Multisite Phosphorylation and Network Dynamics of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Signaling in the Eukaryotic Cell Cycle  Ling Yang, W. Robb MacLellan, Zhangang.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Modeling the Frog Cell Cycle Nancy Griffeth. Goals of modeling Knowledge representation Predictive understanding ◦ Different stimulation conditions ◦
Advertisements

Computational Modeling of the Cell Cycle
A Primer in Bifurcation Theory for Computational Cell Biologists John J. Tyson Virginia Polytechnic Institute & Virginia Bioinformatics Institute
The Dynamics and Mechanics of Endothelial Cell Spreading Cynthia A. Reinhart-King, Micah Dembo, Daniel A. Hammer Biophysical Journal Volume 89, Issue 1,
Network Dynamics and Cell Physiology John J. Tyson Department of Biological Sciences & Virginia Bioinformatics Institute & Virginia Bioinformatics Institute.
The Frog Cell Cycle Defining the Reactions and Differential Equations Nancy Griffeth January 13, 2014 Funding for this workshop was provided by the program.
Mesoscale Simulation of Blood Flow in Small Vessels Prosenjit Bagchi Biophysical Journal Volume 92, Issue 6, Pages (March 2007) DOI: /biophysj
Michail Stamatakis, Nikos V. Mantzaris  Biophysical Journal 
Jingkui Wang, Marc Lefranc, Quentin Thommen  Biophysical Journal 
Bistability, Bifurcations, and Waddington's Epigenetic Landscape
Role of ATP-Hydrolysis in the Dynamics of a Single Actin Filament
3-D Particle Tracking in a Two-Photon Microscope: Application to the Study of Molecular Dynamics in Cells  Valeria Levi, QiaoQiao Ruan, Enrico Gratton 
Long-Range Signal Transmission in Autocrine Relays
Systems-Level Dissection of the Cell-Cycle Oscillator: Bypassing Positive Feedback Produces Damped Oscillations  Joseph R. Pomerening, Sun Young Kim,
Zhanghan Wu, Jianhua Xing  Biophysical Journal 
Spontaneous Synchronization of Coupled Circadian Oscillators
Volume 95, Issue 2, Pages (July 2008)
Oscillatory Flow Accelerates Autocrine Signaling due to Nonlinear Effect of Convection on Receptor-Related Actions  Marek Nebyla, Michal Přibyl, Igor.
Volume 101, Issue 9, Pages (November 2011)
Kinetics of Genetic Switching into the State of Bacterial Competence
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages (March 2009)
A Theoretical Model of Slow Wave Regulation Using Voltage-Dependent Synthesis of Inositol 1,4,5-Trisphosphate  Mohammad S. Imtiaz, David W. Smith, Dirk.
Dynamical Scenarios for Chromosome Bi-orientation
Melissa Nivala, Paavo Korge, Michael Nivala, James N. Weiss, Zhilin Qu 
Joseph M. Johnson, William J. Betz  Biophysical Journal 
Multicellular Sprouting In Vitro
Reversible Phosphorylation Subserves Robust Circadian Rhythms by Creating a Switch in Inactivating the Positive Element  Zhang Cheng, Feng Liu, Xiao-Peng.
Michail Stamatakis, Nikos V. Mantzaris  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 98, Issue 8, Pages (April 2010)
Meng Qin, Jian Zhang, Wei Wang  Biophysical Journal 
Michał Komorowski, Jacek Miękisz, Michael P.H. Stumpf 
Volume 112, Issue 12, Pages (June 2017)
Chuck Yeung, Matthew Shtrahman, Xiao-lun Wu  Biophysical Journal 
Landscape, Flux, Correlation, Resonance, Coherence, Stability, and Key Network Wirings of Stochastic Circadian Oscillation  Chunhe Li, Erkang Wang, Jin.
Christina Vasalou, Erik D. Herzog, Michael A. Henson 
The Hidden Rhythms of the Dividing Cell
Metabolic Synchronization by Traveling Waves in Yeast Cell Layers
Calculating the Free Energy of Association of Transmembrane Helices
Hao Yuan Kueh, Philipp Niethammer, Timothy J. Mitchison 
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages 1-11 (January 2010)
A Dynamical Framework for the All-or-None G1/S Transition
Analysis of a Generic Model of Eukaryotic Cell-Cycle Regulation
Volume 6, Issue 4, Pages e3 (April 2018)
Volume 97, Issue 9, Pages (November 2009)
Vulnerable Window for Conduction Block in a One-Dimensional Cable of Cardiac Cells, 1: Single Extrasystoles  Zhilin Qu, Alan Garfinkel, James N. Weiss 
Volume 110, Issue 3, Pages (February 2016)
L. Stirling Churchman, Henrik Flyvbjerg, James A. Spudich 
Theodore R. Rieger, Richard I. Morimoto, Vassily Hatzimanikatis 
Andrew E. Blanchard, Chen Liao, Ting Lu  Biophysical Journal 
Phosphatase Specificity and Pathway Insulation in Signaling Networks
Criticality and Adaptivity in Enzymatic Networks
Hao Yuan Kueh, Philipp Niethammer, Timothy J. Mitchison 
Jong-Chin Lin, D. Thirumalai  Biophysical Journal 
Effects of Receptor Interaction in Bacterial Chemotaxis
An Elastic Analysis of Listeria monocytogenes Propulsion
Steady-State Differential Dose Response in Biological Systems
Volume 104, Issue 8, Pages (April 2013)
Tongli Zhang, Paul Brazhnik, John J. Tyson  Biophysical Journal 
Modeling the Cell Cycle: Why Do Certain Circuits Oscillate?
Self-Consistent Proteomic Field Theory of Stochastic Gene Switches
Morten Gram Pedersen, Richard Bertram, Arthur Sherman 
Frank T.M. Nguyen, Michael D. Graham  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 64, Issue 2, Pages (October 2016)
Stable Stochastic Dynamics in Yeast Cell Cycle
Ping Liu, Ioannis G. Kevrekidis, Stanislav Y. Shvartsman 
Volume 94, Issue 11, Pages (June 2008)
Antonio Politi, Lawrence D. Gaspers, Andrew P. Thomas, Thomas Höfer 
The Sonic Hedgehog Signaling System as a Bistable Genetic Switch
The late G2 checkpoint controlling cell-cycle progression from G2 to M phase. The late G2 checkpoint controlling cell-cycle progression from G2 to M phase.
Volume 91, Issue 8, Pages (October 2006)
Presentation transcript:

Multisite Phosphorylation and Network Dynamics of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Signaling in the Eukaryotic Cell Cycle  Ling Yang, W. Robb MacLellan, Zhangang Han, James N. Weiss, Zhilin Qu  Biophysical Journal  Volume 86, Issue 6, Pages 3432-3443 (June 2004) DOI: 10.1529/biophysj.103.036558 Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Models of the signal transduction network for CDK regulation. (A) Signaling network of the full model. (B) Signaling network of simplified Model A. (C) Signaling network of simplified Model B. (D) Signaling network of simplified Model C. The thick solid arrows indicate cyclin synthesis and dashed arrows indicate cyclin degradation. Labels refer to the variables used in the differential equations (Appendix) for each monomer and dimer. Rate constants for CDC25, CAK, wee1, and Myt1 phosphorylation and dephosphorylation of CDK are denoted as kcdc25, kcak, kwee1, and kmyt1, and other rate constants are as indicated. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Models for the phosphorylation steps for CDC25 (A), wee1 (B), CAK (C), and SCF-SKP2 or APC-CDC20 (D). Phosphorylation of CDC25, wee1, and CAK are catalyzed by active cyclin-CDK. SCF-SKP2 or APC-CDC20 (U inactive and U* active in D) is also activated by active cyclin-CDK. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Dynamical behaviors from the signaling transduction network shown in Fig. 1. (A–D) Active cyclin-CDK (x) versus time at different dynamical regimes. (A) Stable low kinase activity. (B) Stable high kinase activity. (C) Bistability. Starting from different initial conditions, the system approached to different steady state. (D) Bifurcation diagram of bistability. Dashed segment is the unstable steady state. Shaded arrows indicate the hysteresis loop. (E) Limit cycle oscillation. (F) Bifurcation diagram of limit cycle. Solid circles are stable steady states and open circles are the maxima and minima of the limit cycle oscillation. (G) Complex (period-2) dynamical behavior. (H) Complex (chaotic) dynamical behavior. (I) Active cyclin-CDK versus free CDK for the period-2 dynamics in G. (J) Active cyclin-CDK versus free CDK for the chaotic oscillations in H. The parameters for A–D are: k1 = 0.5, k2 = 8.64, kpp = 0.094, kd1 = 0.72, kd2 = 0.75, kd3 = 0.57, ks,cdc25 = 15.8, kd,cdc25 = 1/3, kz1⁡−⁡=67.8,   kz2⁡−⁡=82.5,ks,wee1 = 3.92, kd,wee1 = 1/3, kw1⁡−⁡=19.7,kw2⁡−⁡=58.4,ks,cak = 26.31, kd,cak = 1/3, kh1⁡−⁡=63.9,kh2⁡−⁡=28.3,az1 = 0.215, az2 = 0.8, aw1 = 0.085, aw2 = 0.8, ah1 = 0.06, ah2 = 0.37, bz1 = 6.3, bz2 = 7.6, bw1 = 5.6, bw2 = 5.2, bh1 = 2.5, bh2 = 7.4, α0=0.015, α1=0.015, α2=1, β0=1, β1=0.72, β2=0.19, γ0=0.02, γ1=0.91, and γ2=1. The parameters for E and F are: k1 = 0.5, k2 = 0.4, kpp = 0.33, kd1 = 0.83, kd2 = .013, kd3 = 1, ks,cdc25 = 24.8, kd,cdc25 = 1/3, kz1⁡−⁡=86.5,kz2⁡−⁡=76.6,ks,wee1 = 5.6, kd,wee1 = 1/3, kw1⁡−⁡=56.2,kw2⁡−⁡=84.5,ks,cak = 24.5, kd,cak = 1/3, kh1⁡−⁡=60.3,kh2⁡−⁡=0.13,az1 = 0.12, az2 = 0.65, aw1 = 0.82, aw2 = 0.74, ah1 = 0.74, ah2 = 0.17, bz1 = 7.9, bz2 = 0.31, bw1 = 9.5, bw2 = 3.5, bh1 = 5.2, bh2 = 9.0, α0=0.011, α1=0.61, α2=1, β0=1, β1=0.70, β2=0.19, γ0=0.0058, γ1=0.26, and γ2=1. The cyclin synthesis rate in each panel is: (A) ks,cyc = 8.0; (B) ks,cyc = 30; (C) ks,cyc = 13.9; and (E) ks,cyc = 1.92. The parameters for G and I are: ks,cyc = 12.4, kd1 = 0.83, k1 = 0.27, k2 = 6.65, kpp = 0.99, kd3 = 0.9, kd2 = 0.14, ks,cdc25 = 28.9, kd,cdc25 = 1/3, kZ1⁡−⁡ = 93, kZ2⁡−⁡ = 71.8, ks,wee1 = 7.74, kd,wee1 = 1/3, kw1⁡−⁡ = 77.4, kw2⁡−⁡ = 14, ks,cak = 32.7, kd,cak = 1/3, kh1⁡− = 70.9, kh2⁡−⁡ = 17.7, KM = 5.0, kd1u=kd2u=kd3u = 2.0, az1 = 0.23, az2 = 0.18, aw1 = 0.625, aw2 = 0.78, ah1 = 0.9, ah2 = 0.19, bz1 = 9.5, bz2 = 4.8, bw1 = 7.1, bw2 = 10, bh1 = 1.15, bh2 = 4.23, α0=0.07, α1=0.155, α2=1, β0=1, β1=0.81, β2=0.1, γ0=0.02, γ1=0.76, γ2=1, and τ=20. The parameters for H and J are: ks,cyc = 32.98, kd1 = 0.1, k1 = 0.365, k2 = 9.94, kpp = 0.33, kd3 = 0.965, kd2 = 0.164, ks,cdc25 = 19.1, kd,cdc25 = 1/3, kZ1⁡−⁡ = 99.9, kZ2⁡−⁡ = 97.5, ks,wee1 = 8.68, kd,wee1 = 1/3, kw1⁡−⁡ = 86.8, kw2⁡−⁡ = 88.9, ks,cak = 29.96, kd,cak = 1/3, kh1⁡−⁡ = 79.3, kh2⁡−⁡ = 39.45, KM = 5.0, kd1u=kd2u=kd3u = 1.0, az1 = 0.07, az2 = 0.07, aw1 = 0.71, aw2 = 0.054, ah1 = 0.066, ah2 = 0.0065, bz1 = 6.29, bz2 = 6.58, bw1 = 6.14, bw2 = 2.4, bh1 = 0.94, bh2 = 1.27, α0=0.134, α1=0.118, α1=1, β0=1, β1=0.298, β2=0.07, γ0=0.013, γ1=0.34, γ2=1.0, and τ=20. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Histogram of key parameters for Case 1: CDC25_2p. (A and B) Cyclin synthesis rate ks,cyc distributions for bistable (〈ks,cyc〉=19.8) and limit cycle (ks,cyc=9.97) dynamics. (C and D) Distributions of α0 (kinase activity of unphosphorylated CDC25, 〈α0〉=0.0016) and α1 (kinase activity of one-site phosphorylated CDC25, 〈α1〉=0.3) for bistability. (E and F) Distributions of α0 (〈α0〉=0.05) and α1 (〈α1〉=0.39) for limit cycle. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 (A and B) Distributions of β1 (kinase activity of one-site phosphorylated wee1, 〈β1〉=0.33) and β2 (kinase activity of two-site phosphorylated wee1, 〈β2〉=0.049) for bistability in Case 2: wee1_2p. (C and D) Distributions of γ0 (kinase activity of unphosphorylated CAK, 〈γ0〉=0.0029) and γ1 (kinase activity of one-site phosphorylated CAK, 〈γ1〉=0.12) for bistability in Case 3: CAK_2p. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 Distribution of kwee1/kcak for bistability in Case 1: CDC25_2p. The average ratio 〈kwee1/kcak〉=8.25. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 7 Phase diagram in the parameter space of cyclin synthesis rate ks,cyc and negative feedback strength ku(kd1u=kd2u=ku, kd3u=0). BS marks the bistable region and LC marks the limit cycle region. (A) The full model in Fig. 1 A. (B) Simplified Model A in Fig. 1 B. (C) Simplified Model C in Fig. 1 D. (D) Simplified Model B in Fig. 1 C. The parameters for the Full model and Model A are: k1 = 0.5, k2 = 7.5, kpp = 0.96, kd1 = 0.7, kd2 = 0.78, kd3 = 0.2, ks,cdc25 = 24.5, kd,cdc25 = 1/3, kZ1⁡−⁡ = 16, kZ2⁡−⁡ = 3.1, ks,wee1 = 2.9, kd,wee1 = 1/3, kw1⁡− = 97, kw2⁡−⁡ = 95, ks,cak = 9.1, kd,cak = 1/3, kh1⁡−⁡ = 96, kh2⁡−⁡ = 68, KM = 5.0, kd3u=0, az1 = 0.39, az2 = 0.22, aw1 = 0.18, aw2 = 0.077, ah1 = 0.007, ah2 = 0.79, bz1 = 2.0, bz2 = 2.0, bw1 = 3.5, bw2 = 7.2, bh1 = 9.68, bh2 = 1.56, α0=0.0044, α1=0.36, α2=1, β0=1, β1=0.027, β2=0.198, γ0=0.005, γ1=0.31, γ2=1, and τ=20. The parameters for Model C are the same as above except ks,cdc25=24.5. The parameters for Model B are k1 = 0.8, k2 = 5.3, kpp = 0.48, kd1 = 0.42, kd2 = 0.38, kd3 = 0.26, ks,cdc25 = 8.0, kd,cdc25 = 1/3, kZ1⁡−⁡ = 54, kZ2⁡−⁡ = 42, ks,wee1 = 7.2, kd,wee1 = 1/3, kw1⁡−⁡ = 42, kw2⁡−⁡ = 4.7, KM = 5.0, kd3u=0, az1 = 0.88, az2 = 0.08, aw1 = 0.5, aw2 = 0.86, bz1 = 1.6, bz2 = 1.3, bw1 = 3.7, bw2 = 6.6, α0=0.02, α1=0.24, α2=1, β0=1, β1=0.19, β2=0.1, and τ=20. Biophysical Journal 2004 86, 3432-3443DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.103.036558) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions