Florian Hinzpeter, Ulrich Gerland, Filipe Tostevin  Biophysical Journal 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 101, Issue 8, Pages (October 2011)
Advertisements

Pressure and Temperature Dependence of Growth and Morphology of Escherichia coli: Experiments and Stochastic Model  Pradeep Kumar, Albert Libchaber  Biophysical.
Motor Regulation Results in Distal Forces that Bend Partially Disintegrated Chlamydomonas Axonemes into Circular Arcs  V. Mukundan, P. Sartori, V.F. Geyer,
Steady-State Differential Dose Response in Biological Systems
Koichiro Uriu, Luis G. Morelli  Biophysical Journal 
Precision and Variability in Bacterial Temperature Sensing
Zhanghan Wu, Jianhua Xing  Biophysical Journal 
Spatial Control of Biochemical Modification Cascades and Pathways
Dynamics of Active Semiflexible Polymers
Volume 113, Issue 12, Pages (December 2017)
Volume 98, Issue 11, Pages (June 2010)
Looping Probabilities in Model Interphase Chromosomes
Volume 112, Issue 6, Pages (March 2017)
Volume 104, Issue 5, Pages (March 2013)
Phase Transitions in Biological Systems with Many Components
Carlos R. Baiz, Andrei Tokmakoff  Biophysical Journal 
MunJu Kim, Katarzyna A. Rejniak  Biophysical Journal 
Reversible Phosphorylation Subserves Robust Circadian Rhythms by Creating a Switch in Inactivating the Positive Element  Zhang Cheng, Feng Liu, Xiao-Peng.
He Meng, Johan Bosman, Thijn van der Heijden, John van Noort 
Is Aggregate-Dependent Yeast Aging Fortuitous
An Equilibrium Model for the Combined Effect of Macromolecular Crowding and Surface Adsorption on the Formation of Linear Protein Fibrils  Travis Hoppe,
Fundamental Constraints on the Abundances of Chemotaxis Proteins
Michał Komorowski, Jacek Miękisz, Michael P.H. Stumpf 
Determining the Activation Time Course of Synaptic AMPA Receptors from Openings of Colocalized NMDA Receptors  Ingo C. Kleppe, Hugh P.C. Robinson  Biophysical.
Quantifying Biomolecule Diffusivity Using an Optimal Bayesian Method
Taeyoon Kim, Margaret L. Gardel, Ed Munro  Biophysical Journal 
Xiao-Han Li, Elizabeth Rhoades  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 114, Issue 12, Pages (June 2018)
Volume 113, Issue 4, Pages (August 2017)
Volume 114, Issue 5, Pages (March 2018)
Electrostatic Free Energy Landscapes for DNA Helix Bending
Pattern Selection by Dynamical Biochemical Signals
Colocalization of Multiple DNA Loci: A Physical Mechanism
Hao Yuan Kueh, Philipp Niethammer, Timothy J. Mitchison 
Paolo Mereghetti, Razif R. Gabdoulline, Rebecca C. Wade 
Volume 103, Issue 2, Pages (July 2012)
A Model for the Transient Subdiffusive Behavior of Particles in Mucus
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages 1-11 (January 2010)
Volume 88, Issue 6, Pages (June 2005)
Stochastic Pacing Inhibits Spatially Discordant Cardiac Alternans
Volume 109, Issue 3, Pages (August 2015)
Teuta Pilizota, Joshua W. Shaevitz  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 101, Issue 8, Pages (October 2011)
Ivan Coluzza, Daan Frenkel  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 98, Issue 11, Pages (June 2010)
Volume 97, Issue 9, Pages (November 2009)
Thermodynamic Characterization of the Unfolding of the Prion Protein
Volume 110, Issue 1, Pages (January 2016)
Dynamics of Active Semiflexible Polymers
Dirk Gillespie, Le Xu, Gerhard Meissner  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 108, Issue 1, Pages (January 2015)
Ensemble Modeling of Metabolic Networks
Mathematical Modeling of the Heat-Shock Response in HeLa Cells
Robust Driving Forces for Transmembrane Helix Packing
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 
Stochastic Pacing Inhibits Spatially Discordant Cardiac Alternans
Bending and Puncturing the Influenza Lipid Envelope
Steady-State Differential Dose Response in Biological Systems
Enrique M. De La Cruz, Jean-Louis Martiel, Laurent Blanchoin 
The Role of Network Architecture in Collagen Mechanics
Volume 101, Issue 8, Pages (October 2011)
Brian L. Sprague, Robert L. Pego, Diana A. Stavreva, James G. McNally 
Simulating the Entropic Collapse of Coarse-Grained Chromosomes
Paolo Mereghetti, Razif R. Gabdoulline, Rebecca C. Wade 
Malin Persson, Elina Bengtsson, Lasse ten Siethoff, Alf Månsson 
Zackary N. Scholl, Weitao Yang, Piotr E. Marszalek  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 98, Issue 3, Pages (February 2010)
Presentation transcript:

Optimal Compartmentalization Strategies for Metabolic Microcompartments  Florian Hinzpeter, Ulrich Gerland, Filipe Tostevin  Biophysical Journal  Volume 112, Issue 4, Pages 767-779 (February 2017) DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194 Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Illustration of the pathway model and compartmentalization strategies. (a) Model two-step enzymatic pathway with enzymes contained within a microcompartment. The permeable compartment shell allows for the exchange of metabolites S and I with the cytoplasm. (b) A fixed number of enzymes could be distributed according to many different compartmentalization strategies, each characterized by a particular compartment size, enzyme density, and ratio of E1 to E2 enzymes. Each such strategy would lead to a different pathway flux, and therefore a different productivity. To this figure in color, go online. Biophysical Journal 2017 112, 767-779DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194) Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Optimal compartmentalization strategies for α-carboxysome parameters. (a) Optimal productivity (top), total enzyme density, eT∗=e1∗+e2∗ (middle), and enzyme abundance ratio, ϕ∗=e1∗/e2∗ (bottom) for four different arrangements of enzymes: uniform distribution at optimal density (green circles); uniform distribution at maximal density, eT=emax (purple crosses); enzyme arrangement as observed in carboxysomes (Eq. 7; red diamonds); and optimized intracompartment enzyme arrangements (blue squares), as plotted in Fig. S1 in the Supporting Material. (b) Examples of the enzyme arrangements for the carboxysome configuration of Eq. 7 (with optimized e1 and e2 values) for different compartment sizes. To see this figure in color, go online. Biophysical Journal 2017 112, 767-779DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194) Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Results of well-mixed approximation. Shown are the optimal productivity (top), the enzyme density, eT∗ (middle), and the ratio of E1 to E2 enzymes, ϕ∗ (bottom). Data points show numerical optimization of the analytical expression for productivity for uniform enzymes, as in Fig. 2 a. Blue and orange dashed lines are the corresponding optima in the well-mixed approximation (Eqs. 11 and 12). The dashed green line shows the leading-order correction to the optimal productivity (Eq. 13). To see this figure in color, go online. Biophysical Journal 2017 112, 767-779DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194) Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Optimal compartmentalization strategies outside the well-mixed regime. (a–c) Optimal productivity and corresponding enzyme densities as a function of the compartment radius for boundary permeabilities ps=pi= 104 μm s−1 (a); ps= 104 μm s−1, pi= 10 μm s−1 (b); and ps= 10 μm s−1, pi= 104 μm s−1 (c). Other parameters are fixed at κ1=κ2= 0.4 (μM s)−1, emax= 25 mM, s0= 250 μM, and D= 100 μm2 s−1. The limit ps,pi→∞ (see the Supporting Material) is shown as a green dashed line. (d–f) Optimal concentration profiles for the three cases above at a compartment radius of R= 100 nm. To see this figure in color, go online. Biophysical Journal 2017 112, 767-779DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194) Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Optimal compartmentalization strategies with Michaelis-Menten reaction kinetics. Optimal productivity (top) and total enzyme concentration (bottom) for different external substrate concentrations, s0, are shown. Data points show results of numerical optimization for the reaction-diffusion model (Eqs. 2 and 3) with a uniform distribution of enzymes. Solid lines show the corresponding optimization in the well-mixed approximation. Reaction parameters were chosen to resemble the activity of an “average” enzyme, kcat(1)=kcat(2)= 10 s−1 and KM(1)=KM(2)= 100 μM (55). Other parameters were D= 100 μm2 s−1 and ps=pi= 50 μm s−1. To see this figure in color, go online. Biophysical Journal 2017 112, 767-779DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194) Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 Comparison of optimal compartmentalization strategies for α- and β-carboxysomes. The higher shell permeability of β-carboxysomes (blue line) (ps = 1080 μm s−1, pi = 215 μm s−1) shifts the optimal productivity curve toward larger compartment radii and leads to a more pronounced productivity maximum compared to α-carboxysomes (orange dashed line) (ps = 90 μm s−1, pi = 18 μm s−1). Typical size ranges for the two carboxysome types are denoted by the shaded regions. To see this figure in color, go online. Biophysical Journal 2017 112, 767-779DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.3194) Copyright © 2017 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions