, but have to rely on many unknown parameters, making them often difficult to parse mechanistically and to use for extracting general principles. We discuss some examples of a new approach-complexity-aware simple modeling-that can bridge the gap between the small-scale and large-scale approaches.

Integrative biological simulation praxis: Considerations from physics, philosophy, and data/model curation practices

Integrative biological simulations have a varied and controversial history in the biological sciences. From computational models of organelles, cells, and simple organisms, to physiological models of tissues, organ systems, and ecosystems, a diverse array of biological systems have been the target of large-scale computational modeling efforts. Nonetheless, these research agendas have yet to prove decisively their value among the broader community of theoretical and experimental biologists. In this commentary, we examine a range of philosophical and practical issues relevant to understanding the potential of integrative simulations. We discuss the role of theory and modeling in different areas of physics and suggest that certain sub-disciplines of physics provide useful cultural analogies for imagining the future role of simulations in biological research. We examine philosophical issues related to modeling which consistently arise in discussions about integrative simulations and suggest a pragmatic viewpoint that balances a belief in philosophy with the recognition of the relative infancy of our state of philosophical understanding. Finally, we discuss community workflow and publication practices to allow research to be readily discoverable and amenable to incorporation into simulations. We argue that there are aligned incentives in widespread adoption of practices which will both advance the needs of integrative simulation efforts as well as other contemporary trends in the biological sciences, ranging from open science and data sharing to improving reproducibility.

Information Integration and Energy Expenditure in Gene Regulation

The quantitative concepts used to reason about gene regulation largely derive from bacterial studies. We show that this bacterial paradigm cannot explain the sharp expression of a canonical developmental gene in response to a regulating transcription factor (TF). In the absence of energy expenditure, with regulatory DNA at thermodynamic equilibrium, information integration across multiple TF binding sites can generate the required sharpness, but with strong constraints on the resultant "higher-order cooperativities." Even with such integration, there is a "Hopfield barrier" to sharpness; for n TF binding sites, this barrier is represented by the Hill function with the Hill coefficient n. If, however, energy is expended to maintain regulatory DNA away from thermodynamic equilibrium, as in kinetic proofreading, this barrier can be breached and greater sharpness achieved. Our approach is grounded in fundamental physics, leads to testable experimental predictions, and suggests how a quantitative paradigm for eukaryotic gene regulation can be formulated.

Beware the tail that wags the dog: informal and formal models in biology

Informal models have always been used in biology to guide thinking and devise experiments. In recent years, formal mathematical models have also been widely introduced. It is sometimes suggested that formal models are inherently superior to informal ones and that biology should develop along the lines of physics or economics by replacing the latter with the former. Here I suggest to the contrary that progress in biology requires a better integration of the formal with the informal.

Nucleosomes, transcription, and probability

Speaking of current measurements on single ion channel molecules, David Colquhoun wrote in 2006, "Individual molecules behave randomly, so suddenly we had to learn how to deal with stochastic processes." Here I describe theoretical efforts to understand recent experimental observations on the chromatin structure of single gene molecules, a molecular biologist's path toward probabilistic theories.

A modular analysis of the auxin signalling network

Auxin is essential for plant development from embryogenesis onwards. Auxin acts in large part through regulation of transcription. The proteins acting in the signalling pathway regulating transcription downstream of auxin have been identified as well as the interactions between these proteins, thus identifying the topology of this network implicating 54 Auxin Response Factor (ARF) and Aux/IAA (IAA) transcriptional regulators. Here, we study the auxin signalling pathway by means of mathematical modeling at the single cell level. We proceed analytically, by considering the role played by five functional modules into which the auxin pathway can be decomposed: the sequestration of ARF by IAA, the transcriptional repression by IAA, the dimer formation amongst ARFs and IAAs, the feedback loop on IAA and the auxin induced degradation of IAA proteins. Focusing on these modules allows assessing their function within the dynamics of auxin signalling. One key outcome of this analysis is that there are both specific and overlapping functions between all the major modules of the signaling pathway. This suggests a combinatorial function of the modules in optimizing the speed and amplitude of auxin-induced transcription. Our work allows identifying potential functions for homo- and hetero-dimerization of transcriptional regulators, with ARF:IAA, IAA:IAA and ARF:ARF dimerization respectively controlling the amplitude, speed and sensitivity of the response and a synergistic effect of the interaction of IAA with transcriptional repressors on these characteristics of the signaling pathway. Finally, we also suggest experiments which might allow disentangling the structure of the auxin signaling pathway and analysing further its function in plants.

Models in biology: 'accurate descriptions of our pathetic thinking'

In this essay I will sketch some ideas for how to think about models in biology. I will begin by trying to dispel the myth that quantitative modeling is somehow foreign to biology. I will then point out the distinction between forward and reverse modeling and focus thereafter on the former. Instead of going into mathematical technicalities about different varieties of models, I will focus on their logical structure, in terms of assumptions and conclusions. A model is a logical machine for deducing the latter from the former. If the model is correct, then, if you believe its assumptions, you must, as a matter of logic, also believe its conclusions. This leads to consideration of the assumptions underlying models. If these are based on fundamental physical laws, then it may be reasonable to treat the model as 'predictive', in the sense that it is not subject to falsification and we can rely on its conclusions. However, at the molecular level, models are more often derived from phenomenology and guesswork. In this case, the model is a test of its assumptions and must be falsifiable. I will discuss three models from this perspective, each of which yields biological insights, and this will lead to some guidelines for prospective model builders.

Time-scale separation--Michaelis and Menten's old idea, still bearing fruit

Michaelis and Menten introduced to biochemistry the idea of time-scale separation, in which part of a system is assumed to be operating sufficiently fast compared to the rest so that it may be taken to have reached a steady state. This allows, in principle, the fast components to be eliminated, resulting in a simplified description of the system's behaviour. Similar ideas have been widely used in different areas of biology, including enzyme kinetics, protein allostery, receptor pharmacology, gene regulation and post-translational modification. However, the methods used have been independent and ad hoc. In the present study, we review the use of time-scale separation as a means to simplify the description of molecular complexity and discuss recent work setting out a single framework that unifies these separate calculations. The framework offers new capabilities for mathematical analysis and helps to do justice to Michaelis and Menten's insights about individual enzymes in the context of multi-enzyme biological systems.

Cell responses only partially shape cell-to-cell variations in protein abundances in Escherichia coli chemotaxis

Cell-to-cell variations in protein abundance in clonal cell populations are ubiquitous in living systems. Because protein composition determines responses in individual cells, it stands to reason that the variations themselves are subject to selective pressures. However, the functional role of these cell-to-cell differences is not well understood. One way to tackle questions regarding relationships between form and function is to perturb the form (e.g., change the protein abundances) and observe the resulting changes in some function. Here, we take on the form-function relationship from the inverse perspective, asking instead what specific constraints on cell-to-cell variations in protein abundance are imposed by a given functional phenotype. We develop a maximum entropy-based approach to posing questions of this type and illustrate the method by application to the well-characterized chemotactic response in Escherichia coli. We find that full determination of observed cell-to-cell variations in protein abundances is not inherent in chemotaxis itself but, in fact, appears to be jointly imposed by the chemotaxis program in conjunction with other factors (e.g., the protein synthesis machinery and/or additional nonchemotactic cell functions, such as cell metabolism). These results illustrate the power of maximum entropy as a tool for the investigation of relationships between biological form and function.