1. Computational and Systems Biology
  2. Plant Biology
Download icon

Coordination of robust single cell rhythms in the Arabidopsis circadian clock via spatial waves of gene expression

  1. Peter D Gould
  2. Mirela Domijan
  3. Mark Greenwood
  4. Isao T Tokuda
  5. Hannah Rees
  6. Laszlo Kozma-Bognar
  7. Anthony JW Hall  Is a corresponding author
  8. James CW Locke  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Liverpool, United Kingdom
  2. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  3. Ritsumeikan University, Japan
  4. Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungary
Research Article
  • Cited 25
  • Views 5,249
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2018;7:e31700 doi: 10.7554/eLife.31700

Abstract

The Arabidopsis circadian clock orchestrates gene regulation across the day/night cycle. Although a multiple feedback loop circuit has been shown to generate the 24h rhythm, it remains unclear how robust the clock is in individual cells, or how clock timing is coordinated across the plant. Here we examine clock activity at the single cell level across Arabidopsis seedlings over several days under constant environmental conditions. Our data reveal robust single cell oscillations, albeit desynchronised. In particular, we observe two waves of clock activity; one going down, and one up the root. We also find evidence of cell-to-cell coupling of the clock, especially in the root tip. A simple model shows that cell-to-cell coupling and our measured period differences between cells can generate the observed waves. Our results reveal the spatial structure of the plant clock and suggest that unlike the centralised mammalian clock, the Arabidopsis clock has multiple coordination points.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Peter D Gould

    Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Mirela Domijan

    Sainsbury Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Mark Greenwood

    Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Isao T Tokuda

    Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6212-0022
  5. Hannah Rees

    Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Laszlo Kozma-Bognar

    Biological Research Centre, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Szeged, Hungary
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8289-193X
  7. Anthony JW Hall

    Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    anthony.hall@earlham.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. James CW Locke

    Sainsbury Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    james.locke@slcu.cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0670-1943

Funding

Gatsby Charitable Foundation

  • James CW Locke

H2020 European Research Council

  • James CW Locke

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

  • Peter D Gould
  • Mirela Domijan
  • Anthony JW Hall
  • James CW Locke

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Richard Amasino, University of Wisconsin, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: September 6, 2017
  2. Accepted: April 25, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: April 26, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 5, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2018, Gould et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,249
    Page views
  • 798
    Downloads
  • 25
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Xiakun Chu et al.
    Research Article

    The way in which multidomain proteins fold has been a puzzling question for decades. Until now, the mechanisms and functions of domain interactions involved in multidomain protein folding have been obscure. Here, we develop structure-based models to investigate the folding and DNA-binding processes of the multidomain Y-family DNA polymerase IV (DPO4). We uncover shifts in folding mechanism among ordered domain-wise folding, backtracking folding, and cooperative folding, modulated by interdomain interactions. These lead to "U-shaped' folding kinetics. We characterize the effects of interdomain flexibility on the promotion of DPO4-DNA (un)binding, which probably contributes to the ability of DPO4 to bypass DNA lesions, a known biological role of Y-family polymerases. We suggest that the native topology of DPO4 leads to a trade-off between fast, stable folding and tight functional DNA binding. Our approach provides an effective way to quantitatively correlate the roles of protein interactions in conformational dynamics at the multidomain level.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Dennis Segebarth et al.
    Research Article

    Bioimage analysis of fluorescent labels is widely used in the life sciences. Recent advances in deep learning (DL) allow automating time-consuming manual image analysis processes based on annotated training data. However, manual annotation of fluorescent features with a low signal-to-noise ratio is somewhat subjective. Training DL models on subjective annotations may be instable or yield biased models. In turn, these models may be unable to reliably detect biological effects. An analysis pipeline integrating data annotation, ground truth estimation, and model training can mitigate this risk. To evaluate this integrated process, we compared different DL-based analysis approaches. With data from two model organisms (mice, zebrafish) and five laboratories, we show that ground truth estimation from multiple human annotators helps to establish objectivity in fluorescent feature annotations. Furthermore, ensembles of multiple models trained on the estimated ground truth establish reliability and validity. Our research provides guidelines for reproducible DL-based bioimage analyses.