The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Limit Cycle Models for Circadian Rhythms Based on Transcriptional Regulation in Drosophila and Neurospora
Abstract
We examine theoretical models for circadian oscillations based on transcriptional regulation in Drosophila and Neurospora. For Drosophila, the molecular model is based on the negative feedback exerted on the expression of the per and tim genes by the complex formed between the PER and TIM proteins. For Neurospora, similarly, the model relies on the feedback exerted on the expression of the frq gene by its protein product FRQ. In both models, sustained rhythmic variations in protein and mRNA levels occur in continuous darkness, in the form of limit cycle oscillations. The effect of light on circadian rhythms is taken into account in the models by considering that it triggers degradation of the TIM protein in Drosophila, and frq transcription in Neurospora. When incorporating the control exerted by light at the molecular level, we show that the models can account for the entrainment of circadian rhythms by light-dark cycles and for the damping of the oscillations in constant light, though such damping occurs more readily in the Drosophila model. The models account for the phase shifts induced by light pulses and allow the construction of phase response curves. These compare well with experimental results obtained in Drosophila. The model for Drosophila shows that when applied at the appropriate phase, light pulses of appropriate duration and magnitude can permanently or transiently suppress circadian rhythmicity. We investigate the effects of the magnitude of light-induced changes on oscillatory behavior. Finally, we discuss the common and distinctive features of circadian oscillations in the two organisms.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
Cites
The Geometry of Biological Time
Winfree, A. T. (1980) · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-22492-2 · Cited by 3,613
Circadian oscillation of a mammalian homologue of the Drosophila period gene
Tei, H., Okamura, H., Shigeyoshi, Y., Fukuhara, C., Ozawa, R., Hirose, M., & Sakaki, Y. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/39086 · Cited by 792
Cited by
Computational systems biology.
Kitano, H. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01254 · Cited by 2,209
Robustness can evolve gradually in complex regulatory gene networks with varying topology
Ciliberti, S., Martin, O. C., & Wagner, A. (2007) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030015 · Cited by 390
Robustness of circadian rhythms with respect to molecular noise
Gonze, D., Halloy, J., & Goldbeter, A. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.022628299 · Cited by 401
Self-citationMathematical models of sleep regulation
Achermann, P. (2003) · Frontiers in Bioscience · doi:10.2741/1064 · Cited by 358
Magnetic field effects in biology from the perspective of the radical pair mechanism
Zadeh-Haghighi, H., & Simon, C. (2022) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2022.0325 · Cited by 197
Metadata
- Authors
- Leloup, J.-C., Gonze, D., & Goldbeter, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Biological Rhythms
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 433-448
- ISSN
- 0748-7304 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-4531
- OpenAlex
- W2130618526
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 2.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Limit Cycle Models for Circadian Rhythms Based on Transcriptional Regulation in Drosophila and Neurospora. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/074873099129000948
- The paper
- Leloup, J.-C., Gonze, D., & Goldbeter, A. (1999). Limit Cycle Models for Circadian Rhythms Based on Transcriptional Regulation in Drosophila and Neurospora. Journal of Biological Rhythms. https://doi.org/10.1177/074873099129000948
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.