Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2103.10566 v3 pith:LH46YZD7 submitted 2021-03-18 math.DS cond-mat.stat-mechphysics.chem-phq-bio.QM

On the validity of the stochastic quasi-steady-state approximation in open enzyme catalyzed reactions: Timescale separation or singular perturbation?

classification math.DS cond-mat.stat-mechphysics.chem-phq-bio.QM
keywords quasi-steady-stateapproximationstochasticdeterministicperturbationsingularreactionscatalyzed
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The quasi-steady-state approximation is widely used to develop simplified deterministic or stochastic models of enzyme catalyzed reactions. In deterministic models, the quasi-steady-state approximation can be mathematically justified from singular perturbation theory. For several closed enzymatic reactions, the homologous extension of the quasi-steady-state approximation to the stochastic regime, known as the stochastic quasi-steady-state approximation, has been shown to be accurate under the analogous conditions that permit the quasi-steady-state reduction of the deterministic counterpart. However, it was recently demonstrated that the extension of the stochastic quasi-steady-state approximation to an open Michaelis--Menten reaction mechanism is only valid under a condition that is far more restrictive than the qualifier that ensures the validity of its corresponding deterministic quasi-steady-state approximation. In this paper, we suggest a possible explanation for this discrepancy from the lens of geometric singular perturbation theory. In so doing, we illustrate a misconception in the application of the quasi-steady-state approximation: timescale separation does not imply singular perturbation.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.