Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Executable cell biology

Nature Biotechnology volume 25, pages 1239–1249 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

Computational modeling of biological systems is becoming increasingly important in efforts to better understand complex biological behaviors. In this review, we distinguish between two types of biological models—mathematical and computational—which differ in their representations of biological phenomena. We call the approach of constructing computational models of biological systems 'executable biology', as it focuses on the design of executable computer algorithms that mimic biological phenomena. We survey the main modeling efforts in this direction, emphasize the applicability and benefits of executable models in biological research and highlight some of the challenges that executable biology poses for biology and computer science. We claim that for executable biology to reach its full potential as a mainstream biological technique, formal and algorithmic approaches must be integrated into biological research. This will drive biology toward a more precise engineering discipline.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The methodology of executable biology.
Figure 2: Boolean networks.
Figure 3: Petri nets.
Figure 4: Interacting state machine models.
Figure 5: Pi calculus.
Figure 6: Hybrid systems.
Figure 7: The analogy between hardware design and biological models.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ideker, T., Galitski, T. & Hood, L. A new approach to decoding life: systems biology. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 2, 343–372 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kitano, H. Systems biology: a brief overview. Science 295, 1662–1664 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Aebersold, R. & Mann, M. Mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nature 422, 198–207 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Priami, C., Regev, A., Shapiro, E.Y. & Silverman, W. Application of a stochastic name-passing calculus to representation and simulation of molecular processes. Inf. Process. Lett. 80, 25–31 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Regev, A., Silverman, W. & Shapiro, E. Representation and simulation of biochemical processes using the pi-calculus process algebra. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 459–470 (2001).

  6. Errampalli, D.D., Priami, C. & Quaglia, P. A formal language for computational systems biology. OMICS 8, 370–380 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cardelli, L. Abstract machines of systems biology. Transactions on Computational Systems Biology III. LNCS 3737, 145–168, (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kam, N., Harel, D. & Cohen, I.R. in Visual Languages and Formal Methods Stresa, Italy, September 5-7, 2001 (IEEE, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Efroni, S., Harel, D. & Cohen, I.R. Toward rigorous comprehension of biological complexity: modeling, execution and visualization of thymic T-cell maturation. Genome Res. 13, 2485–2497 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kam, N. et al. in First International Workshop on Computational Methods in Systems Biology (CMSB), Roverto, Italy, February 24–26, 2003 (ed. Priami, C.) LNCS 2602, 4–20 (2003).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Fisher, J., Piterman, N., Hubbard, E.J., Stern, M.J. & Harel, D. Computational insights into Caenorhabditis elegans vulval development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 1951–1956 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Efroni, S., Harel, D. & Cohen, I.R. Emergent dynamics of thymocyte development and lineage determination. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3, e13 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fisher, J., Piterman, N., Hajnal, A. & Henzinger, T.A. Predictive modeling of signaling croostalk during C. elegans vulval development. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3, e92 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sadot, A. et al. Towards verified biological models. in Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (in the press).

  15. Harel, D. Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Sci. Comput. Program. 8, 231–274 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alur, R. & Henzinger, T.A. Reactive Modules. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 15, 7–48 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Giurumescu, C.A., Sternberg, P.W. & Asthagiri, A.R. Intercellular coupling amplifies fate segregation during Caenorhabditis elegans vulval development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 1331–1336 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Janes, K.A. & Yaffe, M.B. Data-driven modelling of signal-transduction networks. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7, 820–828 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Aldridge, B.B., Burke, J.M., Lauffenburger, D.A. & Sorger, P.K. Physicochemical modelling of cell signalling pathways. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 1195–1203 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Janes, K.A. & Lauffenburger, D.A. A biological approach to computational models of proteomic networks. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 10, 73–80 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hua, F., Hautaniemi, S., Yokoo, R. & Lauffenburger, D.A. Integrated mechanistic and data-driven modelling for multivariate analysis of signalling pathways. J. R. Soc. Interface 3, 515–526 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Stelling, J., Sauer, U., Szallasi, Z., Doyle, F.J., III & Doyle, J. Robustness of cellular functions. Cell 118, 675–685 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Stelling, J. Mathematical models in microbial systems biology. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 7, 513–518 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Alon, U. Network motifs: theory and experimental approaches. Nat. Rev. Genet. 8, 450–461 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Davidson, E.H. et al. A genomic regulatory network for development. Science 295, 1669–1678 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Bolouri, H. & Davidson, E.H. Modeling transcriptional regulatory networks. Bioessays 24, 1118–1129 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Bolouri, H. & Davidson, E.H. Transcriptional regulatory cascades in development: initial rates, not steady state, determine network kinetics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9371–9376 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O. & Peled, D. Model Checking (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schaub, M.A., Henzinger, T.A. & Fisher, J. Qualitative networks: a symbolic approach to analyze biological signaling networks. BMC Syst. Biol. 1 (2007).

  30. Kauffman, S.A. Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets. J. Theor. Biol. 22, 437–467 (1969).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Glass, L. & Kauffman, S.A. The logical analysis of continuous, non-linear biochemical control networks. J. Theor. Biol. 39, 103–129 (1973).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Shmulevich, I. & Zhang, W. Binary analysis and optimization-based normalization of gene expression data. Bioinformatics 18, 555–565 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Shmulevich, I., Lahdesmaki, H., Dougherty, E.R., Astola, J. & Zhang, W. The role of certain Post classes in Boolean network models of genetic networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 10734–10739 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Li, F., Long, T., Lu, Y., Ouyang, Q. & Tang, C. The yeast cell-cycle network is robustly designed. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 4781–4786 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Albert, R. & Othmer, H.G. The topology of the regulatory interactions predicts the expression pattern of the segment polarity genes in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Theor. Biol. 223, 1–18 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Akutsu, T., Miyano, S. & Kuhara, S. Identification of genetic networks from a small number of gene expression patterns under the Boolean network model. Pac. Symp. Biocomput., 17–28 (1999).

  37. Friedman, N., Linial, M., Nachman, I. & Pe'er, D. Using Bayesian networks to analyze expression data. J. Comput. Biol. 7, 601–620 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ideker, T.E., Thorsson, V. & Karp, R.M. Discovery of regulatory interactions through perturbation: inference and experimental design. Pac. Symp. Biocomput., 305–316 (2000). [AU: Please provide the missing volume number in this journal reference. (in reference 38 “Ideker, Thorsson, Karp, 2000”). ]

  39. Sachs, K., Perez, O., Pe'er, D., Lauffenburger, D.A. & Nolan, G.P. Causal protein-signaling networks derived from multiparameter single-cell data. Science 308, 523–529 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. D'Haeseleer, P., Liang, S. & Somogyi, R. Genetic network inference: from co-expression clustering to reverse engineering. Bioinformatics 16, 707–726 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. de Jong, H. Modeling and simulation of genetic regulatory systems: a literature review. J. Comput. Biol. 9, 67–103 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Chaouiya, C. Petri net modelling of biological networks. Brief. Bioinform. 8, 210–219 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Li, C., Ge, Q.W., Nakata, M., Matsuno, H. & Miyano, S. Modelling and simulation of signal transductions in an apoptosis pathway by using timed Petri nets. J. Biosci. 32, 113–127 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Reddy, V.N., Mavrovouniotis, M.L. & Liebman, M.N. in 1st ISMB, Bethesda, Maryland, July 1993 (eds. Hunter, L., Searls, D. & Shavlik, J.) 328–336 (AAAI, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Barjis, J. & Barjis, I. in Conference on Information Intelligence and Systems (ICIIS), Bethesda, Maryland, October 31–November 3, 1999, 4–9 (IEEE, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Simao, E., Remy, E., Thieffry, D. & Chaouiya, C. Qualitative modelling of regulated metabolic pathways: application to the tryptophan biosynthesis in E. coli. Bioinformatics 21 Suppl 2, ii190–ii196 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Steggles, L.J., Banks, R. & Wipat, A. in 4th International Conference on Computational Methods in Systems Biology (CMSB), Trento, Italy, October 18–19, 2006 (ed. Priami, C.) LNCS 4210, 127–142 (2006).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  48. Genrich, H., Küffner, R. & Voss, K. Executable Petri net models for the analysis of metabolic pathways. Int. J. Softw. Tools Tech. Transf. 3, 394–404 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Goss, P.J. & Peccoud, J. Quantitative modeling of stochastic systems in molecular biology by using stochastic Petri nets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 6750–6755 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Srivastava, R., Peterson, M.S. & Bentley, W.E. Stochastic kinetic analysis of the Escherichia coli stress circuit using sigma(32)-targeted antisense. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 75, 120–129 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Srivastava, R., You, L., Summers, J. & Yin, J. Stochastic vs. deterministic modeling of intracellular viral kinetics. J. Theor. Biol. 218, 309–321 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Dill, D. et al. The Pathalyzer: a tool for analysis of signal transduction pathways. [in Biology], San Diego, December 2–4, 2005, LNCS 4023 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Efroni, S., Harel, D. & Cohen, I.R. Reactive animation: Realistic modeling of complex dynamic systems. Computer 38, 38–47 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Damm, W. & Harel, D. LSCs: Breathing life into message sequence charts. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 19, 45–80 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Sternberg, P.W. & Horvitz, H.R. The combined action of two intercellular signaling pathways specifies three cell fates during vulval induction in C. elegans. Cell 58, 679–693 (1989).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Milner, R. Communicating and Mobile Systems: The pi-Calculus (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Priami, C. The stochastic pi-calculus. Comp. J. 38, 578–589 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Regev, A., Panina, E.M., Silverman, W., Cardelli, L. & Shapiro, E.Y. Bioambients: An abstraction for biological compartments. Theor. Comput. Sci. 325, 141–167 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Cardelli, L. Brane caluli. in Computational Methods in Systems Biology (CMSB) Paris, May 26, 2004 (eds. Danos, V. & Schächter) LNCS 3082, 257 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Curti, M., Degano, P., Priami, C. & Baldari, C. Modeling biochemical pathways through enhanced pi-calculus. Theor. Comput. Sci. 325, 111–140 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Calder, M., Vyshemirsky, V., Gilbert, D. & Orton, R. Analysis of signalling pathways using the prism model checker. in 3rd International Conference on Computational Methods in Systems Biology (CMSB) 179–190, (ed. G. Plotkin) Edinburgh, Scotland (2005).

  62. Calder, M., Duguid, A., Gilmore, S. & Hillston, J. Stronger computational modelling of signalling pathways using both continuous and discrete-state methods. in 4th International Conference on Computational Methods in Systems Biology (CMSB), Trento, Italy, October 18–19 (ed. C. Priami) LNCS 4210, 63–78 (2006).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  63. Heath, J., Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D. & Tymchyshyn, O. Probabilistic model checking of complex biological pathways. in 4th International Conference on Computational Methods in Systems Biology (CMSB), Trento, Italy, October 18–19 (ed. C. Priami) LNCS 4210, 32–48 (2006).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  64. Henzinger, T.A. The theory of hybrid automata in Proceedings 11th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science 278–292 (1996).

  65. Ghosh, R. & Tomlin, C. Lateral inhibition through delta-notch signalling: A piecewise affine hybrid model. in 4th International Workshop on Hybrid Systems Computation and Control, Rome, Italy, LNCS 2034, 232–246 (2001).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  66. Ghosh, R. & Tomlin, C. Symbolic reachable set computation of piecewise affine hybrid automata and its application to biological modeling: Delta-Notch protein signaling. in IEE Transactions on Systems Biology, volume 1, 170–183, June 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kaern, M., Elston, T.C., Blake, W.J. & Collins, J.J. Stochasticity in gene expression: from theories to phenotypes. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6, 451–464 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Sprinzak, D. & Elowitz, M.B. Reconstruction of genetic circuits. Nature 438, 443–448 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Rosenfeld, N., Perkins, T.J., Alon, U., Elowitz, M.B. & Swain, P.S. A fluctuation method to quantify in vivo fluorescence data. Biophys. J. 91, 759–766 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Gilman, A. & Arkin, A.P. Genetic “code”: representations and dynamical models of genetic components and networks. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 3, 341–369 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Lazebnik, Y. Can a biologist fix a radio?–Or, what I learned while studying apoptosis. Cancer Cell 2, 179–182 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Kwiatkowska, M. et al. Simulation and verification for computational modeling of signaling pathways. in Proceedings of Winter Simulation Conference, Monterey, California, December 2–6, 2006, 1666–1674 (IEEE, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Alur, R. et al. Hybrid modeling and simulation of biomolecular networks. in Fourth International Workshop on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control, Rome, Italy, March 28–30, 2001 (eds. Di Benedetto, M.D. & Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L.) LNCS 2034, 19–32 (2001).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We apologize to colleagues whose work was not reviewed due to lack of space. We thank John K. Heath, Alex Hajnal, Freddy Radtke and Nir Piterman for helpful discussions and critical readings of the manuscript and the anonymous referees for valuable comments. J.F. is particularly grateful to David Harel for introducing her to this line of research and for many fruitful discussions over the years. Our research is supported in part by the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant 205321-111840.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Microsoft Research, Cambridge, CB3 0FB, UK

    Jasmin Fisher

  2. School of Computer and Communication Sciences, EPFL, Lausanne, CH-1015, Switzerland

    Jasmin Fisher & Thomas A Henzinger

  3. Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences, University of California at Berkeley, 94720-1770, California, USA

    Thomas A Henzinger

Authors
  1. Jasmin Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas A Henzinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jasmin Fisher or Thomas A Henzinger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fisher, J., Henzinger, T. Executable cell biology. Nat Biotechnol 25, 1239–1249 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1356

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1356

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing