Phenotypic plasticity and effects of selection on cell division symmetry in Escherichia coli.
Aging has been demonstrated in unicellular organisms and is presumably due to asymmetric distribution of damaged proteins and other components during cell division. Whether the asymmetry-induced aging is inevitable or an adaptive and adaptable response is debated. Although asymmetric division leads to aging and death of some cells, it increases the effective growth rate of the population as shown by theoretical and empirical studies. Mathematical models predict on the other hand, that if the cells divide symmetrically, cellular aging may be delayed or absent, growth rate will be reduced but growth yield will increase at optimum repair rates. Therefore in nutritionally dilute (oligotrophic) environments, where growth yield may be more critical for survival, symmetric division may get selected. These predictions have not been empirically tested so far. We report here that Escherichia coli grown in oligotrophic environments had greater morphological and functional symmetry in cell division. Both phenotypic plasticity and genetic selection appeared to shape cell division time asymmetry but plasticity was lost on prolonged selection. Lineages selected on high nutrient concentration showed greater frequency of presumably old or dead cells. Further, there was a negative correlation between cell division time asymmetry and growth yield but there was no significant correlation between asymmetry and growth rate. The results suggest that cellular aging driven by asymmetric division may not be hardwired but shows substantial plasticity as well as evolvability in response to the nutritional environment.
Department of Microbiology, Abasaheb Garware College, Pune, India.
Uttara N
UN
Lele
Ulfat I
UI
Baig
Milind G
MG
Watve
D002455:Cell Division; D016922:Cellular Senescence; D004926:Escherichia coli / Q000166:cytology* / Q000254:growth & development; D005502:Food; D008954:Models, Biological; D010641:Phenotype; D012641:Selection, Genetic
Science. 2000 Feb 25;287(5457):1427-30
10688781
Science. 2001 Apr 20;292(5516):504-7
11283355
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2001 Jan;2(1):11-20
11413461
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Feb 26;105(8):3076-81
18287048
J Mol Biol. 2009 Sep 25;392(3):589-601
19596340
PLoS Biol. 2008 Jun 24;6(6):e150
18593213
J Bacteriol. 2008 Sep;190(18):6070-5
18621895
Science. 2003 Mar 14;299(5613):1751-3
12610228
J Bacteriol. 2008 Oct;190(20):6609-14
18689474
Yeast. 1999 Oct;15(14):1511-8
10514568
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Oct 3;103(40):14831-5
17001004
PLoS Biol. 2005 Feb;3(2):e45
15685293
Mech Ageing Dev. 2006 Oct;127(10):786-93
16899276
Aging Cell. 2007 Apr;6(2):235-44
17376147
Mech Ageing Dev. 2005 Sep;126(9):1011-6
15893805
Ageing Res Rev. 2007 Aug;6(2):128-40
17512264
J Bacteriol. 1995 Oct;177(19):5707-10
7559363
J Exp Med. 2004 Feb 2;199(3):295-302
14744992
Biogerontology. 2006 Jun;7(3):165-8
16858629
Q Rev Biol. 2008 Sep;83(3):243-56
18792661
Development. 1997 Jun;124(12):2463-76
9199372
Mech Ageing Dev. 1980 Jan;12(1):47-52
6986516
Science. 2003 Jun 20;300(5627):1920
12817142
PLoS Genet. 2007 May 25;3(5):e84
17530929
EMBO J. 2010 Mar 3;29(5):910-23
20094032
Cell. 2005 Nov 18;123(4):655-67
16286010