Table 4. Comparison between model predictions and experimental outcomes from (Barkoulas et al., 2013).
The model prediction (mean ±SD within the parameter ensemble) is displayed below the experimental outcome.
| Experiment | VPC fates (% 1°, 2°, 3°) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P4.p | P5.p | P6.p | P7.p | P8.p | |
|
Excess EGF × reduced Notch (Figure 3)
The Notch level is our fit for Notch RNAi in the JU2039 line ~ 0.4 × WT. The EGF level is based on the mRNA level measured in the JU2036 EGF perturbation line (Barkoulas et al., 2013). | |||||
| JU2039 (WT EGF) | 1, 0, 99 | 1, 91, 8 | 100, 0, 0 | 1, 87, 11 | 0, 0, 100 |
| 0 ± 0, 0 ± 0, 99 ± 0 | 3 ± 1, 88 ± 1, 8 ± 1 | 99 ± 0, 0 ± 0, 1 ± 0 | 3 ± 1, 89 ± 1, 8 ± 1 | 0 ± 0, 0 ± 0, 99 ± 0 | |
| JU2113 (1.25 × WT EGF) | 7, 10, 83 | 32, 60, 8 | 100, 0, 0 | 4, 79, 17 | 0, 2, 98 |
| 0 ± 0, 0 ± 0, 99 ± 0 | 16 ± 8, 76 ± 9, 9 ± 2 | 99 ± 0, 0 ± 0, 1 ± 0 | 16 ± 9, 75 ± 10, 9 ± 2 | 0 ± 0, 0 ± 0, 99 ± 0 | |
|
Excess EGF × ectopic Notch activity (Figure 4)
Increasing EGF levels in a background with mild ectopic Notch activity. The level of ectopic Notch activity is our fit for the JU2064 line ~ WT + 0.05. EGF levels are based on measured mRNA levels in the EGF perturbation lines JU2036, JU2035, and JU1107 (Barkoulas et al., 2013). | |||||
| JU2091 (1.25 × WT EGF) | 0, 0, 100 | 0, 100, 0 | 100, 0, 0 | 0, 100, 0 | 0, 1, 99 |
| 0 ± 0, 1 ± 1, 99 ± 1 | 1 ± 0, 99 ± 1, 1 ± 0 | 98 ± 0, 1 ± 0, 1 ± 0 | 1 ± 0, 99 ± 1, 1 ± 0 | 0 ± 0, 1 ± 1, 99 ± 1 | |
| JU2089 (1.79 × WT EGF) | 0, 5, 96 | 2, 98, 0 | 100, 0, 0 | 2, 99, 0 | 1, 7, 92 |
| 0 ± 0, 6 ± 5, 93 ± 5 | 2 ± 1, 97 ± 2, 1 ± 1 | 99 ± 0, 1 ± 0, 1 ± 0 | 2 ± 1, 97 ± 2, 1 ± 1 | 1 ± 0, 6 ± 5, 93 ± 6 | |
| JU2092 (2.75 × WT EGF) | 3, 24, 74 | 0, 100, 0 | 100, 0, 0 | 0, 100, 0 | 8, 24, 68 |
| 1 ± 1, 38 ± 14, 61 ± 14 | 9 ± 4, 88 ± 5, 3 ± 1 | 99 ± 0, 1 ± 0, 1 ± 0 | 8 ± 4, 88 ± 5, 3 ± 1 | 1 ± 1, 38 ± 14, 61 ± 14 | |