1 Organization and Order 0 Organization and Order 30 October 2009 Alan Levin [email protected]USC Computer Science Colloquium This briefing and related work available at http://ailevin.wordpress.com/ Agenda Introduction: Organization and how we model it Functional and structural modeling contexts Modeling: Rosen’s modeling relation and scientific models Bottom up and top down explanation Practical: Applying lessons from system engineering Structure and function on an even footing Application: Protein folding Progress predicting 3-D folding from sequence Conclusion
18
Embed
Organization and Order - WordPress.com · Biopolymer building blocks Metabolism, transport, regulation, … Wealth of physical, chemical, structural data 60K 3-D folded structures
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
catastrophe, chaos, complexity theories Emergence: underlying models don’t predict it, or the
modelers didn’t expect it Order and organization often used synonymously
Both seem to refer to pattern, regularity, symmetry Unfortunately this causes confusion
3
Organization and Order2
One Organism
1014 Cells
10-9 cal/deg
1022 Polymers
0.6 cal/deg
1025 Monomers
401 cal/deg
Organization Is Not OrderIntroduction
∆S = klnW
Almost all of the ∆S is in forming the polymers Any 1014 cells have entropy of a person All the entropy is in forming the polymers The ∆S for boiling a cup of water is 343 cal/K
Organization is not the same as order We throw away what we want to study in studying the
molecular level Studying organization structurally leads to confusion
Calculation 75kg person -->10 kg amino acids,120 g nucleotides k is 3.3 x 10-24 calories per degree Kelvin (cal/K) 1023 nucleotides and 1025 amino acids
41023 nucleic acids201025proteins400 cal/K from protein and 1 cal/K from nucleic acids
4
Organization and Order3
Organization Is Functional
“By thermodynamic criteria a biological system is notmore ordered than a rock of the same weight.”
L. Blumenfeld1
“When we talk about a ‘well-organized’ system–whetheran organism, a business, a team, or a personal life–weare referring to how effectively it caries out certainactivities, rather than to specific structural factorsinternal to the system.”
J. Wicken6
Introduction
Entropy analysis of organism very dissatisfying Nothing wrong with thermodynamics, but we are
asking the wrong sort of question A system at equilibrium may be orderly or disorderly
but it cannot be organized since it can’t do anything
We need more than structural modeling for a scientificexplanation of organization
What are functional models and how do they relate tostructural models?
5
Organization and Order4
How Do Function And Structure Relate?
Modeling What kinds of explanations do the models provide? Rosen’s modeling relation
Practical What kinds of modeling methods are available? System engineering process
Application How can both models be applied to the same problem? Protein folding example
Introduction
Models are about questions and answers Rosen was a controversial theoretical biologist Consider underlying assumptions of scientific models Also relates to measurements and prediction
System engineering is critical to interpreting Rosen Practical experience separating function, structure
and reintegrating Many useful analogies in role of architecture This also provides underpinning for SE indicating
possible extensions of SE methods Protein folding
“Simple” functional biological system Really just to test the concepts
6
Organization and Order5
NaturalSystem
FormalSystem
Encoding
DecodingC
ause Infer
Modeling
Rosen’s Modeling Relation
The Worldor
Out There
The Modelor
In Here
To the extent that we are closing the loop between formaland natural systems we are doing science
Encode perceptions (measurements) into symbols in amath model
Decode prediction from inferences in math model Relate inferential chain in the math to causal chain in
the world Encoding/decoding bridge “out there” and “in here,” and we
impute things to nature Laws, state spaces, abstract system spaces We pretend that nature is something with a
mathematical domain and range, but it’s not there ”Science, in fact, requires both; it requires an external,
objective world of phenomena, and the internal, subjectiveworld of the self, which perceives, organizes, acts, andunderstands.” R. Rosen5
7
Organization and Order6
Structural Models Explain Bottom Up
Differential Equations
State Space Trajectories
Modeling
!
dx dt ="(y # x)
dy dt = x($ # z) # y
dz dt = xy #%z
Benard Cells
Fluid Element Pieces
Structural Question: What is this system made of and howdoes it work?
Answer: The pieces are incompressible fluid elements;system DE explains system dynamics
System inherits state space, DE from the pieces Different systems modeled by the same pieces
Synthesis: choose pieces and build system model Agnostic to what the system does: no function Trajectories in state space are inference loop Lorenz attractor
2-D fluid flow with imposed temperature difference State variables are not physical coordinates Deterministic and chaotic depending on parameters http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LorenzAttractor.html
8
Organization and Order7
Functional Components
Functional Architecture
Modeling
Functional Models Explain Top Down
A
BC
f
gD
q
h
Mappings
Chloroplast
f:A B
System
Component
What does this system do and how is it organized? Behavior and organization are explained by how
components cooperate (functional architecture) Components inherit function from system context Component is the atom of functional model Defined by mapping: constitutive, domain: influence
by system, range: influence on system Mappings can also be in domain/range e.g q Very different systems modeled by the same
architecture and have a similar organization Analysis: Study system behaviors to choose components Agnostic to what the system is made of: no stuff Inference loop is path through functional architecture This functional architecture has nothing to do with
chloroplasts
9
Organization and Order8
Lessons From System Engineering2
Practical
RequirementsAnalysis
FunctionalAnalysis
DesignSynthesis
DesignLoop
RequirementsLoop
System•Implementation
Operational•Need
Requirements loop is functional modeling Requirements analysis corresponds to encoding
functional observables and examining linkages Requirements describe system behaviors Functional analysis creates, refines functional
architecture Design loop is a metaphor for structural modeling
Architecture covers many possible implementations Design synthesis does trade studies
Requirements constrain specific implementation Separating function and implementation is one of the
great powers of system engineering Trade studies, prototypes divide and conquer
otherwise intractable problems
10
Organization and Order9
Function, Structure on an Even FootingPractical
Nature
Top DownDescribe Class of
Systems
Bottom UpChoose Specific
System
?
Structure constrains function Synthesize a structural model and analyze the
model’s dynamics looking for organized behavior Scientists call this emergence
Function constrains structure Analyze a functional model and synthesize the
model’s components looking for structural dynamics System engineers call this a trade study
Crucial to decode and encode between models Functional first if more interested in organization and you
think whole is more than sum of parts Structural first if more interested in composition and you
think whole is merely sum of parts Why do we study emergence in Lorenz attractor rather
Folded proteins are ubiquitous functional components Biopolymer building blocks Metabolism, transport, regulation, …
Wealth of physical, chemical, structural data 60K 3-D folded structures in Protein Data Bank4
Many more protein sequences can be read offgenomes
Bovine Trypsin: 223 Amino Acids, 11 peptide inhibitor, Caion, 141 waters C gray, N blue, O red, S yellow
Note tight 3-D structure Soluble proteins surprisingly dense Cartoon shows local helical, pleated sheet structures Local structures folded back on one another and
stabilized by disulfides and hiding “oily” side chains
12
Organization and Order11
Biennial Protein Folding Competition7
Started with purely structural modeling
Best models today use templates from Protein Data Bank With reasonable template, model is very good Structural heuristics optimize from template starting point
Often the correct template is not found Purely structural models must be used Results are much poorer
Application
Structural model pieces are amino acids Constitutive parameters: side chain Variable parameters: alpha carbon angles at least
From sequence to folded 3-D structure Seemed straight forward 50 years ago, but… Many degrees of freedom, complex dynamics, solvent Small energy differences between folded states 223 amino acids gives 3223 = 10106 conformations
From physical chemistry to bio-informatic heuristics With reasonable template, model is very good Structural studies now drive template heuristics
13
Organization and Order12
Evolution of Template MatchingApplication
Sequence matching Related evolutionary sequences
Local structure matching Treat local structures as rigid units
Threading Local structure motifs or folds
14
Organization and Order13
Why Does Threading Work So Well?
Threading greatly constrains structural modeling Protein conformation space is extremely large The fold space in Protein Data Bank is surprisingly small8
Why is the fold space so small? Sequence variation must leave function close to wild type Naturally occurring folds constrained by evolutionary history
Threading literally works from function to structure Theading: “Can this sequence perform template functions?” Protein Data Bank fold space is evolved biological function
Application
For 223 amino acids estimate 3223 = 10106 conformations Only three alpha carbon angles per position Particles in universe 1080 ? Part of why problem is hard bottom up
Fold space in PDB seems to be several thousand families Evolution is inherently constrained functionally
Always working from an existing functional context Helpful or harmful depends on organism, environment Exploring possibility near existing functional success
15
Organization and Order14
Conclusion
System engineering provides powerful insights to science Functional analysis and system architecture methods Interplay of function and structure to extend science Well suited to tasks of proteomics, synthetic biology, bio/eco
technical challenges
Function constrains intractable structural problems Recent progress in protein modeling demonstrates this Critical in synthetic biology, other complex problems
Organization is functional, order is structural We demystify emergence simply by explaining it functionally Function and structure are complementary, neither is more
physical nor more empirical Organization must be measured by functional metrics
SE in some sense grew out of OR in response to Nuclearage and Space age technical problems
Can a new methodology grow out of SE in responseto synthetic biology and other complex eco/bioproblems?
Proteomics asks how the proteins in a pathway, organelle,organism cooperate
This is a functional question State space grows like number of pieces factorial
Order and organization metrics Entropy, information important in science, engineering Stat Mech links entropy and structural information Similar functional metric for functional information
Organization and order subtlety interdependent Order limits maximal organization and organization
limits minimal order
16
Organization and Order15
References
1. Blumenfeld L. (1981) Problems of Biological Physics. Berlin, New York:Springer-Verlag.
2. Defense Acquisition University (2005) Systems Engineering FundamentalsJanuary 2001. Fort Belvoir, VA
3. Levin, A. (2009) A Top-Down Approach to a Complex Natural System:Protein Folding. Axiomathes. DOI: 10.1007/s10516-009-9093-0.
4. RCSB Protein Data Bank. Cited October 6, 2009http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/statistics/contentGrowthChart.do?content=total&seqid=100
5. Rosen, R. (1991) Life Itself : a comprehensive inquiry into the nature, origin,and fabrication of life. New York: Columbia University Press.
6. Wicken, J. (1987) Evolution, Thermodynamics, and Information: extendingthe Darwinian program. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Zhang, Y. (2008) Progress and Challenges in Protein Structure Prediction.Current Opinion in Structural Biology, 18(3), 342-348.
8. Zhang, Y, Skolnick J (2005)The protein structure prediction problem couldbe solved using the current PDB library. PNAS USA 102(4):1029-1034