Limits and Constraints on Mechanisms of Cell-Cycle Regulation Imposed by Cell Size-Homeostasis Measurements

Modelling how plant cell-cycle progression leads to cell size regulation

Populations of cells typically maintain a consistent size, despite cell division rarely being precisely symmetrical. Therefore, cells must possess a mechanism of "size control", whereby the cell volume at birth affects cell-cycle progression. While size control mechanisms have been elucidated in a number of other organisms, it is not yet clear how this mechanism functions in plants. Here, we present a mathematical model of the key interactions in the plant cell cycle. Model simulations reveal that the network of interactions exhibits limit-cycle solutions, with biological switches underpinning both the G1/S and G2/M cell-cycle transitions. Embedding this network model within growing cells, we test hypotheses as to how cell-cycle progression can depend on cell size. We investigate two different mechanisms at both the G1/S and G2/M transitions: (i) differential expression of cell-cycle activator and inhibitor proteins (with synthesis of inhibitor proteins being independent of cell size), and (ii) equal inheritance of inhibitor proteins after cell division. The model demonstrates that both these mechanisms can lead to larger daughter cells progressing through the cell cycle more rapidly, and can thus contribute to cell-size control. To test how these features enable size homeostasis over multiple generations, we then simulated these mechanisms in a cell-population model with multiple rounds of cell division. These simulations suggested that integration of size-control mechanisms at both G1/S and G2/M provides long-term cell-size homeostasis. We concluded that while both size independence and equal inheritance of inhibitor proteins can reduce variations in cell size across individual cell-cycle phases, combining size-control mechanisms at both G1/S and G2/M is essential to maintain size homeostasis over multiple generations. Thus, our study reveals how features of the cell-cycle network enable cell-cycle progression to depend on cell size, and provides a mechanistic understanding of how plant cell populations maintain consistent size over generations.

Implications of differential size-scaling of cell-cycle regulators on cell size homeostasis

Accurate timing of division and size homeostasis is crucial for cells. A potential mechanism for cells to decide the timing of division is the differential scaling of regulatory protein copy numbers with cell size. However, it remains unclear whether such a mechanism can lead to robust growth and division, and how the scaling behaviors of regulatory proteins influence the cell size distribution. Here we study a mathematical model combining gene expression and cell growth, in which the cell-cycle activators scale superlinearly with cell size while the inhibitors scale sublinearly. The cell divides once the ratio of their concentrations reaches a threshold value. We find that the cell can robustly grow and divide within a finite range of the threshold value with the cell size proportional to the ploidy. In a stochastic version of the model, the cell size at division is uncorrelated with that at birth. Also, the more differential the cell-size scaling of the cell-cycle regulators is, the narrower the cell-size distribution is. Intriguingly, our model with multiple regulators rationalizes the observation that after the deletion of a single regulator, the coefficient of variation of cell size remains roughly the same though the average cell size changes significantly. Our work reveals that the differential scaling of cell-cycle regulators provides a robust mechanism of cell size control.

LPCAT1 overexpression promotes the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains one of the most common malignant neoplasms. Lysophosphatidylcholine acyltransferase 1 (LPCAT1) plays a key role in the lipid remodelling and is correlated with various neoplasms. Nonetheless, the biological functions and molecular mechanisms of LPCAT1 underlying HCC remain obscure.

METHODS

In the present study, we investigated the role of LPCAT1 in the progression of HCC. In-house RT-qPCR, tissue microarrays, and immunohistochemistry were performed to detect the expression levels and the clinical value of LPCAT1 in HCC. External datasets were downloaded to confirm the results. Proliferation, migration, invasiveness, cell cycle, and apoptosis assays were conducted to reveal the biological effects LPCAT1 has on SMMC-7721 and Huh7 cells. HCC differentially expressed genes and LPCAT1 co-expressed genes were identified to explore the molecular mechanisms underlying HCC progression.

RESULTS

LPCAT1 showed upregulated expression in 3715 HCC specimens as opposed to 3105 non-tumour specimens. Additionally, LPCAT1 might be an independent prognostic factor for HCC. LPCAT1-knockout hampered cellular proliferation, migration, and metastasis in SMMC-7721 and Huh7 cells. More importantly, the cell cycle and chemical carcinogenesis were the two most enriched signalling pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that increased LPCAT1 correlated with poor prognosis in HCC patients and fuelled HCC progression by promoting cellular growth, migration, and metastasis.

MAGOH/MAGOHB Inhibits the Tumorigenesis of Gastric Cancer via Inactivation of b-RAF/MEK/ERK Signaling

Background

Gastric cancer is one of the most malignant tumors all over the world. It has been reported that proteins play key roles during the tumorigenesis of gastric cancer. To identify novel potential targets for gastric cancer, differential expressed proteins between gastric cancer and adjacent normal tissues were analyzed with proteomics and bioinformatics tool.

Methods

The differentially expressed proteins between gastric cancer and adjacent normal tissues were analyzed by Omicsbean (multi-omics data analysis tool). Cell viability was tested by CCK-8 assay. Flow cytometry was used to measure cell apoptosis and cycle. Transwell assay was used to test cell migration and invasion. Gene and protein expressions were detected by RT-qPCR, immunohistochemistry and Western blot, respectively.

Results

MAGOH and MAGOHB were found to be notably upregulated in gastric cancer tissues compared with that in normal tissues. Knockdown of MAGOH significantly inhibited the proliferation of gastric cancer cells via inducing the cell apoptosis. In addition, MAGOH knockdown induced G2 phase arrest in gastric cancer cells. Moreover, MAGOH knockdown notably inhibited migration and invasion of gastric cancer cells. Importantly, double knockdown of MAGOH and MAGOHB exhibited much better anti-tumor effects on gastric cancer compared with alone treatment. Finally, double knockdown of MAGOH and MAGOHB mediated the tumorigenesis of gastric cancer via regulation of RAF/MEK/ERK signaling.

Conclusion

MAGOH knockdown inhibited the tumorigenesis of gastric cancer via mediation of b-RAF/MEK/ERK signaling, and double knockdown of MAGOH and MAGOHB exhibited much better anti-tumor effects. This finding might provide us a new strategy for the treatment of gastric cancer.