The ability of transcription factors to differentially regulate gene expression is a crucial component of the mechanism underlying inversion, a frequently observed genetic interaction pattern
Saman Amini, Annika JacobseniD, Olga IvanovaiD, Philip LijnzaadiD, Jaap HeringaiD, Frank C. P. HolstegeiD, K. Anton FeenstraiD, Patrick KemmereniD
Abstract
Genetic interactions, a phenomenon whereby combinations of mutations lead to unexpected effects, reflect how cellular processes are wired and play an important role in complex genetic diseases. Understanding the molecular basis of genetic interactions is crucial for deciphering pathway organization as well as understanding the relationship between genetic variation and disease. Several putative molecular mechanisms have been linked to different genetic interaction types. However, differences in genetic interaction patterns and their underlying mechanisms have not yet been compared systematically between different functional gene classes. Here, differences in the occurrence and types of genetic interactions are compared for two classes, gene-specific transcription factors (GSTFs) and signaling genes (kinases and phosphatases). Genome-wide gene expression data for 63 single and double deletion mutants in bakers yeast reveals that the two most common genetic interaction patterns are buffering and inversion. Buffering is typically associated with redundancy and is well understood. In inversion, genes show opposite behavior in the double mutant compared to the corresponding single mutants. The underlying mechanism is poorly understood. Although both classes show buffering and inversion patterns, the prevalence of inversion is much stronger in GSTFs. To decipher potential mechanisms, a Petri Net modeling approach was employed, where genes are represented as nodes and relationships between genes as edges. This allowed over 9 million possible three and four node models to be exhaustively enumerated. The models show that a quantitative difference in interaction strength is a strict requirement for obtaining inversion. In addition, this difference is frequently accompanied with a second gene that shows buffering. Taken together, these results provide a mechanistic explanation for inversion. Furthermore, the ability of transcription factors to differentially regulate expression of their targets provides a likely explanation why inversion is more prevalent for GSTFs compared to kinases and phosphatases.\n\nAuthor SummaryThe relationship between genotype and phenotype is one of the major challenges in biology. While many previous studies have identified genes involved in complex genetic diseases, there is still a gap between genotype and phenotype. One of the difficulties in filling this gap has been attributed to genetic interactions. Large-scale studies have revealed that genetic interactions are widespread in model organisms such as bakers yeast. Several molecular mechanisms have been proposed for different genetic interaction types. However, differences in occurrence and underlying molecular mechanism of genetic interactions have not yet been compared between gene classes of different function. Here, we compared genetic interaction patterns identified using gene expression profiling for two classes of genes: gene specific transcription factors and signaling related genes. We modelled all possible molecular networks to unravel putative molecular differences underlying different genetic interaction patterns. Our study proposes a new mechanistic explanation for a certain genetic interaction pattern that is more strongly associated with transcription factors compared to signaling related genes. Overall, our findings and the computational methodologies implemented here can be valuable for understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying genetic interactions.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 4
- FWCI
- 0.25
- Field percentile
- 47th percentile
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Changes in gene expression shift and switch genetic interactions
Xianghua Li, Jasna Lalić, … Ben Lehner·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Aug 29, 2019
- Systematic inference of regulation by protein kinases finds surprising level of transcription factor deactivation
Christian Degnbol Madsen, Jotun Hein, Christopher Thomas Workman·bioRxiv·Sep 3, 2021
- Balance between mutually exclusive traits shifted by variants of a yeast transcription factor
Michael W. Dorrity, Josh T. Cuperus, … Christine Queitsch·Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesPeer-reviewed·Aug 1, 2018
- Construction of two-input logic gates using Transcriptional Interference
Antoni E. Bordoy, Nolan J. O’Connor, Anushree Chatterjee·ACS Synthetic BiologyPeer-reviewed·Sep 18, 2019
- Transcription factor clusters enable target search but do not contribute to target gene activation
Joseph V.W. Meeussen, Wim Pomp, … Tineke Laura Lenstra·Nucleic Acids ResearchPeer-reviewed·Mar 16, 2023
- Trans-acting genetic variation affects the expression of adjacent genes
Krisna Van Dyke, Sheila Lutz, … Frank Wolfgang Albert·GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Feb 3, 2021