BERRİN ÖZDİL BAY, HÜSEYİN AKTUĞ, ÇEVİK GÜREL, KUBİLAY DOĞAN KILIÇ, Gökçe Ceren KUŞÇU, Yasemin ADALI

Hücre içi trafik ve hücre davranış özellikleri

Hücre davranışı ve farklılaşmasının yanı sıra hücre bölünme modeli de canlılar için hayati önem taşımaktadır. Hücresel farklılaşma ve hücre çeşitliliği, doğrudan ve dolaylı olarak erken embriyonik aşamada hücre iskeleti, hücre polaritesi, hücre içi ve hücre dışı sinyaller gibi biyolojik süreçlerin yanı sıra, hücre şekli ve hareketinden de etkilenir. Atipik hücre davranışı, embriyogenezde ve bazen onkogenezde gözlenmektedir. Hücre içi trafik, hücrenin dışarıdan gelen sinyallere verdiği cevaplar ve hücre davranışı yönünden daha kapsamlı değerlendirilmelidir. Bu derlemenin amacı: hücre davranışının anlaşılmasında önemli yer tutan; hücre bölünme mekanizmaları açısından hücre şekli, hücrenin farklılaşma kapasitesi, hücre iskeleti, hücre motilitesi ve hücre polaritesi kavramlarını birbirleri ile ilişkilendirerek açıklamaktır.

Intracellular trafficking and cell behaviour characteristics

Cell behavior, differentiation and cell division pattern is vital for living organisms. Cellular differentiation and diversification is directly and indirectly affected by cell skeleton, cell polarity, intracellular and extracellular signals, cell shape and movement from the early embryonic stage. Atypical cell behavior is observed in embryogenesis and occasionally in oncogenesis. Intracellular traffic in the basis of this behavior and the assessment of extrinsic information to the cell are still needed to be investigated. The aim of this review is to clarify concepts of cell shape, differentiation capacity, cytoskeleton, cell motility and polarity in terms of cell division mechanisms which are important in the discovery of cell behavior.

PDF

___

1. Shahriyari L, Komarova NL. Symmetric vs. asymmetric stem cell divisions: An adaptation against cancer? PloS One. 2013;8(10):e76195.
2. Yatabe Y, Tavare S, Shibata D. Investigating stem cells in human colon by using methylation patterns. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2001;98(19):10839-44.
3. Horvitz HR, Herskowitz I. Mechanisms of asymmetric cell division: Two Bs or not two Bs, that is the question. Cell 1992;68(2):237-55.
4. Glotzer M. Cleavage furrow positioning. J Cell Biol 2004;164(3):347-51.
5. Cowan CR, Hyman AA. Asymmetric cell division in C. elegans: Cortical polarity and spindle positioning. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2004;20:427-53.
6. Neumuller RA, Knoblich JA. Dividing cellular asymmetry: asymmetric cell division and its implications for stem cells and cancer. Genes Dev 2009;23(23):2675-99.
7. Lechler T, Fuchs E. Asymmetric cell divisions promote stratification and differentiation of mammalian skin. Nature 2005;437(7056):275-80.
8. Smart IH. Variation in the plane of cell cleavage during the process of stratification in the mouse epidermis. Br J Dermatol 1970;82(3):276-82.
9. Fuchs E, Raghavan S. Getting under the skin of epidermal morphogenesis. Nat Rev Genet 2002;3(3):199-209.
10. Watt FM. Role of integrins in regulating epidermal adhesion, growth and differentiation. EMBO J 2002;21(15):3919-26.
11. Blanpain C, Lowry WE, Pasolli HA, Fuchs E. Canonical notch signaling functions as a commitment switch in the epidermal lineage. Genes Dev 2006;20(21):3022-35.
12. Le Roy H, Zuliani T, Wolowczuk I, et al. Asymmetric distribution of epidermal growth factor receptor directs the fate of normal and cancer keratinocytes in vitro. Stem Cells Dev 2010;19(2):209-20.
13. Williams SE, Beronja S, Pasolli HA, Fuchs E. Asymmetric cell divisions promote notch-dependent epidermal differentiation. Nature 2011;470(7334):353-8.
14. Ray S, Lechler T. Regulation of asymmetric cell division in the epidermis. Cell Div 2011;6(1):12.
15. Teixido-Travesa N, Villen J, Lacasa C, et al. The gammaTuRC revisited: A comparative analysis of interphase and mitotic human gammaTuRC redefines the set of core components and identifies the novel subunit GCP8. Mol Biol Cell 2010;21(22):3963-72.
16. Cooper GM. The Cell: A Molecular Approach. 2nd ed, ASM Press; Boston:2000.
17. Paluch E, Heisenberg C-P. Biology and physics of cell shape changes in development. Curr Biol 2009;19(17):R790-9.
18. Lange JR, Fabry B. Cell and tissue mechanics in cell migration. Exp Cell Res 2013;319(16):2418-23.
19. Bischofs IB, Klein F, Lehnert D, Bastmeyer M, Schwarz US. Filamentous network mechanics and active contractility determine cell and tissue shape. Biophys J 2008;95(7):3488-96.
20. Thery M, Jimenez-Dalmaroni A, Racine V, Bornens M, Julicher F. Experimental and theoretical study of mitotic spindle orientation. Nature 2007;447(7143):493-6.
21. Nelson CM, Jean RP, Tan JL, et al. Emergent patterns of growth controlled by multicellular form and mechanics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2005;102(33):11594-9.
22. Chen CS, Alonso JL, Ostuni E, Whitesides GM, Ingber DE. Cell shape provides global control of focal adhesion assembly. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2003;307(2):355-61.
23. Bischofs IB, Schmidt SS, Schwarz US. Effect of adhesion geometry and rigidity on cellular force distributions. Phys Rev Lett 2009;103(4):048101.
24. Albert Philipp J, Schwarz Ulrich S. Dynamics of cell shape and forces on micropatterned substrates predicted by a cellular potts model. Biophys J 2014;106(11):2340-52.
25. Labouesse C, Verkhovsky AB, Meister JJ, Gabella C, Vianay B. Cell shape dynamics reveal balance of elasticity and contractility in peripheral arcs. Biophys J 2015;108(10):2437-47.
26. Hanahan D, Weinberg Robert A. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell 2011;144(5):646-74.
27. David R, Luu O, Damm EW, Wen JW, Nagel M, Winklbauer R. Tissue cohesion and the mechanics of cell rearrangement. Development 2014;141(19):3672-82.
28. Webb DJ, Parsons JT, Horwitz AF. Adhesion assembly, disassembly and turnover in migrating cells -- over and over and over again. Nat Cell Biol 2002;4(4):E97-100.
29. Bravo-Cordero JJ, Magalhaes MA, Eddy RJ, Hodgson L, Condeelis J. Functions of cofilin in cell locomotion and invasion. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2013;14(7):405-15.
30. Li R, Gundersen GG. Beyond polymer polarity: How the cytoskeleton builds a polarized cell. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2008;9(11):860-73.
31. Lecuit T, Le Goff L. Orchestrating size and shape during morphogenesis. Nature 2007;450(7167):189-92.
32. des Georges A, Katsuki M, Drummond DR, Osei M, Cross RA, Amos LA. Mal3, the Schizosaccharomyces pombe homolog of EB1, changes the microtubule lattice. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2008;15(10):1102-08.
33. Barton JS, Riazi GH. Evidence for two growth steps in microtubule polymerization. Biochim Biophys Acta 1980;630(3):392-401. 34. Goldman RD, Grin B, Mendez MG, Kuczmarski ER. Intermediate filaments: Versatile building blocks of cell structure. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2008;20(1):28-34.
35. Ikebe M. Regulation of the function of mammalian myosin and its conformational change. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2008;369(1):157-64.
36. Numata N, Kon T, Shima T, et al. Molecular mechanism of force generation by dynein, a molecular motor belonging to the AAA+ family. Biochem Soc Trans 2008;36(Pt 1):131-5.
37. Wegner A, Engel J. Kinetics of the cooperative association of actin to actin filament. Biophys Chem 1975;3(3):215-25.
38. Bornens M. Organelle positioning and cell polarity. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2008;9(11):874-86.
39. Lansbergen G, Akhmanova A. Microtubule plus end: A hub of cellular activities. Traffic 2006;7(5):499-507.
40. Gundersen GG, Gomes ER, Wen Y. Cortical control of microtubule stability and polarization. Cur Opin Cell Biol 2004;16(1):106- 12.
41. Wedlich-Soldner R, Altschuler S, Wu L, Li R. Spontaneous cell polarization through actomyosin-based delivery of the Cdc42 GTPase. Science 2003;299(5610):1231-5.
42. Kaksonen M, Toret CP, Drubin DG. Harnessing actin dynamics for clathrin-mediated endocytosis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2006;7(6):404-14.