Towards Real-Time Control of Gene Expression: Controlling the Hog Signaling Cascade

To decipher the dynamical functioning of cellular processes, the method of choice is to observe the time response of cells subjected to well controlled perturbations in time and amplitude. Efficient methods, based on molecular biology, are available to monitor quantitatively and dynamically many cellular processes. In contrast, it is still a challenge to perturb cellular processes - such as gene expression - in a precise and controlled manner. Here, we propose a first step towards in vivo control of gene expression: in real-time, we dynamically control the activity of a yeast signaling cascade thanks to an experimental platform combining a micro-fluidic device, an epi-fluorescence microscope and software implementing control approaches. We experimentally demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, and we investigate computationally some possible improvements of our control strategy using a model of the yeast osmo-adaptation response fitted to our data.

[1]  J. Monod,et al.  Genetic regulatory mechanisms in the synthesis of proteins. , 1961, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  N. Friedman,et al.  Structure and function of a transcriptional network activated by the MAPK Hog1 , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[3]  A. Oudenaarden,et al.  A Systems-Level Analysis of Perfect Adaptation in Yeast Osmoregulation , 2009, Cell.

[4]  J. Doyle,et al.  Robust perfect adaptation in bacterial chemotaxis through integral feedback control. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  H. Kitano.  Systems Biology: A Brief Overview , 2002, Science.

[6]  Stefan Hohmann,et al.  Yeast Stress Responses , 1997, Topics in Current Genetics.

[7]  John C. Doyle,et al.  Surviving heat shock: control strategies for robustness and performance. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  L.C.G.J.M. Habets,et al.  Control of multi-affine systems on rectangles with applications to hybrid biomolecular networks , 2002, Proceedings of the 41st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2002..

[9]  Drew Endy,et al.  Stimulus Design for Model Selection and Validation in Cell Signaling , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[10]  Jun-ichi Imura,et al.  Controllability Analysis of Biosystems Based on Piecewise-Affine Systems Approach , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[11]  A. van Oudenaarden,et al.  Quantitative time-lapse fluorescence microscopy in single cells. , 2009, Annual review of cell and developmental biology.

[12]  M. Gossen,et al.  Transcriptional activation by tetracyclines in mammalian cells. , 1995, Science.

[13]  Vitoantonio Bevilacqua,et al.  Developing optimal input design strategies in cancer systems biology with applications to microfluidic device engineering , 2009, BMC Bioinformatics.

[14]  A novel method to isolate cells with conditional gene expression using fluorescence activated cell sorting. , 1997, Nucleic acids research.

[15]  Jerome T. Mettetal,et al.  The Frequency Dependence of Osmo-Adaptation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2008, Science.

[16]  Eduardo D. Sontag,et al.  Mathematical Control Theory: Deterministic Finite Dimensional Systems , 1990 .

[17]  Vipul Periwal,et al.  System Modeling in Cellular Biology: From Concepts to Nuts and Bolts , 2006 .

[18]  M. Ptashne,et al.  A general method for maximizing the expression of a cloned gene. , 1979, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[20]  Megan N. McClean,et al.  Signal processing by the HOG MAP kinase pathway , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  Axel Kowald,et al.  Systems Biology in Practice: Concepts, Implementation and Application , 2005 .

[22]  Frank Allgöwer,et al.  Assessment and Future Directions of Nonlinear Model Predictive Control , 2007 .

[23]  Pamela A. Silver,et al.  Regulated nucleo/cytoplasmic exchange of HOG1 MAPK requires the importin β homologs NMD5 and XPO1 , 1998, The EMBO journal.

[24]  M. Elowitz,et al.  Frequency-modulated nuclear localization bursts coordinate gene regulation , 2008, Nature.

[25]  I. Herskowitz,et al.  Unique and redundant roles for HOG MAPK pathway components as revealed by whole-genome expression analysis. , 2003, Molecular biology of the cell.

[26]  D. Stillman,et al.  SWI/SNF Binding to the HO Promoter Requires Histone Acetylation and Stimulates TATA-Binding Protein Recruitment , 2006, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[27]  Jorge Goncalves,et al.  Control theory and systems biology , 2009 .

[28]  David E. Levin,et al.  Identification of Positive Regulators of the Yeast Fps1 Glycerol Channel , 2009, PLoS genetics.

[29]  L. Hood,et al.  Reverse Engineering of Biological Complexity , 2007 .

[30]  E. Klipp,et al.  Integrative model of the response of yeast to osmotic shock , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[31]  Ricard Solé,et al.  Dynamic Signaling in the Hog1 MAPK Pathway Relies on High Basal Signal Transduction , 2009, Science Signaling.

[32]  Ádám M. Halász,et al.  Stochastic Modeling and Control of Biological Systems: The Lactose Regulation System of Escherichia Coli , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[33]  Jean-Luc Gouzé,et al.  Exact control of genetic networks in a qualitative framework: The bistable switch example , 2011, Autom..

[34]  Edda Klipp,et al.  A Quantitative Study of the Hog1 MAPK Response to Fluctuating Osmotic Stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2010, PloS one.

[36]  J. Thorner,et al.  Stress resistance and signal fidelity independent of nuclear MAPK function , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.