Motivation Computational models in biology are frequently underdetermined, due to limits in our capacity to measure biological systems. In particular, mechanistic models often contain parameters whose values are not constrained by a single type of measurement. It may be possible to achieve better model determination by combining the information contained in different types of measurements. Bayesian statistics provides a convenient framework for this, allowing a quantification of the reduction in uncertainty with each additional measurement type. We wished to explore whether such integration is feasible and whether it can allow computational models to be more accurately determined. Results We created an ordinary differential equation model of cell cycle regulation in budding yeast and integrated data from 13 different studies covering different experimental techniques. We found that for some parameters, a single type of measurement, relative time course mRNA expression, is sufficient to constrain them. Other parameters, however, were only constrained when two types of measurements were combined, namely relative time course and absolute transcript concentration. Comparing the estimates to measurements from three additional, independent studies, we found that the degradation and transcription rates indeed matched the model predictions in order of magnitude. The predicted translation rate was incorrect however, thus revealing a deficiency in the model. Since this parameter was not constrained by any of the measurement types separately, it was only possible to falsify the model when integrating multiple types of measurements. In conclusion, this study shows that integrating multiple measurement types can allow models to be more accurately determined.@en

Background Computational models in biology are characterized by a large degree of uncertainty. This uncertainty can be analyzed with Bayesian statistics, however, the sampling algorithms that are frequently used for calculating Bayesian statistical estimates are computationally demanding, and each algorithm has unique advantages and disadvantages. It is typically unclear, before starting an analysis, which algorithm will perform well on a given computational model. Results We present BCM, a toolkit for the Bayesian analysis of Computational Models using samplers. It provides efficient, multithreaded implementations of eleven algorithms for sampling from posterior probability distributions and for calculating marginal likelihoods. BCM includes tools to simplify the process of model specification and scripts for visualizing the results. The flexible architecture allows it to be used on diverse types of biological computational models. In an example inference task using a model of the cell cycle based on ordinary differential equations, BCM is significantly more efficient than existing software packages, allowing more challenging inference problems to be solved. Conclusions BCM represents an efficient one-stop-shop for computational modelers wishing to use sampler-based Bayesian statistics.@en