Skip to main content
Log in

Global asymptotic stability of the active disassembly model of flagellar length control

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Organelle size control is a fundamental question in biology that demonstrates the fascinating ability of cells to maintain homeostasis within their highly variable environments. Theoretical models describing cellular dynamics have the potential to help elucidate the principles underlying size control. Here, we perform a detailed study of the active disassembly model proposed in Fai et al. (elife 8:e42599, 2019). We construct a hybrid system which is shown to be well-behaved throughout the domain. We rule out the possibility of oscillations arising in the model and prove global asymptotic stability in the case of two flagella by the construction of a suitable Lyapunov function. Finally, we generalize the model to the case of arbitrary flagellar number in order to study olfactory sensory neurons, which have up to twenty cilia per cell. We show that our theoretical results may be extended to this case and explore the implications of this universal mechanism of size control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Challis RC, Tian H, Wang J, He J, Jiang J, Chen X, Yin W, Connelly T, Ma L, Yu CR et al (2015) An olfactory cilia pattern in the mammalian nose ensures high sensitivity to odors. Curr Biol 25(19):2503–2512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chien A, Shih SM, Bower R, Tritschler D, Porter ME, Yildiz A (2017) Dynamics of the IFT machinery at the ciliary tip. eLife 6:e28606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fai TG, Mohapatra L, Kar P, Kondev J, Amir A (2019) Length regulation of multiple flagella that self-assemble from a shared pool of components. eLife 8:e42599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funfak A, Fisch C, Abdel Motaal HT, Diener J, Combettes L, Baroud CN, Dupuis-Williams P (2015) Paramecium swimming and ciliary beating patterns: a study on four RNA interference mutations. Integ Biol 7(1):90–100

  • Goldstein RE (2015) Green algae as model organisms for biological fluid dynamics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 47:343–375

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Guckenheimer J, Holmes P (1983) Local bifurcations. In: Nonlinear oscillations, dynamical systems, and bifurcations of vector fields. Springer, pp 117–165

  • Gutman BL, Niyogi KK (2004) Chlamydomonas and Arabidopsis. a dynamic duo. Plant Physiol 135(2):607–610

  • Haldane JBS (1926) On being the right size. Harper’s Magaz 152:424–427

  • Hendel NL, Thomson M, Marshall WF (2018) Diffusion as a ruler: modeling kinesin diffusion as a length sensor for intraflagellar transport. Biophys J 114(3):663–674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khona DK, Rao VG, Motiwalla MJ, Varma PS, Kashyap AR, Das K, Shirolikar SM, Borde L, Dharmadhikari JA, Dharmadhikari AK et al (2013) Anomalies in the motion dynamics of long-flagella mutants of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. J Biol Phys 39(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozminksi KG, Johnson KA, Forscher P, Rosenbaum JL (1993) A motility in the eukaryotic flagellum unrelated to flagellar beating. Proc Natl Acad Sci 90(12):5519–5523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebovitz N (2019) Ordinary differential equations. Cengage Learning

  • Ludington WB, Shi LZ, Zhu Q, Berns MW, Marshall WF (2012) Organelle size equalization by a constitutive process. Curr Biol 22(22):2173–2179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall WF (2016) Cell geometry: how cells count and measure size. Annu Rev Biophys 45:49–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInally SG, Dawson SC (2016) Eight unique basal bodies in the multi-flagellated diplomonad Giardia lamblia. Cilia 5(1):21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milo R, Phillips R (2015) Cell biology by the numbers. Garland Sci

  • Morga B, Bastin P (2013) Getting to the heart of intraflagellar transport using Trypanosoma and Chlamydomonas models: the strength is in their differences. Cilia 2(1):16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen RL, Tam L-W, Lefebvre PA (2005) The LF1 gene of Chlamydomonas Reinhardtii encodes a novel protein required for flagellar length control. Genetics 169(3):1415–1424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum JL, Moulder JE, Ringo DL (1969) Flagellar elongation and shortening in Chlamydomonas: the use of cycloheximide and colchicine to study the synthesis and assembly of flagellar proteins. J Cell Biol 41(2):600–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomé PA, Merchant SS (2019) A series of fortunate events: Introducing Chlamydomonas as a reference organism. Plant Cell 31(8):1682–1707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholey JM (2003) Intraflagellar transport. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 19(1):423–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teschl G (2012) Ordinary differential equations and dynamical systems, vol 140. American Mathematical Soc

  • Wan KY, Jékely G (2020) On the unity and diversity of cilia. Phil Trans R Soc B 375:20190148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wemmer KA, Marshall WF (2007) Flagellar length control in Chlamydomonas-a paradigm for organelle size regulation. Int Rev Cytol 260:175–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zink D, Fischer AH, Nickerson JA (2004) Nuclear structure in cancer cells. Nat Rev Cancer 4(9):677–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Ariel Amir and Te Cao for providing feedback on an early version of this manuscript. We further acknowledge useful discussions with Prathitha Kar, Lishibanya Mohapatra, and Jane Kondev, and Rosemary Challis for providing data on cilia lengths in olfactory sensory neurons. We acknowledge support under National Science Foundation grant DMS-1913093 (TGF) and National Institute of Health grant T32 NS007292 (YP).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas G. Fai.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A: Flux derivation

Appendix A: Flux derivation

Consider the lengths of two flagella and their evolution in time, which we denote by \(L_1(t)\) and \(L_2(t)\). As stated in Sect. 1, we assume a total number of molecular motors M and a total amount of tubulin T.

We now derive the dynamical equations for the flagellar lengths, closely following (Fai et al. 2019). Assembly occurs in two steps in our model, each of which follows the law of first-order chemical kinetics. First, tubulin aggregates on an IFT particle containing a single molecular motor. Second, the IFT particles are injected into the flagellum. The first step of protein aggregation on IFT particles results in particles carrying an amount of tubulin proportional to \(T_f\). In the second step, i.e. the injection of IFT particles at the flagellar base, the number \(M_f\) of free molecular motors determines the injection rate \(J_i\) via:

$$\begin{aligned} J_i= \frac{1}{2}k_\text {on} M_f, \end{aligned}$$
(65)

where \(k_\text {on}\) is the rate constant of injection and the factor of one half is due to equal probabilities of injection into either flagellum.

Because the timescale of IFT (order of seconds) is fast compared to the timescale of changes in the flagellar lengths (order of minutes), we assume a quasi-steady state in which there is no accumulation of IFT particles along the flagellum. Therefore, the rate of injection equals the arrival flux of IFT particles to the flagellar tip.

The assembly rate is assumed proportional to this arrival flux times the average amount of tubulin carried by an IFT particle, resulting in

$$\begin{aligned} \text {assembly rate} = \gamma J_i T_f = \frac{1}{2}\gamma k_\text {on} M_f T_f, \end{aligned}$$
(66)

where \(\gamma \) is a constant of proportionality.

As mentioned above \(T_f = T-L_1-L_2\). In order to express \(M_f\) in terms of the flagellar lengths, we must incorporate the detailed motion of proteins during IFT. While, as mentioned above, IFT particles including the motors and cargo move at constant speed in the anterograde direction, it has been shown that some IFT proteins such as kinesin motors diffuse in the retrograde direction back to the flagellar base (Chien et al. 2017). We capture these different possibilities by letting \(M_{b,i}\) and \(M_{d_i}\) represent the numbers of motors undergoing ballistic and diffusive motion, respectively, on the \(i^{\mathrm{th}}\) flagellum. By conservation of motor number, we have

$$\begin{aligned} M_f = M-M_{b,1}-M_{b,2}-M_{d,1}-M_{d,2} \end{aligned}$$
(67)

We may express the ballistic flux \(J_{b,i}\) on the \(i^{\mathrm{th}}\) flagellum as the product of the concentration of motors moving ballistically in the anterograde direction times their speed:

$$\begin{aligned} J_{b,i}= \frac{M_{b,i}v}{L_i}, \end{aligned}$$
(68)

where v is the IFT speed in the anterograde direction.

On the other hand, To capture this diffusive motion, we let the concentration of diffusing particles on the \(i^{\mathrm{th}}\) flagellum be \(c_{d,i}(x)\) for positions \(x\in [0,L_i]\) along the flagellum. If the diffusive flux \(J_{d,i}\) is constant, then by Fick’s law \(J = -D \partial c/\partial x\) so that the concentration will be a linear function of x, and in particular

$$\begin{aligned} c_{d,i}(x) = \frac{M_{d,i}}{L_i}+\frac{J_{d,i}}{D}\left( x-L_i/2\right) , \end{aligned}$$
(69)

where we have used the fact that \(\int _0^{L_i} c_{d,i} \mathrm {d}x = M_{d,i}\).

Assuming the flagellar base acts as a sink, we may apply the boundary condition \(c_{d,i}(0)=0\) to (69) and express the flux in terms of the number of diffusing motors:

$$\begin{aligned} J_{d,i} = \frac{2DM_{d,i}}{L_i^2}, \end{aligned}$$
(70)

and it follows that

$$\begin{aligned} c_{d,i}(x) = \frac{J_{d,i}}{D}x. \end{aligned}$$
(71)

Since \(J_i=J_{b,1}=J_{b,2}=J_{d,1}=J_{d,2}\) by the quasi-steady state assumption, we drop the subscripts and denote the constant flux by J. Plugging the expressions from (67) (68) and (70) into (66) yields

$$\begin{aligned} J = \frac{1}{2}k_\text {on}\left( M-J\frac{L_1+L_2}{2v}+J\frac{L_1^2+L_2^2}{4D}\right) , \end{aligned}$$

and upon solving for J we obtain

$$\begin{aligned} J = \frac{k_\text {on}M/2}{1+k_\text {on}\left( L_1+L_2\right) /2v+k_\text {on}\left( L_1^2+L_2^2\right) /4D}. \end{aligned}$$
(72)

Inserting this expression into (66) yields finally

$$\begin{aligned} \text {assembly rate} = \gamma J \left( T-L_1-L_2\right) , \end{aligned}$$
(73)

where J is given by (72).

For the disassembly rate, we assume there is both a basal rate of disassembly \(d_0\) as well as an additional disassembly which depends on the concentration of depolymerase at the flagellar tip. For simplicity, we will assume that the depolymerase concentration at the \(i^{\mathrm{th}}\) flagellum is proportional to the kinesin concentration \(c_{d,i}(L_i)\). (As discussed in Fai et al. (2019), this would be the case so long as the depolymerase follows the same pattern of ballistic anterograde to diffusive retrograde motion.) Therefore, we have

$$\begin{aligned} \text {disassembly rate} = d_0+d_1 c_{d,i}(L_i) = d_0+d_1\frac{J L_i}{D}. \end{aligned}$$
(74)

Subtracting the assembly and disassembly rates yields the following system of coupled nonlinear ODE’s:

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm {d}L_1}{\mathrm {d}t}&= \gamma J \left( T-L_1-L_2\right) -d_0-d_1\frac{J L_1}{D} \end{aligned}$$
(75)
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm {d}L_2}{\mathrm {d}t}&= \gamma J \left( T-L_1-L_2\right) -d_0-d_1\frac{J L_2}{D}, \end{aligned}$$
(76)

where J is given by (72) above.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fai, T.G., Park, Y. Global asymptotic stability of the active disassembly model of flagellar length control. J. Math. Biol. 84, 8 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-021-01709-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-021-01709-9

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation