Multicellularity: How contraction has shaped evolution
The Cheshire Cat in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland is famous for its disappearing act: parts of its body vanish one by one until nothing remains but its ethereal grin. Scientists attempting to retrace the evolution of animals confront something equally curious. One might assume that going ever further back in evolutionary time, recently-evolved animal traits would drop away until a sort of ‘minimal animal’ remained. However, a growing body of data suggests that this minimal animal may not be an animal at all. Instead, sophisticated cellular processes once thought to be exclusive to animals are found across several unicellular eukaryotes: grins without (multicellular) cats!
So how do scientists reconstruct the deep history of multicellularity? The record for the oldest multicellular organism to be studied directly belongs to plants grown from 30,000-year-old seeds preserved in permafrost (Yashina et al., 2012). However, multicellular life is much older than this. Fossils of multicellular red algae have been dated to 1.6 billion years ago (Bengtson et al., 2017), and fossils of multicellular fungi date from about a billion years ago (Loron et al., 2019). The oldest confidently-dated animal fossils are about half a billion years old (Bobrovskiy et al., 2018). Multicellularity arose independently in plants, fungi and animals (Brunet and King, 2017). Scientists are interested in the unicellular ancestors of these groups because they want to know if each transition into multicellularity was driven by similar evolutionary forces. Unfortunately, fossils reveal little about the cell biology of these primordial organisms.
Darwin was well aware of this challenge. To reconstruct the evolutionary history of an organism, he wrote in On the Origin of Species, “we ought to look exclusively to its lineal ancestors; but this is scarcely ever possible and we are forced in each case to look to… the collateral descendants from the same original parent-form.” That is, one must hope the traits of surviving organisms reveal those of their extinct ancestors. Researchers now know that Darwin’s idea of “living fossils” was too simplistic. No organism remains entirely identical to its ancestor: genetic mutations constantly accumulate, driven by conflict, competition, and random chance. Nevertheless, one could hope to reconstruct the ancestor using a patchwork of different ancestral traits preserved across different surviving descendants.
A central theme of the emerging field of evolutionary cell biology is to study organisms that provide as much information as possible about the past. One way to do this is to develop new model organisms based on their position in the tree of life. As the evolution of animals is retraced, an ancestral unicellular species at the very threshold of multicellularity will eventually be reached. It is possible this species has no surviving descendants, other than the animals themselves. To find more collateral descendants, one must push further back in time. The better life’s existing diversity is sampled, the more likely that a species will be found similar to the ancestors scientists want to reconstruct.
The billion-year-old clade known as Holozoa consists of animals and closely related unicellular species, including choanoflagellates, filastereans, and ichthyosporeans. Just a decade ago this was a sparsely sampled region of the eukaryotic tree: for example, the first choanoflagellate genome was only published in 2008 (Brunet and King, 2017). Today dozens of holozoan species have been cultured, sequenced, and studied, and they are a fertile hunting ground for interesting cell biology. Importantly, the non-animal holozoans include species that can become transiently multicellular, at certain times or under certain conditions. Specifically, some choanoflagellates and ichthyosporeans have clonal multicellular life stages, while some filastereans form multicellular aggregates. But are these behaviors homologous to multicellularity in animals, and therefore representative of the ancestral state? Or are they examples of convergent evolution, driven by adaptations to similar environments?
One way to answer these questions is to resolve the molecular mechanisms that enable multicellular behavior across holozoans. Suggestively, holozoan genomes encode transcription factors and cell adhesion genes known to be essential for animal multicellularity, but the roles of these genes had not been directly demonstrated (Grau-Bové et al., 2017; Richter et al., 2018). Now, two independent teams have reported the results of studies on certain animal-like behaviors in unicellular lineages that shed light on the evolution of animal multicellularity (Figure 1).
In a paper in eLife, Iñaki Ruiz-Trillo and co-workers from Barcelona, Liverpool, Oslo, Shizuoka and Hiroshima – including Omaya Dudin and Andrej Ondracka as joint first authors – report how reproduction in an ichthyosporean called Sphaeroforma arctica involves a stage of growth that is reminiscent of the embryonic development of fruit flies. The nucleus of an initial single cell divides repeatedly to form a polarized epithelial layer, which then gives rise to multiple cells as its membrane undergoes coordinated invaginations (Dudin et al., 2019).
In a second paper in Science, Nicole King and co-workers from Berkeley and Amsterdam – including Thibaut Brunet, Ben Larson and Tess Linden as joint first authors – report the results of a study on a newly isolated choanoflagellate which they name Choanoeca flexa (Brunet et al., 2019). In bright light this organism exists as a cup-shaped colony of cells, with their flagella pointing inwards. In the dark, however, the cup flips inside-out via a collective cellular contraction. This collective contraction is reminiscent of the contractions that generate curvature in developing animal tissues.
Both studies use imaging and pharmacological inhibition to demonstrate that these multicellular processes depend on the same molecular machinery: complexes of actin and myosin that can generate mechanical forces within cells. These results suggest that the last common ancestor of holozoans was an organism that was capable of transient multicellularity, with cells that could contract collectively. Among its descendants, only the animals evolved a permanently multicellular lifestyle, using the power of collective contraction to sculpt tissues and generate the “endless forms most beautiful” that so inspired Darwin.
The origin of animal multicellularity and cell differentiationDevelopmental Cell 43:124–140.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2017.09.016
Article and author information
- Version of Record published: November 14, 2019 (version 1)
© 2019, Thattai
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
- Page views
Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
- Cell Biology
Uso1/p115 and RAB1 tether ER-derived vesicles to the Golgi. Uso1/p115 contains a globular-head-domain (GHD), a coiled-coil (CC) mediating dimerization/tethering and a C-terminal region (CTR) interacting with golgins. Uso1/p115 is recruited to vesicles by RAB1. Genetic studies placed Uso1 paradoxically acting upstream of, or in conjunction with RAB1 (Sapperstein et al., 1996). We selected two missense mutations in uso1 resulting in E6K and G540S in the GHD that rescued lethality of rab1-deficient Aspergillus nidulans. The mutations are phenotypically additive, their combination suppressing the complete absence of RAB1, which emphasizes the key physiological role of the GHD. In living hyphae Uso1 recurs on puncta (60 sec half-life) colocalizing partially with the Golgi markers RAB1, Sed5 and GeaA/Gea1/Gea2, and totally with the retrograde cargo receptor Rer1, consistent with Uso1 dwelling in a very early Golgi compartment from which ER residents reaching the Golgi recycled back to the ER. Localization of Uso1, but not of Uso1E6K/G540S, to puncta is abolished by compromising RAB1 function, indicating that E6K/G540S creates interactions bypassing RAB1. That Uso1 delocalization correlates with a decrease in the number of Gea1 cisternae supports that Uso1-and-Rer1-containing puncta are where the protein exerts its physiological role. In S-tag-coprecipitation experiments Uso1 is an associate of the Sed5/Bos1/Bet1/Sec22 SNARE complex zippering vesicles with the Golgi, with Uso1E6K/G540S showing stronger association. Using purified proteins, we show that Bos1 and Bet1 bind the Uso1 GHD directly. However, Bet1 is a strong E6K/G540S-independent binder, whereas Bos1 is weaker but becomes as strong as Bet1 when the GHD carries E6K/G540S. G540S alone markedly increases GHD binding to Bos1, whereas E6K causes a weaker effect, correlating with their phenotypic contributions. AlphaFold2 predicts that G540S increases binding of the GHD to the Bos1 Habc domain. In contrast, E6K lies in an N-terminal, potentially alpha-helical, region that sensitive genetic tests indicate as required for full Uso1 function. Remarkably, this region is at the end of the GHD basket opposite to the end predicted to interact with Bos1. We show that unlike dimeric full-length and CTR∆ Uso1 proteins, the GHD lacking the CC/CTR dimerization domain, whether originating from bacteria or Aspergillus extracts and irrespective of whether it carries or not E6K/G540S, would appear to be monomeric. With the finding that overexpression of E6K/G540S and wild-type GHD complement uso1∆, our data indicate that the GHD monomer is capable of providing, at least partially, the essential Uso1 functions, and that long-range tethering activity is dispensable. Rather, these findings strongly suggest that the essential role of Uso1 involves the regulation of SNAREs.
- Cell Biology
Full-length mRNAs transfer between adjacent mammalian cells via direct cell-to-cell connections called tunneling nanotubes (TNTs). However, the extent of mRNA transfer at the transcriptome-wide level (the 'transferome') is unknown. Here, we analyzed the transferome in an in vitro human-mouse cell co-culture model using RNA-sequencing. We found that mRNA transfer is non-selective, prevalent across the human transcriptome, and that the amount of transfer to mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) strongly correlates with the endogenous level of gene expression in donor human breast cancer cells. Typically, <1% of endogenous mRNAs undergo transfer. Non-selective, expression-dependent RNA transfer was further validated using synthetic reporters. RNA transfer appears contact-dependent via TNTs, as exemplified for several mRNAs. Notably, significant differential changes in the native MEF transcriptome were observed in response to co-culture, including the upregulation of multiple cancer and cancer-associated fibroblast-related genes and pathways. Together, these results lead us to suggest that TNT-mediated RNA transfer could be a phenomenon of physiological importance under both normal and pathogenic conditions.