IGEM:IMPERIAL/2006/project/Oscillator/Theoretical Analyses/3Dto2D: Difference between revisions
From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
Baijiongjun (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
== '''Model Simplification: Can We Learn Anything from 2D Models?''' == | == '''Model Simplification: Can We Learn Anything from 2D Models?''' == | ||
< | <font size="4">'''From 3D to 2D'''</font size="4"> | ||
<br><br> | |||
*Simplification is possible because of the similarity of the growth rates of V and W in the full 3D Model | *Simplification is possible because of the similarity of the growth rates of V and W in the full 3D Model | ||
**Their complex production terms are identical | **Their complex production terms are identical | ||
Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
**A simple hypotheses could lead to a very big simplification in our analysis | **A simple hypotheses could lead to a very big simplification in our analysis | ||
**A 2D analysis is much simpler, and still will give us valid prediction on whether the system will oscillate. | **A 2D analysis is much simpler, and still will give us valid prediction on whether the system will oscillate. | ||
*Required Hypotheses for Simplification | |||
*'''Required Hypotheses for Simplification''' | |||
** Hypothesis 1: d1=d2 | ** Hypothesis 1: d1=d2 | ||
** Hypothesis 2: [aiiA] = [LuxR] initially ( that is at time t=0) | ** Hypothesis 2: [aiiA] = [LuxR] initially ( that is at time t=0) |
Revision as of 04:12, 30 October 2006
Analysis of the Model of the Molecular Predation Oscillator
Model Simplification: Can We Learn Anything from 2D Models?
From 3D to 2D
- Simplification is possible because of the similarity of the growth rates of V and W in the full 3D Model
- Their complex production terms are identical
- Only their dissipative terms (-d1*V and -d2*W ) varies
- A simple hypotheses could lead to a very big simplification in our analysis
- A 2D analysis is much simpler, and still will give us valid prediction on whether the system will oscillate.
- Required Hypotheses for Simplification
- Hypothesis 1: d1=d2
- Hypothesis 2: [aiiA] = [LuxR] initially ( that is at time t=0)
- The assumption of d1=d2 is feasible because aiiA and LuxR within the cells will be washed out at the same rate in chemostat
- As long as we can ensure the washing out rate is much more dominant than their natural half-life. (Easily achieved)
- Under previous 2 Hypothesis
- Both aiiA and LuxR will start at the same concentration, and the same rate of production and degradation
- Hence they will be at the same concentration thoughout
- System then can be simplified to
- NB: Hypothesis 2 is not really essential
- If d1=d2, the difference between W and V will decay to 0 exponentially (with a time constant 1/d1)
- Therefore after a little time we can assume V=W
- The larger d1, the faster the assumption becomes valid
- The larger the difference between initial values of V & W, the longer the settling time of reaching V=W only
- In particular we are sure that the condition on the parameters for obtaining a limit cycle will still be identical in 2D and 3D despite of the initial concentrations of U V W.
Problem : There is a Huge Difference Between 2D and 3D
- Poincare-Bendixson Theorem works for 1D and 2D only, but not 3D!!!
- We only need simple requirements for a limit cycle in 2D
- In 3D the requirement is more complex - or much more complex
- Can we really afford to assume the hypotheses and reduce the system to 2D?
- If our hypotheses are exactly met: Yes!
- In practice: there might be slight errors
- Slight error on Hypothesis 2: not important
- Slight error on hypothesis 1:
- [aiiA] and [LuxR] get more and more out of synchronisation
- However, if the hypotheses are almost met, we can hope to have a few synchronised cycles
- We hope that the conditions on the parameter to generate limit cycle will be the same, the only differences are the amplitude, frequency and phase difference of the oscillations
- However, studying the 2D model will also help us understand the 3D model more
Conclusion
- There is a lot to learn from the 2D model
- A word of caution:
- The simulation above shows individual cycles of [aiiA] and [LuxR]
- Frequencies are equal
- Profiles very similar
- Peak amplitudes different
- Clearly for such cycles d1=d2 was not met. We therefore have to study the 3D case in its entirety at some point
- However for our current interest of whether the system can result in generation, 2D case of d1=d2 should be enough
- The simulation above shows individual cycles of [aiiA] and [LuxR]