Advertisement

Journal of Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 270–277 | Cite as

The Growth and Development of Some Recent Plant Models: A Viewpoint

Article

Abstract

A nontechnical introduction to selected recent models of plant development and growth is presented. Problems of creating predictive, quantitative models for (1) regulatory networks and (2) the use of space by developing tissues are outlined. These problems can be addressed using suitable mathematical frameworks to represent the substantial variety of relevant biological mechanisms, including gene regulation, protein modification, and cell–cell signaling by ligand/receptor pairs and by polarized auxin transport; also relevant are cell growth and division, the changing topology of signaling relationships between cells, and mechanical interactions between cells. Modeling frameworks are briefly described for gene regulation networks, including signaling; for more general biochemical reaction networks; for mechanical interactions (using a weak spring model) and signaling mediated by a changing topology of neighbor relations among growing and dividing cells; and for approximating such models at the tissue level using spatially continuous descriptions with changing shape. Finally, a “dynamical grammar” framework allows naturally for integrative and multiscale models because it can, in principle, combine any or all of the foregoing mechanisms. With mathematical and computational tools such as these, and with the current rapid progress in instrumentation and imagery, the future looks bright for scientifically effective modeling of plant development.

Keywords

Developmental model Shoot apical meristem Gene regulation network Gene regulation signaling network Dynamical grammar Polarized transport Weak spring model Voronoi diagram Active surface Multiscale model 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Useful discussions with Christophe Godin, Marcus Heisler, Henrik Jönsson, Elliot Meyerowtiz, Sergei Nikolaev, Przemyslaw Prusinkiewicz, John Reinitz, Adrienne Roeder, Alex Sadovsky, and Bruce Shapiro are gratefully acknowledged. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation′s Frontiers in Biological Research (FIBR) program, award number EF-0330786.

References

  1. Barbier de Reuille P, Bohn-Courseau I, Ljung K, Morin H, Carraro N, and others. 2006. Computer simulations reveal properties of the cell–cell signaling network at the shoot apex in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:1627–1632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cheng J, Scharenbroich L, Baldi P, Mjolsness E. 2005. Sigmoid: towards an intelligent, scalable, software infrastructure for pathway bioinformatics and systems biology. IEEE Intelligent Systems May/June:68–75Google Scholar
  3. Dirichlet GL. 1850. Über die Reduktion der positiven quadratischen Formen mit drei unbestimmten ganzen Zahlen. J Reine Angewandte Math 40:209–227Google Scholar
  4. Espinosa-Soto C, Padilla-Longoria P, Alvarez-Buylla ER. 2004. A gene regulatory network model for cell-fate determination during Arabidopsis thaliana flower development that is robust and recovers experimental gene expression profiles. Plant Cell, 16:2923–2939PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jönsson H, Heisler M, Shapiro BE, Meyerowitz EM, Mjolsness E. 2006. An auxin-driven polarized transport model for phyllotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:1633–1638PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kosman D, Reinitz J, Sharp DH. 1998. Automated assay of gene expression at cellular resolution. In: Altman RB, Dunker AK, Hunter L, Klein T, editors. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 1998. Singapore, World Scientific, pp. 6–17Google Scholar
  7. Landau L, Lifshitz EM. 1986. Theory of Elasticity, 3rd Ed., Course of Theoretical Physics Volume 7. Oxford, England, UK, Butterworth-Heinemann, 187 pGoogle Scholar
  8. Marnellos G, Mjolsness E. 1998. A gene network approach to modeling early neurogenesis in Drosophila. In: Altman RB, Dunker AK, Hunter L, Klein T, editors. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 1998. Singapore, World Scientific, pp. 30–41Google Scholar
  9. Mjolsness E, Sharp DH, Reinitz J. 1991. A connectionist model of development. J Theor Biol 152:429–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mjolsness E, Meyerowitz E, Gor V, Mann T. 1999. Morphogenesis in plants: modeling the shoot apical meristem, and possible applications. Proceedings 1999 NASA Workshop on Evolvable HardwareGoogle Scholar
  11. Mjolsness E, Jönsson H, Shapiro BE, Meyerowitz EM. 2004. Modeling plant development with gene regulation networks including signaling and cell division. In: Kolchanov N, Hofestaedt R, editors. Bioinformatics of Genome Regulation and Structure, Boston, MA, USA, Kluwer (Springer), pp. 311–318Google Scholar
  12. Mjolsness E. 2006. Stochastic Process Semantics for Dynamical Grammar Syntax: An Overview. Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics (online at http://www.anytime.cs.umass.edu/aimath06/). Also archived as http://www.arxiv.org/pdf/cs.AI/0511073
  13. Murray JD. 1989. Mechanical models for generating pattern and form in development. Chapter 17 in Mathematical Biology, 2nd ed., Berlin, Germany, Springer-Verlag. 767 pGoogle Scholar
  14. Prusinkiewicz P, Lindenmayer A. 1990. The Algorithmic Beauty of Plants. New York, NU, USA, Springer-Verlag. p 224Google Scholar
  15. Prusinkiewicz P, Hammel MS, Mjolsness E. 1993. Animation of plant development, Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 27:351–360Google Scholar
  16. Reinitz J, Mjolsness E, Sharp DH. 1995. Model for Cooperative Control of Positional Information in Drosophila by bcd and Maternal hb. J Exp Zool 271:47–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shapiro BE, Mjolsness E. 2001. Developmental simulations with Cellerator. In: Yi TM, Hucka M, Morohashi M, Kitano H, editors. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Systems Biology. Madison WI, USA: Omnipress, pp. 342–351Google Scholar
  18. Shapiro BE, Levchenko A, Meyerowitz EM, Wold BJ, Mjolsness ED. 2003. Cellerator: extending a computer algebra system to include biochemical arrows for signal transduction simulations. Bioinformatics 19:677–678PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Smith RS, Guyomarc’h S, Mandel T, Reinhardt D, Kuhlemeier C, et al. 2006. A plausible model of phyllotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:1301–1306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Swinton J. 2003. Watching the daisies grow: Turing and Fibonacci phyllotaxes. In: C.A. Teuscher (ed), Alan Turing: Life and Legacy of a Great Thinker. Springer 2003. See also: Allan Turing and Morphogenesis, Web site http://www.swintons.net/jonathan/turing.htm and “dynamic phyllotaxis” link therein, dated 25 September 2003; last accessed 6/14/06. Analysis of unpublished works in the Turing Digital Archive http://www.turingarchive.org/browse.php/C/24-27, last accessed 6/14/06
  21. Teran J, Blemker S, Ng Thow Hing V, Fedkiw R. 2003. Finite volume methods for the simulation of skeletal muscle. In: Breen D, Lin M, editors. Eurographics/SIGGRAPH Symposium on Computer Animation, pp. 68–74Google Scholar
  22. Voronoi G. 1908. Nouvelles applications des paramètres continus à la théorie des formes quadratiques. J Reine Angewandte Math 133:97–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Genomics and Bioinformatics, and Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations