Fig 29. Performance of the antithetic controller in a motif 2 (m2) structural background (Fig 28).
(a) The controller has a transporter mediated compensatory flux and is exposed to linear growth and increase in k3 as in Fig 9a. Same rate constants and initial concentrations as in Fig 9 with the exception that k2 = 1 × 105, and k10 = 1 × 10−3. Note the minor offset in A during phase 2. (b) Same controller with rate constants as in (a), but exposed to exponential volume and k3 increases as in Fig 14. Initial concentrations: A0 = 2.0, E1,0 = E2,0 = 1.0, M0 = O0 = 1 × 105. The controller is not able to oppose exponential growth. (c) Controller with a cell internal compensatory flux (Fig 28) and exposed to the conditions as in Fig 20. Same rate constants as in (a). Initial concentrations: A0 = 2.0, E1,0 = E2,0 = 25.0, M0 = O0 = 2 × 105, N0 = O0 = 1 × 106. The controller is fully capable to oppose linear growth together with a linear increase in k3. (d) Same controller with rate constants as in (c), but exposed to exponential volume and k3 increases as in Fig 14. Initial concentrations as in (c), but to avoid depletion of M and O initial concentrations of these compounds were raised to 1 × 106. Note also here the overcompensation in the case growth occurs exponentially in phase 2. Despite the larger consumption rates of M and O in comparison with (c) the controller is not able to counteract both exponential increases in V and k3. See S7 Text for more details.