ArticlePLoS computational biology2013
A design principle of group-level decision making in cell populations.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Population-level bistability inmBio · 2025Article
- Putting theory to the test: An integrated computational/experimental chemostat model of the tragedy of the commons.PloS one · 2024Article
- Parameters, architecture and emergent properties of theJournal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2023Article
- Antiactivators prevent self-sensing inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Peptide signaling without feedback in signal production operates as a true quorum sensing communication system in Bacillus subtilis.Communications biology · 2021Article
- Article
- Bacterial quorum sensing in complex and dynamically changing environments.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2019Review
- Article
- Fold-change detection and scale invariance of cell-cell signaling in social amoeba.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- Core principles of bacterial autoinducer systems.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2015Article
- Collective decision-making in microbes.Frontiers in microbiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Populations of cells often switch states as a group to cope with environmental changes such as nutrient availability and cell density. Although the gene circuits that underlie the switches are well understood at the level of single cells, the ways in which such circuits work in concert among many cells to support group-level switches are not fully explored. Experimental studies of microbial quorum sensing show that group-level changes in cellular states occur in either a graded or an all-or-none fashion. Here, we show through numerical simulations and mathematical analysis that these behaviors generally originate from two distinct forms of bistability. The choice of bistability is uniquely determined by a dimensionless parameter that compares the synthesis and the transport of the inducing molecules. The role of the parameter is universal, such that it not only applies to the autoinducing circuits typically found in bacteria but also to the more complex gene circuits involved in transmembrane receptor signaling. Furthermore, in gene circuits with negative feedback, the same dimensionless parameter determines the coherence of group-level transitions from quiescence to a rhythmic state. The set of biochemical parameters in bacterial quorum-sensing circuits appear to be tuned so that the cells can use either type of transition. The design principle identified here serves as the basis for the analysis and control of cellular collective decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.