Better sensing through empty receptors
New model suggests cells may be more sensitive to their environment than previously thought
Web edition : Friday, September 25th, 2009
font_down font_up Text Size

Cells may benefit by paying attention to sensors that are still open for business.

A new model finds that, contrary to conventional wisdom, sensors on the outside of a cell that have not yet detected a chemical signal may be more useful than those that have already detected the signal, a study set to appear in Physical Review Letters suggests. By reconsidering how a cell sorts information, Ned Wingreen of Princeton University and Robert Endres of Imperial College London found that these unbound sensors can collectively provide a clearer view of the environment.

Single-celled organisms, such as bacteria and yeast, must accurately judge their landscape to find food and avoid trouble. Cells sense their surroundings through small proteins called receptors that coat the outer cell membrane. When a receptor grabs on to a particular molecule, like a sugar or an amino acid, the receptor can spur the cell to move toward or away from those molecules, a process called chemotaxis. 

“Sensing can be life or death for cells, especially in the case of chemotaxis,” Wingreen says. “It's a competitive world out there, so whoever senses it gets to eat it.”

In 1977, Howard Berg and E.M. Purcell proposed a fundamental limit on how sensitive cells can be to a chemical’s concentration. This model assumed that cells sense the concentration of a chemical by detecting how long the chemical stays bound to a receptor. A cell would be more likely to move toward high concentrations of an attractant, such as a food signal, than low concentrations. But Wingreen and Endres wondered if cells, by focusing on a different piece of the incoming data, could be even better at detecting low concentrations than the Berg-Purcell limit predicted.

“What is the best the cell can do?” Wingreen says. “What is the most information you can extract from the data?” Wingreen and Endres reasoned that perhaps cells use information about the rate at which unoccupied receptors bind with molecules. If this is true, how long a receptor holds onto that signal isn’t important information for the cell. A receptor that isn’t bound to anything still has potential to detect a chemical, but a receptor that’s already locked on to a chemical has no additional information to offer the cell.

Wingreen and Endres calculated cells’ ability to detect molecules using data from only unoccupied receptors as they latched onto molecules. The researchers found that this method allowed cells to sense even lower concentrations of molecules. What’s more, the new method predicts that cells’ sensing abilities would be more accurate than previously thought.

Berg, of Harvard University, says the new results are “interesting, but not profound. It's a different way of thinking about the receptor binding problem” that offers a refinement on the previous notion, he says.  
 
So far, the researchers don’t know if any cells actually implement this optimal strategy. “For me, the most interesting thing is looking at specific sensing systems,” Wingreen says. “Can we find an example where we think this is being used?” To get the benefits from this sensing system, cells would have to figure out a way to take already-bound receptors out of the equation.

Biochemist Gerald Hazelbauer says that the proposed system may turn up in some cells.  “Experience shows that if one can think of a possible mechanism for a particular biological process, no matter how strange or unusual, there is probably a biological system or organism that utilizes that mechanism,” says Hazelbauer, of the University of Missouri in Columbia.
Found in: Chemistry and Genes & Cells
Comments 2
  • Chemotactic eukaryotic cells are able to detect chemoattractant gradients that are both shallow and have a low background concentration. Under these conditions, the noise in the number of bound receptors can be significant and needs to be taken into account in determining the directional sensing process. Here, we quantify numerically the number of bound receptors on the membrane of a disk-shaped cell by using a numerical Monte Carlo tool. The obtained time traces of the receptor occupancy can be used as inputs for any directional sensing model. We investigate the response of the local excitation global inhibition model and a recently developed balanced inactivation model. We determine a measure for the motility of the cell for each model, based on the relevant output variable, as a function of experimental parameters, resulting in several experimentally testable predictions. Furthermore, we show that these two models behave in a qualitatively different fashion when the background concentration is varied. Thus, to properly characterize the sensitivity of cells to receptor occupancy, it is not sufficient to examine the input signal. Rather, one needs to take into account the response of the second messenger pathway. The growth rate of this project leads to health (see health care awareness http://personalmoneystore.com/Payday-Loans/) awareness industries.
    Devon B Devon B
    Sep. 29, 2009 at 3:29am
  • Science Blindness To Gene's Lifehood


    A. From "Better sensing through empty receptors"

    http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/47817/title/Better_sensing_through_empty_receptors

    A new model suggests cells may be more sensitive to their environment than previously thought.

    This work deals with the mechanism and efficiency of some components of the sensing system on a monocell organism's outer membrane. It refers to

    - cells may benefit...
    - how a cell sorts information...
    - single-celled organisms, such as bacteria and yeast, must accurately judge their landscape to find food and avoid trouble.


    B. From "Bacterium With Chemoreceptors Versus Multicelled Organisms"

    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/200/122.page#3489

    From sensing to signalling to tumbling to re-swimming. This goes on in a bacterial cell. Who and how assesses the information and draws and issues instructions?


    C. 21st Century Science Is Still Blind To Gene's Lifehood

    This blindness is one of the hallmarks of the scientifically decadent corrupt still ongoing 20th century technology culture.


    D. Cells are just the functional housings of the organisms genes-genome

    Nature evolved genes to constrain energy as long as possible and to replicate for augmenting the amount of constrained energy.

    Genes evolved the capability and technique first to adapt and later to manipulate their environments by means of their expressions. Their expressions handle everything for the genes, from sensing to remembering to signaling through foraging through all components of surviving. Each and all of their expressions are targeted for augmented constrained energy survival.

    Is this so difficult to notice and accept scientifically?

    It seems that mundane scientific decadence blinds 21st century science to the lifehood of genes.


    Dov Henis
    (Comments From The 22nd Century)
    Dov Henis Dov Henis
    Oct. 4, 2009 at 3:57am
Post a comment

Please login or register to participate.


Advertisement
Suggested Reading:
seperator
  • Sanders, L. 2009. Microswimmers make a splash: Tiny travelers take on a viscous world.  (July 4): Vol. 176, p. 22. Available at
    [Go to]
Citations & References:
seperator
  • Robert G. Endres and Ned S. Wingreen. 2009. Maximum likelihood and the single receptor. Physical Review Letters, in press.
Reader Favorites:
seperator
SN on the Web:
seperator