Saturday 22 September 2018

ARTICLE: Time marches on -- mitochondria, ageing, and disease

Burgstaller, J.P., Kolbe, T., Havlicek, V., Hembach, S., Poulton, J., Piálek, J., Steinborn, R., Rülicke, T., Brem, G., Jones, N.S. and Johnston, I.G. Large-scale genetic analysis reveals mammalian mtDNA heteroplasmy dynamics and variance increase through lifetimes and generations. Nature communications2488 (2018)

DNA in mitochondria, the powerhouses of the cell, is passed down from mother to child. But there are many mitochondria in each cell, and these mitochondria may have different genetic features. If a mother carries a mixture of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) types, this can make it hard to say which features their children will inherit. For mothers carrying a disease-causing mtDNA mutation, this makes family planning and clinical therapies challenging.


In particular, the role of a mother's age has long been a mystery. Is the probability of a child inheriting a particular mtDNA feature higher when mothers are younger or older? An answer to this question could help plan clinical strategies to improve fertility and prevent the inheritance of deadly mitochondrial disease.


To address this, we worked with our excellent collaborators with a combination of maths, statistics, and experiment. Our collaborators used cutting-edge technology to reveal the mixtures of mtDNA in the egg cells of mother mice at a wide range of ages, and in the litters of offspring the mothers produced. This experimental work was the largest-scale study of mammalian mtDNA that we're aware of, involving thousands of observations throughout lifetimes and between generations. In concert, we developed a mathematical model describing the changes to, and inheritance of, mtDNA from mother to offspring. We combined the model and data to learn how different biological processes affect mtDNA through and between generations.



Cells contain populations of mitochondria, and these populations change over time. In European mice, we observed how variability in these populations evolves as mammals age and reproduce. We found that older mother have more varied mitochondria and pass this variance on to their offspring -- of central importance in the inheritance of genetic disease. 

We found that the variability of mtDNA dramatically increased as mothers aged. This means that the probability of inheriting more extreme -- both lower and higher -- levels of a genetic feature increases for older mothers. We also found that different mtDNA mixtures were inherited in different ways - with some mtDNA types favoured for inheritance and some disfavoured. We used our findings to create a way to predict how the risk that offspring would inherit disease-causing mtDNA features changes over time. Moving forward, we're aiming to harness these powerful ways of using large datasets to describe and predict the dynamics of mtDNA inheritance in humans, and to learn what it is about these mtDNA types that predicts their evolution across generations. You can read the article for free in Nature Communications here.

ARTICLE: How do plants roll dice?

Johnston, I.G. and Bassel, G.W. Identification of a bet-hedging network motif generating noise in hormone concentrations and germination propensity in Arabidopsis. Journal of the Royal Society Interface15 141 (2018)

Seeds feed the world, and uniform, reliable harvests of seeds and grains is essential for food security. However, there's a fundamental tension between the evolutionary priorities of plants and the agricultural priorities of humans. Evolutionarily, it is good for plants to "hedge their bets" by having seeds germinate at different times. A plant whose seeds all germinate in March will be susceptible to a frost in April, potentially leading to the loss of a generation of offspring. By contrast, a plant whose seeds germinate throughout March and April will have a subset of its offspring survive that frost, and its genes will be passed on to the next generation.


This bet-hedging poses a challenge for agriculture. In agricultural settings, we have more control over plant environments, and so plants have less need to withstand unpredictable environmental fluctuations. At the same time, non-uniform germination decreases crop yields, makes harvesting harder, and makes crops more susceptible to pest invasion. If we can learn how plants generate this evolved germination variability, we can design engineering and/or breeding strategies to reduce this and improve crop yields.



Plants have evolved to "hedge their bets" by having seeds germinate at different times -- this makes generations of plants more robust to environmental fluctuations. Our work reveals a mechanism that "rolls dice" within plant cells, acting like a random number generator to produce variability in germination propensity. 

In a previous paper (blog post here), we looked at how germination is controlled by an interaction between two hormones known as ABA and GA. During that project, we noticed a surprising feature of the cellular pathways affecting ABA. Oddly, it seemed that ABA both activated a pathway that increased its own production, and at the same time (and in the same place) activated a pathways that increased its own degradation. These two pathways seemed to be competitive -- one increases levels of ABA, the other decreases them. Why would cells spend energy in this "futile" way?


We hypothesised that these competitive pathways might have the effect of generating variability in ABA levels. The pathways are fundamentally "noisy", involving random interactions in the chaotic environment of the cell. Consider increasing the activity of both pathways simultaneously. One pathway would act to increase levels of ABA, the other would act to decrease it. The increased "push and pull" of these noisy pathways would increase the spread of levels of ABA in different cells, even if average levels stayed the same.


Because it's hard to measure the levels of hormones in individual cells over time, we initially took a theoretical approach. We showed, with maths, that the competing pathways did indeed have this variability-inducing effect. By varying the activity through these pathways, the cell can increase variability in ABA levels, and hence increase variability in germination propensity. We showed that the theory we developed was compatible with some experiments where the ABA circuitry was artificially manipulated. The theory went on to reveal various aspects of cellular machinery that we could conceivably target through synthetic approaches, in order to reduce germination variability. Put together, our quantitative theory, supported by experiment, explained the mysterious competitive pathways and revealed several new interventions with the potential to improve food security. You can read about it for free in the Journal of the Royal Society Interface here. Iain  


ARTICLE: Which genes are essential for bacterial survival?

Goodall, E.C., Robinson, A., Johnston, I.G., Jabbari, S., Turner, K.A., Cunningham, A.F., Lund, P.A., Cole, J.A. and Henderson, I.R., 2018. The essential genome of Escherichia coli K-12. mBioe02096 (2018)

Bacteria cause diseases, and are developing resistance to the drugs we use to kill them. Anti-microbial resistance (AMR) is one of the most pressing global health challenges facing society. In the immense scientific endeavour of creating new, effective treatments for bacterial infections, fundamental biological knowledge about how bacteria live and proliferate is of vital importance.


One way we can obtain this knowledge is by discovering what cellular machinery that bacteria need to survive and proliferate. A common (and famous) bacterium called Escherichia coli (E. coli) has over 4000 protein-coding genes, but we're not really sure which of these genes is essential for the bacterium, and how many provide some non-essential "added value". If we can learn which genes are essential for bacteria, we have a more specific set of targets to shoot for in designing new drugs and therapies.


So -- how can we find out which genes are essential for E. coli? One neat way involves a new experimental approach called transposon-directed insertion site sequencing (TraDIS). Transposons are elements of DNA that can be inserted into a bacterial genome -- when they are inserted into part of the genome that codes for a gene, they prevent that gene being properly expressed, effectively removing it from the bacterium. TraDIS, in essence, takes a large population of bacteria and inserts one transposon into a random position in each bacterium. The population is then left to evolve for some time. After that time, we look at the genomes of bacteria within the surviving population, and see exactly where transposon insertions have been retained in some living bacteria.



A stylised representation of the E. coli genome and the positions within it where we found transposons to have been retained (corresponding to non-essential genes). 

The idea is that any bacteria in the population that have a transposon inserted into an essential gene will die. As such a gene is essential, it's required for survival, and a transposon preventing its expression will kill the bacterium. Therefore, if some bacteria in a population retain an insertion in gene X and survive, it follows that gene X is not essential. Conversely, if we see a large region of the genome within which no insertions are retained in the final population, it is likely that that region corresponds to an essential gene. 


There's some mathematical subtlety in the "it is likely". Depending on how many transposon insertions originally occur, and the length of the genome, some regions without insertions may occur just by chance. We did a bit of maths to work out how unlikely it is to see an insertion-free region of a given length arise by chance; and, by extension, how likely it is that a gene identified by this analysis is indeed essential for the bacterium. However, the maths was only one part of this project -- it was first and foremost an experimental tour de force by our excellent collaborators. We jointly provided a new atlas of essential genes in E. coli, provide a new way of reasoning about the powerful TraDIS technique, and provide several new insights into bacterial physiology and biochemistry. The work is freely available in the journal mBio here. Iain 

ARTICLE: How cells adapt to progressive increase in mitochondrial mutation

Aryaman, J., Johnston, I.G. and Jones, N.S. Mitochondrial DNA density homeostasis accounts for a threshold effect in a cybrid model of a human mitochondrial disease. Biochemical Journal474 4019 (2017).

Mitochondria produce the cell's major energy currency: ATP. If mitochondria become dysfunctional, this can be associated with a variety of devastating diseases, from Parkinson's disease to cancer. Technological advances have allowed us to generate huge volumes of data about these diseases. However, it can be a challenge to turn these large, complicated, datasets into basic understanding of how these diseases work, so that we can come up with rational treatments.


We were interested in a dataset (see here) which measured what happened to cells as their mitochondria became progressively more dysfunctional. A typical cell has roughly 1000 copies of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which contains information on how to build some of the most important parts of the machinery responsible for making ATP in your cells. When mitochondrial DNA becomes mutated, these instructions accumulate errors, preventing the cell's energy machinery from working properly. Since your cells each contain about 1000 copies of mitochondrial DNA, it is interesting to think about what happens to a cell as the fraction of mutated mitochondrial DNA (called 'heteroplasmy') gradually increases.  We used maths to try and explain how a cell attempts to cope with increasing levels of heteroplasmy, resulting in a wealth of hypotheses which we hope to explore experimentally in the future.





The central idea arising from our analysis of this large dataset is that cells seem to attempt to maintain the number of normal mtDNAs per cell volume as heteroplasmy initially increases from 0% mutant. We suggest they do this by shrinking their size. By getting smaller, cells are able to reduce their energy demands as the fraction of mutant mtDNA increases, allowing them to balance their energy budget and maintain energy supply = demand. However, cells can only get so small and eventually the cell must change its strategy. At a critical fraction of mutated mtDNA (h* in the cartoon above), we suggest that cells switch on an alternative energy production mode called glycolysis. This causes energy supply to increase, and as a result, cells grow larger in size again. These ideas, as well as experimental proposals to test them, are freely available in the Biochemical Journal "Mitochondrial DNA Density Homeostasis Accounts for a Threshold Effect in a Cybrid Model of a Human Mitochondrial Disease". Juvid, Iain and Nick

ARTICLE: How plants decide when to germinate

Topham, A.T., Taylor, R.E., Yan, D., Nambara, E., Johnston, I.G. and Bassel, G.W. Temperature variability is integrated by a spatially embedded decision-making center to break dormancy in Arabidopsis seeds. PNAS 114 6629 (2017)

A plant's choice to germinate is one of the most important decisions in the world. If it is made too soon, the plant may be damaged by harsh winter conditions; if too late, the plant may be outcompeted, and crop yields may be lower. If crops in a field make the decision at different times, there is more room for weeds to grow and pests to take over. 


In a recent study, we combined mathematical modelling with several neat experiments to identify sets of cells that make this germination choice in a much-studied plant called thale cress (Arabidopsis thaliana), and have learned how it makes decisions based on the plant's environment.



Two views of the plant embryo from laser microscopy, highlighting cells where different components of the germination control machinery are expressed. The background shows the "attractor basins" in a mathematical description of the germination decision: horizontal and vertical axes give the levels of two hormones ABA and GA, the blue region corresponds to dormant seeds and the red region to germination. 

This germination circuitry functions through a circuit of chemical stimuli and responses. Using laser microscopy, we found that different parts of this circuit exist in different parts of the plant embryo -- and that the separation of these parts is central to how the brain functions. We used mathematical modelling to show that communication between separated elements of the germination circuitry controls the plant's sensitivity to its environment. Following this theory, we used a mutant plant where cells were more chemically linked -- essentially enhancing communication between circuit elements -- to show that germination depends on these intra-cellular signals.


The separation of circuit elements allows a wider palette of responses to stimuli. It's like the difference between reading one critic's review of a film four times over, or amalgamating four different critics' views before deciding to go to the cinema. Our mathematical theory predicted that more plants would germinate when exposed to varying environments -- like three short pulses of cold -- than constant environments -- like one long cold period. We tested this theory in the lab and found exactly this behaviour.


Next, the hope is to learn about the germination brain in other plants and crops, and to show how our new knowledge of the germination machinery can be used to enhance and synchronise germination in crops. You can read the paper for free in the journal PNAS here. Iain

Sunday 4 February 2018

The Algorithmic Beauty of Plants

(title taken from a wonderful book here)

Last year we ran a second year undergraduate computer practical in Biosciences introducing students to the ways in which computer simulations can be used to model plant growth. There are several neat scientific and practical ideas here. The students find that the diverse and complex range of beautiful plant forms can be mimicked by simulating simple, iterated rules (as in the pic). But the deeper idea is that these forms are not just mimicked by iterated rules  they genuinely emerge from such rules, not represented in a computer but in the biological language of the genome. This is the first time many students have met the idea that computational modelling allows a scientist to "play god"  they can make whatever changes they like to the rules and explore the effect on the simulated plants they grow. They also get to grips with algorithmic thinking  a highly transferrable skill given the expansion of coding and computational approaches across sectors.

Figure 1: L-Studio, simulating plant growth in computers from simple iterated rules. (top) An introductory exercise modelling a highly reduced model plant using a small number of growth rules. (bottom) A more involved simulation, based again around repeated application of simple rules, giving a fairly natural-looking plant structure.

The class is about 50 students, working in pairs or small groups with a computer. They are given some introductory exercises on “L-systems” (have a play e.g. here!), then given increasingly complicated structures to play with – including some famous fractals – and finally meet the translation to plant forms. In this way they learn to think algorithmically in a more abstract sense before the connection to biology is driven home. The exercises start fairly prescriptive, reproducing given structures. They then progress to a more investigative mode – given a particular plant form, how would you change its growth rules to, for example, outcompete tall neighbours, or disperse seeds more broadly? The final, exploratory, mode is the most interesting, where the students are given free rein, and design, adapt, and compare their own plant “designs”.

There are typically two members of staff and a handful of PhD students or postdocs acting in a TA capacity. We help with the initial setup – smoothing the way to this (unnatural for some) way of working with biological model systems in a computer. We then engage in a more scientific way with the groups, posing extension questions, guiding through questioning (careful not to just recite the solution to a given problem). In the final exploratory mode, we reduce the formality and jointly discuss scientific extensions and applications with the students and encourage the social aspect of the comparison and collaboration.

This class is an interesting one from a pedagogical point of view. The mode of learning shifts through the course of the two-hour session, from prescriptive to exploratory. Typically the class is very split in their uptake of this unfamiliar way of thinking. Some students love it, particularly the open-ended parts, and stick around to the end taking pictures of their plants and sending them to friends. Some frequently question the “point” of the class – a common question because logistics often mean they meet this class before lectures that naturally set up the modelling perspective. However, it usually just takes a few minutes of one-on-one discussion – illustrated with examples of our own research using computational modelling – to convince students of the utility both of the science and of the transferrable skill acquisition. One of my most personally rewarding experiences was with a student who started out almost aggressively sceptical about the point of these models – and whether the class would get him a better degree. After a discussion of the science and the transferrable value of computational modelling, he completely switched around and was interested in further pursuit of these topics. Other students are less polarised – they view the class as a box to be ticked. The final section of the class has an interesting influence here, where the enthusiasm of some groups rubs off onto the box-tickers. As such, there’s an interesting dynamic of teaching staff acting to catalyse the spread of enthusiasm – and of information – that emerges from the students’ own exploration.