Browsing by Author "Ghose, Debraj"
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Chemotactic movement of a polarity site enables yeast cells to find their mates.(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021-06) Ghose, Debraj; Jacobs, Katherine; Ramirez, Samuel; Elston, Timothy; Lew, DanielHow small eukaryotic cells can interpret dynamic, noisy, and spatially complex chemical gradients to orient growth or movement is poorly understood. We address this question using Saccharomyces cerevisiae, where cells orient polarity up pheromone gradients during mating. Initial orientation is often incorrect, but polarity sites then move around the cortex in a search for partners. We find that this movement is biased by local pheromone gradients across the polarity site: that is, movement of the polarity site is chemotactic. A bottom-up computational model recapitulates this biased movement. The model reveals how even though pheromone-bound receptors do not mimic the shape of external pheromone gradients, nonlinear and stochastic effects combine to generate effective gradient tracking. This mechanism for gradient tracking may be applicable to any cell that searches for a target in a complex chemical landscape.Item Open Access Experimentally informed bottom-up model of yeast polarity suggests how single cells respond to chemical gradients(2021) Ghose, DebrajHow do single cells—like neutrophils, amoebae, neurons, yeast, etc.—grow or move in a directed fashion in response to spatial chemical gradients? To address this question, we used the mating response in the budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as a biological model. To mate, pairs of yeast cells orient their cell fronts toward each other and fuse. Each cell relies on a pheromone gradient established by its partner to orient correctly. The ability for cells to resolve gradients is striking, because each cell is only ~5 μm wide and is thought to be operating in complex and noisy environments. Interestingly, mating pairs of cells often start out not facing each other. When this happens, the front of each cell—defined by a patch of cortical polarity proteins—undergoes a series of erratic and random movements along the cell cortex till it ‘finds’ the mating partner’s patch. We sought to understand how polarity patches in misaligned cells find each other. To this end, we first characterized patch movement in cells by the distribution of their step-lengths and turning angles and analyzed a bottom-up model of the polarity patch’s dynamics. The final version of our model combines 11 reaction-diffusion equations representing polarity protein dynamics with a stochastic module representing vesicle trafficking on a plane with periodic boundary conditions. We found that the model could not quantitatively reproduce step-length and turning angle distributions, which suggested that some mechanisms driving patch movement may not be present in the model. Incorpo-rating biologically inspired features into the model—such as focused vesicle delivery, sudden fluctuations in vesicle delivery rates, and the presence of polarity inhibitors on vesicles—allowed us to quantitatively match the in vivo polarity patch’s behavior. We then introduced a pathway, which connects pheromone sensing to polarity, to see how the model behaved when exposed to pheromone gradients. Concurrently, we analyzed the behavior of fluores-cently labeled polarity patches in mating pairs of cells. We discovered that the ~1 μm wide patch could (remarkably) sense and bias its movement up pheromone gradients, a result corroborated by our model. Further analysis of the model revealed that while the polarity patch tends to bias the location of a cluster of pheromone-sensing-receptors, the receptors can transform an external pheromone distribution into a peaked non-linear “polarity-activation” profile that “pulls” the patch. Stochastic perturbations cause the patch to “ping-pong” around the activation-profile. In a gradient of pheromone, this ping-ponging be-comes biased, leading to net patch movement up the gradient. We speculate that such a mechanism could be used by single cells with mobile fronts to track chemical gradients.
Item Open Access Exploratory polarization facilitates mating partner selection in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.(Molecular biology of the cell, 2021-05) Clark-Cotton, Manuella R; Henderson, Nicholas T; Pablo, Michael; Ghose, Debraj; Elston, Timothy C; Lew, Daniel JYeast decode pheromone gradients to locate mating partners, providing a model for chemotropism. How yeast polarize toward a single partner in crowded environments is unclear. Initially, cells often polarize in unproductive directions, but then they relocate the polarity site until two partners' polarity sites align, whereupon the cells "commit" to each other by stabilizing polarity to promote fusion. Here we address the role of the early mobile polarity sites. We found that commitment by either partner failed if just one partner was defective in generating, orienting, or stabilizing its mobile polarity sites. Mobile polarity sites were enriched for pheromone receptors and G proteins, and we suggest that such sites engage in an exploratory search of the local pheromone landscape, stabilizing only when they detect elevated pheromone levels. Mobile polarity sites were also enriched for pheromone secretion factors, and simulations suggest that only focal secretion at polarity sites would produce high pheromone concentrations at the partner's polarity site, triggering commitment.Item Open Access Mechanistic insights into actin-driven polarity site movement in yeast.(Molecular biology of the cell, 2020-05) Ghose, Debraj; Lew, DanielDirected cell growth or migration are critical for the development and function of many eukaryotic cells. These cells develop a dynamic "front" (also called "polarity site") that can change direction. Polarity establishment involves autocatalytic accumulation of polarity regulators, including the conserved Rho-family GTPase Cdc42, but the mechanisms underlying polarity reorientation remain poorly understood. The tractable model yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, relocates its polarity site when searching for mating partners. Relocation requires polymerized actin, and is thought to involve actin-mediated vesicle traffic to the polarity site. In this study, we provide a quantitative characterization of spontaneous polarity site movement as a search process and use a mechanistic computational model that combines polarity protein biochemical interactions with vesicle trafficking to probe how various processes might affect polarity site movement. Our findings identify two previously documented features of yeast vesicle traffic as being particularly relevant to such movement: tight spatial focusing of exocytosis enhances the directional persistence of movement, and association of Cdc42-directed GTPase-Activating Proteins with secretory vesicles increases the distance moved. Furthermore, we suggest that variation in the rate of exocytosis beyond simple Poisson dynamics may be needed to fully account for the characteristics of polarity site movement in vivo.Item Open Access Ratiometric GPCR signaling enables directional sensing in yeast.(PLoS biology, 2019-10-17) Henderson, Nicholas T; Pablo, Michael; Ghose, Debraj; Clark-Cotton, Manuella R; Zyla, Trevin R; Nolen, James; Elston, Timothy C; Lew, Daniel JAccurate detection of extracellular chemical gradients is essential for many cellular behaviors. Gradient sensing is challenging for small cells, which can experience little difference in ligand concentrations on the up-gradient and down-gradient sides of the cell. Nevertheless, the tiny cells of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae reliably decode gradients of extracellular pheromones to find their mates. By imaging the behavior of polarity factors and pheromone receptors, we quantified the accuracy of initial polarization during mating encounters. We found that cells bias the orientation of initial polarity up-gradient, even though they have unevenly distributed receptors. Uneven receptor density means that the gradient of ligand-bound receptors does not accurately reflect the external pheromone gradient. Nevertheless, yeast cells appear to avoid being misled by responding to the fraction of occupied receptors rather than simply the concentration of ligand-bound receptors. Such ratiometric sensing also serves to amplify the gradient of active G protein. However, this process is quite error-prone, and initial errors are corrected during a subsequent indecisive phase in which polarity clusters exhibit erratic mobile behavior.