Evolving Homeostatic Tissue Using Genetic Algorithms

Multicellular organisms maintain form and function through a multitude of homeostatic mechanisms. The details of these mechanisms are in many cases unknown, and so are their evolutionary origin and their link to development. In order to illuminate these issues we have investigated the evolution of structural homeostasis in the simplest of cases, a tissue formed by a mono-layer of cells. To this end, we made use of a 3-dimensional hybrid cellular automaton, an individual-based model in which the behaviour of each cell depends on its local environment. Using an evolutionary algorithm (EA) we evolved cell signalling networks, both with a fixed and an incremental fitness evaluation, which give rise to and maintain a mono-layer tissue structure. Analysis of the solutions provided by the EA shows that the two evaluation methods gives rise to different types of solutions to the problem of homeostasis. The fixed method leads to almost optimal solutions, where the tissue relies on a high rate of cell turnover, while the solutions from the incremental scheme behave in a more conservative manner, only dividing when necessary. In order to test the robustness of the solutions we subjected them to environmental stress, by wounding the tissue, and to genetic stress, by introducing mutations. The results show that the robustness very much depends on the mechanism responsible for maintaining homeostasis. The two evolved cell types analysed present contrasting mechanisms by which tissue homeostasis can be maintained. This compares well to different tissue types found in multicellular organisms. For example the epithelial cells lining the colon in humans are shed at a considerable rate, while in other tissue types, which are not as exposed, the conservative type of homeostatic mechanism is normally found. These results will hopefully shed light on how multicellular organisms have evolved homeostatic mechanisms and what might occur when these mechanisms fail, as in the case of cancer.

[1]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  A Taxonomy for Artificial Embryogeny , 2003, Artificial Life.

[2]  S. Lindquist,et al.  Hsp90 as a capacitor of phenotypic variation , 2002, Nature.

[3]  Richard Newman,et al.  Shape Homeostasis in Virtual Embryos , 2009, Artificial Life.

[4]  Andreas Zell,et al.  Evolving the Ability of Limited Growth and Self-Repair for Artificial Embryos , 2003, ECAL.

[5]  A. Anderson,et al.  Evolution of cell motility in an individual-based model of tumour growth. , 2009, Journal of theoretical biology.

[6]  J P Freyer,et al.  In situ oxygen consumption rates of cells in V‐79 multicellular spheroids during growth , 1984, Journal of cellular physiology.

[7]  M. Chaplain,et al.  Continuous and discrete mathematical models of tumor-induced angiogenesis , 1998, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[8]  Tmd Kovacs,et al.  Soft Computing in Engineering Design and Manufacturing , 1998 .

[9]  C. Nüsslein-Volhard,et al.  Mutations affecting segment number and polarity in Drosophila , 1980, Nature.

[10]  P. K. Chawdhry,et al.  Soft Computing in Engineering Design and Manufacturing , 1998, Springer London.

[11]  Maciej Swat,et al.  Adhesion between cells, diffusion of growth factors, and elasticity of the AER produce the paddle shape of the chick limb. , 2006, Physica A.

[12]  A. Anderson,et al.  A Computational Study of the Development of Epithelial Acini: I. Sufficient Conditions for the Formation of a Hollow Structure , 2008, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[13]  M. Pike,et al.  Increased cell division as a cause of human cancer. , 1990, Cancer research.

[14]  E. Blackburn,et al.  A telomeric sequence in the RNA of Tetrahymena telomerase required for telomere repeat synthesis , 1989, Nature.

[15]  K. Ganeshaiah,et al.  Development of Seeds as Self-Organizing Units: Testing the Predictions , 1995, International Journal of Plant Sciences.

[16]  C. Hooper.  CELL TURNOVER IN EPITHELIAL POPULATIONS , 1956, The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society.

[17]  A. Wagner.  Robustness and evolvability: a paradox resolved , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[18]  R K Jain,et al.  Mosaic blood vessels in tumors: frequency of cancer cells in contact with flowing blood. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  Kunihiko Kaneko,et al.  Evolution of Robustness to Noise and Mutation in Gene Expression Dynamics , 2007, PloS one.

[20]  A. Spradling,et al.  The Mother of All Stem Cells? , 2007, Science.

[21]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Finding Acceptable Solutions in the Pareto-Optimal Range using Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms , 1998 .

[22]  David Basanta,et al.  The Evolution of Robust Development and Homeostasis in Artificial Organisms , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[23]  Wolfgang Banzhaf,et al.  Genetic Programming: An Introduction , 1997 .

[24]  J. Cunliffe.  Morphostasis: an evolving perspective. , 1997, Medical hypotheses.

[25]  P. Vaupel,et al.  Oxygen diffusivity in tumor tissue (DS-Carcinosarcoma) under temperature conditions within the range of 20–40°C , 1977, Pflügers Archiv.

[26]  P. Schuster,et al.  IR-98-039 / April Continuity in Evolution : On the Nature of Transitions , 1998 .

[27]  D. W. Thompson.  On Growth and Form: The Complete Revised Edition , 1992 .

[28]  A. Anderson,et al.  A hybrid cellular automaton model of clonal evolution in cancer: the emergence of the glycolytic phenotype. , 2008, Journal of theoretical biology.

[29]  Lewis Wolpert,et al.  Principles of Development , 1997 .

[30]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  New structural variation in evolutionary searches of RNA neutral networks , 2006, Biosyst..

[31]  L. Wolpert.  Positional information and the spatial pattern of cellular differentiation. , 1969, Journal of theoretical biology.

[32]  D. Hanahan,et al.  The Hallmarks of Cancer , 2000, Cell.

[33]  William H. Press,et al.  The Art of Scientific Computing Second Edition , 1998 .

[34]  B. L. Shapiro,et al.  Down syndrome--a disruption of homeostasis. , 1983, American journal of medical genetics.

[35]  S. V. Sotirchos,et al.  Variations in tumor cell growth rates and metabolism with oxygen concentration, glucose concentration, and extracellular pH , 1992, Journal of cellular physiology.

[36]  Yves Duthen,et al.  Using a genetic algorithm to evolve cellular automata for 2D/3D computational development , 2006, GECCO.

[37]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Migration of tumor cells in 3D matrices is governed by matrix stiffness along with cell-matrix adhesion and proteolysis. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[38]  A. Anderson,et al.  An evolutionary hybrid cellular automaton model of solid tumour growth. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[39]  Alexander R. A. Anderson,et al.  Modelling evolutionary cell behaviour using neural networks: Application to tumour growth , 2009, Biosyst..

[40]  D. McGill.  Textbook of gastroenterology , 1985 .

[41]  Tadataka Yamada,et al.  Textbook of Gastroenterology , 1995 .

[42]  E. Bornberg-Bauer,et al.  A structural model of latent evolutionary potentials underlying neutral networks in proteins , 2007 .

[43]  A. Anderson,et al.  A hybrid mathematical model of solid tumour invasion: the importance of cell adhesion , 2005 .

[44]  A. Anderson,et al.  A Computational Study of the Development of Epithelial Acini: II. Necessary Conditions for Structure and Lumen Stability , 2008, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[45]  M. Pigliucci.  Genotype–phenotype mapping and the end of the ‘genes as blueprint’ metaphor , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[46]  C. Waddington.  The strategy of the genes , 1957 .