A Mass Conserved Reaction–Diffusion System Captures Properties of Cell Polarity

Cell polarity is a general cellular process that can be seen in various cell types such as migrating neutrophils and Dictyostelium cells. The Rho small GTP(guanosine 5′-tri phosphate)ases have been shown to regulate cell polarity; however, its mechanism of emergence has yet to be clarified. We first developed a reaction–diffusion model of the Rho GTPases, which exhibits switch-like reversible response to a gradient of extracellular signals, exclusive accumulation of Cdc42 and Rac, or RhoA at the maximal or minimal intensity of the signal, respectively, and tracking of changes of a signal gradient by the polarized peak. The previous cell polarity models proposed by Subramanian and Narang show similar behaviors to our Rho GTPase model, despite the difference in molecular networks. This led us to compare these models, and we found that these models commonly share instability and a mass conservation of components. Based on these common properties, we developed conceptual models of a mass conserved reaction–diffusion system with diffusion–driven instability. These conceptual models retained similar behaviors of cell polarity in the Rho GTPase model. Using these models, we numerically and analytically found that multiple polarized peaks are unstable, resulting in a single stable peak (uniqueness of axis), and that sensitivity toward changes of a signal gradient is specifically restricted at the polarized peak (localized sensitivity). Although molecular networks may differ from one cell type to another, the behaviors of cell polarity in migrating cells seem similar, suggesting that there should be a fundamental principle. Thus, we propose that a mass conserved reaction–diffusion system with diffusion-driven instability is one of such principles of cell polarity.

[1]  Marc W. Kirschner,et al.  A PtdInsP3- and Rho GTPase-mediated positive feedback loop regulates neutrophil polarity , 2002, Nature Cell Biology.

[2]  John G. Collard,et al.  The Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factor Tiam1 Affects Neuronal Morphology; Opposing Roles for the Small GTPases Rac and Rho , 1997, The Journal of cell biology.

[3]  Hui Ma,et al.  Chemoattractant‐mediated transient activation and membrane localization of Akt/PKB is required for efficient chemotaxis to cAMP in Dictyostelium , 1999, The EMBO journal.

[4]  Rong Zeng,et al.  Regulation of PTEN by Rho small GTPases , 2005, Nature Cell Biology.

[5]  Wei Lu,et al.  Directional Sensing Requires Gβγ-Mediated PAK1 and PIXα-Dependent Activation of Cdc42 , 2003, Cell.

[6]  Yue Zhang,et al.  Regulation of Cell Polarity and Protrusion Formation by Targeting RhoA for Degradation , 2003, Science.

[7]  R. Firtel,et al.  Dictyostelium: a model for regulated cell movement during morphogenesis. , 2000, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[8]  M. Schwartz,et al.  In vivo dynamics of Rac-membrane interactions. , 2006, Molecular biology of the cell.

[9]  Richard A. Firtel,et al.  Role of Phosphatidylinositol 3′ Kinase and a Downstream Pleckstrin Homology Domain–Containing Protein in Controlling Chemotaxis inDictyostelium , 2001, The Journal of cell biology.

[10]  C. Parent,et al.  Localization of the G protein betagamma complex in living cells during chemotaxis. , 2000, Science.

[11]  Carole A. Parent,et al.  PI 3-Kinases and PTEN How Opposites Chemoattract , 2002, Cell.

[12]  Markus Affolter,et al.  Signaling to cytoskeletal dynamics during chemotaxis. , 2005, Developmental cell.

[13]  A. Ridley Rho GTPases and cell migration. , 2001, Journal of cell science.

[14]  Francisca Vazquez,et al.  Novel Mechanism of PTEN Regulation by Its Phosphatidylinositol 4,5-Bisphosphate Binding Motif Is Critical for Chemotaxis* , 2004, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[15]  S. Kuroda,et al.  Regulation of the cytoskeleton and cell adhesion by the Rho family GTPases in mammalian cells. , 1999, Annual review of biochemistry.

[16]  C. Parent,et al.  Localization of the G Protein βγ Complex in Living Cells During Chemotaxis , 2000 .

[17]  E. Giniger How do Rho family GTPases direct axon growth and guidance? A proposal relating signaling pathways to growth cone mechanics. , 2002, Differentiation; research in biological diversity.

[18]  C. Hall,et al.  Regulation of Phosphorylation Pathways by p21 GTPases , 1996 .

[19]  P. Devreotes,et al.  Tumor Suppressor PTEN Mediates Sensing of Chemoattractant Gradients , 2002, Cell.

[20]  H. Meinhardt Orientation of chemotactic cells and growth cones: models and mechanisms. , 1999, Journal of cell science.

[21]  K. Rottner,et al.  Interplay between Rac and Rho in the control of substrate contact dynamics , 1999, Current Biology.

[22]  Atul Narang,et al.  A mechanistic model for eukaryotic gradient sensing: spontaneous and induced phosphoinositide polarization. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[23]  P. Iglesias,et al.  Two complementary, local excitation, global inhibition mechanisms acting in parallel can explain the chemoattractant-induced regulation of PI(3,4,5)P3 response in dictyostelium cells. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[24]  E. Munro PAR proteins and the cytoskeleton: a marriage of equals. , 2006, Current opinion in cell biology.

[25]  P. V. van Haastert,et al.  A diffusion-translocation model for gradient sensing by chemotactic cells. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[26]  G. Borisy,et al.  Cell Migration: Integrating Signals from Front to Back , 2003, Science.

[27]  A. Mochizuki,et al.  Transient and steady state of mass-conserved reaction-diffusion systems. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[28]  Paul Herzmark,et al.  Lipid products of PI(3)Ks maintain persistent cell polarity and directed motility in neutrophils , 2002, Nature Cell Biology.

[29]  James J. Campbell,et al.  Multistep Navigation and the Combinatorial Control of Leukocyte Chemotaxis , 1997, The Journal of cell biology.

[30]  A. Levchenko,et al.  Models of eukaryotic gradient sensing: application to chemotaxis of amoebae and neutrophils. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[31]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  A Mathematical Model for Chemoattractant Gradient Sensing Based on Receptor-Regulated Membrane Phospholipid Signaling Dynamics , 2001, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[32]  C. Nobes,et al.  Rho, Rac, and Cdc42 GTPases regulate the assembly of multimolecular focal complexes associated with actin stress fibers, lamellipodia, and filopodia , 1995, Cell.

[33]  Michael J. Ward,et al.  The stability of spike solutions to the one-dimensional Gierer—Meinhardt model , 2001 .

[34]  P. Devreotes,et al.  Temporal and spatial regulation of chemotaxis. , 2002, Developmental cell.

[35]  R. Firtel,et al.  Two Poles and a Compass , 2003, Cell.

[36]  Richard A. Firtel,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Regulation of 3-Phosphoinositides by PI 3-Kinase and PTEN Mediates Chemotaxis , 2002, Cell.

[37]  H G Othmer,et al.  Scale-invariance in reaction-diffusion models of spatial pattern formation. , 1980, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[38]  Shigeru Kondo The reaction‐diffusion system: a mechanism for autonomous pattern formation in the animal skin , 2002, Genes to cells : devoted to molecular & cellular mechanisms.

[39]  R. Skupsky,et al.  Distinguishing modes of eukaryotic gradient sensing. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[40]  T. Carlos Leukocyte recruitment at sites of tumor: dissonant orchestration , 2001, Journal of leukocyte biology.

[41]  Kevan M. Shokat,et al.  To stabilize neutrophil polarity, PIP3 and Cdc42 augment RhoA activity at the back as well as signals at the front , 2006, The Journal of cell biology.

[42]  J W Sedat,et al.  Polarization of chemoattractant receptor signaling during neutrophil chemotaxis. , 2000, Science.

[43]  P. Devreotes,et al.  Eukaryotic Chemotaxis: Distinctions between Directional Sensing and Polarization* , 2003, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[44]  C. Parent,et al.  A cell's sense of direction. , 1999, Science.

[45]  Daniel Kalman,et al.  Rac and Cdc42 play distinct roles in regulating PI(3,4,5)P3 and polarity during neutrophil chemotaxis , 2003, The Journal of cell biology.

[46]  K. Kaneko,et al.  Turing pattern with proportion preservation. , 2005, Journal of theoretical biology.

[47]  D. Murphy,et al.  G Protein Signaling Events Are Activated at the Leading Edge of Chemotactic Cells , 1998, Cell.

[48]  Jingsong Xu,et al.  Divergent Signals and Cytoskeletal Assemblies Regulate Self-Organizing Polarity in Neutrophils , 2003, Cell.

[49]  R. Firtel,et al.  Receptor-mediated regulation of PI3Ks confines PI(3,4,5)P3 to the leading edge of chemotaxing cells. , 2003, Molecular biology of the cell.

[50]  M. Goebeler,et al.  Chemokines in cutaneous wound healing , 2001, Journal of leukocyte biology.

[51]  A. Hall,et al.  Rho GTPases in cell biology , 2002, Nature.

[52]  R. Firtel,et al.  Signaling pathways controlling cell polarity and chemotaxis. , 2001, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[53]  Shin Ishii,et al.  A molecular model for axon guidance based on cross talk between rho GTPases. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[54]  H. Meinhardt,et al.  Pattern formation by local self-activation and lateral inhibition. , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[55]  S. Zigmond,et al.  Cell polarity: an examination of its behavioral expression and its consequences for polymorphonuclear leukocyte chemotaxis , 1981, The Journal of cell biology.

[56]  G. Schultz,et al.  Roles of Gβγ in membrane recruitment and activation of p110γ/p101 phosphoinositide 3-kinase γ , 2003, The Journal of cell biology.

[57]  C. Hall,et al.  Regulation of phosphorylation pathways by p21 GTPases. The p21 Ras-related Rho subfamily and its role in phosphorylation signalling pathways. , 1996, European Journal of Biochemistry.

[58]  John G. Collard,et al.  Rac Downregulates Rho Activity: Reciprocal Balance between Both Gtpases Determines Cellular Morphology and Migratory Behavior , 1999 .