Life is a nonequilibrium phenomenon: Metabolism provides a continuous supply of energy that drives nearly all cellular processes. However, very little is known about how much energy different cellular processes use, i.e., their energetic costs. The most direct experimental measurements of these costs involve modulating the activity of cellular processes and determining the resulting changes in energetic fluxes. In this review, we present a flux balance framework to aid in the design and interpretation of such experiments and discuss the challenges associated with measuring the relevant metabolic fluxes. We then describe selected techniques that enable measurement of these fluxes. Finally, we review prior experimental and theoretical work that has employed techniques from biochemistry and nonequilibrium physics to determine the energetic costs of cellular processes. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics, Volume 14 is March 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
more »
« less
Physical bioenergetics: Energy fluxes, budgets, and constraints in cells
Cells are the basic units of all living matter which harness the flow of energy to drive the processes of life. While the biochemical networks involved in energy transduction are well-characterized, the energetic costs and constraints for specific cellular processes remain largely unknown. In particular, what are the energy budgets of cells? What are the constraints and limits energy flows impose on cellular processes? Do cells operate near these limits, and if so how do energetic constraints impact cellular functions? Physics has provided many tools to study nonequilibrium systems and to define physical limits, but applying these tools to cell biology remains a challenge. Physical bioenergetics, which resides at the interface of nonequilibrium physics, energy metabolism, and cell biology, seeks to understand how much energy cells are using, how they partition this energy between different cellular processes, and the associated energetic constraints. Here we review recent advances and discuss open questions and challenges in physical bioenergetics.
more » « less- Award ID(s):
- 2119963
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10250684
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Volume:
- 118
- Issue:
- 26
- ISSN:
- 0027-8424
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- Article No. e2026786118
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract As scientists, we are at least as excited about the open questions—the things we do not know—as the discoveries. Here, we asked 15 experts to describe the most compelling open questions in plant cell biology. These are their questions: How are organelle identity, domains, and boundaries maintained under the continuous flux of vesicle trafficking and membrane remodeling? Is the plant cortical microtubule cytoskeleton a mechanosensory apparatus? How are the cellular pathways of cell wall synthesis, assembly, modification, and integrity sensing linked in plants? Why do plasmodesmata open and close? Is there retrograde signaling from vacuoles to the nucleus? How do root cells accommodate fungal endosymbionts? What is the role of cell edges in plant morphogenesis? How is the cell division site determined? What are the emergent effects of polyploidy on the biology of the cell, and how are any such “rules” conditioned by cell type? Can mechanical forces trigger new cell fates in plants? How does a single differentiated somatic cell reprogram and gain pluripotency? How does polarity develop de-novo in isolated plant cells? What is the spectrum of cellular functions for membraneless organelles and intrinsically disordered proteins? How do plants deal with internal noise? How does order emerge in cells and propagate to organs and organisms from complex dynamical processes? We hope you find the discussions of these questions thought provoking and inspiring.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract The ability to program collective cell migration can allow us to control critical multicellular processes in development, regenerative medicine, and invasive disease. However, while various technologies exist to make individual cells migrate, translating these tools to control myriad, collectively interacting cells within a single tissue poses many challenges. For instance, do cells within the same tissue interpret a global migration ‘command’ differently based on where they are in the tissue? Similarly, since no stimulus is permanent, what are the long-term effects of transient commands on collective cell dynamics? We investigate these questions by bioelectrically programming large epithelial tissues to globally migrate ‘rightward’ via electrotaxis. Tissues clearly developed distinct rear, middle, side, and front responses to a single global migration stimulus. Furthermore, at no point poststimulation did tissues return to their prestimulation behavior, instead equilibrating to a 3rd, new migratory state. These unique dynamics suggested that programmed migration resets tissue mechanical state, which was confirmed by transient chemical disruption of cell–cell junctions, analysis of strain wave propagation patterns, and quantification of cellular crowd dynamics. Overall, this work demonstrates how externally driving the collective migration of a tissue can reprogram baseline cell–cell interactions and collective dynamics, even well beyond the end of the global migratory cue, and emphasizes the importance of considering the supracellular context of tissues and other collectives when attempting to program crowd behaviors.
-
null (Ed.)ABSTRACT Half a century after Lewis Wolpert's seminal conceptual advance on how cellular fates distribute in space, we provide a brief historical perspective on how the concept of positional information emerged and influenced the field of developmental biology and beyond. We focus on a modern interpretation of this concept in terms of information theory, largely centered on its application to cell specification in the early Drosophila embryo. We argue that a true physical variable (position) is encoded in local concentrations of patterning molecules, that this mapping is stochastic, and that the processes by which positions and corresponding cell fates are determined based on these concentrations need to take such stochasticity into account. With this approach, we shift the focus from biological mechanisms, molecules, genes and pathways to quantitative systems-level questions: where does positional information reside, how it is transformed and accessed during development, and what fundamental limits it is subject to?more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Background The biophysics of an organism span multiple scales from subcellular to organismal and include processes characterized by spatial properties, such as the diffusion of molecules, cell migration, and flow of intravenous fluids. Mathematical biology seeks to explain biophysical processes in mathematical terms at, and across, all relevant spatial and temporal scales, through the generation of representative models. While non-spatial, ordinary differential equation (ODE) models are often used and readily calibrated to experimental data, they do not explicitly represent the spatial and stochastic features of a biological system, limiting their insights and applications. However, spatial models describing biological systems with spatial information are mathematically complex and computationally expensive, which limits the ability to calibrate and deploy them and highlights the need for simpler methods able to model the spatial features of biological systems.
Results In this work, we develop a formal method for deriving cell-based, spatial, multicellular models from ODE models of population dynamics in biological systems, and vice versa. We provide examples of generating spatiotemporal, multicellular models from ODE models of viral infection and immune response. In these models, the determinants of agreement of spatial and non-spatial models are the degree of spatial heterogeneity in viral production and rates of extracellular viral diffusion and decay. We show how ODE model parameters can implicitly represent spatial parameters, and cell-based spatial models can generate uncertain predictions through sensitivity to stochastic cellular events, which is not a feature of ODE models. Using our method, we can test ODE models in a multicellular, spatial context and translate information to and from non-spatial and spatial models, which help to employ spatiotemporal multicellular models using calibrated ODE model parameters. We additionally investigate objects and processes implicitly represented by ODE model terms and parameters and improve the reproducibility of spatial, stochastic models.
Conclusion We developed and demonstrate a method for generating spatiotemporal, multicellular models from non-spatial population dynamics models of multicellular systems. We envision employing our method to generate new ODE model terms from spatiotemporal and multicellular models, recast popular ODE models on a cellular basis, and generate better models for critical applications where spatial and stochastic features affect outcomes.
