Show simple item record

Accuracy of proofreading with zero energy cost

dc.contributor.authorSavageau, Michael A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-04-07T17:59:53Z
dc.date.available2006-04-07T17:59:53Z
dc.date.issued1981-11-07en_US
dc.identifier.citationSavageau, Michael A. (1981/11/07)."Accuracy of proofreading with zero energy cost." Journal of Theoretical Biology 93(1): 179-195. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/24199>en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6WMD-4F1SV94-FR/2/0c18f43d10f92e93e848a393ea5e77e2en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/24199
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=7334819&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractAccuracy of biological discrimination at the molecular level is known in some systems to involve kinetic proofreading mechanisms. Hopfield and Ninio were the first to propose simple specific kinetic mechanisms for such proofreading and to demonstrate that an energy cost accompanies their improvement in accuracy. Savageau and Freter subsequently derived the explicit cost-accuracy relationship for a broad class of proofreading mechanisms, including the conventional Hopfield-Ninio mechanism just referred to. In other systems, the presence of proofreading mechanisms is in question because the diagnostic features of conventional kinetic proofreading are absent. However, Hopfield has recently proposed an alternative "energy-relay" mechanism, which lacks the characteristic features of conventional proofreading and yet is capable of improving accuracy. In this paper, I use the general cost-accuracy relationship that we have previously derived to examine the energy cost and accuracy of proofreading mechanisms involving an energy relay. The principal findings are the following. First, such mechanisms improve accuracy with a zero cost of proofreading, when "proofreading cost," defined as the cost due specifically to proofreading, is separated from the costs of putting material through the system. Second, the basic energy-relay mechanism discussed by Hopfield has only a modest improvement in accuracy, but a comparable improvement by a conventional proofreading mechanism would have a cost of about 0[middle dot]0352 (moles ATP per mole of total product output). Third, accuracy can be increased somewhat if multiple stages of conventional kinetic proofreading precede the energy-relay mechanism. The cost for this improvement is zero while a comparable increase in accuracy achieved by conventional proofreading alone has a cost of about 0[middle dot]0385. Finally, I propose an alternative arrangement of energy-relay mechanisms that is capable of increasing accuracy still further. The maximum accuracy achieved by this scheme at zero energy cost is comparable to that achieved by an infinite expenditure of energy in a single stage of conventional proofreading.en_US
dc.format.extent891657 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.titleAccuracy of proofreading with zero energy costen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNatural Resources and Environmenten_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMolecular, Cellular and Developmental Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, U.S.A.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid7334819en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/24199/1/0000458.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(81)90063-1en_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Theoretical Biologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.