Asymmetric Cell Division in T Lymphocyte Fate Diversification

Trends in Immunology

Volumn 36, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 670-683

  Arsenio, Janilyn ^a   Metz, Patrick J ^a   Chang, John T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptive immunity; Asymmetric division; Single cell analyses; T lymphocyte differentiation; T lymphocyte fate determination

Indexed keywords

ASYMMETRIC CELL DIVISION; CELL FATE; CELL LINEAGE; DAUGHTER CELL; GENETIC TRANSCRIPTION; HUMAN; IMMUNE RESPONSE; INFECTION; MEMORY CELL; NONHUMAN; REGULATORY MECHANISM; REVIEW; T LYMPHOCYTE; ANIMAL; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CYTOLOGY; IMMUNOLOGY;

ANIMALS; ASYMMETRIC CELL DIVISION; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL LINEAGE; HUMANS; T-LYMPHOCYTES;

EID: 84946752071     PISSN: 14714906     EISSN: 14714981     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.it.2015.09.004     Document Type: Review

References (130)

1. + T cell differentiation. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2012, 12:749-761.
2. Ahmed R., et al. The precursors of memory: models and controversies. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2009, 9:662-668.
3. Ahmed R., Gray D. Immunological memory and protective immunity: understanding their relation. Science 1996, 272:54-60.
4. + T cell immunity. Science 2013, 340:630-635.
5. Chang J.T., et al. Asymmetric T lymphocyte division in the initiation of adaptive immune responses. Science 2007, 315:1687-1691.
6. Knoblich J.A. Mechanisms of asymmetric stem cell division. Cell 2008, 132:583-597.
7. + T cell response to infection and memory T cell formation. Nat. Immunol. 2013, 14:404-412.
8. Holmes S., et al. Memory T cells have gene expression patterns intermediate between naive and effector. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102:5519-5523.
9. Kaech S.M., et al. Molecular and functional profiling of memory CD8 T cell differentiation. Cell 2002, 111:837-851.
10. + T cells. J. Immunol. 2001, 166:7335-7344.
11. Willinger T., et al. Molecular signatures distinguish human central memory from effector memory CD8 T cell subsets. J. Immunol. 2005, 175:5895-5903.
12. Buganim Y., et al. Single-cell expression analyses during cellular reprogramming reveal an early stochastic and a late hierarchic phase. Cell 2012, 150:1209-1222.
13. Dalerba P., et al. Single-cell dissection of transcriptional heterogeneity in human colon tumors. Nat. Biotechnol. 2011, 29:1120-1127.
14. Guo G., et al. Resolution of cell fate decisions revealed by single-cell gene expression analysis from zygote to blastocyst. Dev. Cell 2010, 18:675-685.
15. Lu R., et al. Tracking single hematopoietic stem cells in vivo using high-throughput sequencing in conjunction with viral genetic barcoding. Nat. Biotechnol. 2011, 29:928-933.
16. + T lymphocyte fates during adaptive immunity revealed by single-cell gene-expression analyses. Nat. Immunol. 2014, 15:365-372.
17. Shalek A.K., et al. Single-cell RNA-seq reveals dynamic paracrine control of cellular variation. Nature 2014, 510:363-369.
18. Patel A.P., et al. Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma. Science 2014, 344:1396-1401.
19. Buettner F., et al. Computational analysis of cell-to-cell heterogeneity in single-cell RNA-sequencing data reveals hidden subpopulations of cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 2015, 33:155-160.
20. + T cell frequency varies for different epitopes and predicts repertoire diversity and response magnitude. Immunity 2007, 27:203-213.
21. + T cell precursor frequency regulates primary and memory responses to infection. Immunity 2008, 28:859-869.
22. Chang J.T., et al. Molecular regulation of effector and memory T cell differentiation. Nat. Immunol. 2014, 15:1104-1115.
23. + T cell precursor can develop into diverse effector and memory subsets. Immunity 2007, 27:985-997.
24. + T cell differentiation. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207:1235-1246.
25. + T cells. Science 2013, 340:635-639.
26. + T cells responding to infection. Immunity 2013, 39:347-356.
27. + T cells from a diverse repertoire produce different effector cell types during infection. Cell 2013, 153:785-796.
28. + T cell fates via the graded expression of T-bet transcription factor. Immunity 2007, 27:281-295.
29. + T lymphocyte fate specification by protein kinase Czeta and protein kinase Clambda/iota. J. Immunol. 2015, 194:2249-2259.
30. Choi Y.S., et al. ICOS receptor instructs T follicular helper cell versus effector cell differentiation via induction of the transcriptional repressor Bcl6. Immunity 2011, 34:932-946.
31. Pepper M., et al. Opposing signals from the Bcl6 transcription factor and the interleukin-2 receptor generate T helper 1 central and effector memory cells. Immunity 2011, 35:583-595.
32. Chang J.T., et al. Asymmetric proteasome segregation as a mechanism for unequal partitioning of the transcription factor T-bet during T lymphocyte division. Immunity 2011, 34:492-504.
33. + T cells. Science 2010, 327:1098-1102.
34. Glatman Zaretsky A., et al. T follicular helper cells differentiate from Th2 cells in response to helminth antigens. J. Exp. Med. 2009, 206:991-999.
35. Johnston R.J., et al. Bcl6 and Blimp-1 are reciprocal and antagonistic regulators of T follicular helper cell differentiation. Science 2009, 325:1006-1010.
36. Schmitt N., et al. The cytokine TGF-beta co-opts signaling via STAT3-STAT4 to promote the differentiation of human TFH cells. Nat. Immunol. 2014, 15:856-865.
37. Celli S., et al. CD4 T cells integrate signals delivered during successive DC encounters in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 2005, 202:1271-1278.
38. Gebhardt T., et al. Memory T cells in nonlymphoid tissue that provide enhanced local immunity during infection with herpes simplex virus. Nat. Immunol. 2009, 10:524-530.
39. Masopust D., et al. Dynamic T cell migration program provides resident memory within intestinal epithelium. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207:553-564.
40. + T cells. J. Exp. Med. 2007, 204:1625-1636.
41. + T cells in the memory population mediate potent protective immunity. Immunity 2013, 38:1250-1260.
42. Ciocca M.L., et al. Asymmetric memory T cell division in response to rechallenge. J. Immunol. 2012, 188:4145-4148.
43. + T cells. J. Immunol. 2014, 193:2651-2660.
44. Gmyrek G.B., et al. Polarity gene discs large homolog 1 regulates the generation of memory T cells. Eur J. Immunol. 2013, 43:1185-1194.
45. Humphries L.A., et al. Characterization of in vivo Dlg1 deletion on T cell development and function. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e45276.
46. Martin P., et al. Control of T helper 2 cell function and allergic airway inflammation by PKCzeta. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102:9866-9871.
47. Real E., et al. Atypical PKCs regulate T lymphocyte polarity and scanning behavior. J. Immunol. 2007, 179:5649-5652.
48. Round J.L., et al. Dlgh1 coordinates actin polymerization, synaptic T cell receptor and lipid raft aggregation, and effector function in T cells. J. Exp. Med. 2005, 201:419-430.
49. + T cells. PLoS ONE 2015, 10:e0133353.
50. Xavier R., et al. Discs large (Dlg1) complexes in lymphocyte activation. J. Cell Biol. 2004, 166:173-178.
51. Yang J.Q., et al. Loss of PKC lambda/iota impairs Th2 establishment and allergic airway inflammation in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:1099-1104.
52. Zanin-Zhorov A., et al. Scaffold protein Disc large homolog 1 is required for T-cell receptor-induced activation of regulatory T-cell function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:1625-1630.
53. Hawkins E.D., et al. Regulation of asymmetric cell division and polarity by Scribble is not required for humoral immunity. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4:1801.
54. Yeh J.H., et al. Regulation of a late phase of T cell polarity and effector functions by Crtam. Cell 2008, 132:846-859.
55. + T cells in lymphopenic hosts. Immunity 1999, 11:183-190.
56. Dustin M.L., Springer T.A. T-cell receptor cross-linking transiently stimulates adhesiveness through LFA-1. Nature 1989, 341:619-624.
57. King C.G., et al. T cell affinity regulates asymmetric division, effector cell differentiation, and tissue pathology. Immunity 2012, 37:709-720.
58. Oliaro J., et al. Asymmetric cell division of T cells upon antigen presentation uses multiple conserved mechanisms. J. Immunol. 2010, 185:367-375.
59. + cell properties during viral infection. Immunity 2011, 35:633-646.
60. Sarkar S., et al. Functional and genomic profiling of effector CD8 T cell subsets with distinct memory fates. J. Exp. Med. 2008, 205:625-640.
61. Jaitin D.A., et al. Massively parallel single-cell RNA-seq for marker-free decomposition of tissues into cell types. Science 2014, 343:776-779.
62. Macosko E.Z., et al. Highly parallel genome-wide expression profiling of individual cells using nanoliter droplets. Cell 2015, 161:1202-1214.
63. Weng N.P., et al. The molecular basis of the memory T cell response: differential gene expression and its epigenetic regulation. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2012, 12:306-315.
64. Youngblood B., et al. T-cell memory differentiation: insights from transcriptional signatures and epigenetics. Immunology 2013, 139:277-284.
65. + T-cell differentiation. Immunol. Rev. 2013, 253:82-96.
66. + T cells. J. Immunol. 2009, 182:7738-7748.
67. Lara-Astiaso D., et al. Chromatin state dynamics during blood formation. Science 2014, 345:943-949.
68. + effector and memory T-cell differentiation. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6:6301.
69. Jung Y.W., et al. Differential localization of effector and memory CD8 T cell subsets in lymphoid organs during acute viral infection. J. Immunol. 2010, 185:5315-5325.
70. Jameson S.C., Masopust D. Diversity in T cell memory: an embarrassment of riches. Immunity 2009, 31:859-871.
71. van der Windt G.J., Pearce E.L. Metabolic switching and fuel choice during T-cell differentiation and memory development. Immunol. Rev. 2012, 249:27-42.
72. Wang R., Green D.R. Metabolic reprogramming and metabolic dependency in T cells. Immunol. Rev. 2012, 249:14-26.
73. Kidani Y., et al. Sterol regulatory element-binding proteins are essential for the metabolic programming of effector T cells and adaptive immunity. Nat. Immunol. 2013, 14:489-499.
74. Dittrich P., Ibanez A.J. Analysis of metabolites in single cells-what is the best micro-platform?. Electrophoresis 2015, Published online June 26, 2015. 10.1002/elps.201500045.
75. Onjiko R.M., et al. Single-cell mass spectrometry reveals small molecules that affect cell fates in the 16-cell embryo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2015, 112:6545-6550.
76. Conduit P.T., Raff J.W. Cnn dynamics drive centrosome size asymmetry to ensure daughter centriole retention in Drosophila neuroblasts. Curr. Biol. 2010, 20:2187-2192.
77. Januschke J., et al. Drosophila neuroblasts retain the daughter centrosome. Nat. Commun. 2011, 2:243.
78. Yamashita Y.M., et al. Asymmetric inheritance of mother versus daughter centrosome in stem cell division. Science 2007, 315:518-521.
79. + T cells produce a single pulse of IFN-gamma in vivo within hours of infection, but without antiviral effect. J. Immunol. 2014, 193:1873-1885.
80. Moreau H.D., et al. Dynamic in situ cytometry uncovers T cell receptor signaling during immunological synapses and kinapses in vivo. Immunity 2012, 37:351-363.
81. Pozzi P., et al. High-throughput spatial light modulation two-photon microscopy for fast functional imaging. Neurophotonics 2015, 2:015005.
82. + T cell response. Immunity 2006, 25:19-29.
83. Plumlee C.R., et al. Early effector CD8 T cells display plasticity in populating the short-lived effector and memory-precursor pools following bacterial or viral infection. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5:12264.
84. + T cells. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6:7089.
85. Chiu B.C., et al. Central memory CD8 T cells in aged mice are virtual memory cells. J. Immunol. 2013, 191:5793-5796.
86. Lee J.Y., et al. Virtual memory CD8 T cells display unique functional properties. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:13498-13503.
87. Akue A.D., et al. Derivation and maintenance of virtual memory CD8 T cells. J. Immunol. 2012, 188:2516-2523.
88. Park C.O., Kupper T.S. The emerging role of resident memory T cells in protective immunity and inflammatory disease. Nat. Med. 2015, 21:688-697.
89. Park S.G., et al. The kinase PDK1 integrates T cell antigen receptor and CD28 coreceptor signaling to induce NF-kappaB and activate T cells. Nat. Immunol. 2009, 10:158-166.
90. Fruman D.A., Bismuth G. Fine tuning the immune response with PI3K. Immunol. Rev. 2009, 228:253-272.
91. Tskvitaria-Fuller I., et al. Specific patterns of Cdc42 activity are related to distinct elements of T cell polarization. J. Immunol. 2006, 177:1708-1720.
92. Atwood S.X., et al. Cdc42 acts downstream of Bazooka to regulate neuroblast polarity through Par-6 aPKC. J. Cell Sci. 2007, 120:3200-3206.
93. Bandyopadhyay G., et al. PKC-zeta mediates insulin effects on glucose transport in cultured preadipocyte-derived human adipocytes. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2002, 87:716-723.
94. Uberall F., et al. Evidence that atypical protein kinase C-lambda and atypical protein kinase C-zeta participate in Ras-mediated reorganization of the F-actin cytoskeleton. J. Cell Biol. 1999, 144:413-425.
95. Prehoda K.E. Polarization of Drosophila neuroblasts during asymmetric division. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2009, 1:a001388.
96. Yamashita Y.M., et al. Polarity in stem cell division: asymmetric stem cell division in tissue homeostasis. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2010, 2:a001313.
97. Doe C.Q., Bowerman B. Asymmetric cell division: fly neuroblast meets worm zygote. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2001, 13:68-75.
98. Williams S.E., Fuchs E. Oriented divisions, fate decisions. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2013, 25:749-758.
99. Atwood S.X., Prehoda K.E. aPKC phosphorylates Miranda to polarize fate determinants during neuroblast asymmetric cell division. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:723-729.
100. Betschinger J., et al. The Par complex directs asymmetric cell division by phosphorylating the cytoskeletal protein Lgl. Nature 2003, 422:326-330.
101. Suzuki A., Ohno S. The PAR-aPKC system: lessons in polarity. J. Cell Sci. 2006, 119:979-987.
102. Ohno S. Intercellular junctions and cellular polarity: the PAR-aPKC complex, a conserved core cassette playing fundamental roles in cell polarity. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2001, 13:641-648.
103. Plant P.J., et al. A polarity complex of mPar-6 and atypical PKC binds, phosphorylates and regulates mammalian Lgl. Nat. Cell Biol. 2003, 5:301-308.
104. Betschinger J., et al. Phosphorylation-induced autoinhibition regulates the cytoskeletal protein Lethal (2) giant larvae. Curr Biol 2005, 15:276-282.
105. Yamanaka T., et al. Mammalian Lgl forms a protein complex with PAR-6 and aPKC independently of PAR-3 to regulate epithelial cell polarity. Curr. Biol. 2003, 13:734-743.
106. Lee C.Y., et al. Lgl, Pins and aPKC regulate neuroblast self-renewal versus differentiation. Nature 2006, 439:594-598.
107. Smith C.A., et al. aPKC-mediated phosphorylation regulates asymmetric membrane localization of the cell fate determinant Numb. EMBO J. 2007, 26:468-480.
108. Guo M., et al. Control of daughter cell fates during asymmetric division: interaction of Numb and Notch. Neuron 1996, 17:27-41.
109. Fuerstenberg S., et al. Identification of Miranda protein domains regulating asymmetric cortical localization, cargo binding, and cortical release. Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 1998, 12:325-339.
110. Tio M., et al. cdc2 links the Drosophila cell cycle and asymmetric division machineries. Nature 2001, 409:1063-1067.
111. Hutterer A., et al. Mitotic activation of the kinase Aurora-A requires its binding partner Bora. Dev. Cell 2006, 11:147-157.
112. Wirtz-Peitz F., et al. Linking cell cycle to asymmetric division: Aurora-A phosphorylates the Par complex to regulate Numb localization. Cell 2008, 135:161-173.
113. Ting S.B., et al. Asymmetric segregation and self-renewal of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells with endocytic Ap2a2. Blood 2012, 119:2510-2522.
114. Wu M., et al. Imaging hematopoietic precursor division in real time. Cell Stem Cell 2007, 1:541-554.
115. Metcalf D., Wiadrowski M. Autoradiographic analysis of lymphocyte proliferation in the thymus and in thymic lymphoma tissue. Cancer Res. 1966, 26:483-491.
116. Sugimoto M., Yasuda T. Asymmetric (differential) cell division of thymic lymphocytes by means of cytoplasmic polarization: possible biological meanings. Thymus 1983, 5:297-310.
117. Barnett B.E., et al. Asymmetric B cell division in the germinal center reaction. Science 2012, 335:342-344.
118. Thaunat O., et al. Asymmetric segregation of polarized antigen on B cell division shapes presentation capacity. Science 2012, 335:475-479.
119. Hope K.J., et al. An RNAi screen identifies Msi2 and Prox1 as having opposite roles in the regulation of hematopoietic stem cell activity. Cell Stem Cell 2010, 7:101-113.
120. Heidel F.H., et al. The cell fate determinant Llgl1 influences HSC fitness and prognosis in AML. J. Exp. Med. 2013, 210:15-22.
121. Sengupta A., et al. Atypical protein kinase C (aPKCzeta and aPKClambda) is dispensable for mammalian hematopoietic stem cell activity and blood formation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2011, 108:9957-9962.
122. Pike K.A., et al. Immature T-cell clustering and efficient differentiation require the polarity protein Scribble. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2011, 108:1116-1121.
123. Leitges M., et al. Targeted disruption of the zetaPKC gene results in the impairment of the NF-kappaB pathway. Mol. Cell 2001, 8:771-780.
124. Gao L., et al. Multiple splice variants of Par3 and of a novel related gene, Par3L, produce proteins with different binding properties. Gene 2002, 294:99-107.
125. Huo Y., Macara I.G. The Par3-like polarity protein Par3L is essential for mammary stem cell maintenance. Nat. Cell Biol. 2014, 16:529-537.
126. Goldstein B., Macara I.G. The PAR proteins: fundamental players in animal cell polarization. Dev. Cell 2007, 13:609-622.
127. Klein A.M., et al. Droplet barcoding for single-cell transcriptomics applied to embryonic stem cells. Cell 2015, 161:1187-1201.
128. Buenrostro J.D., et al. Single-cell chromatin accessibility reveals principles of regulatory variation. Nature 2015, 523:486-490.
129. Cusanovich D.A., et al. Multiplex single-cell profiling of chromatin accessibility by combinatorial cellular indexing. Science 2015, 348:910-914.
130. Bendall S.C., et al. Single-cell mass cytometry of differential immune and drug responses across a human hematopoietic continuum. Science 2011, 332:687-696.