scholarly journals Characterization of Dependencies Between Growth and Division in Budding Yeast

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael B. Mayhew ◽  
Edwin S. Iversen ◽  
Alexander J. Hartemink
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Size Control ◽  
Inverse Correlation ◽  
Time Lapse ◽  
Independent Manner ◽  
Statistical Framework ◽  
Cell Variation

AbstractCell growth and division are processes vital to the proliferation and development of life. Coordination between these two processes has been recognized for decades in a variety of organisms. In the budding yeastSaccharomyces cerevisiae, this coordination or ‘size control’ appears as an inverse correlation between cell size and the rate of cell-cycle progression, routinely observed in G1prior to cell division commitment. Beyond this point, cells are presumed to complete S/G2/M at similar rates and in a size-independent manner. As such, studies of dependence between growth and division have focused on G1. Moreover, coordination between growth and division has commonly been analyzedwithinthe cycle of a single cell without accounting for correlations in growth and division characteristicsbetweencycles of related cells. In a comprehensive analysis of three published time-lapse microscopy datasets, we analyze both intra-and inter-cycle dependencies between growth and division, revisiting assumptions about the coordination between these two processes. Interestingly, we find evidence (1) that S/G2/M durations are systematically longer in daughters than in mothers, (2) of dependencies between S/G2/M and size at budding that echo the classical G1dependencies, and, (3) in contrast with recent bacterial studies, of negative dependencies between size at birth and size accumulated during the cell cycle. In addition, we develop a novel hierarchical model to uncover inter-cycle dependencies, and we find evidence for such dependencies in cells growing in sugar-poor environments. Our analysis highlights the need for experimentalists and modelers to account for new sources of cell-to-cell variation in growth and division, and our model provides a formal statistical framework for the continued study of dependencies between biological processes.

scholarly journals Characterization of dependencies between growth and division in budding yeast

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (127) ◽  
pp. 20160993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael B. Mayhew ◽  
Edwin S. Iversen ◽  
Alexander J. Hartemink
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Size Control ◽  
Inverse Correlation ◽  
Time Lapse ◽  
Independent Manner ◽  
Statistical Framework ◽  
Unicellular Organisms ◽  
Cell Variation

Cell growth and division are processes vital to the proliferation and development of life. Coordination between these two processes has been recognized for decades in a variety of organisms. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae , this coordination or ‘size control’ appears as an inverse correlation between cell size and the rate of cell-cycle progression, routinely observed in G 1 prior to cell division commitment. Beyond this point, cells are presumed to complete S/G 2 /M at similar rates and in a size-independent manner. As such, studies of dependence between growth and division have focused on G 1 . Moreover, in unicellular organisms, coordination between growth and division has commonly been analysed within the cycle of a single cell without accounting for correlations in growth and division characteristics between cycles of related cells. In a comprehensive analysis of three published time-lapse microscopy datasets, we analyse both intra- and inter-cycle dependencies between growth and division, revisiting assumptions about the coordination between these two processes. Interestingly, we find evidence (i) that S/G 2 /M durations are systematically longer in daughters than in mothers, (ii) of dependencies between S/G 2 /M and size at budding that echo the classical G 1 dependencies, and (iii) in contrast with recent bacterial studies, of negative dependencies between size at birth and size accumulated during the cell cycle. In addition, we develop a novel hierarchical model to uncover inter-cycle dependencies, and we find evidence for such dependencies in cells growing in sugar-poor environments. Our analysis highlights the need for experimentalists and modellers to account for new sources of cell-to-cell variation in growth and division, and our model provides a formal statistical framework for the continued study of dependencies between biological processes.

scholarly journals Dilution and titration of cell-cycle regulators may control cell size in budding yeast

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank S. Heldt ◽  
Reece Lunstone ◽  
John J. Tyson ◽  
Béla Novák
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Growth ◽  
Cell Size ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Control Cell ◽  
Gene Copy Number ◽  
Size Control ◽  
Gene Copy ◽  
Cell Cycle Regulators

AbstractThe size of a cell sets the scale for all biochemical processes within it, thereby affecting cellular fitness and survival. Hence, cell size needs to be kept within certain limits and relatively constant over multiple generations. However, how cells measure their size and use this information to regulate growth and division remains controversial. Here, we present two mechanistic mathematical models of the budding yeast (S. cerevisiae) cell cycle to investigate competing hypotheses on size control: inhibitor dilution and titration of nuclear sites. Our results suggest that an inhibitor-dilution mechanism, in which cell growth dilutes the transcriptional inhibitor Whi5 against the constant activator Cln3, can facilitate size homeostasis. This is achieved by utilising a positive feedback loop to establish a fixed size threshold for the START transition, which efficiently couples cell growth to cell cycle progression. Yet, we show that inhibitor dilution cannot reproduce the size of mutants that alter the cell’s overall ploidy and WHI5 gene copy number. By contrast, size control through titration of Cln3 against a constant number of genomic binding sites for the transcription factor SBF recapitulates both size homeostasis and the size of these mutant strains. Moreover, this model produces an imperfect ‘sizer’ behaviour in G1 and a ‘timer’ in S/G2/M, which combine to yield an ‘adder’ over the whole cell cycle; an observation recently made in experiments. Hence, our model connects these phenomenological data with the molecular details of the cell cycle, providing a systems-level perspective of budding yeast size control.

scholarly journals Budding yeast relies on G1 cyclin specificity to couple cell cycle progression with morphogenetic development

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (23) ◽  
pp. eabg0007
Author(s):  
Deniz Pirincci Ercan ◽  
Florine Chrétien ◽  
Probir Chakravarty ◽  
Helen R. Flynn ◽  
Ambrosius P. Snijders ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Quantitative Model ◽  
Cyclin Dependent Kinase ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Model Cell ◽  
Mitotic Cyclin ◽  
Substrate Phosphorylation ◽  
The Cost

Two models have been put forward for cyclin-dependent kinase (Cdk) control of the cell cycle. In the qualitative model, cell cycle events are ordered by distinct substrate specificities of successive cyclin waves. Alternatively, in the quantitative model, the gradual rise of Cdk activity from G1 phase to mitosis leads to ordered substrate phosphorylation at sequential thresholds. Here, we study the relative contributions of qualitative and quantitative Cdk control in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. All S phase and mitotic cyclins can be replaced by a single mitotic cyclin, albeit at the cost of reduced fitness. A single cyclin can also replace all G1 cyclins to support ordered cell cycle progression, fulfilling key predictions of the quantitative model. However, single-cyclin cells fail to polarize or grow buds and thus cannot survive. Our results suggest that budding yeast has become dependent on G1 cyclin specificity to couple cell cycle progression to essential morphogenetic events.

scholarly journals Quantitative Characterization of a Mitotic Cyclin Threshold Regulating Exit from Mitosis

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 2129-2138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick R. Cross ◽  
Lea Schroeder ◽  
Martin Kruse ◽  
Katherine C. Chen
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Cell Cycle Control ◽  
Predictive Ability ◽  
Eukaryotic Cell ◽  
Model Predictions ◽  
Mitotic Cyclin ◽  
Constitutive Overexpression

Regulation of cyclin abundance is central to eukaryotic cell cycle control. Strong overexpression of mitotic cyclins is known to lock the system in mitosis, but the quantitative behavior of the control system as this threshold is approached has only been characterized in the in vitro Xenopus extract system. Here, we quantitate the threshold for mitotic block in budding yeast caused by constitutive overexpression of the mitotic cyclin Clb2. Near this threshold, the system displays marked loss of robustness, in that loss or even heterozygosity for some regulators becomes deleterious or lethal, even though complete loss of these regulators is tolerated at normal cyclin expression levels. Recently, we presented a quantitative kinetic model of the budding yeast cell cycle. Here, we use this model to generate biochemical predictions for Clb2 levels, asynchronous as well as through the cell cycle, as the Clb2 overexpression threshold is approached. The model predictions compare well with biochemical data, even though no data of this type were available during model generation. The loss of robustness of the Clb2 overexpressing system is also predicted by the model. These results provide strong confirmation of the model's predictive ability.

scholarly journals Cellular Ras and Cyclin D1 Are Required during Different Cell Cycle Periods in Cycling NIH 3T3 Cells

1999 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. 4623-4632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masahiro Hitomi ◽  
Dennis W. Stacey
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Synthesis ◽  
Cyclin D1 ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Time Lapse ◽  
S Phase ◽  
3T3 Cells ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Nih 3T3 ◽  
Nih 3T3 Cells

ABSTRACT Novel techniques were used to determine when in the cell cycle of proliferating NIH 3T3 cells cellular Ras and cyclin D1 are required. For comparison, in quiescent cells, all four of the inhibitors of cell cycle progression tested (anti-Ras, anti-cyclin D1, serum removal, and cycloheximide) became ineffective at essentially the same point in G1 phase, approximately 4 h prior to the beginning of DNA synthesis. To extend these studies to cycling cells, a time-lapse approach was used to determine the approximate cell cycle position of individual cells in an asynchronous culture at the time of inhibitor treatment and then to determine the effects of the inhibitor upon recipient cells. With this approach, anti-Ras antibody efficiently inhibited entry into S phase only when introduced into cells prior to the preceding mitosis, several hours before the beginning of S phase. Anti-cyclin D1, on the other hand, was an efficient inhibitor when introduced up until just before the initiation of DNA synthesis. Cycloheximide treatment, like anti-cyclin D1 microinjection, was inhibitory throughout G1 phase (which lasts a total of 4 to 5 h in these cells). Finally, serum removal blocked entry into S phase only during the first hour following mitosis. Kinetic analysis and a novel dual-labeling technique were used to confirm the differences in cell cycle requirements for Ras, cyclin D1, and cycloheximide. These studies demonstrate a fundamental difference in mitogenic signal transduction between quiescent and cycling NIH 3T3 cells and reveal a sequence of signaling events required for cell cycle progression in proliferating NIH 3T3 cells.

scholarly journals Budding Yeast Bub2 Is Localized at Spindle Pole Bodies and Activates the Mitotic Checkpoint via a Different Pathway from Mad2

1999 ◽  
Vol 145 (5) ◽  
pp. 979-991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Fraschini ◽  
Elisa Formenti ◽  
Giovanna Lucchini ◽  
Simonetta Piatti
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Mitotic Spindle ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Spindle Pole Body ◽  
Mitotic Checkpoint ◽  
Spindle Pole ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Spindle Pole Bodies

The mitotic checkpoint blocks cell cycle progression before anaphase in case of mistakes in the alignment of chromosomes on the mitotic spindle. In budding yeast, the Mad1, 2, 3, and Bub1, 2, 3 proteins mediate this arrest. Vertebrate homologues of Mad1, 2, 3, and Bub1, 3 bind to unattached kinetochores and prevent progression through mitosis by inhibiting Cdc20/APC-mediated proteolysis of anaphase inhibitors, like Pds1 and B-type cyclins. We investigated the role of Bub2 in budding yeast mitotic checkpoint. The following observations indicate that Bub2 and Mad1, 2 probably activate the checkpoint via different pathways: (a) unlike the other Mad and Bub proteins, Bub2 localizes at the spindle pole body (SPB) throughout the cell cycle; (b) the effect of concomitant lack of Mad1 or Mad2 and Bub2 is additive, since nocodazole-treated mad1 bub2 and mad2 bub2 double mutants rereplicate DNA more rapidly and efficiently than either single mutant; (c) cell cycle progression of bub2 cells in the presence of nocodazole requires the Cdc26 APC subunit, which, conversely, is not required for mad2 cells in the same conditions. Altogether, our data suggest that activation of the mitotic checkpoint blocks progression through mitosis by independent and partially redundant mechanisms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document