4.7 Article

Robustness of epithelial sealing is an emerging property of local ERK feedback driven by cell elimination

期刊

DEVELOPMENTAL CELL
卷 56, 期 12, 页码 1700-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2021.05.006

关键词

-

资金

  1. FRM (Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale) [ARF20170938651]
  2. Marie Sklodowska-Curie postdoctoral fellowship (MechDeath) [789573]
  3. Institut Pasteur
  4. ERC [758457]
  5. Cercle FSER
  6. CNRS (UMR 3738)
  7. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [789573] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)
  8. European Research Council (ERC) [758457] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research using Drosophila pupal notum as a model shows that clusters of cell death impair epithelial sealing, but such clusters are rarely observed in vivo. Statistical analysis and simulations reveal a transient and local protective phase near each cell death, driven by transient activation of ERK in neighboring cells, preventing clustered cell elimination.
What regulates the spatiotemporal distribution of cell elimination in tissues remains largely unknown. This is particularly relevant for epithelia with highratesofcelleliminationwhere simultaneousdeathof neighboringcells could impair epithelial sealing. Here, using the Drosophila pupal notum(a single-layer epithelium) and a newoptogenetic tool to trigger caspase activation and cell extrusion, we first showed that death of clusters of at least three cells impaired epithelial sealing; yet, such clusters were almost never observed in vivo. Accordingly, statistical analysis and simulations of cell death distribution highlighted a transient and local protective phase occurring near every cell death. This protection is driven by a transient activation of ERK in cells neighboring extruding cells, which inhibits caspase activation and prevents elimination of cells in clusters. This suggests that the robustness of epithelia with high rates of cell elimination is an emerging property of local ERK feedback.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据