The Schaechter-Bentzon-Maaløe experiment and the analysis of cell cycle events in eukaryotic cells

Fundamental principles in bacterial physiology-history, recent progress, and the future with focus on cell size control: a review

Bacterial physiology is a branch of biology that aims to understand overarching principles of cellular reproduction. Many important issues in bacterial physiology are inherently quantitative, and major contributors to the field have often brought together tools and ways of thinking from multiple disciplines. This article presents a comprehensive overview of major ideas and approaches developed since the early 20th century for anyone who is interested in the fundamental problems in bacterial physiology. This article is divided into two parts. In the first part (sections 1-3), we review the first 'golden era' of bacterial physiology from the 1940s to early 1970s and provide a complete list of major references from that period. In the second part (sections 4-7), we explain how the pioneering work from the first golden era has influenced various rediscoveries of general quantitative principles and significant further development in modern bacterial physiology. Specifically, section 4 presents the history and current progress of the 'adder' principle of cell size homeostasis. Section 5 discusses the implications of coarse-graining the cellular protein composition, and how the coarse-grained proteome 'sectors' re-balance under different growth conditions. Section 6 focuses on physiological invariants, and explains how they are the key to understanding the coordination between growth and the cell cycle underlying cell size control in steady-state growth. Section 7 overviews how the temporal organization of all the internal processes enables balanced growth. In the final section 8, we conclude by discussing the remaining challenges for the future in the field.

Rethinking cell-cycle-dependent gene expression in Schizosaccharomyces pombe

Three studies of gene expression during the division cycle of Schizosaccharomyces pombe led to the proposal that a large number of genes are expressed at particular times during the S. pombe cell cycle. Yet only a small fraction of genes proposed to be expressed in a cell-cycle-dependent manner are reproducible in all three published studies. In addition to reproducibility problems, questions about expression amplitudes, cell-cycle timing of expression, synchronization artifacts, and the problem with methods for synchronizing cells must be considered. These problems and complications prompt the idea that caution should be used before accepting the conclusion that there are a large number of genes expressed in a cell-cycle-dependent manner in S. pombe.

On the fiftieth anniversary of the Schaechter, Maaløe, Kjeldgaard experiments: implications for cell-cycle and cell-growth control

The Schaechter-Maaløe-Kjeldgaard papers, which have their 50(th) anniversary this year, have major implications for understanding the cell cycle, control of cell growth, control of cell size, metabolic control, the basic bacterial growth curve, and myriad other bacterial and eukaryotic growth phenomena. These ideas have broad applications that should be considered in current studies of the cell cycle. In particular, the emphasis on steady-state growth conditions, and clear and sharp changes in growth conditions were fundamental to their experiments and have been codified in the principles of the Copenhagen School of Microbiology.

Comment on and reply to "Analysis of variation of amplitudes in cell cycle gene expression" by Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger: on the analysis of gene expression during the normal, eukaryotic, cell cycle

BACKGROUND

The paper of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger on gene expression during the division cycle of HeLa cells using the data of Whitfield et al. are discussed in order to see whether their analysis is related to gene expression during the division cycle.

RESULTS

The results of Liu, Gaido and Wolfinger demonstrate that different inhibition methods proposed to "synchronize" cells lead to different levels of gene expression. This result, in and of itself, should be taken as evidence that the original work of Whitfield et al. is flawed and should not be used to support the notion that the cells studied were synchronized or that the microarray analyses identify cell-cycle-regulated genes. Furthermore, the DNA content evidence presented by Whitfield et al. supports the proposal that the cells described as 'synchronized' are not synchronized. A comparison of the gene expression amplitudes from two different experiments indicates that the results are not reproducible.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that the analysis of Liu, Gaido, and Wolfinger is problematic because their work assumes that the cells they analyze are or were synchronized. The very fact that different inhibition methods lead to different degrees of gene expression should be taken as additional evidence that the experiments should be viewed skeptically rather than accepted as an approach to understanding gene expression during the cell cycle.

Microarray analysis of gene expression during the cell cycle

Microarrays have been applied to the determination of genome-wide expression patterns during the cell cycle of a number of different cells. Both eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells have been studied using whole-culture and selective synchronization methods. The published microarray data on yeast, mammalian, and bacterial cells have been uniformly interpreted as indicating that a large number of genes are expressed in a cell-cycle-dependent manner. These conclusions are reconsidered using explicit criteria for synchronization and precise criteria for identifying gene expression patterns during the cell cycle. The conclusions regarding cell-cycle-dependent gene expression based on microarray analysis are weakened by arguably problematic choices for synchronization methodology (e.g., whole-culture methods that do not synchronize cells) and questionable statistical rigor for identifying cell-cycle-dependent gene expression. Because of the uncertainties in synchrony methodology, as well as uncertainties in microarray analysis, one should be somewhat skeptical of claims that there are a large number of genes expressed in a cell-cycle-dependent manner.

Cyclin D1 serves as a cell cycle regulatory switch in actively proliferating cells

Much of our current understanding of the cell cycle involves analyses of its induction in quiescent cells. To better understand the control of cell cycle propagation and termination, studies have been performed in actively cycling cultures using time-lapse photography and quantitative image analysis. These studies reveal a highly ordered sequence of events required for promotion of continued proliferation. The decision to continue cell cycle progression takes place in G2 phase, when cellular Ras induces the elevation of cyclin D1 levels. These levels are maintained through G1 phase and are required for the initiation of S phase, at which time cyclin D1 levels are automatically reduced to low levels. The reduction of cyclin D1 to low levels during S phase is required for DNA synthesis, and forces the cell to induce high cyclin D1 levels once again when it enters G2 phase. In this way, cyclin D1 is proposed to serve as an active switch in the regulation of continued cell cycle progression.