Skip to main content
. 2008 Feb 6;3(2):e1555. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001555

Figure 2. Dynamical behavior of APC:Cdc20 concentration versus time for the Dissociation variant (A, C) and the Convey variant (B, D) each in the uncontrolled (A, B) and the controlled (C, D) case.

Figure 2

Calculation results are presented for different values of the rate k−7 in [s−1 >(dissociation of MCC:APC) between 0.0008 and 0.08, because k−7 is unknown and crucial for model behavior, as indicated. The APC:Cdc20 concentration should be close to zero before attachment and should rise quickly after attachment. Spindle attachment occurs at t = 2000s (switching parameter u from 1 to 0). For the uncontrolled case (A, B), both variants cannot explain the checkpoint behavior; and the Convey variant is even less satisfying compared to the Dissociation variant. In the controlled case (C, D), both variants fully inhibit APC:Cdc20 before attachment and both show fast switching recovery for high k−7 values. The controlled Convey variant (D) is slightly faster (by about 5 mins) in switching compared to the controlled Dissociation (C) variant. Parameters setting according to Table 1 and Table 2.