Noise filtering tradeoffs in spatial gradient sensing and cell polarization response

BMC Systems Biology

Volumn 5, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Chou, Ching Shan ^a   Bardwell, Lee ^b   Nie, Qing ^b   Yi, Tau Mu ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Noise gradient sensing g protein cell; Polarity yeast mating

Indexed keywords

EUKARYOTA;

PHEROMONE;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CELL POLARITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CYTOLOGY; DRUG EFFECT; METABOLISM; MICROFLUIDIC ANALYSIS; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; YEAST;

CELL POLARITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MICROFLUIDIC ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHEROMONES; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; YEASTS;

EID: 83255162690     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17520509     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1752-0509-5-196     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Rao CV, Wolf DM, Arkin AP. Control, exploitation, and tolerance of intracellular noise. Nature 2002, 420:231-237. 10.1038/nature01258, 12432408.
2. van Haastert PJM, Postma M. Biased random walk by stochastic fluctuations of chemoattractant-receptor interactions at the lower limit of detection. Biophys J 2007, 93:1787-1796. 10.1529/biophysj.107.104356, 1948060, 17513372.
3. Alberts B, Bray D, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Watson JD. Molecular Biology of the Cell 1994, New York: Garland Publishing.
4. Phillips R, Kondev J, Theriot J. Physical Biology of the Cell 2009, New York: Garland Science.
5. Berg HC, Purcell EM. Physics of chemoreception. Biophys J 1977, 20:193-219. 10.1016/S0006-3495(77)85544-6, 1473391, 911982.
6. Bialek W, Setayeshgar S. Physical limits to biochemical signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102:10040-10045. 10.1073/pnas.0504321102, 1177398, 16006514.
7. Andrews BW, Yi T-M, Iglesias PA. Optimal noise filtering in the chemotactic response of E. coli. PLoS Comp Biol 2006, 2.
8. Thompson DW. On Growth and Form 1961, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Drubin DG, Nelson WJ. Origins of cell polarity. Cell 1996, 84:335-344. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81278-7, 8608587.
10. Meinhardt H. Orientation of chemotactic cells and growth cones: Models and mechanisms. J Cell Sci 1999, 112:2867-2874.
11. Yi T-M, Chen S, Chou C-S, Nie Q. Modeling yeast cell polarization induced by pheromone gradients. J Stat Phys 2007, 128:193-207.
12. Chou C-S, Nie Q, Yi T-M. Modeling robustness tradeoffs in yeast cell polarization induced by spatial gradients. PLoS ONE 2008, 3:e3103. 10.1371/journal.pone.0003103, 3021495, 21267054.
13. Shibata T, Fujimoto K. Noisy signal amplification in ultrasensitive signal transduction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102:331-336. 10.1073/pnas.0403350102, 544281, 15625116.
14. Pruyne D, Bretscher A. Polarization of cell growth in yeast: I. Establishment and maintenance of polarity states. J Cell Sci 2000, 113:365-375.
15. Pruyne D, Bretscher A. Polarization of cell growth in yeast: II. The role of the cortical actin cytoskeleton. J Cell Sci 2000, 113:571-585.
16. Dohlman HG, Thorner JW. Regulation of G protein-initiated signal transduction in yeast: Paradigms and principles. Annu Rev Biochem 2001, 70:703-754. 10.1146/annurev.biochem.70.1.703, 11395421.
17. Endres RG, Wingreen NS. Accuracy of direct gradient sensing by single cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:15749-15754. 10.1073/pnas.0804688105, 2572938, 18843108.
18. Rappel W-J, Levine H. Receptor noise limitations on cheotactic sensing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:19270-19275. 10.1073/pnas.0804702105, 2614751, 19064934.
19. Fuller D, Chen W, Adler M, Groisman A, Levine H, Rappel W-J, Loomis WF. External and internal constraints on eukaryotic chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010, 107:9656-9659. 10.1073/pnas.0911178107, 2906906, 20457897.
20. Andrews BW, Iglesias PA. An information-theoretic characterization of the optimal gradient sensing response of cells. PLoS Comput Biol 2007, 3:e153. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030153, 1937015, 17676949.
21. Howell AS, Savage NS, Johnson SA, Bose I, Wagner AW, Zyla TR, Nijhout HF, Reed MC, Goryachev AB, Lew DJ. Singularity in polarization: rewiring yeast cells to make two buds. Cell 2009, 139:731-743. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.10.024, 2783644, 19914166.
22. Kozubowski L, Saito K, Johnson JM, Howell AS, Zyla TR, Lew DJ. Symmetry-breaking polarization driven by a Cdc42p GEF-PAK complex. Curr Biol 2008, 18:1719-1726. 10.1016/j.cub.2008.09.060, 2803100, 19013066.
23. Brandman O, JE F, Li R, Meyer T. Interlinked fast and slow positive feedback loops drive reliable cell decisions. Science 2005, 310:496-498. 10.1126/science.1113834, 3175767, 16239477.
24. Wedlich-Soldner R, Altschuler S, Wu L, Li R. Spontaneous cell polarization through actomyosin-based delivery of the Cdc42 GTPase. Science 2003, 299:1231-1235. 10.1126/science.1080944, 12560471.
25. Marco E, Wedlich-Soldner R, Li R, Altschuler SJ, Wu LF. Endocytosis optimizes the dynamic localization of membrane proteins that regulate cortical polarity. Cell 2007, 129:411-422. 10.1016/j.cell.2007.02.043, 2000346, 17448998.
26. Madhani HD, Fink GR. The riddle of MAP kinase signaling specificity. Trends Genet 1998, 14:151-155. 10.1016/S0168-9525(98)01425-5, 9594663.
27. Bardwell L. A walk-through of the yeast mating pheromone response pathway. Peptides 2004, 25:1465-1476. 10.1016/j.peptides.2003.10.022, 3017507, 15374648.
28. Bagnat M, Simons K. Cell surface polarization during yeast mating. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002, 99:14183-14188. 10.1073/pnas.172517799, 137858, 12374868.
29. Levchenko A, Iglesias PA. Models of eukaryotic gradient sensing: Application to chemotaxis of amoebae and neutrophils. Biophys J 2002, 82:50-63. 10.1016/S0006-3495(02)75373-3, 1302448, 11751295.
30. Yi T-M, Huang Y, Simon MI, Doyle J. Robust perfect adaptation in bacterial chemotaxis through integral feedback control. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000, 97:4649-4653. 10.1073/pnas.97.9.4649, 18287, 10781070.
31. Van Kampen NG. Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry 1992, Amsterdam: Elsevier.
32. Segall JE. Polarization of yeast cells in spatial gradients of alpha mating factor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993, 90:8332-8336. 10.1073/pnas.90.18.8332, 47350, 8397402.
33. Mortimer D, Feldner J, Vaughan T, Vetter I, Pujic Z, Rosoff WJ, Burrage K, Dayan P, Richards LJ, Goodhill GJ. A Bayesian model predicts the response of axons to molecular gradients. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009, 106:10296-10301. 10.1073/pnas.0900715106, 2700145, 19541606.
34. Hornung G, Barkai N. Noise propagation and signaling sensitivity in biological networks: A role for positive feedback. PLoS Comput Biol 2008, 4:e8. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0040008, 2174979, 18179281.
35. Brandman O, Meyer T. Feedback loops shape cellular signals in space and time. Science 2008, 322:390-395. 10.1126/science.1160617, 2680159, 18927383.
36. Ferrell JE, Xiong W. Bistability in cell signaling: How to make continuous processes discontinuous, and reversible processes irreversible. Chaos 2001, 11:227-236. 10.1063/1.1349894, 12779456.
37. Ferrell JE. Feedback regulation of opposing enzymes generates robust, all-or-none bistable responses. Curr Biol 2008, 18:244-245.
38. Iglesias PA, Devreotes PN. Navigating through models of chemotaxis. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2008, 20:35-40. 10.1016/j.ceb.2007.11.011, 18207721.
39. Paulsson J. Summing up the noise in gene networks. Nature 2004, 427:415-418. 10.1038/nature02257, 14749823.
40. Rieke F, Warland D, de Ruyter van Steveninck R, Bialek W. Spikes: Exploring the Neural Code 1997, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
41. Franklin GF, Powell JD, Emami-Naeini A. Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems 1994, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, Third.
42. Skogestad S, Postlethwaite I. Multivariable Feedback Control: Analysis and Design 1996, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
43. Rodieck RW. The First Steps in Seeing 1998, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc..
44. Yi TM, Kitano H, Simon MI. A quantitative characterization of the yeast heterotrimeric G protein cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:10764-10769. 10.1073/pnas.1834247100, 196877, 12960402.
45. Endres RG, Wingreen NS. Accuracy of direct gradient sensing by cell-surface receptors. Prog Biophys Mol Bio 2009, 100:33-39.
46. Keniry ME, Sprague GF. Identification of p21-activated kinase specificity determinants in budding yeast: a single amino acid substitution imparts Ste20 specificity to Cla4. Mol Cell Biol 2003, 23:1569-1580. 10.1128/MCB.23.5.1569-1580.2003, 151699, 12588977.
47. Butty AC, Perrinjaquet N, Petit A, Jaquenoud M, Segall JE, Hofmann K, Zwahlen C, Peter M. A positive feedback loop stabilizes the guanine-nucleotide exchange factor Cdc24 at sites of polarization. Embo J 2002, 21:1565-1576. 10.1093/emboj/21.7.1565, 125953, 11927541.
48. Evangelista M, Blundell K, Longtine MS, Chow CJ, Adames N, Pringle JR, Peter M, Boone C. Bni1p, a yeast Formin linking Cdc42p and the actin cytoskeleton during polarized morphogenesis. Science 1997, 276:118-122. 10.1126/science.276.5309.118, 9082982.
49. Narang A. Spontaneous polarization in eukaryotic gradient sensing: A mathematical model based on mutual inhibition of frontness and backness pathways. J Theor Biol 2006, 240:538-553. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.10.022, 16343548.
50. Paliwal S, Iglesias PA, Campbell K, Hilioti Z, Groisman A, Levchenko A. MAPK-mediated bimodal gene expression and adaptive gradient sensing in yeast. Nature 2007, 446:46-51. 10.1038/nature05561, 17310144.
51. Hao N, Zeng Y, Elston TC, Dohlman HG. Control of MAPK specificity by feedback phosphorylation of shared adaptor protein Ste50. J Biol Chem 2008, 283:33798-33802. 10.1074/jbc.C800179200, 2662209, 18854322.
52. Moore TI, Chou C-S, Nie Q, Jeon NL, Yi T-M. Robust spatial sensing of mating pheromone gradients by yeast cells. PLoS ONE 2008, 3:e3865. 10.1371/journal.pone.0003865, 2586657, 19052645.
53. Moore TI, Chou CS, Nie Q, Jeon NL, Yi TM. Robust spatial sensing of mating pheromone gradients by yeast cells. PLoS One 2008, 3:e3865. 10.1371/journal.pone.0003865, 2586657, 19052645.
54. Malleshaiah MK, Shahrezaei V, Swain PS, Michnick SW. The scaffold protein Ste5 directly controls a switch-like mating decision in yeast. Nature 2010, 465:101-105. 10.1038/nature08946, 20400943.
55. Takahashi S, Pryciak PM. Membrane localization of scaffold proteins promotes graded signaling in the yeast MAP kinase cascade. Curr Biol 2008, 18:1184-1191. 10.1016/j.cub.2008.07.050, 2562168, 18722124.
56. Liu X, Bardwell L, Nie Q. A combination of multisite phosphorylation and substrate sequestration produces switchlike responses. Biophys J 2010, 98:1396-1407. 10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4307, 2856190, 20409458.
57. Guthrie C, Fink GR. Guide to Yeast Genetics and Molecular Biology 1991, San Diego: Academic Press Inc..