TIM March 18th, 2019
Can T cells tune speed and turning behavior
to optimize their search for antigen?
Inge Wortel
inge.wortel@radboudumc.nl
Department of Tumor Immunology, Radboudumc
How can I find the most chocolate? Two things matter:
1. How fast do I move? (speed)
Faster : | cover more area, |
but less time to look |
2. How long until I turn? (persistence)
Short time : | more thorough |
but get less far |
Images adapted from: Benichou et al. Review of Modern Physics, 2011.
T cells in uninfected LN A. Peixoto, Harvard Medical School |
Neutrophils in an infected lung
Chtanova et al, Immunity 2008. |
T cells show highly different migratory behavior depending on context:
$\rightarrow$ Does this reflect different "optimal" search strategies?
Image adapted from: Krummel et al. Nature Reviews Immunology, 2016.
A cell takes a series of steps
to find targets. We can tune:
Problems:
Migrating cells: universal coupling between speed and persistence (UCSP)
Migrating cells: universal coupling between speed and persistence (UCSP)
Problems:
How do intrinsic (UCSP) and extrinsic (tissue) factors
constrain T cell migration patterns?
This model must:
1 | describe migration | $\rightarrow$ T cells should actively move |
2 | reproduce UCSP | $\rightarrow$ speed/persistence as output, not input |
3 | be spatial | $\rightarrow$ T cells should have a shape |
4 | be multicellular | $\rightarrow$ allow cells to interact with surrounding tissue |
Pixels belong to cells, which
move by copying pixels:
Copy success chance (Pcopy) is higher when it helps the cell:
Stay together: | Maintain its size: | Maintain its membrane: |
$\searrow$ | $\downarrow$ | $\swarrow$ |
This model must:
1 | describe migration | $\rightarrow$ T cells should actively move |
2 | reproduce UCSP | $\rightarrow$ speed/persistence as output, not input |
3 | be spatial | $\rightarrow$ T cells should have a shape |
4 | be multicellular | $\rightarrow$ allow cells to interact with surrounding tissue |
Cells move if we add positive feedback on protrusive activity ($\approx$ actin polymerization)1:
Parameters: | ||
λact | $\approx$ | protrusive force |
maxact | $\approx$ | polymerized actin lifetime |
1Niculescu et al. PLoS Computational Biology, 2015.
This model must:
1 | describe migration | $\rightarrow$ T cells should actively move |
2 | reproduce UCSP | $\rightarrow$ speed/persistence as output, not input |
3 | be spatial | $\rightarrow$ T cells should have a shape |
4 | be multicellular | $\rightarrow$ allow cells to interact with surrounding tissue |
Similar cells grouped (2D and 3D):
![]() |
$\rightarrow$ Exponential coupling is strong in cells with same maxact
The epidermis is packed tightly with keratinocytes
...Yet T cells remaining after an infection are highly motile:
![]() |
|
Ariotti et al, PNAS 2012. |
$\rightarrow$ Can we still see the UCSP for T cells in such a dense environment?
maxact = 30:
"stop-and-go"
maxact = 100:
protrusions split
In a tightly packed skin:
$\rightarrow$ Stringent environmental constraints can overrule the UCSP
Cells cannot freely "choose" their speed and persistence:
- | Speed and persistence are coupled (cell-intrinsic) |
- | Environmental constraints further restrict motility patterns, and can overrule the UCSP (cell-extrinsic) |
$\rightarrow$ "Optimizing" speed and persistence is not so straightforward!
Use a genetic algorithm to let cells maximize the area they explore. Each generation, cells undergo three phases:
Before: | |
After: |
... But different behavior!
Free: | |
Skin: |
Cells can "optimize" their search to some extent, but:
- | Even if we make evolution easy, the cell is still subject to constraints and trade-offs |
- | What is "optimal" depends both on the cell and the environment |
- | Cells with very similar parameters can look very different depending on the environment they're in |
$\rightarrow$ Do cells choose their speed and persistence, or does their environment choose it for them?
All tested λact / maxact combinations:
$\rightarrow$ Speed-persistence coupling exists in all 3 settings
Similar cells grouped (2D and 3D):
$\rightarrow$ Coupling holds throughout different shapes & behaviors
Model:
Experimental data:
$\rightarrow$ Model reproduces saturation observed in vitro
At some point, the cell cannot go faster or straighter:
Microchannels restrict shape changes:
... And indeed do not show saturation:
Higher persistence is possible, but there still is a limit: