Identifying Network Motifs that Buffer Front-to-Back Signaling in Polarized Neutrophils

Cell Reports

Volumn 3, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1607-1616

  Wang, Yanqin ^a   Ku, Chin Jen ^a   Zhang, Elizabeth R ^a   Artyukhin, Alexander B ^a   Weiner, Orion D ^b   Wu, Lani F ^a   Altschuler, Steven J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CELL ACTIVATION; CELL DENSITY; CELL INTERACTION; CELL POLARITY; CELL POPULATION; CELL SPREADING; CELL STRUCTURE; CELLULAR DISTRIBUTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INHIBITION KINETICS; INTRACELLULAR SIGNALING; MICROTUBULE; NEUTROPHIL; PHENOTYPE; POSITIVE FEEDBACK; PRIORITY JOURNAL; CELL MOTION; CYTOLOGY; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

CELL MOVEMENT; CELL POLARITY; HUMANS; MICROTUBULES; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEUTROPHILS; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 84878540976     PISSN: None     EISSN: 22111247     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.04.009     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Baratt A., Arkhipov S.N., Maly I.V. An experimental and computational study of effects of microtubule stabilization on T-cell polarity. PLoS One 2008, 3:e3861.
2. Bement W.M., Benink H.A., von Dassow G. A microtubule-dependent zone of active RhoA during cleavage plane specification. J.Cell Biol. 2005, 170:91-101.
3. Böyum A. Isolation of mononuclear cells and granulocytes from human blood. Isolation of monuclear cells by one centrifugation, and of granulocytes by combining centrifugation and sedimentation at 1 g. Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest. Suppl. 1968, 97:77-89.
4. Caǧatay T., Turcotte M., Elowitz M.B., Garcia-Ojalvo J., Süel G.M. Architecture-dependent noise discriminates functionally analogous differentiation circuits. Cell 2009, 139:512-522.
5. Chau A.H., Walter J.M., Gerardin J., Tang C., Lim W.A. Designing synthetic regulatory networks capable of self-organizing cell polarization. Cell 2012, 151:320-332.
6. Ebbinghaus M., Santen L. Theoretical modeling of aging effects in microtubule dynamics. Biophys. J. 2011, 100:832-838.
7. Eddy R.J., Pierini L.M., Maxfield F.R. Microtubule asymmetry during neutrophil polarization and migration. Mol. Biol. Cell 2002, 13:4470-4483.
8. Flyvbjerg H., Holy T.E., Leibler S. Stochastic dynamics of microtubules: a model for caps and catastrophes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1994, 73:2372-2375.
9. Gamba A., de Candia A., Di Talia S., Coniglio A., Bussolino F., Serini G. Diffusion-limited phase separation in eukaryotic chemotaxis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005, 102:16927-16932.
10. Gay G., Courtheoux T., Reyes C., Tournier S., Gachet Y. A stochastic model of kinetochore-microtubule attachment accurately describes fission yeast chromosome segregation. J.Cell Biol. 2012, 196:757-774.
11. Geva-Zatorsky N., Rosenfeld N., Itzkovitz S., Milo R., Sigal A., Dekel E., Yarnitzky T., Liron Y., Polak P., Lahav G., Alon U. Oscillations and variability in the p53 system. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2006, 2. 2006.0033.
12. Irimia D., Balázsi G., Agrawal N., Toner M. Adaptive-control model for neutrophil orientation in the direction of chemical gradients. Biophys. J. 2009, 96:3897-3916.
13. Janes K.A., Wang C.C., Holmberg K.J., Cabral K., Brugge J.S. Identifying single-cell molecular programs by stochastic profiling. Nat. Methods 2010, 7:311-317.
14. Jilkine A., Marée A.F., Edelstein-Keshet L. Mathematical model for spatial segregation of the Rho-family GTPases based on inhibitory crosstalk. Bull. Math. Biol. 2007, 69:1943-1978.
15. Keren K., Pincus Z., Allen G.M., Barnhart E.L., Marriott G., Mogilner A., Theriot J.A. Mechanism of shape determination in motile cells. Nature 2008, 453:475-480.
16. Kollmann M., Løvdok L., Bartholomé K., Timmer J., Sourjik V. Design principles of a bacterial signalling network. Nature 2005, 438:504-507.
17. Ku C.J., Wang Y., Pavie B., Altschuler S.J., Wu L.F. On identifying information from image-based spatial polarity phenotypes in neutrophils. Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Biomed. Imaging 2010, 14-17:1029-1032.
18. Ku C.J., Wang Y., Weiner O.D., Altschuler S.J., Wu L.F. Network crosstalk dynamically changes during neutrophil polarization. Cell 2012, 149:1073-1083.
19. Kuchina A., Espinar L., Çaǧatay T., Balbin A.O., Zhang F., Alvarado A., Garcia-Ojalvo J., Süel G.M. Temporal competition between differentiation programs determines cell fate choice. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2011, 7:557.
20. Kumar S., Xu J., Perkins C., Guo F., Snapper S., Finkelman F.D., Zheng Y., Filippi M.D. Cdc42 regulates neutrophil migration via crosstalk between WASp, CD11b, and microtubules. Blood 2012, 120:3563-3574.
21. Kwan K.M., Kirschner M.W. A microtubule-binding Rho-GEF controls cell morphology during convergent extension of Xenopus laevis. Development 2005, 132:4599-4610.
22. Levchenko A., Iglesias P.A. Models of eukaryotic gradient sensing: application to chemotaxis of amoebae and neutrophils. Biophys. J. 2002, 82:50-63.
23. Loughlin R., Heald R., Nédélec F. A computational model predicts Xenopus meiotic spindle organization. J.Cell Biol. 2010, 191:1239-1249.
24. Ma W., Trusina A., El-Samad H., Lim W.A., Tang C. Defining network topologies that can achieve biochemical adaptation. Cell 2009, 138:760-773.
25. Meinhardt H. Orientation of chemotactic cells and growth cones: models and mechanisms. J.Cell Sci. 1999, 112:2867-2874.
26. Michaelson D., Silletti J., Murphy G., D'Eustachio P., Rush M., Philips M.R. Differential localization of Rho GTPases in live cells: regulation by hypervariable regions and RhoGDI binding. J.Cell Biol. 2001, 152:111-126.
27. Mishra P.K., Kunwar A., Mukherji S., Chowdhury D. Dynamic instability of microtubules: effect of catastrophe-suppressing drugs. Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 2005, 72:051914.
28. 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.
29. Neilson M.P., Veltman D.M., van Haastert P.J., Webb S.D., Mackenzie J.A., Insall R.H. Chemotaxis: a feedback-based computational model robustly predicts multiple aspects of real cell behaviour. PLoS Biol. 2011, 9:e1000618.
30. Odell G.M., Foe V.E. An agent-based model contrasts opposite effects of dynamic and stable microtubules on cleavage furrow positioning. J.Cell Biol. 2008, 183:471-483.
31. Onsum M., Rao C.V. A mathematical model for neutrophil gradient sensing and polarization. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2007, 3:e36.
32. Otsuji M., Ishihara S., Co C., Kaibuchi K., Mochizuki A., Kuroda S. A mass conserved reaction-diffusion system captures properties of cell polarity. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2007, 3:e108.
33. Pestonjamasp K.N., Forster C., Sun C., Gardiner E.M., Bohl B., Weiner O., Bokoch G.M., Glogauer M. Rac1 links leading edge and uropod events through Rho and myosin activation during chemotaxis. Blood 2006, 108:2814-2820.
34. Raj A., van Oudenaarden A. Nature, nurture, or chance: stochastic gene expression and its consequences. Cell 2008, 135:216-226.
35. Rasband, W.S. (1997-2012). ImageJ, U. S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/.
36. Rodrigue N., Philippe H. Mechanistic revisions of phenomenological modeling strategies in molecular evolution. Trends Genet. 2010, 26:248-252.
37. Rogers S.L., Wiedemann U., Häcker U., Turck C., Vale R.D. Drosophila RhoGEF2 associates with microtubule plus ends in an EB1-dependent manner. Curr. Biol. 2004, 14:1827-1833.
38. Stephens L., Milne L., Hawkins P. Moving towards a better understanding of chemotaxis. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:R485-R494.
39. Swaney S.F., Huang C.H., Devreotes P.N. Eukaryotic chemotaxis: a network of signaling pathways controls motility, directional sensing, and polarity. Annu. Rev. Biophys. 2010, 39:265-289.
40. VanBuren V., Cassimeris L., Odde D.J. Mechanochemical model of microtubule structure and self-assembly kinetics. Biophys. J. 2005, 89:2911-2926.
41. Van Keymeulen A., Wong K., Knight Z.A., Govaerts C., Hahn K.M., Shokat K.M., Bourne H.R. To stabilize neutrophil polarity, PIP3 and Cdc42 augment RhoA activity at the back as well as signals at the front. J.Cell Biol. 2006, 174:437-445.
42. von Dassow G., Meir E., Munro E.M., Odell G.M. The segment polarity network is a robust developmental module. Nature 2000, 406:188-192.
43. Weiner O.D., Marganski W.A., Wu L.F., Altschuler S.J., Kirschner M.W. An actin-based wave generator organizes cell motility. PLoS Biol. 2007, 5:e221.
44. Wong K., Pertz O., Hahn K., Bourne H. Neutrophil polarization: spatiotemporal dynamics of RhoA activity support a self-organizing mechanism. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103:3639-3644.
45. Wong K., Van Keymeulen A., Bourne H.R. PDZRhoGEF and myosin II localize RhoA activity to the back of polarizing neutrophil-like cells. J.Cell Biol. 2007, 179:1141-1148.
46. Xiong Y., Huang C.H., Iglesias P.A., Devreotes P.N. Cells navigate with a local-excitation, global-inhibition-biased excitable network. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107:17079-17086.
47. Xu J., Wang F., Van Keymeulen A., Herzmark P., Straight A., Kelly K., Takuwa Y., Sugimoto N., Mitchison T., Bourne H.R. Divergent signals and cytoskeletal assemblies regulate self-organizing polarity in neutrophils. Cell 2003, 114:201-214.
48. Xu J., Wang F., Van Keymeulen A., Rentel M., Bourne H.R. Neutrophil microtubules suppress polarity and enhance directional migration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005, 102:6884-6889.
49. Zigmond S.H., Levitsky H.I., Kreel B.J. Cell polarity: an examination of its behavioral expression and its consequences for polymorphonuclear leukocyte chemotaxis. J.Cell Biol. 1981, 89:585-592.