Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41066514›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Spatial distribution of cytoskeleton-mediated feedback controls cell polarization: A computational study.

Parijat Banerjee, Jonathan A Kuhn, Dhiman Sankar Pal, Yu Deng, Tatsat Banerjee, Peter N Devreotes, Pablo A Iglesias

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Signaling and actin waves at a glance.Journal of cell science · 2025
    Review
  3. Ras-mediated dynamic and biphasic regulation of cell migration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Parijat BanerjeeDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Jonathan A KuhnDepartment of Cell Biology and Center for Cell Dynamics, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Dhiman Sankar PalDepartment of Cell Biology and Center for Cell Dynamics, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8442-3507
Yu DengDepartment of Cell Biology and Center for Cell Dynamics, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Tatsat BanerjeeDepartment of Cell Biology and Center for Cell Dynamics, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Peter N DevreotesDepartment of Cell Biology and Center for Cell Dynamics, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3260-1455
Pablo A IglesiasDepartment of Cell Biology and Center for Cell Dynamics, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0840-155X

Funding

Excitable Networks in Directed Cell MigrationR35GM118177 · NIGMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Peter N Devreotes · 2016 to 2026
$12.1M
Molecular Mechanisms of Cytoskeletal Mechanosensory SystemsR01GM149073 · NIGMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Pablo A. Iglesias, DOUGLAS N ROBINSON · 2023 to 2026
$2.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM149073NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM118177
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the social amoeba Dictyostelium, cell motility is regulated through a signal transduction excitable network that interfaces with the cytoskeleton to control actin polymerization patterns. In turn, the cytoskeleton influences the signaling machinery via several feedback loops, but the nature and function of this feedback remain poorly understood. In this study, we use computational models to discern the essential role of complementary positive and negative feedback loops in polarizing cells. We contrast two potential mechanisms for the negative feedback: local inhibition and global inhibition. Our results indicate that both mechanisms can stabilize the leading edge and inhibit actin polymerization in other sites, preventing multipolarity. While some experimental perturbations align more closely with the local inhibition model, statistical analyses reveal its limited polarization potential within a wide excitability range. Conversely, global inhibition more effectively suppresses secondary and tertiary leading-edge formation, making it a more robust polarization mechanism. This raises an intriguing question: if local inhibition better replicates experimental observations but is less effective for polarization than local excitation and global inhibition, could there be a supplementary mechanism enhancing its polarization potential? To address this, we propose a novel mechanism involving the dynamic partitioning of back molecules which enhances communication between the front and back of the cell and can be leveraged by local feedback interactions between the cytoskeleton and signal transduction to improve polarization efficiency.

Indexed as

Cell PolarityCytoskeletonDictyosteliumFeedback, PhysiologicalModels, BiologicalActinsCell MovementComputational BiologyComputer SimulationSignal TransductionActins

Identifiers

PMID41066514
PMCPMC12539730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.