Difference between revisions of "Team:Manchester/Model/MechanismUncertainty"

m
m
Line 81: Line 81:
 
<p> For each of the combinations of potential rate equations for each step the following was undertaken:</p>
 
<p> For each of the combinations of potential rate equations for each step the following was undertaken:</p>
 
<p>The model was run with many iterations. </br> The concentration at steady state for each iteration was recorded and plotted in a histogram. </br> Experimental steady state data was then compared to these histograms. </p>
 
<p>The model was run with many iterations. </br> The concentration at steady state for each iteration was recorded and plotted in a histogram. </br> Experimental steady state data was then compared to these histograms. </p>
 +
 +
<p>For each combination of different rate laws used to model our network, the following steps were taken:
 +
 +
 +
1) Generate probability distributions for each kinetic parameter required.
 +
2) Simulate the model with different sets of kinetic values that are sampled from probability distributions. In our study, 1000 samples for each reaction were modelled, i.e. the model was simulated with 1000 different sets of kinetic values.
 +
3) Analysed the model by retrieving concentrations at reaction completion for each sample and plotted in a histogram.
 +
4) Compared experimental data with our model predictions.</p>
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
<a href="#TopTitle">Return to top of page</a>
 
<a href="#TopTitle">Return to top of page</a>

Revision as of 14:10, 18 October 2016

Manchester iGEM 2016

Network Mechanism Analysis


Contents

Overview and Motivation
Methodology
Results
Conclusions

Overview and Motivation

During discussions with the experimental team it became clear to us that the exact reaction mechanism in place was not clearly understood. By modelling a range of different potential mechanisms and comparing the outputs to experimental data we could draw conclusions about the accuracy of the mechanisms and hence refine the model in an effort to produce more accurate predictions and improve our understanding of the system.

The combinations of different rate laws used to model our reactions are as below:

Reaction One (GOx) Reaction Two (HRP)
Irreversible Michaelis-Menten Irreversible Michaelis-Menten
Reversible Michaelis-Menten Reversible Michaelis-Menten
Uni-Bi Reversible Michaelis-Menten Bi-Uni Reversible Michaelis-Menten

Return to top of page

Methodology

For each of the combinations of potential rate equations for each step the following was undertaken:

The model was run with many iterations.
The concentration at steady state for each iteration was recorded and plotted in a histogram.
Experimental steady state data was then compared to these histograms.

For each combination of different rate laws used to model our network, the following steps were taken: 1) Generate probability distributions for each kinetic parameter required. 2) Simulate the model with different sets of kinetic values that are sampled from probability distributions. In our study, 1000 samples for each reaction were modelled, i.e. the model was simulated with 1000 different sets of kinetic values. 3) Analysed the model by retrieving concentrations at reaction completion for each sample and plotted in a histogram. 4) Compared experimental data with our model predictions.


Return to top of page

Results

PLACEHOLDER FOR GRAPHS


Return to top of page

Conclusions

From the graphs you can see that...



Return to top of page
Return to overview