4.8 Article

Cell size controlled in plants using DNA content as an internal scale

期刊

SCIENCE
卷 372, 期 6547, 页码 1176-+

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.abb4348

关键词

-

资金

  1. John Innes Foundation
  2. UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council Institute Strategic Programme Grant [BB/J004588/1]
  3. European Commission Marie-Curie Fellowship [838718]
  4. European Commission [ERC-2018-AdG_833617]
  5. Ministry of Science and Innovation [RTI2018-094793-B-I00]
  6. Fundacion Ramon Areces
  7. Banco de Santander
  8. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [838718] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study reveals that cell size variability in the Arabidopsis shoot stem cell niche is corrected by adjusting the growth period before DNA synthesis. KRP4 and FBL17 proteins play key roles in removing excess cell cycle regulators, ensuring daughter cells are born with comparable amounts of KRP4. This suggests a potential mechanism where a cell cycle regulator associated with mitotic chromosomes can read DNA content as a cell size-independent scale.
How eukaryotic cells assess and maintain sizes specific for their species and cell type remains unclear. We show that in the Arabidopsis shoot stem cell niche, cell size variability caused by asymmetric divisions is corrected by adjusting the growth period before DNA synthesis. KIP-related protein 4 (KRP4) inhibits progression to DNA synthesis and associates with mitotic chromosomes. The F BOX-LIKE 17 (FBL17) protein removes excess KRP4. Consequently, daughter cells are born with comparable amounts of KRP4. Inhibitor dilution models predicted that KRP4 inherited through chromatin would robustly regulate size, whereas inheritance of excess free KRP4 would disrupt size homeostasis, as confirmed by mutant analyses. We propose that a cell cycle regulator, stabilized by association with mitotic chromosomes, reads DNA content as a cell size-independent scale.

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

4.8
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