Creating Age Asymmetry: Consequences of Inheriting Damaged Goods in Mammalian Cells

Trends in Cell Biology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 82-92

  Moore, Darcie L ^a   Jessberger, Sebastian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

asymmetric segregation; damaged proteins; neurogenesis; organelle; polarity; stem cell

Indexed keywords

DNA; PROTEIN;

ASYMMETRIC CELL DIVISION; CELL AGGREGATION; CELL COMPONENT; CENTRIOLE; DNA STRAND; EUKARYOTIC FLAGELLUM; GENE SEGREGATION; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MAMMAL CELL; MITOCHONDRION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN MISFOLDING; REVIEW; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CELL ORGANELLE; CELLS; CHROMOSOME SEGREGATION; MAMMAL; METABOLISM;

ANIMALS; ASYMMETRIC CELL DIVISION; CELLS; CHROMOSOME SEGREGATION; HUMANS; MAMMALS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; ORGANELLES;

EID: 85002045810     PISSN: 09628924     EISSN: 18793088     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.09.007     Document Type: Review

References (69)

1. 1 Henderson, K.A., Gottschling, D.E., A mother's sacrifice: what is she keeping for herself?. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 20 (2008), 723–728.
2. 2 Pelletier, L., Yamashita, Y.M., Centrosome asymmetry and inheritance during animal development. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 24 (2012), 541–546.
3. 3 Inaba, M., Yamashita, Y.M., Asymmetric stem cell division: precision for robustness. Cell Stem Cell 11 (2012), 461–469.
4. 4 Homem, C.C., Knoblich, J.A., Drosophila neuroblasts: a model for stem cell biology. Development 139 (2012), 4297–4310.
5. 5 Morrison, S.J., Kimble, J., Asymmetric and symmetric stem-cell divisions in development and cancer. Nature 441 (2006), 1068–1074.
6. 6 Gotz, M., Huttner, W.B., The cell biology of neurogenesis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6 (2005), 777–788.
7. 7 Bonifacino, J.S., Adaptor proteins involved in polarized sorting. J. Cell Biol. 204 (2014), 7–17.
8. 8 Kusek, G., et al. Asymmetric segregation of the double-stranded RNA binding protein Staufen2 during mammalian neural stem cell divisions promotes lineage progression. Cell Stem Cell 11 (2012), 505–516.
9. 9 Knoblich, J.A., Asymmetric cell division: recent developments and their implications for tumour biology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 11 (2010), 849–860.
10. 10 Chao, M.P., et al. Establishment of a normal hematopoietic and leukemia stem cell hierarchy. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 73 (2008), 439–449.
11. 11 Watt, F.M., et al. Epidermal stem cells: an update. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 16 (2006), 518–524.
12. 12 Brack, A.S., Rando, T.A., Tissue-specific stem cells: lessons from the skeletal muscle satellite cell. Cell Stem Cell 10 (2012), 504–514.
13. 13 He, S., et al. Mechanisms of stem cell self-renewal. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 25 (2009), 377–406.
14. 14 Zhao, C., et al. Mechanisms and functional implications of adult neurogenesis. Cell 132 (2008), 645–660.
15. 15 Tetteh, P.W., et al. Plasticity within stem cell hierarchies in mammalian epithelia. Trends Cell Biol. 25 (2015), 100–108.
16. 16 Barker, N., et al. Identification of stem cells in small intestine and colon by marker gene Lgr5. Nature 449 (2007), 1003–1007.
17. 17 Doulatov, S., et al. Hematopoiesis: a human perspective. Cell Stem Cell 10 (2012), 120–136.
18. 18 Charge, S.B., Rudnicki, M.A., Cellular and molecular regulation of muscle regeneration. Physiol. Rev. 84 (2004), 209–238.
19. 19 Tumbar, T., et al. Defining the epithelial stem cell niche in skin. Science 303 (2004), 359–363.
20. 20 Cairns, J., Mutation selection and the natural history of cancer. Nature 255 (1975), 197–200.
21. 21 Tajbakhsh, S., Stem cell identity and template DNA strand segregation. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 20 (2008), 716–722.
22. 22 Rando, T.A., The immortal strand hypothesis: segregation and reconstruction. Cell 129 (2007), 1239–1243.
23. 23 Rocheteau, P., et al. A subpopulation of adult skeletal muscle stem cells retains all template DNA strands after cell division. Cell 148 (2012), 112–125.
24. 24 Shinin, V., et al. Asymmetric division and cosegregation of template DNA strands in adult muscle satellite cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 8 (2006), 677–687.
25. 25 Karpowicz, P., et al. Support for the immortal strand hypothesis: neural stem cells partition DNA asymmetrically in vitro. J. Cell Biol. 170 (2005), 721–732.
26. 26 Potten, C.S., et al. Intestinal stem cells protect their genome by selective segregation of template DNA strands. J. Cell Sci. 115 (2002), 2381–2388.
27. 27 Conboy, M.J., et al. High incidence of non-random template strand segregation and asymmetric fate determination in dividing stem cells and their progeny. PLoS Biol., 5, 2007, e102.
28. 28 Tomasetti, C., Bozic, I., The (not so) immortal strand hypothesis. Stem Cell Res. 14 (2015), 238–241.
29. 29 Potten, C.S., et al. The segregation of DNA in epithelial stem cells. Cell 15 (1978), 899–906.
30. 30 Steinhauser, M.L., et al. Multi-isotope imaging mass spectrometry quantifies stem cell division and metabolism. Nature 481 (2012), 516–519.
31. 31 Kiel, M.J., et al. Haematopoietic stem cells do not asymmetrically segregate chromosomes or retain BrdU. Nature 449 (2007), 238–242.
32. 32 Yadlapalli, S., Yamashita, Y.M., Chromosome-specific nonrandom sister chromatid segregation during stem-cell division. Nature 498 (2013), 251–254.
33. 33 Charville, G.W., Rando, T.A., The mortal strand hypothesis: non-random chromosome inheritance and the biased segregation of damaged DNA. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 24 (2013), 653–660.
34. 34 Rambhatla, L., et al. Cellular Senescence: Ex Vivo p53-Dependent Asymmetric Cell Kinetics. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 1 (2001), 28–37.
35. 35 Wei, P.C., et al. Long neural genes harbor recurrent DNA break clusters in neural stem/progenitor cells. Cell 164 (2016), 644–655.
36. 36 Ouellet, J., Barral, Y., Organelle segregation during mitosis: lessons from asymmetrically dividing cells. J. Cell Biol. 196 (2012), 305–313.
37. 37 Lerit, D.A., et al. Organelle asymmetry for proper fitness, function, and fate. Chromosome Res. 21 (2013), 271–286.
38. 38 Vevea, J.D., et al. Inheritance of the fittest mitochondria in yeast. Trends Cell Biol. 24 (2014), 53–60.
39. 39 McFaline-Figueroa, J.R., et al. Mitochondrial quality control during inheritance is associated with lifespan and mother-daughter age asymmetry in budding yeast. Aging Cell 10 (2011), 885–895.
40. 40 Katajisto, P., et al. Asymmetric apportioning of aged mitochondria between daughter cells is required for stemness. Science 348 (2015), 340–343.
41. 41 Dalton, C.M., Carroll, J., Biased inheritance of mitochondria during asymmetric cell division in the mouse oocyte. J. Cell Sci. 126 (2013), 2955–2964.
42. 42 Ogrodnik, M., et al. Dynamic JUNQ inclusion bodies are asymmetrically inherited in mammalian cell lines through the asymmetric partitioning of vimentin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111 (2014), 8049–8054.
43. 43 Wang, X., et al. Asymmetric centrosome inheritance maintains neural progenitors in the neocortex. Nature 461 (2009), 947–955.
44. 44 Paridaen, J.T., et al. Asymmetric inheritance of centrosome-associated primary cilium membrane directs ciliogenesis after cell division. Cell 155 (2013), 333–344.
45. 45 Anderson, C.T., Stearns, T., Centriole age underlies asynchronous primary cilium growth in mammalian cells. Curr. Biol. 19 (2009), 1498–1502.
46. 46 Piotrowska-Nitsche, K., Caspary, T., Live imaging of individual cell divisions in mouse neuroepithelium shows asymmetry in cilium formation and Sonic hedgehog response. Cilia, 1, 2012, 6.
47. 47 Reina, J., Gonzalez, C., When fate follows age: unequal centrosomes in asymmetric cell division. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., 2014, 369.
48. 48 Chen, C.T., et al. Resurrecting remnants: the lives of post-mitotic midbodies. Trends Cell Biol. 23 (2013), 118–128.
49. 49 Skop, A.R., et al. Dissection of the mammalian midbody proteome reveals conserved cytokinesis mechanisms. Science 305 (2004), 61–66.
50. 50 Kuo, T.C., et al. Midbody accumulation through evasion of autophagy contributes to cellular reprogramming and tumorigenicity. Nat. Cell Biol. 13 (2011), 1214–1223.
51. 51 Ettinger, A.W., et al. Proliferating versus differentiating stem and cancer cells exhibit distinct midbody-release behaviour. Nat. Commun., 2, 2011, 503.
52. 52 Dubreuil, V., et al. Midbody and primary cilium of neural progenitors release extracellular membrane particles enriched in the stem cell marker prominin-1. J. Cell Biol. 176 (2007), 483–495.
53. 53 Marzesco, A.M., et al. Release of extracellular membrane particles carrying the stem cell marker prominin-1 (CD133) from neural progenitors and other epithelial cells. J. Cell Sci. 118 (2005), 2849–2858.
54. 54 Crowell, E.F., et al. Engulfment of the midbody remnant after cytokinesis in mammalian cells. J. Cell Sci. 127 (2014), 3840–3851.
55. 55 Dionne, L.K., et al. Midbody: from cellular junk to regulator of cell polarity and cell fate. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 35 (2015), 51–58.
56. 56 Denoth Lippuner, A., et al. Budding yeast as a model organism to study the effects of age. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 38 (2014), 300–325.
57. 57 Johnston, J.A., et al. Aggresomes: a cellular response to misfolded proteins. J. Cell Biol. 143 (1998), 1883–1898.
58. 58 Bufalino, M.R., van der Kooy, D., The aggregation and inheritance of damaged proteins determines cell fate during mitosis. Cell Cycle 13 (2014), 1201–1207.
59. 59 Rujano, M.A., et al. Polarised asymmetric inheritance of accumulated protein damage in higher eukaryotes. PLoS Biol., 4, 2006, e417.
60. 60 Johnston, J.A., et al. Cytoplasmic dynein/dynactin mediates the assembly of aggresomes. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 53 (2002), 26–38.
61. 61 Bufalino, M.R., et al. The asymmetric segregation of damaged proteins is stem cell-type dependent. J. Cell Biol. 201 (2013), 523–530.
62. 62 Kaganovich, D., et al. Misfolded proteins partition between two distinct quality control compartments. Nature 454 (2008), 1088–1095.
63. 63 Pattabiraman, S., Kaganovich, D., Imperfect asymmetry: the mechanism governing asymmetric partitioning of damaged cellular components during mitosis. Bioarchitecture 4 (2014), 203–209.
64. 64 Fuentealba, L.C., et al. Asymmetric mitosis: unequal segregation of proteins destined for degradation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (2008), 7732–7737.
65. 65 Moore, D.L., et al. A mechanism for the segregation of age in mammalian neural stem cells. Science 349 (2015), 1334–1338.
66. 66 Shcheprova, Z., et al. A mechanism for asymmetric segregation of age during yeast budding. Nature 454 (2008), 728–734.
67. 67 Lee, D.A., et al. Tanycytes of the hypothalamic median eminence form a diet-responsive neurogenic niche. Nat. Neurosci. 15 (2012), 700–702.
68. 68 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 34 (2011), 492–504.
69. 69 Wigley, W.C., et al. Dynamic association of proteasomal machinery with the centrosome. J. Cell Biol. 145 (1999), 481–490.