Chemotaxis Explained

Chemotaxis (from chemo- + taxis) is the movement of an organism or entity in response to a chemical stimulus.[1] Somatic cells, bacteria, and other single-cell or multicellular organisms direct their movements according to certain chemicals in their environment. This is important for bacteria to find food (e.g., glucose) by swimming toward the highest concentration of food molecules, or to flee from poisons (e.g., phenol). In multicellular organisms, chemotaxis is critical to early development (e.g., movement of sperm towards the egg during fertilization) and development (e.g., migration of neurons or lymphocytes) as well as in normal function and health (e.g., migration of leukocytes during injury or infection).[2] In addition, it has been recognized that mechanisms that allow chemotaxis in animals can be subverted during cancer metastasis,[3] and the aberrant change of the overall property of these networks, which control chemotaxis, can lead to carcinogenesis.[4] The aberrant chemotaxis of leukocytes and lymphocytes also contribute to inflammatory diseases such as atherosclerosis, asthma, and arthritis.[5] [6] [7] [8] Sub-cellular components, such as the polarity patch generated by mating yeast, may also display chemotactic behavior.[9]

Positive chemotaxis occurs if the movement is toward a higher concentration of the chemical in question; negative chemotaxis if the movement is in the opposite direction. Chemically prompted kinesis (randomly directed or nondirectional) can be called chemokinesis.

History of chemotaxis research

Although migration of cells was detected from the early days of the development of microscopy by Leeuwenhoek, a Caltech lecture regarding chemotaxis propounds that 'erudite description of chemotaxis was only first made by T. W. Engelmann (1881) and W. F. Pfeffer (1884) in bacteria, and H. S. Jennings (1906) in ciliates'.[10] The Nobel Prize laureate I. Metchnikoff also contributed to the study of the field during 1882 to 1886, with investigations of the process as an initial step of phagocytosis.[11] The significance of chemotaxis in biology and clinical pathology was widely accepted in the 1930s, and the most fundamental definitions underlying the phenomenon were drafted by this time. The most important aspects in quality control of chemotaxis assays were described by H. Harris in the 1950s.[12] In the 1960s and 1970s, the revolution of modern cell biology and biochemistry provided a series of novel techniques that became available to investigate the migratory responder cells and subcellular fractions responsible for chemotactic activity.[13] The availability of this technology led to the discovery of C5a, a major chemotactic factor involved in acute inflammation. The pioneering works of J. Adler modernized Pfeffer's capillary assay and represented a significant turning point in understanding the whole process of intracellular signal transduction of bacteria.[14] [15]

Bacterial chemotaxis—general characteristics

Some bacteria, such as E. coli, have several flagella per cell (4–10 typically). These can rotate in two ways:

  1. Counter-clockwise rotation aligns the flagella into a single rotating bundle, causing the bacterium to swim in a straight line; and
  2. Clockwise rotation breaks the flagella bundle apart such that each flagellum points in a different direction, causing the bacterium to tumble in place.[16]

The directions of rotation are given for an observer outside the cell looking down the flagella toward the cell.[17]

Behavior

The overall movement of a bacterium is the result of alternating tumble and swim phases, called run-and-tumble motion.[18] As a result, the trajectory of a bacterium swimming in a uniform environment will form a random walk with relatively straight swims interrupted by random tumbles that reorient the bacterium.[19] Bacteria such as E. coli are unable to choose the direction in which they swim, and are unable to swim in a straight line for more than a few seconds due to rotational diffusion; in other words, bacteria "forget" the direction in which they are going. By repeatedly evaluating their course, and adjusting if they are moving in the wrong direction, bacteria can direct their random walk motion toward favorable locations.[20]

In the presence of a chemical gradient bacteria will chemotax, or direct their overall motion based on the gradient. If the bacterium senses that it is moving in the correct direction (toward attractant/away from repellent), it will keep swimming in a straight line for a longer time before tumbling; however, if it is moving in the wrong direction, it will tumble sooner. Bacteria like E. coli use temporal sensing to decide whether their situation is improving or not, and in this way, find the location with the highest concentration of attractant, detecting even small differences in concentration.[21]

This biased random walk is a result of simply choosing between two methods of random movement; namely tumbling and straight swimming.[22] The helical nature of the individual flagellar filament is critical for this movement to occur. The protein structure that makes up the flagellar filament, flagellin, is conserved among all flagellated bacteria.[23] Vertebrates seem to have taken advantage of this fact by possessing an immune receptor (TLR5) designed to recognize this conserved protein.[24]

As in many instances in biology, there are bacteria that do not follow this rule. Many bacteria, such as Vibrio, are monoflagellated and have a single flagellum at one pole of the cell. Their method of chemotaxis is different. Others possess a single flagellum that is kept inside the cell wall. These bacteria move by spinning the whole cell, which is shaped like a corkscrew.[25]

Signal transduction

Chemical gradients are sensed through multiple transmembrane receptors, called methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCPs), which vary in the molecules that they detect.[26] Thousands of MCP receptors are known to be encoded across the bacterial kingdom.[27] These receptors may bind attractants or repellents directly or indirectly through interaction with proteins of periplasmatic space.[28] The signals from these receptors are transmitted across the plasma membrane into the cytosol, where Che proteins are activated.[29] The Che proteins alter the tumbling frequency, and alter the receptors.[29]

Flagellum regulation

The proteins CheW and CheA bind to the receptor. The absence of receptor activation results in autophosphorylation in the histidine kinase, CheA, at a single highly conserved histidine residue.[30] CheA, in turn, transfers phosphoryl groups to conserved aspartate residues in the response regulators CheB and CheY; CheA is a histidine kinase and it does not actively transfer the phosphoryl group, rather, the response regulator CheB takes the phosphoryl group from CheA. This mechanism of signal transduction is called a two-component system, and it is a common form of signal transduction in bacteria. CheY induces tumbling by interacting with the flagellar switch protein FliM, inducing a change from counter-clockwise to clockwise rotation of the flagellum. Change in the rotation state of a single flagellum can disrupt the entire flagella bundle and cause a tumble.

Receptor regulation

CheB, when activated by CheA, acts as a methylesterase, removing methyl groups from glutamate residues on the cytosolic side of the receptor; it works antagonistically with CheR, a methyltransferase, which adds methyl residues to the same glutamate residues. If the level of an attractant remains high, the level of phosphorylation of CheA (and, therefore, CheY and CheB) will remain low, the cell will swim smoothly, and the level of methylation of the MCPs will increase (because CheB-P is not present to demethylate).[31] The MCPs no longer respond to the attractant when they are fully methylated; therefore, even though the level of attractant might remain high, the level of CheA-P (and CheB-P) increases and the cell begins to tumble.[31] The MCPs can be demethylated by CheB-P, and, when this happens, the receptors can once again respond to attractants. The situation is the opposite with regard to repellents: fully methylated MCPs respond best to repellents, while least-methylated MCPs respond worst to repellents. This regulation allows the bacterium to 'remember' chemical concentrations from the recent past, a few seconds, and compare them to those it is currently experiencing, thus 'know' whether it is traveling up or down a gradient.[32] that bacteria have to chemical gradients, other mechanisms are involved in increasing the absolute value of the sensitivity on a given background. Well-established examples are the ultra-sensitive response of the motor to the CheY-P signal, and the clustering of chemoreceptors.[33] [34]

Chemoattractants and chemorepellents

Chemoattractants and chemorepellents are inorganic or organic substances possessing chemotaxis-inducer effect in motile cells. These chemotactic ligands create chemical concentration gradients that organisms, prokaryotic and eukaryotic, move toward or away from, respectively.[35] Effects of chemoattractants are elicited via chemoreceptors such as methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCP).[36] MCPs in E.coli include Tar, Tsr, Trg and Tap.[37] Chemoattracttants to Trg include ribose and galactose with phenol as a chemorepellent. Tap and Tsr recognize dipeptides and serine as chemoattractants, respectively.[37]

Chemoattractants or chemorepellents bind MCPs at its extracellular domain; an intracellular signaling domain relays the changes in concentration of these chemotactic ligands to downstream proteins like that of CheA which then relays this signal to flagellar motors via phosphorylated CheY (CheY-P). CheY-P can then control flagellar rotation influencing the direction of cell motility.[36]

For E.coli, S. meliloti, and R. spheroides, the binding of chemoattractants to MCPs inhibit CheA and therefore CheY-P activity, resulting in smooth runs, but for B. substilis, CheA activity increases.[36] Methylation events in E.coli cause MCPs to have lower affinity to chemoattractants which causes increased activity of CheA and CheY-P resulting in tumbles. In this way cells are able to adapt to the immediate chemoattractant concentration and detect further changes to modulate cell motility.[36]

Chemoattractants in eukaryotes are well characterized for immune cells. Formyl peptides, such as fMLF, attract leukocytes such as neutrophils and macrophages, causing movement toward infection sites.[38] Non-acylated methioninyl peptides do not act as chemoattractants to neutrophils and macrophages. Leukocytes also move toward chemoattractants C5a, a complement component, and pathogen-specific ligands on bacteria.

Mechanisms concerning chemorepellents are less known than chemoattractants. Although chemorepellents work to confer an avoidance response in organisms, Tetrahymena thermophila adapt to a chemorepellent, Netrin-1 peptide, within 10 minutes of exposure; however, exposure to chemorepellents such as GTP, PACAP-38, and nociceptin show no such adaptations.[39] GTP and ATP are chemorepellents in micro-molar concentrations to both Tetrahymena and Paramecium. These organisms avoid these molecules by producing avoiding reactions to re-orient themselves away from the gradient.[40]

Eukaryotic chemotaxis

The mechanism of chemotaxis that eukaryotic cells employ is quite different from that in the bacteria E. coli; however, sensing of chemical gradients is still a crucial step in the process.[41] Due to their small size and other biophysical constraints, E. coli cannot directly detect a concentration gradient.[42] Instead, they employ temporal gradient sensing, where they move over larger distances several times their own width and measure the rate at which perceived chemical concentration changes.[43] [44]

Eukaryotic cells are much larger than prokaryotes and have receptors embedded uniformly throughout the cell membrane. Eukaryotic chemotaxis involves detecting a concentration gradient spatially by comparing the asymmetric activation of these receptors at the different ends of the cell. Activation of these receptors results in migration towards chemoattractants, or away from chemorepellants. In mating yeast, which are non-motile, patches of polarity proteins on the cell cortex can relocate in a chemotactic fashion up pheromone gradients.[45] [9]

It has also been shown that both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells are capable of chemotactic memory.[46] In prokaryotes, this mechanism involves the methylation of receptors called methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCPs). This results in their desensitization and allows prokaryotes to "remember" and adapt to a chemical gradient. In contrast, chemotactic memory in eukaryotes can be explained by the Local Excitation Global Inhibition (LEGI) model.[46] [47] LEGI involves the balance between a fast excitation and delayed inhibition which controls downstream signaling such as Ras activation and PIP3 production.[48]

Levels of receptors, intracellular signalling pathways and the effector mechanisms all represent diverse, eukaryotic-type components. In eukaryotic unicellular cells, amoeboid movement and cilium or the eukaryotic flagellum are the main effectors (e.g., Amoeba or Tetrahymena).[49] [50] Some eukaryotic cells of higher vertebrate origin, such as immune cells also move to where they need to be. Besides immune competent cells (granulocyte, monocyte, lymphocyte) a large group of cells—considered previously to be fixed into tissues—are also motile in special physiological (e.g., mast cell, fibroblast, endothelial cells) or pathological conditions (e.g., metastases).[51] Chemotaxis has high significance in the early phases of embryogenesis as development of germ layers is guided by gradients of signal molecules.[52] [53]

Motility

Unlike motility in bacterial chemotaxis, the mechanism by which eukaryotic cells physically move is unclear. There appear to be mechanisms by which an external chemotactic gradient is sensed and turned into an intracellular Ras and PIP3 gradients, which results in a gradient and the activation of a signaling pathway, culminating in the polymerisation of actin filaments. The growing distal end of actin filaments develops connections with the internal surface of the plasma membrane via different sets of peptides and results in the formation of anterior pseudopods and posterior uropods.[54] [55] Cilia of eukaryotic cells can also produce chemotaxis; in this case, it is mainly a Ca2+-dependent induction of the microtubular system of the basal body and the beat of the 9 + 2 microtubules within cilia. The orchestrated beating of hundreds of cilia is synchronized by a submembranous system built between basal bodies.The details of the signaling pathways are still not totally clear.

Chemotaxis-related migratory responses

Chemotaxis refers to the directional migration of cells in response to chemical gradients; several variations of chemical-induced migration exist as listed below.

Receptors

In general, eukaryotic cells sense the presence of chemotactic stimuli through the use of 7-transmembrane (or serpentine) heterotrimeric G-protein-coupled receptors, a class representing a significant portion of the genome.[58] Some members of this gene superfamily are used in eyesight (rhodopsins) as well as in olfaction (smelling).[59] [60] The main classes of chemotaxis receptors are triggered by:

However, induction of a wide set of membrane receptors (e.g., cyclic nucleotides, amino acids, insulin, vasoactive peptides) also elicit migration of the cell.[62]

Chemotactic selection

While some chemotaxis receptors are expressed in the surface membrane with long-term characteristics, as they are determined genetically, others have short-term dynamics, as they are assembled ad hoc in the presence of the ligand.[63] The diverse features of the chemotaxis receptors and ligands allows for the possibility of selecting chemotactic responder cells with a simple chemotaxis assay By chemotactic selection, we can determine whether a still-uncharacterized molecule acts via the long- or the short-term receptor pathway.[64] The term chemotactic selection is also used to designate a technique that separates eukaryotic or prokaryotic cells according to their chemotactic responsiveness to selector ligands.[65]

Chemotactic ligands

The number of molecules capable of eliciting chemotactic responses is relatively high, and we can distinguish primary and secondary chemotactic molecules. The main groups of the primary ligands are as follows:

Chemotactic range fitting

Chemotactic responses elicited by ligand-receptor interactions vary with the concentration of the ligand. Investigations of ligand families (e.g. amino acids or oligopeptides) demonstrates that chemoattractant activity occurs over a wide range, while chemorepellent activities have narrow ranges.[72]

Clinical significance

A changed migratory potential of cells has relatively high importance in the development of several clinical symptoms and syndromes.Altered chemotactic activity of extracellular (e.g., Escherichia coli) or intracellular (e.g., Listeria monocytogenes) pathogens itself represents a significant clinical target. Modification of endogenous chemotactic ability of these microorganisms by pharmaceutical agents can decrease or inhibit the ratio of infections or spreading of infectious diseases.Apart from infections, there are some other diseases wherein impaired chemotaxis is the primary etiological factor, as in Chédiak–Higashi syndrome, where giant intracellular vesicles inhibit normal migration of cells.

Chemotaxis increased Chemotaxis decreased
Infections Inflammations AIDS, Brucellosis
Chemotaxis results in the disease — Chédiak–Higashi syndrome, Kartagener syndrome
Chemotaxis is affected Atherosclerosis, arthritis, periodontitis, psoriasis, reperfusion injury, metastatic tumorsMultiple sclerosis, Hodgkin disease, male infertility
Intoxications Hg and Cr salts, ozone

Mathematical models

Several mathematical models of chemotaxis were developed depending on the type of

Although interactions of the factors listed above make the behavior of the solutions of mathematical models of chemotaxis rather complex, it is possible to describe the basic phenomenon of chemotaxis-driven motion in a straightforward way. Indeed, let us denote with

\varphi

the spatially non-uniform concentration of the chemo-attractant and

\nabla\varphi

as its gradient. Then the chemotactic cellular flow (also called current)

{\bfJ}

that is generated by the chemotaxis is linked to the above gradient by the law:[73] where

C

is the spatial density of the cells and

\chi

is the so-called 'Chemotactic coefficient' -

\chi

is often not constant, but a decreasing function of the chemo-attractant. For some quantity

\rho

that is subject to total flux

{\bfJ}

and generation/destruction term

S

, it is possible to formulate a continuity equation:

{\partial\rho\over{\partialt}}+\nabla ⋅ {\bfJ}=S

where

\nabla ⋅

is the divergence. This general equation applies to both the cell density and the chemo-attractant. Therefore, incorporating a diffusion flux into the total flux term, the interactions between these quantities are governed by a set of coupled reaction-diffusion partial differential equations describing the change in

C

and

\varphi

:where

f(C)

describes the growth in cell density,

g(\varphi,C)

is the kinetics/source term for the chemo-attractant, and the diffusion coefficients for cell density and the chemo-attractant are respectively

DC

and

D\varphi

.

Spatial ecology of soil microorganisms is a function of their chemotactic sensitivities towards substrate and fellow organisms.[74] The chemotactic behavior of the bacteria was proven to lead to non-trivial population patterns even in the absence of environmental heterogeneities. The presence of structural pore scale heterogeneities has an extra impact on the emerging bacterial patterns.

Measurement of chemotaxis

See main article: Chemotaxis assay. A wide range of techniques is available to evaluate chemotactic activity of cells or the chemoattractant and chemorepellent character of ligands.The basic requirements of the measurement are as follows:

Despite the fact that an ideal chemotaxis assay is still not available, there are several protocols and pieces of equipment that offer good correspondence with the conditions described above. The most commonly used are summarised in the table below:

Artificial chemotactic systems

Chemical robots that use artificial chemotaxis to navigate autonomously have been designed.[75] [76] Applications include targeted delivery of drugs in the body.[77] More recently, enzyme molecules have also shown positive chemotactic behavior in the gradient of their substrates.[78] The thermodynamically-favorable binding of enzymes to their specific substrates is recognized as the origin of enzymatic chemotaxis.[79] Additionally, enzymes in cascades have also shown substrate-driven chemotactic aggregation.[80]

Apart from active enzymes, non-reacting molecules also show chemotactic behavior. This has been demonstrated by using dye molecules that move directionally in gradients of polymer solution through favorable hydrophobic interactions.[81]

See also

Further reading

External links

Notes and References

  1. Chemotaxis. 6. 77.
  2. de Oliveira S, Rosowski EE, Huttenlocher A . Neutrophil migration in infection and wound repair: going forward in reverse . Nature Reviews. Immunology . 16 . 6 . 378–91 . May 2016 . 27231052 . 5367630 . 10.1038/nri.2016.49 .
  3. Stuelten CH, Parent CA, Montell DJ . Cell motility in cancer invasion and metastasis: insights from simple model organisms . Nature Reviews. Cancer . 18 . 5 . 296–312 . May 2018 . 29546880 . 6790333 . 10.1038/nrc.2018.15 .
  4. Zhan H, Bhattacharya S, Cai H, Iglesias PA, Huang CH, Devreotes PN . An excitable Ras/PI3K/ERK signaling network controls migration and oncogenic transformation in epithelial cells . Developmental Cell . 54 . 5 . 608–623 . September 2020 . 32877650 . 10.1016/j.devcel.2020.08.001 . 7505206 .
  5. Li J, Ley K . Lymphocyte migration into atherosclerotic plaque . Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology . 35 . 1 . 40–9 . January 2015 . 25301842 . 4429868 . 10.1161/ATVBAHA.114.303227 .
  6. Gelfand EW . Importance of the leukotriene B4-BLT1 and LTB4-BLT2 pathways in asthma . Seminars in Immunology . 33 . 44–51 . October 2017 . 29042028 . 5679233 . 10.1016/j.smim.2017.08.005 .
  7. Planagumà A, Domènech T, Pont M, Calama E, García-González V, López R, Aulí M, López M, Fonquerna S, Ramos I, de Alba J, Nueda A, Prats N, Segarra V, Miralpeix M, Lehner MD . Combined anti CXC receptors 1 and 2 therapy is a promising anti-inflammatory treatment for respiratory diseases by reducing neutrophil migration and activation . Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics . 34 . 37–45 . October 2015 . 26271598 . 10.1016/j.pupt.2015.08.002 .
  8. Rana AK, Li Y, Dang Q, Yang F . Monocytes in rheumatoid arthritis: Circulating precursors of macrophages and osteoclasts and, their heterogeneity and plasticity role in RA pathogenesis . International Immunopharmacology . 65 . 348–359 . December 2018 . 30366278 . 10.1016/j.intimp.2018.10.016 . 53116963 .
  9. Ghose D, Jacobs K, Ramirez S, Elston T, Lew D . Chemotactic movement of a polarity site enables yeast cells to find their mates . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 118 . 22 . e2025445118 . June 2021 . 34050026 . 8179161 . 10.1073/pnas.2025445118 . free . 2021PNAS..11825445G .
  10. Web site: Phillips R . How Cells Decide Where to Go: The Case of Bacterial Chemotaxis . Chemotaxis Lecture . 2007 . https://web.archive.org/web/20100619184346/http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/courses/aph161/2007/lectures/ChemotaxisLecture.pdf . 19 June 2010 . 15 April 2017 .
  11. Encyclopedia: Élie Metchnikoff . 12 May 2024 . Encyclopædia Britannica . Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. .
  12. Web site: Roberts B, Chung E, Yu SH, Li SZ . Mathematical Method of Bioengineering Group Presentation . Integrated Systems Neuroengineering . University of California - San Diego. Keller-Segel Models for Chemotaxis . 2012 . https://web.archive.org/web/20170829175316/http://www.isn.ucsd.edu/courses/beng221/problems/2012/BENG221_Project%20-%20Roberts%20Chung%20Yu%20Li.pdf . 29 August 2017 . 1 April 2017 .
  13. Snyderman R, Gewurz H, Mergenhagen SE . Interactions of the complement system with endotoxic lipopolysaccharide. Generation of a factor chemotactic for polymorphonuclear leukocytes . The Journal of Experimental Medicine . 128 . 2 . 259–75 . August 1968 . 4873021 . 2138524 . 10.1084/jem.128.2.259 .
  14. Adler J, Tso WW . 7221477 . "Decision"-making in bacteria: chemotactic response of Escherichia coli to conflicting stimuli . Science . 184 . 4143 . 1292–4 . June 1974 . 4598187 . 10.1126/science.184.4143.1292 . 1974Sci...184.1292A .
  15. Book: Berg H . Howard C. . Berg . 35733036 . 2004 . E. coli in Motion . Springer . 15, 19–29 . 0-387-00888-8 . 10.1007/b97370 . Biological and Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering .
  16. Yuan J, Fahrner KA, Turner L, Berg HC . Asymmetry in the clockwise and counterclockwise rotation of the bacterial flagellar motor . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 107 . 29 . 12846–9 . July 2010 . 20615986 . 2919929 . 10.1073/pnas.1007333107 . 2010PNAS..10712846Y . free .
  17. Web site: Bacterial Chemotaxis. https://web.archive.org/web/20170506024623/http://www.physik.uni-muenchen.de/lehre/vorlesungen/wise_16_17/Biophysics_of_Systems/013_BakterChemotaxis_DB_WS16.pdf . 2017-05-06 . live.
  18. Berg HC, Brown DA . 1909173 . Chemotaxis in Escherichia coli analysed by Three-dimensional Tracking . Nature . 239 . 5374 . 500–504 . October 1972 . 10.1038/239500a0 . 4563019 . 1972Natur.239..500B .
  19. Sourjik V, Wingreen NS . Responding to chemical gradients: bacterial chemotaxis . Current Opinion in Cell Biology . 24. 2. 262–268 . April 2012 . 10.1016/j.ceb.2011.11.008 . 22169400 . 3320702 .
  20. Book: Berg HC . Random walks in biology. 1993. 83–94. Princeton Univ. Press. Princeton, NJ. 978-0-691-00064-0. Expanded, rev..
  21. Sourjik V, Wingreen N. April 2012. Responding to Chemical Gradients: Bacterial Chemotaxis . Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 24 . 2. 262–8. 10.1016/j.ceb.2011.11.008. 22169400. 3320702.
  22. Macnab RM, Koshland DE . The gradient-sensing mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 69 . 9 . 2509–2512 . September 1972 . 4560688 . 426976 . 10.1073/pnas.69.9.2509 . free . 1972PNAS...69.2509M .
  23. Nedeljković M, Sastre DE, Sundberg EJ . Bacterial Flagellar Filament: A Supramolecular Multifunctional Nanostructure . International Journal of Molecular Sciences . 22 . 14 . 7521 . July 2021 . 34299141 . 8306008 . 10.3390/ijms22147521 . free .
  24. Zhong M, Yan H, Li Y . Flagellin: a unique microbe-associated molecular pattern and a multi-faceted immunomodulator . Cellular & Molecular Immunology . 14 . 10 . 862–864 . October 2017 . 28845044 . 5649114 . 10.1038/cmi.2017.78 .
  25. Book: Berg HC . E. coli in motion . 2003 . 978-0-387-00888-2 . Springer . New York, NY .
  26. Wadhams GH, Armitage JP . Making sense of it all: bacterial chemotaxis . Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology . 5 . 12 . 1024–1037 . December 2004 . 15573139 . 10.1038/nrm1524 . 205493118 .
  27. Galperin MY . A census of membrane-bound and intracellular signal transduction proteins in bacteria: bacterial IQ, extroverts and introverts . BMC Microbiology . 5 . 35 . June 2005 . 15955239 . 1183210 . 10.1186/1471-2180-5-35 . free .
  28. Book: Auletta G . Cognitive Biology: Dealing with Information from Bacteria to Minds. Oxford University Press. 2011. 978-0-19-960848-5. United States. 266.
  29. Falke JJ, Bass RB, Butler SL, Chervitz SA, Danielson MA . The two-component signaling pathway of bacterial chemotaxis: a molecular view of signal transduction by receptors, kinases, and adaptation enzymes . Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology . 13 . 457–512 . 1997 . 9442881 . 2899694 . 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.13.1.457 .
  30. Web site: Chemotaxis. https://web.archive.org/web/20150711181802/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4lv7cBYVug. 2015-07-11 . dead. ToxCafe. 2 June 2011. March 23, 2017. YouTube.
  31. Wadhams GH, Armitage JP . Making sense of it all: bacterial chemotaxis . Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology . 5 . 12 . 1024–1037 . December 2004 . 15573139 . 10.1038/nrm1524 . 205493118 .
  32. Book: Shu C, Chen PC, Fung YC . An Introductory Text to Bioengineering (Advanced Series in Biomechanics - Vol. 4). World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.. 2008. 9789812707932. Singapore. 418.
  33. Cluzel P, Surette M, Leibler S . 5334523 . An ultrasensitive bacterial motor revealed by monitoring signaling proteins in single cells . Science . 287 . 5458 . 1652–5 . March 2000 . 10698740 . 10.1126/science.287.5458.1652 . 2000Sci...287.1652C .
  34. Sourjik V . Receptor clustering and signal processing in E. coli chemotaxis . Trends in Microbiology . 12 . 12 . 569–76 . December 2004 . 15539117 . 10.1016/j.tim.2004.10.003 . 10.1.1.318.4824 .
  35. Xu F, Bierman R, Healy F, Nguyen H . A multi-scale model of Escherichia coli chemotaxis from intracellular signaling pathway to motility and nutrient uptake in nutrient gradient and isotropic fluid environments. 10.1016/j.camwa.2015.12.019 . Computers & Mathematics with Applications. 71. 11 . 2466–2478 . 2016. free .
  36. Szurmant H, Ordal GW . Diversity in chemotaxis mechanisms among the bacteria and archaea . Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews . 68 . 2 . 301–19 . June 2004 . 15187186 . 419924 . 10.1128/MMBR.68.2.301-319.2004 .
  37. Yamamoto K, Macnab RM, Imae Y . Repellent response functions of the Trg and Tap chemoreceptors of Escherichia coli . Journal of Bacteriology . 172 . 1 . 383–8 . January 1990 . 2403544 . 208443 . 10.1128/jb.172.1.383-388.1990 .
  38. Schiffmann E, Corcoran BA, Wahl SM . N-formylmethionyl peptides as chemoattractants for leucocytes . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 72 . 3 . 1059–62 . March 1975 . 1093163 . 432465 . 10.1073/pnas.72.3.1059 . 1975PNAS...72.1059S . free .
  39. Kuruvilla H, Schmidt B, Song S, Bhajjan M, Merical M, Alley C, Griffin C, Yoder D, Hein J, Kohl D, Puffenberger C, Petroff D, Newcomer E, Good K, Heston G, Hurtubise A . Netrin-1 Peptide Is a Chemorepellent in Tetrahymena thermophila . International Journal of Peptides . 2016 . 7142868 . 2016 . 27123011 . 4830718 . 10.1155/2016/7142868 . free .
  40. Hennessey TM . Responses of the ciliates Tetrahymena and Paramecium to external ATP and GTP . en . Purinergic Signalling . 1 . 2 . 101–10 . June 2005 . 18404496 . 2096533 . 10.1007/s11302-005-6213-1 .
  41. Book: Köhidai L . Chemotaxis as an Expression of Communication of Tetrahymena. Biocommunication of Ciliates. Witzany G, Nowacki M . 2016. 65 - 82. 10.1007/978-3-319-32211-7_5. 978-3-319-32211-7.
  42. Berg HC, Purcell EM . Physics of chemoreception . Biophysical Journal . 20 . 2 . 193–219 . November 1977 . 911982 . 1473391 . 10.1016/s0006-3495(77)85544-6 . 1977BpJ....20..193B .
  43. Levine H, Rappel WJ . The physics of eukaryotic chemotaxis . Physics Today . 66 . 2 . 24–30 . February 2013 . 24363460 . 3867297 . 10.1063/PT.3.1884 . 2013PhT....66b..24L .
  44. Vladimirov N, Sourjik V . Chemotaxis: how bacteria use memory . Biological Chemistry . 390 . 11 . 1097–1104 . November 2009 . 19747082 . 10.1515/BC.2009.130 . 207440927 .
  45. Ghose D, Lew D . Mechanistic insights into actin-driven polarity site movement in yeast . Molecular Biology of the Cell . 31 . 10 . 1085–1102 . May 2020 . 32186970 . 7346724 . 10.1091/mbc.e20-01-0040 .
  46. Skoge M, Yue H, Erickstad M, Bae A, Levine H, Groisman A, Loomis WF, Rappel WJ . Cellular memory in eukaryotic chemotaxis . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 111 . 40 . 14448–53 . October 2014 . 25249632 . 4210025 . 10.1073/pnas.1412197111 . 2014PNAS..11114448S . free .
  47. Kutscher B, Devreotes P, Iglesias PA . Local excitation, global inhibition mechanism for gradient sensing: an interactive applet . Science's STKE . Feb 2004 . 2004 . 219 . pl3 . 14872096 . 10.1126/stke.2192004pl3 . 4660870 .
  48. Xiong Y, Huang CH, Iglesias PA, Devreotes PN . Cells navigate with a local-excitation, global-inhibition-biased excitable network . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 107 . 40 . 17079–86 . October 2010 . 20864631 . 2951443 . 10.1073/pnas.1011271107 . 2010PNAS..10717079X . free .
  49. Bagorda A, Parent CA . Eukaryotic chemotaxis at a glance . Journal of Cell Science . 121 . Pt 16 . 2621–4 . August 2008 . 18685153 . 10.1242/jcs.018077 . 7213762 . 10.1.1.515.32 .
  50. Köhidai L . Chemotaxis: the proper physiological response to evaluate phylogeny of signal molecules . Acta Biologica Hungarica . 50 . 4 . 375–94 . 1999 . 10.1007/BF03543060 . 10735174 . 248703226 .
  51. Kedrin D, van Rheenen J, Hernandez L, Condeelis J, Segall JE . 31704677 . Cell motility and cytoskeletal regulation in invasion and metastasis . Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia . 12 . 2–3 . 143–52 . September 2007 . 17557195 . 10.1007/s10911-007-9046-4 .
  52. Solnica-Krezel L, Sepich DS . 11331182 . Gastrulation: making and shaping germ layers . Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology . 28 . 687–717 . 2012 . 22804578 . 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-092910-154043 .
  53. Shellard A, Mayor R . Chemotaxis during neural crest migration . Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology . 55 . 111–8 . July 2016 . 26820523 . 10.1016/j.semcdb.2016.01.031 .
  54. Pal DS, Banerjee T, Lin Y, de Trogoff F, Borleis J, Iglesias PA, Devreotes PN . Actuation of single downstream nodes in growth factor network steers immune cell migration . Developmental Cell . 58 . 13 . 1170–1188.e7 . July 2023 . 37220748 . 10524337 . 10.1016/j.devcel.2023.04.019 .
  55. Lin Y, Pal DS, Banerjee P, Banerjee T, Qin G, Deng Y, Borleis J, Iglesias PA, Devreotes PN . Ras suppression potentiates rear actomyosin contractility-driven cell polarization and migration . Nature Cell Biology . 1–15 . July 2024 . 38951708 . 10.1038/s41556-024-01453-4 .
  56. Becker EL . Stimulated neutrophil locomotion: chemokinesis and chemotaxis . Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine . 101 . 10 . 509–13 . October 1977 . 199132 .
  57. Carter SB . 4212997 . Haptotaxis and the mechanism of cell motility . Nature . 213 . 5073 . 256–60 . January 1967 . 6030602 . 10.1038/213256a0 . 1967Natur.213..256C .
  58. Kim JY, Haastert PV, Devreotes PN . Social senses: G-protein-coupled receptor signaling pathways in Dictyostelium discoideum . Chemistry & Biology . 3 . 4 . 239–243 . April 1996 . 8807851 . 10.1016/s1074-5521(96)90103-9 . free .
  59. Montell C . Visual transduction in Drosophila . Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology . 15 . 1 . 231–268 . November 1999 . 10611962 . 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.15.1.231 . 14193715 .
  60. Book: Antunes G, Simoes de Souza FM . G Protein-Coupled Receptors - Signaling, Trafficking and Regulation . Olfactory receptor signaling . Methods in Cell Biology . 132 . 127–45 . 2016 . 26928542 . 10.1016/bs.mcb.2015.11.003 . 9780128035955 .
  61. Thomas MA, Kleist AB, Volkman BF . Decoding the chemotactic signal . Journal of Leukocyte Biology . 104 . 2 . 359–374 . August 2018 . 29873835 . 6099250 . 10.1002/JLB.1MR0218-044 .
  62. van Haastert PJ, De Wit RJ, Konijn TM . Antagonists of chemoattractants reveal separate receptors for cAMP, folic acid and pterin in Dictyostelium . Experimental Cell Research . 140 . 2 . 453–6 . August 1982 . 7117406 . 10.1016/0014-4827(82)90139-2 . 27784085 .
  63. Book: Witzany G, Nowacki M . Biocommunication of Ciliates . 2016 . Springer . 978-3-319-32211-7 .
  64. Book: Köhidai L . Chemotaxis as an Expression of Communication of Tetrahymena . 65–82 . https://books.google.com/books?id=KnFBDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA65 . 10.1007/978-3-319-32211-7_5 . Witzany G, Nowacki M . Biocommunication of Ciliates . 2016 . Springer . 978-3-319-32211-7 .
  65. Köhidai L, Csaba G . 33755476 . Chemotaxis and chemotactic selection induced with cytokines (IL-8, RANTES and TNF-alpha) in the unicellular Tetrahymena pyriformis . Cytokine . 10 . 7 . 481–6 . July 1998 . 9702410 . 10.1006/cyto.1997.0328 .
  66. Zigmond SH . Ability of polymorphonuclear leukocytes to orient in gradients of chemotactic factors . The Journal of Cell Biology . 75 . 2 Pt 1 . 606–16 . November 1977 . 264125 . 2109936 . 10.1083/jcb.75.2.606 .
  67. Powell WS, Rokach J . Biosynthesis, biological effects, and receptors of hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acids (HETEs) and oxoeicosatetraenoic acids (oxo-ETEs) derived from arachidonic acid . Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular and Cell Biology of Lipids . 1851 . 4 . 340–55 . April 2015 . 25449650 . 5710736 . 10.1016/j.bbalip.2014.10.008 .
  68. Powell WS, Rokach J . The eosinophil chemoattractant 5-oxo-ETE and the OXE receptor . Progress in Lipid Research . 52 . 4 . 651–65 . October 2013 . 24056189 . 5710732 . 10.1016/j.plipres.2013.09.001 .
  69. Matsuoka T, Narumiya S . Prostaglandin receptor signaling in disease . TheScientificWorldJournal . 7 . 1329–47 . September 2007 . 17767353 . 5901339 . 10.1100/tsw.2007.182 . free .
  70. Yokomizo T . Two distinct leukotriene B4 receptors, BLT1 and BLT2 . Journal of Biochemistry . 157 . 2 . 65–71 . February 2015 . 25480980 . 10.1093/jb/mvu078 .
  71. Sozzani S, Zhou D, Locati M, Bernasconi S, Luini W, Mantovani A, O'Flaherty JT . Stimulating properties of 5-oxo-eicosanoids for human monocytes: synergism with monocyte chemotactic protein-1 and -3 . Journal of Immunology . 157 . 10 . 4664–71 . November 1996 . 10.4049/jimmunol.157.10.4664 . 8906847 . 23499393 . free .
  72. Kohidai L, Lang O and Csaba G . Chemotactic-range-fitting of amino acids and its correlations to physicochemical parameters in Tetrahymena pyriformis - Evolutionary consequences . Cellular and Molecular Biology . 2003 . 49 . OL487–95 . 14995080.
  73. Book: Murray JD . Mathematical Biology I: An Introduction . https://web.archive.org/web/20220506024008/https://www.ucl.ac.uk/~rmjbale/3307/Reading_Chemotaxis1.pdf . 2022-05-06 . live . Springer . 2002 . 978-0-387-95223-9 . 3rd . Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics . 17 . New York . 395–417 . 10.1007/b98868.
  74. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.11.019. How the chemotactic characteristics of bacteria can determine their population patterns. Soil Biology and Biochemistry . 69 . 346–358 . 2014 . Gharasoo M, Centler F, Fetzer I, Thullner M . 2014SBiBi..69..346G .
  75. Mackenzie D . How animals follow their nose . Knowable Magazine . Annual Reviews . 6 March 2023 . 10.1146/knowable-030623-4 . 257388244 . free . 13 March 2023 . en.
  76. Reddy G, Murthy VN, Vergassola M . Olfactory Sensing and Navigation in Turbulent Environments . Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics . 10 March 2022 . 13 . 1 . 191–213 . 10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031720-032754 . 2022ARCMP..13..191R . 243966350 . en . 1947-5454.
  77. Lagzi I . 84150518. Chemical Robotics—Chemotactic Drug Carriers. Central European Journal of Medicine. 2013. 8. 4. 377–382. 10.2478/s11536-012-0130-9. free.
  78. Sengupta S, Dey KK, Muddana HS, Tabouillot T, Ibele ME, Butler PJ, Sen A . Enzyme molecules as nanomotors . Journal of the American Chemical Society . 135 . 4 . 1406–1414 . January 2013 . 23308365 . 10.1021/ja3091615 .
  79. Mohajerani F, Zhao X, Somasundar A, Velegol D, Sen A . A Theory of Enzyme Chemotaxis: From Experiments to Modeling . Biochemistry . 57 . 43 . 6256–6263 . October 2018 . 30251529 . 10.1021/acs.biochem.8b00801 . 1809.02530 . 52816076 .
  80. Zhao X, Palacci H, Yadav V, Spiering MM, Gilson MK, Butler PJ, Hess H, Benkovic SJ, Sen A . Substrate-driven chemotactic assembly in an enzyme cascade . Nature Chemistry . 10 . 3 . 311–317 . March 2018 . 29461522 . 10.1038/nchem.2905 . 2018NatCh..10..311Z .
  81. Guha R, Mohajerani F, Collins M, Ghosh S, Sen A, Velegol D . Chemotaxis of Molecular Dyes in Polymer Gradients in Solution . Journal of the American Chemical Society . 139 . 44 . 15588–15591 . November 2017 . 29064685 . 10.1021/jacs.7b08783 .

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Chemotaxis".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.