16
THE NETWORK ARCHITECTURE OF EMBRYO DEVELOPMENTAL REGULATION Bradly Alicea 1 , Richard Gordon 2 1 OpenWorm (http://www.openworm.org ), [email protected] 2 Embryogenesis Center, Gulf Specimen Aquarium & Marine Laboratory, 222 Clark Drive Panacea, FL 32346 USA, [email protected] We can learn new information about the cellular differentiation process by: * transforming a lineage tree of Caenorhabditis elegans into an undirected complex network [1]. * observing and measuring connectivity of that network using a distance-based metric. adding three-dimensional (positional) information [2] to a model of cell lineage (a five-dimensional data structure) Provides both an alternative and a related method to lineage mapping and lineage tree reconstruction [3].

The Network Architecture of Embryo Developmental Regulation

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

THE NETWORK ARCHITECTURE OF

EMBRYO DEVELOPMENTAL REGULATION

Bradly Alicea1, Richard Gordon2

1 OpenWorm (http://www.openworm.org), [email protected]

2 Embryogenesis Center, Gulf Specimen Aquarium & Marine Laboratory, 222 Clark Drive Panacea, FL 32346 USA, [email protected]

We can learn new information about the cellular differentiation process by:

* transforming a lineage tree of Caenorhabditis elegans into an undirected complex

network [1].

* observing and measuring connectivity of that network using a distance-based

metric.

• adding three-dimensional (positional) information [2] to a model of cell lineage (a

five-dimensional data structure)

Provides both an alternative and a related method to lineage mapping and lineage

tree reconstruction [3].

Our approach is based on a multidimensional data structure:

Spatial position (x, y, z) and cell lineage (t, i) may provide complementary information, or

may reveal unique characteristics for certain groups of cells (sublineage, other functional

characteristics).

8 terminal cells (N = 15), C. elegans cell lineage, WormWeb.org

http://wormweb.org/celllineage#c=P0&z=1

Traditional lineage tree

Adapted from: http://courses.biology.utah.edu/

bastiani/3230/DB%20Lecture/Lectures/b12Worm.html

Traditional anatomical representation

5-layered tree

7-layered tree

8-layered tree

Magenta points are cells descended from the AB lineage, blue points are cells

descended from the P1 lineage.

Degree of spatial separability greatest in 5-layered tree, most overlap seen in 8-layered

tree.

The Worm and the Embryogenetic

Hairball

Complex networks are used in analyzing the

Caenorhabditis elegans connectome [4] and

Ciona intestinalis cell-cell contacts [5]:

3-D spatial information can be converted to a

series of Euclidean distances.

Examine this scalable and prunable

interactome (analogous to paracrine

signaling) at different spatial scales.

* exclude arcs that connect cell that are too

far away (scalable).

* exclude arcs that connect to cells that

possess or do not possess a given criterion

(e.g. size limit).

Distances can be used to establish “spheres of signaling influence” for a given cell.

Interactions [6] can be real (e.g. two cells alive at the same time) or virtual (e.g. two

cells that share an ancestor-descendent relationship, one of which no longer exists).

COURTESY: diagram in [7].

TOP LEFT: Maximum length (black), cell-cell distance (red).

BOTTOM LEFT: concentric radii from a single cell.

Step 1: find interactome amongst a subtree of cells. Plot out significant distances

in 3-D space.

In this case, we can see the undirected connections (adjacency measured in relative

Euclidean distances and angles) amongst 15 cells.

Embryonic cells in a virtual space centered

upon 0,0,0 and their relative 3-D position.

Connectivity (adjacency) between cells

in AB sublineage to a lineage depth of 4.

Connectivity (adjacency) amongst 224

nodes at a threshold of 0.95 (5% of

maximum distance in embryo structure)

Step 2: expand interactome-finding methodology to the entire tree. Below right is a

224-cell network with a distance threshold of 0.05 of the maximum distance coefficient.

5-dimensional Data Structure

A generalized parameter space based on

observations across embryos (x, y, z)

x (anterior-posterior axis)

y (left-right axis)

z (dorsal-ventral axis)

t (time – relative or absolute)

i (order of nodes at level t)

t

i

xy

z

A spatially-independent parameter space

ordered by some organizational criterion

(e.g. cell size, cell location)

AB P1

00 01 10 11

P0

4 level lineage tree: N=30.

AB subtree (blue), n=15;

P1 subtree (yellow), n=15.

Distance threshold of 0.75 (all

cells within 25% the maximum

distance in embryo structure).

Intra-subtree interaction

(AB, ABar)

Intra-subtree interaction

(P4, P2)

Inter-subtree interaction

(MSa, ABa)

AB

SubtreeP1

Subtree

COURTESY: Bhatla, N. Interactive C. elegans cell lineage. http://wormweb.org/celllineage#c=P0&z=1

What do distance-based interactions look like relative to the lineage tree?

ABa x ABpl

(intra-subtree

interaction)

AB x ABa

(lineage-based

relationship)

ABp x EMS

(inter-subtree

interaction)

P1 x MS

(intra-subtree

interaction)MS x EMS

(lineage-based

relationship)

Levels between cells

in interaction (tree

depth)

Intra-subtree

interactions (AB)

Intra-subtree

Interactions (P1)

Inter-subtree

Interactions

0 57% 31% 12%

1 43% 35% 22%

2 27% 28% 45%

3-7 13% 13% 74%

What is the proportion of potential interactions within and between

subtrees?

Pairwise network that includes all

cells from Division Event 3 to

Division Event 8 in lineage tree (N =

224).

Distance threshold of 0.75 (all cells

within 25% the maximum distance in

embryo structure).

P1

subtree

AB

subtree

For all in

subtree [AB]

For all in

subtree [P1]

Observe different patterns of connectivity within subtrees, sort by lineage depth of cell:

Do the “intra-” patterns of connectivity have

any biological significance?

* no preferential hubs (as measured by

connectivity distribution, network statistics).

* scale-free network topology, with some

influence of ancestral cells.

No decrease in connectivity with lineage depth,

but some sublineages (MS, ABpr) yield

outliers.

Correcting topology for effects of cell lineage (factor in a two-dimensional

measure of distance). Factor of (t,i)

t

i

0 1

0 1 2 3

1

2

(1, 2.5)

Uncorrected topology (n=30),threshold of 0.85

Network of t,i only (n=30),threshold of 0.85

Network based on x,y,z,t,ionly (n=30), threshold of 0.85

0

Clique AnalysisABal ABar ABpl ABpr E MS C P3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

0

1

2

3

4

5

NUMBER OF CLIQUE NODES

FROM SUBTREE

A clique analysis was conducted to find subsets of

vertices where every node is fully connected with the

other nodes in that subset.

Clique analysis conducted on a network of 224 cells,

distance threshold of 0.95 (0.05 total length).

The optimal clique size was determined by balancing the

maximum number of cliques found with the largest

possible clique size itself.

117 cliques (out of 1530 total cell pairs) of size five (5)

were generated.

A heat map was constructed number of clique members

in a sublineage of any one cell in the 8-cell embryo (e.g.

ABal, ABar, ABpl, ABpr, E, MS, C, P3).

Generated cliques most often included more than one

cells from sublineages ABpr and C, least often included

cells from sublineage ABal.

A comparison between Caenorhabditis elegans and Mus

Musculus [8]

Sublineage

(AB, blue)

Sublineage

(P1, red)

Trophectoderm

(blue)

Inner Cell

Mass (red)

Model picks up geometry of

blastocoel, inner vs. outer

trophectoderm.

Model picks up geometry of axial

segregation of AB vs. non-AB

cells, cells on boundary.

REFERENCES:[1] Barabasi, A.L. and Oltvai, Z.N. (2004). Network biology: understanding the cell's functional organization. Nature ReviewsGenetics, 5, 101-113.

[2] Dataset: Bao et.al, Developmental Biology, 318(1), 65-72 (2008); Murray et.al, Genome Research, 22(7), 1282-1294(2012).

[3] Wasserstrom, A. et.al (2008). Reconstruction of Cell Lineage Trees in Mice. PLoS One, 3(4), e1939.

[4] Jabr, F. (2012). The Connectome Debate: Is Mapping the Mind of a Worm Worth It? Scientific American, October 2.

[5] Brozovic, M. et.al (2015). ANISEED 2015: a digital framework for the comparative developmental biology of ascidians.Nucleic Acids Research, 44(D1), D808-D818.

[6] Schnabel R. et.al (2006). Global cell sorting in the C. elegans embryo defines a new mechanism for pattern formation.Developmental Biology, 294(2), 418-431.

[7] Gonczy, P. and Rose, L.S. (2005). Asymmetric Cell Division. WormBook,http://www.wormbook.org/chapters/www_asymcelldiv/asymcelldiv.html

[8] Dataset: Strnad, P. et.al (2016). Inverted light-sheet microscope for imaging mouse pre-implantation development. NatureMethods, 13, 139-142.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:

Networks rendered in Gephi 0.8.2

Dr. Zhirong Bao and Dr. Stephen Larson (C. elegans embryo data)

Comments and Discussion

DevoWorm project:http://devoworm.weebly.com