Accounting for experimental noise reveals that mRNA levels, amplified by post-transcriptional processes, largely determine steady-state protein levels in yeast
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1371/journal.pgen.1005206 · Paper page
Abstract
Cells respond to their environment by modulating protein levels through mRNA transcription and post-transcriptional control. Modest observed correlations between global steady-state mRNA and protein measurements have been interpreted as evidence that mRNA levels determine roughly 40% of the variation in protein levels, indicating dominant post-transcriptional effects. However, the techniques underlying these conclusions, such as correlation and regression, yield biased results when data are noisy, missing systematically, and collinear—properties of mRNA and protein measurements—which motivated us to revisit this subject. Noise-robust analyses of 24 studies of budding yeast reveal that mRNA levels explain more than 85% of the variation in steady-state protein levels. Protein levels are not proportional to mRNA levels, but rise much more rapidly. Regulation of translation suffices to explain this nonlinear effect, revealing post-transcriptional amplification of, rather than competition with, transcriptional signals. These results substantially revise widely credited models of protein-level regulation, and introduce multiple noise-aware approaches essential for proper analysis of many biological phenomena.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Global quantification of mammalian gene expression control
Schwanhäusser, B., Busse, D., Li, N., Dittmar, G., Schuchhardt, J., Wolf, J., Chen, W., & Selbach, M. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10098 · Cited by 6,566 · cited 7× · see citing works
“Low observed mRNA–protein correlations have motivated the search for alternate forms of regulation capable of accounting for the majority of protein-level variability [3, 9, 13].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialLu, P., Vogel, C., Wang, R., Yao, X., & Marcotte, E. M. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1270 · Cited by 1,139 · see citing works
Single-RNA counting reveals alternative modes of gene expression in yeast
Zenklusen, D., Larson, D. R., & Singer, R. H. (2008) · Nature Structural & Molecular Biology · doi:10.1038/nsmb.1514 · Cited by 684 · see citing works
Paxdb, a database of protein abundance averages across all three domains of life
Wang, M., Weiss, M., Simonovic, M., Haertinger, G., Schrimpf, S. P., Hengartner, M. O., & von Mering, C. (2012) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.o111.014704 · Cited by 466 · cited 3× · see citing works
“39) and a typical protein study’s results explain only 32% in another study’s variance, consistent with previous studies reporting wide variation between studies [16].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialPearson, K. (1903) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical or Physical Character · doi:10.1098/rsta.1903.0001 · Cited by 415 · see citing works
Gu, W., Zhou, T., & Wilke, C. O. (2010) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000664 · Cited by 313 · see citing works
Gerashchenko, M. V., Lobanov, A. V., & Gladyshev, V. N. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1120799109 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
A dynamic model of proteome changes reveals new roles for transcript alteration in yeast
Lee, M. V., Topper, S. E., Hubler, S. L., Hose, J., Wenger, C. D., Coon, J. J., & Gasch, A. P. (2011) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.1038/msb.2011.48 · Cited by 290 · see citing works
Li, J. J., Bickel, P. J., & Biggin, M. D. (2014) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.270 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
Growth control of the eukaryote cell: a systems biology study in yeast
Castrillo, J. I., Zeef, L. A., Hoyle, D. C., Zhang, N., Hayes, A., Gardner, D. C., Cornell, M. J., Petty, J., Hakes, L., Wardleworth, L., et al. (2007) · Journal of Biology · doi:10.1186/jbiol54 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Translation inhibitors cause abnormalities in ribosome profiling experiments
Gerashchenko, M. V., & Gladyshev, V. N. (2014) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gku671 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Post-transcriptional expression regulation in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae on a genomic scale
Beyer, A., Hollunder, J., Nasheuer, H.-P., & Wilhelm, T. (2004) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m400099-mcp200 · Cited by 248 · see citing works
Comparative proteomic and transcriptomic profiling of the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe
Schmidt, M. W., Houseman, A., Ivanov, A. R., & Wolf, D. A. (2007) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.1038/msb4100117 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
A comprehensive, quantitative, and genome-wide model of translation
Siwiak, M., & Zielenkiewicz, P. (2010) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000865 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Miura, F., Kawaguchi, N., Yoshida, M., Uematsu, C., Kito, K., Sakaki, Y., & Ito, T. (2008) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/1471-2164-9-574 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Estimating selection on synonymous codon usage from noisy experimental data
Wallace, E. W. J., Airoldi, E. M., & Drummond, D. A. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst051 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationArcher, K. J., Dumur, C. I., Taylor, G. S., Chaplin, M. D., Guiseppi‐Elie, A., Buck, G. A., Grant, G., Ferreira‐Gonzalez, A., & Garrett, C. T. (2008) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2984 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Csárdi, G., Franks, A., Choi, D. S., Airoldi, E. M., & Drummond, D. A.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Broad Institute (US)
- University of Chicago (US)
- Venue
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2014-09-21
- OpenAlex
- W2184096574
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
- Keywords
- mRNA-protein correlation, post-transcriptional regulation, translational regulation, mRNA levels, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, transcriptional regulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
