Modern Formal Methods and Applications pp 83-122 | Cite as

# Formal Methods for Modeling Biological Regulatory Networks

## Summary

This chapter presents how the formal methods can be used to analyse biological regulatory networks, which are at the core of all biological phenomena as, for example, cell differentiation or temperature control. The dynamics of such a system, i.e. its semantics, is often described by an ordinary differential equation system, but has also been abstracted into a discrete formalism due to R. Thomas. This second description is well adapted to stateof-the-art measurement techniques in biology, which often provide qualitative and coarse-grained descriptions of biological regulatory networks. This formalism permits us to design a formal framework for analysing the dynamics of biological systems. The verification tools, as model checking, can then be used not only to verify if the modelling is coherent with known biological properties, but also to help biologists in the modelling process. Actually, for a given biological regulatory network, a large class of semantics can be automatically built and model checking allows the selection of the semantics, which are coherent with the biological requirement, i.e. the temporal specification. This modelling process is illustrated with the well studied genetic regulatory network controlling immunity in bacteriophage lambda.

## Keywords

Model Check Formal Method Stable Steady State Atomic Proposition Kripke Structure## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## 5.8 References

- [1]V. Bassano and G. Bernot. Marked regulatory graphs: a formal framework to simulate biological regulatory networks with simple automata. In
*14’th International Workshop on Rapid System Prototyping*, pages 93–99, San Diego, 2003.Google Scholar - [2]G. Bernot, F. Cassez, J.-P. Comet, F. Delaplace, C. Müller, O. Roux, and O.H. Roux. Semantics of biological regulatory networks. In
*Proceedings of the Workshop on Concurrent Models in Molecular Biology (BioConcur’2003)*, 2003.Google Scholar - [3]G. Bernot, J.-P. Comet, A. Richard, and J. Guespin. A fruitful application of formal methods to biological regulatory networks: Extending Thomas’ asynchronous logical approach with temporal logic.
*J. Theor. Biol.*, 229(3):339–347, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [4]A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, F. Giunchiglia, and M. Roveri. NuSMV: a reimplementation of SMV. In
*Proceeding of the International Workshop on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT-98)*, BRICS Notes Series, NS-98-4, pages 25–31, 1998.Google Scholar - [5]O. Cinquin and J. Demongeot. Positive and negative feedback: striking a balance between necessary antagonists.
*J. Theor. Biol.*, 216(2):229–241, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [6]O. Cinquin and J. Demongeot. Roles of positive and negative feedback in biological systems.
*C.R.Biol.*, 325(11):1085–1095, 2002.Google Scholar - [7]H. de Jong, J.-L. Gouzé, C. Hernandez, M. Page, S. Tewfik, and J. Geiselmann. Qualitative simulation of genetic regulatory networks using piecewise-linear models.
*Bull. Math. Biol.*, 66(2):301–340, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [8]E.A. Emerson.
*Handbook of theoretical computer science, Volume B: formal models and semantics*, chapter Temporal and modal logic, pages 995–1072. MIT Press, 1990.Google Scholar - [9]A.F. Filippov.
*Differential equations with discontinuous right-hand sides*. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988.Google Scholar - [10]L. Glass and S.A. Kauffman. The logical analysis of continuous non linear biochemical control networks.
*J. Theor. Biol.*, 39(1):103–129, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [11]J.-L. Gouzé and S. Tewfik. A class of piecewise linear differential equations arising in biological models.
*Dynamical Syst.*, 17:299–316, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [12]T.A. Henzinger, P.-H. Ho, and H. Wong-Toi. HyTech: A model checker for hybrid systems.
*Software Tools for Technology Transfer*, 1:110–122, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [13]M. Huth and M. Ryan.
*Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems*. Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar - [14]B.J. Kuipers.
*Qualitative reasoning: modeling and simulation with incomplete knowledge*. MIT Press, 1994.Google Scholar - [15]K. McMillan.
*Symbolic Model Checking*. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.Google Scholar - [16]L. Mendoza, D. Thieffry, and E.R. Alvarez-Buylla. Genetic control of flower morphogenesis in arabidopsis thaliana: a logical analysis.
*Bioinformatics*, 15(7–8):593–606, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [17]S. Pérès and J.-P. Comet. Contribution of computational tree logic to biological regulatory networks: example from pseudomonas aeruginosa. In
*International workshop on Computational Methods in Systems Biology*, volume 2602 of*LNCS*, pages 47–56, February 24–26, 2003.Google Scholar - [18]E. Plathe, T. Mestl, and S.W. Omholt. Feedback loops, stability and multistationarity in dynamical systems.
*J. Biol. Syst.*, 3:569–577, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [19]L. Sánchez and D. Thieffry. A logical analysis of the drosophila gapgene system.
*J. Theor. Biol.*, 211(2):115–141, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [20]L. Sánchez, J. van Helden, and D. Thieffry. Establishment of the dorsoventral pattern during embryonic development of drosophila melanogaster: a logical analysis.
*J. Theor. Biol.*, 189(4):377–389, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [21]S.S. Shen-Orr, R. Milo, S. Mangan, and U. Alon. Network motifs in the transcriptional regulation network of Escherichia coli.
*Nat. Genet.*, 31(1):64–68, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [22]E.H. Snoussi. Qualitative dynamics of a piecewise-linear differential equations: a discrete mapping approach.
*Dynamics and stability of Systems*, 4:189–207, 1989.Google Scholar - [23]E.H. Snoussi. Necessary conditions for multistationarity and stable periodicity.
*J. Biol. Syst.*, 6:3–9, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [24]E.H. Snoussi and R. Thomas. Logical identification of all steady states: the concept of feedback loop characteristic states.
*Bull. Math. Biol.*, 55(5):973–991, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [25]C. Soulé. Graphical requirements for multistationarity.
*ComPlexUs*, 1:123–133, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [26]D. Thieffry and R. Thomas. Dynamical behaviour of biological regulatory networks-II. Immunity control in bacteriophage lambda.
*Bull. Math. Biol.*, 57(2):277–297, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [27]R. Thomas. Logical analysis of systems comprising feedback loops.
*J. Theor. Biol.*, 73(4):631–656, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [28]R. Thomas. On the relation between the logical structure of systems and their ability to generate multiple steady states or sustained oscillations.
*Springer Series in Synergies 9*, pages 180–193, 1980.Google Scholar - [29]R. Thomas and R. d’Ari.
*Biological Feedback*. CRC Press, 1990.Google Scholar - [30]R. Thomas, A.M. Gathoye, and L. Lambert. A complex control circuit. Regulation of immunity in temperate bacteriophages.
*Eur. J. Biochem.*, 71(1):211–227, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [31]R. Thomas and M. Kaufman. Multistationarity, the basis of cell differentiation and memory. II. Logical analysis of regulatory networks in terms of feedback circuits.
*Chaos*, 11:180–195, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [32]R. Thomas, D. Thieffry, and M. Kaufman. Dynamical behaviour of biological regulatory networks-I. Biological role of feedback loops an practical use of the concept of the loop-characteristic state.
*Bull. Math. Biol.*, 57(2):247–276, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [33]E.O. Voit.
*Computational Analysis of biochemical systems: a practical guide for biochemists and molecular biologists*. Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar