Skip to main content
PLOS Computational Biology logoLink to PLOS Computational Biology
. 2022 Mar 30;18(3):e1009981. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009981

Pulsatile contractions and pattern formation in excitable actomyosin cortex

Michael F Staddon 1,2,3, Edwin M Munro 4,5, Shiladitya Banerjee 6,*
Editor: Alex Mogilner7
PMCID: PMC9000090  PMID: 35353813

Abstract

The actin cortex is an active adaptive material, embedded with complex regulatory networks that can sense, generate, and transmit mechanical forces. The cortex exhibits a wide range of dynamic behaviours, from generating pulsatory contractions and travelling waves to forming organised structures. Despite the progress in characterising the biochemical and mechanical components of the actin cortex, the emergent dynamics of this mechanochemical system is poorly understood. Here we develop a reaction-diffusion model for the RhoA signalling network, the upstream regulator for actomyosin assembly and contractility, coupled to an active actomyosin gel, to investigate how the interplay between chemical signalling and mechanical forces regulates stresses and patterns in the cortex. We demonstrate that mechanochemical feedback in the cortex acts to destabilise homogeneous states and robustly generate pulsatile contractions. By tuning active stress in the system, we show that the cortex can generate propagating contraction pulses, form network structures, or exhibit topological turbulence.

Author summary

The cellular actin cortex is a dynamic sub-membranous network of filamentous actin, myosin motors, and other accessory proteins that regulates the ability of cells to maintain or change shapes. While the key molecular components and mechanical properties of the actin cortex have been characterized, the ways in which biochemical signalling and mechanical forces interact to regulate cortex behaviours remain poorly understood. In this article, we develop a mathematical model for the actomyosin cortex that combines the reaction-diffusion dynamics of signalling proteins with active force generation by actomyosin networks. Using this model, we investigate how the feedback between mechanics and biochemical signalling regulates the propagation of actomyosin flows, mechanical stresses, and pattern formation in the cortex. Our work reveals a variety of ways in which the cortex can tune the dynamic coupling between biochemical activity, force production, and advective transport to control mechanical behaviours.

Introduction

The actin cortex is an adaptive active material that dynamically regulates its mechanical properties to maintain or change cell shapes [14]. The actin cortex can display a wide range of dynamic behaviours from driving intracellular pulsatory contractions [5, 6] to cellular-scale polarized flows [5, 7, 8] and assembling protrusive or contractile structures during cell motility and cytokinesis [9, 10]. These behaviours must adapt to the cell’s local environment and developmental stage. For instance, cellular-scale pulsatile contractions are often observed during developmental morphogenesis, where pulsatile contractions act as a mechanical ratchet to sequentially alter cell size and shapes [1114], leading to tissue bending or elongation [15]. At the intracellular level, actomyosin pulses occur with chaotic spatiotemporal dynamics [5, 16, 17]. Travelling waves of actomyosin contraction can propagate across the cortical surface [16, 18, 20], and can be highly organised as in the case of surface contraction waves, which propagate as single waves from one pole of the cell to the other [19, 20]. In other physiological contexts, stable contractile structures are needed, as in the formation of stress fibers during cell adhesion [10], assembly of actomyosin purse-string during wound healing or gap closure [2123], or the formation of a contractile ring during cytokinesis [24, 25]. While the biochemical pathways underlying actomyosin dynamics are known, the mechanisms by which actomyosin-driven mechanical forces feedback to upstream chemical signals to govern patterns and flows in the actin cortex remain poorly understood [4].

Alan Turing, in his seminal paper, demonstrated that reaction-diffusion systems can autonomously generate a wide variety of spatiotemporal patterns observed in nature, but noted that mechanical forces may also play an important role in pattern formation [26]. In recent years, purely biochemical models have been proposed for actomyosin pattern formation. RhoA and its downstream effectors of actin and myosin have been shown to form an activator-inhibitor system that exhibits excitable dynamics and oscillations [17, 2729]. Here autocatalytic production of the activator RhoA leads to delayed accumulation of the inhibitor F-actin, producing local pulses of RhoA activity. Since F-actin diffusion is negligible compared to RhoA, this system produces travelling pulses of RhoA activity but cannot generate Turing patterns [27, 28]. By tuning RhoA production rates locally, static patterns of RhoA can be generated [28]. This raises the question if actomyosin patterns in the cortex strictly rely on biochemical cues or can spontaneously and robustly emerge via interplay between mechanical forces and biochemical signalling.

Mechanochemical feedback in the cytoskeleton is another mechanism for generating spatiotemporal patterns [3034]. Active gel models of the cytoskeleton have suggested that pulsatory patterns can emerge from contractile instabilities driven by a positive feedback, in which active stress drives advective flows of stress producing factors such as actin and myosin [33, 35, 36]. These contractile instabilities cluster myosin into a few high concentration regions, but regulating myosin contraction with an independent RhoA oscillator can prevent the collapse of myosin and sustain oscillations [18]. However recent studies suggest a negative feedback loop between actomyosin and RhoA [17, 2729], raising the question of how the feedback between RhoA and actomyosin mechanics is regulated to generate flows and patterns. Additionally, it remains unclear how the same molecular system can regulate the formation of stable contractile structures [4, 37] or exhibit turbulent dynamics [16].

Here we develop a reaction-diffusion model for an excitable signalling network comprising RhoA and actomyosin, coupled to the mechanics of an active gel representing the actomyosin network, to study how the feedback between biochemical signalling and mechanical stresses regulate mechanochemical patterns and flows in the actin cortex. Our mechanochemical model coupling RhoA signalling and transport with actomyosin mechanics goes beyond previous theoretical models that are either purely biochemical [17, 2729] or based on the mechanics of active gels [18, 33, 35, 36, 38]. Using this mechanochemical model, we ask how pulsatory flows arise from the coupling between a fast diffusing activator (RhoA) and a slow diffusing inhibitor (actomyosin), how mechanochemical feedbacks stabilise contractile instabilities into localised patterns, and how active stresses propagate local contractile signals or drive turbulent dynamics. Our model builds upon recent experimental observations of an activator-inhibitor relationship between RhoA and actomyosin [17], by introducing myosin-driven contraction to provide a mechanical feedback. By tuning just two biologically relevant parameters, the basal rate of RhoA production and the magnitude of active contractile stress, our model is able to capture a wide range of dynamic phases observed in the actomyosin networks, from travelling waves and pulsatile contractions to stable contractile networks and turbulent dynamics. We find that mechanochemical feedback acts to destabilise stationary states to robustly generate pulsed contractions. At high contractile activity and low basal rates of RhoA production, stable patterns of actomyosin emerge. Furthermore, the mechanochemical system encodes memory of transient perturbations that allows local signals to be translated into propagating contraction waves or stable patterns.

Results

Mechanochemical feedback generates robust pulsatile contractions

To elucidate the role of mechanochemical feedback in the generation of dynamic behaviours and instabilities in the actin cortex, we first study an ordinary differential equation model for the coupling between RhoA, actomyosin, and mechanical strain (Fig 1A). Here, for simplicity, we neglect spatial variations in chemical concentrations and study the coupled dynamics of RhoA and actomyosin in a locally homogeneous region of the cortex. Recent experiments on Xenopus oocytes [27] and C. elegans embryos [17] suggest that actomyosin pulsation in the cortex is regulated by the excitable dynamics of RhoA GTPase—the upstream regulator of actomyosin assembly and force production. Local autocatalytic activation of RhoA drives rapid initiation of RhoA pulses, followed by F-actin assembly and myosin recruitment. As actomyosin concentrations increase, F-actin dependent accumulation of the RhoA GTPase-activating proteins RGA-3/4 terminate the pulse through a delayed negative feedback [17].

Fig 1. Mechanical feedback sustains pulsatile contractions in excitable active medium.

Fig 1

(A) Feedback loop schematic of the system. Solid lines indicate biochemical feedback. Dashed lines indicate mechanical feedback. (B) RhoA (blue) and actomyosin concentration over time in the excitable phase during a single pulse. Dashed lines indicated experimentally measured values, solid lines show model with best fit parameters. (C-D) Trajectory curves and nullclines showing the fixed points for RhoA (blue) and actomyosin (orange) in the excitable (C) and in the pulsatile regime (D). Black arrows on the trajectory are equally spaced in time. Grey arrows show motion in phase space. Solid circles represent stable fixed points and the open circle is the unstable fixed point. (E) Concentration of actomyosin over time in the quiescent phase (S = 0), excitable phase (S = 0.002 s−1), pulsatile phase (S = 0.025 s−1), and contractile phase (S = 0.075 s−1). (F) Phase diagram of the system, for varying contractile stress, σa/E, and applied stimulus, S, with ηL/E = 5s. (G) Phase diagram of the system, for varying rate of autocatalytic production of RhoA, a, negative feedback parameter, g. See Table 1 for a list of default parameters in the model.

Here, for simplicity, we represent F-actin and myosin as a single species—actomyosin—whose properties combine active force production (by myosin) and inhibition of RhoA (by F-actin). This representation is justified since the time course of appearance and disappearance of F-actin and myosin intensities measured locally during pulses of RhoA activity in the C. elegans cortex are remarkably similar, and the cortical lifetimes of F-actin and myosin II measured by single molecule imaging are also remarkably similar [17]. Based on experimental observations [17], we make the following assumptions in our model. First, RhoA is activated at a constant basal rate, S. Second, active RhoA promotes further production of active RhoA via an autocatalytic feedback, and also promotes the production of actomyosin. Third, actomyosin (F-actin) promotes local inactivation of RhoA by recruiting GAPs. With these assumptions, the rate of production of RhoA-GTP can be written in terms of the RhoA-GTP concentration r and actomyosin concentration m:

Rr(r,m)=S+arra+rgmrrg+r, (1)

where S is the applied stimulus (or basal rate of RhoA production) representing the activity of Rho-GEF, a is the rate of autocatalytic production of RhoA, and g is a negative feedback parameter arising from F-actin-driven accumulation of the GAP RGA-3/4 that inactivates RhoA. The constants ra and rg represent the threshold concentrations of RhoA above which the rate of RhoA production is independent of RhoA concentration. The rate of actomyosin production is given by:

Rm(r,m)=Sm+kar2kdm, (2)

where Sm is the basal rate of actomyosin production, ka is the actomyosin assembly rate and kd is the disassembly rate. While the model parameters S, Sm, ka and kd are directly available from single-molecule data [17], the rest are calibrated by fitting our model to the experimental data for the concentration of RhoA and actomyosin during one contraction pulse (Fig 1B). The overall architecture of the biochemical circuit, namely autocatalytic production of RhoA and delayed feedback inhibition, is similar to recently proposed models for cortical RhoA dynamics [27, 29].

To introduce mechanical feedback into this model, we describe a locally homogeneous region of the cortex as an active viscoelastic material with strain u, with contractile stresses generated by the actomyosin:

ηLu˙+Eu=σamm0+m, (3)

where E is the compressional elastic modulus, ηL is the local viscosity of the cytoskeletal element, σa (> 0) is the maximum active stress arising from actomyosin-driven contractions, and m0 is the concentration of actomyosin at half-maximum stress. The viscoelastic time-scale, τ = ηL/E and relative contractility σa/E are estimated from available data on actin cortex of C. elegans [39]. Mechanical stress feeds back to the dynamics of both RhoA and actomyosin through conservation of mass; if the size of the system doubles then the concentration of chemical species must halve. Written explicitly, ∂u(c(1 + u)) = 0, which implies that ∂uc = −c/(1 + u), where c is the chemical concentration. While the contraction of a material in one or two dimensions should lead to an expansion in other dimensions, such deformation effects are not relevant for regulating the concentrations of membrane-bound RhoA and cortical actomyosin. It is likely that local contraction or dilation can drive variations in the thickness of cortical actomyosin, but how magnitude of cortical stress depends on thickness remains poorly understood and likely depends on details that vary across cells [40].

The governing equations for the coupled dynamics of RhoA and actomyosin are given by:

r˙=Rr(r,m)ru˙1+u, (4)
m˙=Rm(r,m)mu˙1+u. (5)

In the above equations, actomyosin provides additional feedback to both RhoA and itself through changes in mechanical strain. An increase in local actomyosin concentration induces a local contraction, which in turn increases the actomyosin concentrations. By contrast, when actomyosin concentration decreases, there is local strain relaxation leading to a decrease in actomyosin concentration. Using the parameters calibrated from experiments, we simulated these dynamics numerically [41], for different values of the activity parameters S and σa, to understand the role of mechanochemical feedback in actin cortex dynamics.

The model yields four distinct dynamic behaviours—quiescent, excitable, pulsatile, and contractile, depending on the magnitude of the applied stimulus, S (S1 Fig). For low S, the system displays an excitable behaviour—a single pulse of RhoA, followed by a pulse of actomyosin and contractile strain buildup, before reaching a steady-state (Fig 1E). This excitable behaviour can be visualised in phase space as a trajectory about the intersecting nullclines (Fig 1C). For this excitable pulse, we observed a loop about the high (r, m) fixed point before settling to a steady state at the lower fixed point.

As the applied stimulus is increased, other behaviours emerge (Fig 1E and 1F). For a small increase in S, we observe sustained pulsatile contractions, when the RhoA nullcline shifts up (Fig 1D), resulting in a single fixed point at high concentrations and the system is trapped in a limit cycle. At even higher values of S, the limit cycle is unstable and the pulse amplitude decays until the system settles in a contracted state with high actomyosin concentration and strain. Finally, for very low applied stimulus, we observe a quiescent mode; both RhoA and actomyosin steadily increase to a fixed set-point.

Previous work has shown that changes in concentration due to mechanical contraction can trigger oscillations in systems that otherwise remain stationary [42]. While pulsatile contractions are observed in the absence of contractile stress (σa = 0), we find that including mechanical feedback helps to sustain oscillations over a wider range of the parameter space (Fig 1F). As actomyosin concentration drops after a pulse, the mechanical strain relaxes, further reducing both actomyosin and RhoA concentrations away from a fixed point, allowing another pulse to occur. These pulsatile states occur above a threshold value for the autocatalytic positive feedback parameter a and for moderate values of the negative feedback parameter g (Fig 1G). When the negative feedback is higher than the positive feedback we observe quiescent behaviour, where any changes in RhoA concentration are quickly slowed down by the negative feedback and brought to its equilibrium value. When a is high compared to g we observed several distinct regions of dynamic behaviours. When both a and g are low, the system settles to a contractile steady-state. When both a and g are high the system is excitable, and when a is high and g is moderate the system becomes pulsatile (Fig 1G).

Spatial propagation of pulsatile flows and contractile pattern formation

To investigate the role of active mechanical stresses and RhoA signalling on spatial patterns and flows within the actin cortex, we develop a continuum active gel model of the actin cortex, coupled to the excitable RhoA signalling network and a viscous cytosol (Fig 1A). Using the C. elegans embryo as a model system, we develop a one-dimensional description of the actin cortex with periodic boundary conditions, assuming azimuthal symmetry around the long axis of the cell. The actin cortex is modelled as a porous Maxwell viscoelastic material, behaving elastically at short times and remodelling over longer time scales, with flows in the cortex advecting RhoA and actomyosin. The constitutive equation defining the time-evolution of stress field σ(x, t) is given by:

τσ˙+σ=ηxv+σa(mm0+m) (6)

where the spatial coordinate x denotes distance along the surface of the cell, τ is the viscoelastic relaxation time scale, η is the actomyosin network viscosity and v(x, t) is the actomyosin flow velocity. The second term on the right hand side of the above equation is the active stress term with σa the active contractile stress, and m0 is the actomyosin concentration at half-maximum active stress. Local balance of viscoelastic forces with cytosolic drag, pressure and actomyosin-generated active contractile forces can be written as:

Γ(vvcyto)=xσϕxP, (7)

where Γ is the frictional drag coefficient between the actomyosin network and the cytosol, vcyto is velocity of the cytosolic fluid, P is the cytosolic pressure, and ϕ is the cytosol volume fraction. Conservation of mass implies, ϕvcyto = −(1 − ϕ)v. Darcy’s law applied to the poroviscoelastic continuum yields a relationship between the pressure gradient and relative velocity between the cytosol and the cytoskeletal network [43, 44]

Γϕ(vcytov)=xP. (8)

By taking a spatial derivative in Eq (6), and using Eqs (7) and (8) alongwith mass conservation we obtain the following equation for the cytoskeletal velocity field:

γ(v+τv˙)=ηx2v+σax(mm0+m), (9)

where γ = Γ(1 + ϕ)/ϕ is the effective drag coefficient. Mechanical feedback is then introduced through myosin-induced F-actin flows which advect both RhoA and myosin [18, 45], leading to their local accumulation due to convergent flows or depletion via divergent flows. These advective flows compete with reaction and diffusion of RhoA and actomyosin:

r˙+x(rv)=Rr(r,m)+Drx2r, (10)
m˙+x(mv)=Rm(r,m)+Dmx2m, (11)

where Dr and Dm are the diffusion coefficients for RhoA and actomyosin, taken from Nishikawa et al [18]. The default parameter for active stress and viscoelastic time scale are taken from Saha et al [39]. The model equations are then numerically integrated [46] in a periodic box of length L = 10λ, where λ=η/γ is the hydrodynamic length scale.

As shown in Fig 2A–2C, the numerical solutions predict a wide diversity of dynamic states as the active contractility σa=σa/γ and RhoA stimulus S are varied– from stationary patterns to propagating waves and pulsatile flows (S2 Fig). At low σa, diffusion dominates over advection, giving rise to spatially uniform concentration profiles that exhibit excitable, oscillatory, or contractile dynamics (Fig 2C, top row), as observed in the cellular-scale model (Fig 1). In the absence of mechanical feedback, reaction-diffusion alone cannot generate spatial patterns because the activator, RhoA, diffuses much faster than the inhibitor, actomyosin (DrDm). In this regime, the homogeneous state becomes unstable and Turing patterns emerge, only when DrDm (S3 Fig).

Fig 2. Active stress generates spatial patterns and pulsatory flows.

Fig 2

(A) Phase diagram of the dynamic states of the system as a function of applied Rho stimulus S and active contractility σa=σa/γ. Encircled data points correspond to kymographs in panel C. (B) Actomyosin wave speed, computed from linear stability analysis of the model equations, for varying S and σa. (C) Kymograph of actomyosin concentration in different regimes (left to right, top to bottom): excitable, oscillatory, homogeneous contractile, localised contractions, propagating waves and pulsatile flows. See Tables 1 and 2 for a list of model parameters.

As σa is increased, contractile instabilities develop due to local accumulation of actomyosin, allowing finite wavelength patterns to emerge. At low S and high σa, we observe stable localized peaks of actomyosin and RhoA (Fig 2C, bottom left). Initially, autocatalytic positive feedback of RhoA creates small RhoA concentration peaks (Fig 3A, 1st panel), which in turn produce actomyosin (Fig 3A, 2nd panel). As actomyosin begins to accumulate, large inward flows are generated, further increasing both RhoA and actomyosin concentrations (Fig 3A, 3rd panel). Finally, actomyosin-induced inhibition of RhoA results in RhoA localization on either side of the actomyosin peak (Fig 3A, 4th panel), in contrast to Turing patterns where activators and inhibitors overlap. With no RhoA advection, RhoA diffuses away from the peak, producing actomyosin behind it and generates a travelling wave (S4A Fig). With no actomyosin advection, actomyosin concentrations remain too low to prevent RhoA from diffusing and create a uniform steady state (S4B Fig). When several contractile actomyosin foci exist, they attract each other and merge into a single peak. This phase is reminiscent of equatorial RhoA zones during cell division [47, 48], and medial [49] and junctional [50] RhoA domains in polarized epithelia.

Fig 3. Feedback mechanisms for pulsatile flows and stationary pattern formation.

Fig 3

(A) RhoA and actomyosin concentration during localized contraction (σa=80 μm2/s, S = 0) at t = 5s, 15s, 25s, and 35s (left to right). (B) RhoA and actomyosin concentration profiles over a pulsatile flow cycle (σa=80 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1) at t = 500s, 520s, 540s, and 565s (left to right). Arrows indicate flow velocity.

At higher S and moderate σa, we observe propagating waves and pulsatile flows (Fig 2C, bottom). A higher level of excitation in RhoA generates a localized actomyosin peak with high contractility. Away from the actomyosin peak, RhoA concentrations are higher and are advected towards actomyosin (Fig 3B, 1st panel). Advected RhoA produces actomyosin as it moves, such that the newly assembled actomyosin generates flows away from the centre, reducing the actomyosin concentration at the centre (Fig 3A, 2nd panel). Once the initial contraction dissipates, the two remaining actomyosin peaks merge, completing a cycle (Fig 3A, panels 3–4).

In the propagating waves state, we observe the periodic formation of RhoA pulses, which travel in waves before annihilating as two waves meet, as observed in the starfish oocyte [16, 27]. As σa is increased, actomyosin pulses generate large contractile flows that advect neighbouring pulses, creating chaotic, aperiodic motion. The pulses are highly localised, with small regions of high actomyosin concentration that form before dispersing, followed by a new pulse elsewhere, as in the C. elegans embryo [17]. Mechanical feedback through advection is necessary for the waves to form (S4D Fig). Without advection of RhoA however, we may still observe waves, since the actomyosin generated by RhoA forms clusters that travel with RhoA (S4C Fig). However, these waves display much less chaotic motion when compared to the system with advection (Fig 2C, bottom right).

Linear stability analysis of the continuum model reveals the role of active stress in destabilising the homogeneous state of the system (Fig 2B, S5 Fig). At low S, three fixed points exist (Fig 1B), with the lower fixed point being stable for high σa. As S is increased, the RhoA nullcline shifts up until only one fixed point remains and the system enters the pulsatile regime (Fig 1C). Increasing σa leads to contractile instabilities that manifest as propagating waves and pulsatile flows (Fig 2C). While active stress is required for wave propagation, higher σa leads to lower wave speeds (Fig 2B).

Response to local bursts of contractile activity

While our model can capture many of the dynamic states observed in the actin cortex, cells must have the ability to actively switch between flowing and contractile states during physiological transitions. Such state transitions may be triggered by a local up-regulation in RhoA activity, which may be induced in response to mechanical forces or by cell cycle checkpoints. But how mechanochemical coupling shapes the spatiotemporal response to transient localized changes in RhoA activity remains unclear.

To understand how RhoA signals can propagate through space and induce state transitions, we locally turned on RhoA activity and examined the output response. Starting from rest with no applied stimulus (S = 0), we applied an increased stimulus at the central region (S = 0.03 s−1) (Fig 4A). By changing active stress in the system, we were able to regulate both the ability for the input RhoA to propagate in space, and for the system to remember the spatial location of the signal. We observed three distinct phases (Fig 4A): (i) propagation of a bistable front, where the memory of the signal location is lost and a global increase in RhoA concentration is observed, (ii) a soliton phase with transient spatial memory, and (iii) a high memory phase where a stable RhoA pattern is maintained.

Fig 4. Response to local bursts of contractile activity.

Fig 4

(A) Kymograph of Rho concentration upon local transient application of Rho stimulus: S = 0.03 s−1 inside box (dashed rectangle) and S = 0 outside box, for different values of active stress: (left) bistable front propagation for σa=12.5 μm2/s, (middle) solitons for σa=25 μm2/s, and (right) localised contraction for σa=50 μm2/s. (B) Spatially averaged RhoA concentration, 300s after the application of stimulus. (C) Correlation between RhoA concentration and input stimulus S(x, t), averaged over the last 120s.

At low active stress (σa=12.5 μm2/s), RhoA is excited into a pulsatile state within the activation region, while spreading laterally through diffusion (Fig 4A, left). A front of highly concentrated RhoA travels away from the source, increasing the total RhoA and actomyosin in the system (Fig 4B). This is reminiscent of a bistable front propagation in classical excitable systems [50, 51], where the system switches to the high concentration stationary state (Fig 2C).

As active stress is increased, we find that mechanical feedback is able to tune the properties of the biochemical system away from classical excitable systems. At moderate active stress (σa=25 μm2/s), RhoA pulses spread out as two solitons before annihilating as they meet (Fig 4A, middle), as seen in surface contraction waves [19, 20]. In contrast to classical excitable systems, actomyosin generated behind the RhoA wavefront increases its own concentration through contractile flows. This region of highly concentrated actomyosin behind the wave acts as a barrier that inhibits RhoA, preventing the system from switching to the high fixed point, and instead creates a soliton. Such a barrier can be seen at σa=12 μ2/s, although it is too weak to prevent diffusion, with the band of reduced RhoA concentration behind the wavefront (Fig 4A, left).

At high active stress (σa=50 μm2/s), the contractile forces within the activated region are strong enough to maintain a spatially localized state that persists after the activation, remaining stationary in a fixed location at the centre of activation (Fig 4A, right). This suggests a potential mechanism for cells to direct the locations of contractility. Without the guidance of externally induced RhoA activation, the system in this parameter regime is incapable of spontaneously forming a stable pattern.

To quantify the input-output relationship of the system, we measured the correlation between the input signal and the output RhoA concentration at long times (Fig 4C). At low σa, RhoA spreads outwards, leading to a loss of correlation between input and the output signal, akin to a memoryless system. For the soliton case, the shape of the input signal is remembered, resulting in a negative correlation as the waves travel away from the source. Finally, in the spatially patterned phase, a high-memory state emerges where RhoA remains localized at the centre of activation, with a strong positive correlation between the input and the output. These results suggest that mechanical stresses can play an important role in biochemical signal propagation, and in retaining the spatial memory of activity. For low active stress, signals propagate the fastest with global changes in contractility and no memory of the spatial location of the signal. As active stress is increased, we observe contraction waves propagating away from the source, displaying transient memory. At higher stresses, a high memory state develops, where transient local RhoA activations create localized contractile states.

Network formation, pulsatile flows and topological turbulence

We now proceed to analyze our model in two spatial dimensions to investigate how contractile patterns form and propagate on the surface of a cell. The constitutive equation defining the time-evolution of the stress field σ(x, t) is given by

τσ˙ij+σij=ηbkvkδij+ηs(ivj+jvikvkδij)+σa(mm0+m)δij (12)

where v is the velocity vector, ηs and ηb are the shear and bulk viscosities, and we have assumed that the bulk and shear components have the same relaxation timescale, τ. Using local force balance

γvi=jσij (13)

we find that the equation governing the temporal evolution of the velocity field v is given by

γ(v+τv˙)=ηs2v+ηb(·v)+σa(mm0+m). (14)

We assume that the bulk viscosity is higher than the shear viscosity, such that ηb=34η and ηs=14η, where η is the experimentally measured viscosity [18]. The reaction-diffusion equations for RhoA and actomyosin concentration fields are given by

r˙+·(rv)=Rr(r,m)+Dr2r, (15)
m˙+·(mv)=Rm(r,m)+Dm2m. (16)

In the two-dimensional model, as we vary active stress (σa) and the applied stimulus of RhoA (S) we observe similar dynamic phases as in the one-dimensional model, though with more varied spatial organisation. At low applied stimulus and high active stress, we observe the formation of stable contractile networks (Fig 5A and S1 Video), analogous to the pattern formation phase observed in the one-dimensional model. Here, an initial excitable pulse forms many small cluster of highly concentrated actomyosin (Fig 5A, left panel). Over time, the clusters stretch and merge with other nearby clusters (Fig 5A, middle panel), eventually creating a space-spanning network of actomyosin, which gradually condenses into a stable configuration of fully connected edges and vertices (Fig 5A, right panel). These condensates of actomyosin are stabilized by contractile flows, similar to the localized contraction peaks observed in the one-dimensional model (Fig 3A). This sequence of actomyosin patterning is reminiscent of apical microridge formation in some epithelial cells [52].

Fig 5. Pattern formation and pulsatile flows in two spatial dimensions.

Fig 5

(A-C) Actomyosin concentration field obtained from simulations of the active gel model in two spatial dimensions, showing (A) contractile network formation (σa=80 μm2/s, S = 0), (B) propagating waves (σa=50 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1) and (C) localized pulsatile contractions (σa=100 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1). Scale bar indicates a distance of λ = 15 μm.

As the applied stimulus S is increased we observe pulsatile contractions and propagating waves of RhoA and actomyosin. At moderate active stress we observe propagating waves (Fig 5B and S2 Video), in which waves of actomyosin propagate with constant velocity until two waves collide and annihilate, with new waves periodically produced. Finally, at high applied stimulus and high active stress, we observe the pulsatile contraction phase (Fig 5C and S3 Video). Pulses of actomyosin contract into highly concentrated foci before dispersing and new pulses are formed. These dynamics are distinct from propagating waves as the pulses of actomyosin move more erratically as clusters merge, and show much more spatial variation in concentration. The corresponding velocity and strain fields are shown in S6 Fig.

The propagating waves of RhoA show features of topological turbulence, as recently reported in both the Xenopus eggs and embryo [27] and the starfish oocyte [16]. In this regime, RhoA and actomyosin exist with a limit cycle (Fig 1D), allowing us to extract the phase of oscillation using the relation ϕ=tan1(rr¯mm¯), where r¯ and m¯ are the mean RhoA and actomyosin concentrations (Fig 6A). We find that numerous topological defects exist in the phase field, indicating locations where the phase field is discontinuous, as reported in experiments [16, 27].

Fig 6. Topological turbulence in RhoA flows.

Fig 6

(A) The RhoA phase field, ϕ, corresponding to the dynamics in Fig 5B. Plus and minus symbols represent the location of +1 and -1 defects, respectively. Scale bar indicates a distance of λ = 15 μm. (B) Spatial map of the phase velocity field vϕ = ∇ϕ. (C) Spatial map of contours of the phase vorticity field ω = ∇ × vϕ. Red indicates positive vorticity, corresponding to plus defects. Blue indicates negative vorticity, corresponding to minus defects. Lines indicate streamlines of the phase velocity field. (D) Representative images of a +1 defect (top) and -1 defect (bottom) over an oscillation cycle at (left to right) t = 640s, 660s, and 680s. (E) Linear scaling between the effective kinetic energy and the effective enstrophy of the RhoA phase velocity. (F) Probability density of normalized speed of RhoA phase field motion, for different values of active stress, σa=50,60,100. Light colours indicate higher magnitudes of active stress.

These may be parameterised by the winding number: the total amount that the phase changes by following an anti-clockwise contour around the defect. From the phase velocity field vϕ = ∇ϕ (Fig 6B), the integer winding number is calculated as 12πCvϕ·ds, where C is a closed curve around the defect containing no others. In a +1 defect, the phase field spirals anti-clockwise about the defect, while in a -1 defect it spirals in a clockwise direction (Fig 6D). In our model, we find approximately the same number of +1 and -1 defects. In addition, oppositely charged defects attract one another, and annihilate when close enough, conserving the overall charge of the system (S4 Video).

The phase velocity also describes an effective velocity field due to a potential flow with point vortices of magnitude ω = ∇ × vϕ, with +1 and -1 defects corresponding to the center of vorticies with clockwise or anticlockwise rotations. We find a linear scaling between the effective kinetic energy E¯=12vϕ2 and the effective enstrophy Ω¯=12ω2, a measure of vorticity, for different values of active stress, in agreement with experimental data on RhoA in starfish oocytes [16]. Furthermore, when we quantify the phase velocity statistics, we find a power law tail in the probability density function which decays like v−3, likely due to interacting vortices, consistent with experimental results [16] and theoretical predictions for vortex interactions [53]. Thus our model can quantitatively capture the key statistics and scaling laws of defect mediated turbulence in the RhoA phase field.

Discussion

Activator-inhibitor coupling between RhoA and actomyosin has been shown to generate excitable dynamics and oscillations in the concentration of RhoA, F-actin and myosin-II [17, 18, 27, 29]. Purely biochemical feedback models with reaction-diffusion dynamics are thus sufficient to reproduce pulsatile dynamics of cortical RhoA and actomyosin concentrations as observed in experiments [17, 18, 27]. However, in contrast to Turing pattern-forming systems [26], the activator RhoA is fast-diffusing while the inhibitor actomyosin is slow-diffusing, thus the system should be expected to form spatially uniform states. Stochastic noise is therefore required to trigger the formation of waves in these excitable chemical systems without additional feedback mechanisms [17, 27, 29].

Mechanical forces generated by myosin-II in F-actin networks play an essential role in regulating the emergent dynamics of the cortical actomyosin networks. Mechanochemical feedback motifs in which mechanical strain locally upregulates actomyosin concentration through a mechanochemical coupling can lead to the formation of stress patterns [32, 54]. Alternatively, the contractile stresses generated by actomyosin drives advective flows of RhoA and actomyosin up the concentration gradients, and thus providing an additional mechanical feedback through active stress. Active fluid models involving the diffusion and advection of active stress producing components, are cable of displaying both pulsatile and stable contractions without explicit coupling to signalling networks [33, 35]. In particular, it has been suggested that spontaneous pulsatory patterns may emerge when the fast-diffusing chemical species up-regulates and the slow-diffusing species down-regulates the active stress, or the up-regulator of active stress turns over faster compared to the down-regulator [35]. These conclusions, however, stand in contrast to the known properties of cortical RhoA and actomyosin, where the both the fast-diffusing RhoA and slow-diffusing actomyosin up-regulate the active stress.

Recent work suggests that feedback between chemical signaling and mechanical forces are essential to regulate pulsatile actomyosin dynamics in the cellular actin cortex [18]. Without coupling to chemical signaling, a positive feedback between contractile stresses generated by actomyosin and advective flows can lead to a density instability in the cortex, leading to the formation of high density myosin regions. By regulating myosin assembly and disassembly by an independent oscillatory signal, the contractile instability can be controlled, generating a pulsatile pattern of myosin-driven contractions. While this model neglects feedback between excitable RhoA and actomyosin, it illustrates how the coupling between signaling and mechanics can lead to spontaneous formation and propagation of RhoA waves without noise. At the cellular scale, dilution effects due to contraction could be capable of inducing oscillations in otherwise stationary systems [42]. However, the role of myosin-induced forces on wave propagation may be system dependent. In the Xenopus embryo, the myosin inhibitor blebbistatin had no significant effect on the observed pulses [27], but in the starfish oocyte, applying blebbistatin prevented surface contraction waves from propagating [20].

In this work, we couple actomyosin mechanics and biochemistry with RhoA signalling in a unified theoretical framework, where mechanical stresses and chemical signalling feedback to each other, regulating the emergent dynamics of the cortex. With this mechanochemical model, we are able to reproduce waves, patterns and pulsatile dynamics observed in the actin cortex by changing only two control parameters, namely the amount of active stress, and the basal rate of RhoA production. We demonstrate that mechanical feedback helps to robustly sustain pulsatile contractions, and provides a new mechanism for spatial patterning of RhoA and myosin, distinct from classical Turing patterns [26]. Having an excitable cortex with tunable dynamics and mechanochemical feedback can be beneficial in a number of morphogenetic contexts. Sustained pulsed contractions can act as a mechanical ratchet to sequentially reduce cell area and drive tissue bending [1114, 55, 56]. Mechanochemical feedback may be important in enabling robust control of this morphogenetic ratchet. Cells may also display excitable behaviours which are governed by mechanics, for example, with active contractions triggered by large mechanical strains on the cell, helping to prevent tissue rupture [57, 58].

At low RhoA activity and high contractile activity, myosin forms stationary patterns, with RhoA localised on either side of the myosin peak. In two spatial dimensions, we observe the formation of many small clusters of high myosin concentrations, which stretch towards neighbouring clusters and condense into a stable contractile domains of actomyosin and RhoA. This is reminiscent of stable patterns observed in vivo on the apical surfaces of epithelial cells, including microridges [52], stable junctional and medial RhoA domains [49, 50]. As contractile activity is increased, the waves of myosin become highly peaked, creating pulsing contractile networks, reminiscent of pulsatile contractions in the C. elegans cortex [5]. At moderate activity, we observe periodic waves of myosin which annihilate before new wavefronts are generated in regions with low actomyosin concentration. These waves show features of topological turbulence, reminiscent of topological turbulence in RhoA concentration waves observed in Xenopus and starfish eggs [16, 27]. Besides generating patterns and flows, the level of active contractile stress regulates the system’s response to local RhoA signals, enabling phase transitions and memory entrainment as the activity is increased. Together, these results highlight the importance of considering both mechanical forces and chemical reactions when modelling the actin cortex, and they reveal a variety of ways in which cells can tune the dynamic coupling between RhoA activity, force production, and advective transport to control morphogenetic behaviours.

Methods

Linear stability analysis

To understand how mechanical stress and biochemical stimulus work together to generate pulsatile behaviour and propagating waves, we perform linear stability analysis about the homogenous steady-state (or fixed point) to determine the stability of the state, and the onset of oscillatory instabilities. In particular, we use linear stability analysis to compute the frequency, wave length and wave speed of the wave-like states that emerge from perturbations about quiescent homogeneous state. A perturbation of the form y˜eikx about the steady state, (r, m, 0), results in the following Jacobian:

J˜=(aA(A+r)2gmG(G+r)2Drk2gr(G+r)ikr2karkdDmk2ikm0ikσam0γτ(m0+m)2γ+νk2γτ). (17)

By finding the eigenvalue with the highest real part over all k, λ(k*), we obtain the fastest growing mode with wavelength 1/2πk*, frequency Im(λ(k)), and a wave speed of Im(λ(k))/2πk*.

Numerical method

The system of ordinary differential equations (Eqs 15) are numerically integrated using the SciPy package, which implements a Runge-Kutta 4(5) method. The 1D and 2D systems of partial differential equations are solved numerically using the FiPy python package, a finite volume PDE solver. The equations discretized in a periodic box with edge lengths L = 10λ, where λ=η/γ is the hydrodynamic length scale, using 150 grid points in each dimension. The system is then integrated forward in time using an implicity method, outputting in timesteps of dt = 1s.

Model parameters

Tables 1 and 2 list the parameters used in our simulations. The RhoA-actomyosin chemical reaction model and parameters are obtained by fitting data from Michaux et al [17]. Parameters for dimensionless active stress and viscoelastic time scale are taken from Saha et al [39], and myosin and RhoA diffusion coefficients are taken from Nishikawa et al [18].

Table 1. Default biochemical parameters.

Parameter Value
S 0 s−1
a 0.1609 s−1
n 1
r a 0.3833
g 0.1787 s−1
r g 0.01
S m 0.0076 s−1
k a 0.1408 s−1
k d 0.0828 s−1

Table 2. Default mechanical parameters.

Parameter Value
τ 5s
λ 14.3 μm
σa/γ 49.8 μm2s−1
D r 0.1 μm2s−1
D m 0.01 μm2s−1

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Dynamics in the activator-inhibitor mechanochemical model in response to changes in RhoA stimulus S.

(A-C) Dynamics of RhoA concentration (blue), actomyosin concentration (red), and contractile strain (yellow) in the (A) excitable phase (σa/E = 0.2, S = 0.002 s−1), (B) pulsatile phase (σa/E = 0.2, S = 0.025 s−1), and (C) the contractile phase (σa/E = 0.2, S = 0.075 s−1).

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Strain rate and RhoA kymographs in different phases of the continuum active gel model.

Kymographs of (A) strain rate (∂x v), and (B) RhoA concentration for the different phases in the active gel model corresponding to the actomyosin kymographs shown in Fig 2C.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Reaction-diffusion alone is not sufficient to generate pulsatile flows and waves in RhoA-myosin systems.

(A) Spatial wavelength, (B) temporal frequency, and (C) wave speed computed by linear stability analysis of the RhoA-myosin reaction-diffusion model with σa=0, for varying stimulus S and activator to inhibitor diffusivity ratio, Dr/Dm. White regions in the parameter space show homogeneous steady states. Default parameter value of Dr/Dm is 10. (D-E) Kymographs of actomyosin concentration (D) and RhoA concentration (E) showing pattern formation for low RhoA diffusivity (Dr/Dm = 0.01, S = 0.01 s−1). (F) Steady-state spatial profiles of RhoA and actomyosin concentrations for the patterns corresponding to (D) and (E). Overlapping peaks indicates Turing pattern formation.

(TIF)

S4 Fig. RhoA and actomyosin advection are necessary for stable pattern formation and propagating waves.

(A-D) Kymographs of actomyosin concentration with (A, C) no RhoA advection, and (B, D) no actomyosin advection. For (A, B) S = 0.00 s−1, σa=100, and (C, D) S = 0.01 s−1, σa=100.

(TIF)

S5 Fig. Linear stability analysis predicts the frequency and wavelength of pulsatile contractions.

(A) Spatial wavelength, and (B) temporal frequency computed by linear stability analysis for varying active contractility σa and RhoA stimulus S.

(TIF)

S6 Fig. Velocity field in two spatial dimensions.

(A-C) Actomyosin concentration field obtained from simulations of the active gel model in two spatial dimensions, showing (A) contractile network formation (σa=80 μm2/s, S = 0), (B) propagating waves (σa=50 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1) and (C) localized pulsatile contractions (σa=100 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1). Scale bar indicates a distance of λ = 15 μm. Arrows indicate velocity field v and colour the local strain rate ∇⋅v.

(TIF)

S1 Video. Actomyosin network formation.

(MP4)

S2 Video. Propagating waves of actomyosin.

(MP4)

S3 Video. Pulsatile actomyosin contractions.

(MP4)

S4 Video. Topological turbulent flows of RhoA.

(MP4)

Data Availability

Data and codes from this study are available at: https://github.com/BanerjeeLab/CortexPattern.

Funding Statement

MFS received no specific funding for this work. SB received funding from the Royal Society (URF/R1/180187), Human Frontiers Science Program (RGY0073/2018) and the National Institutes of Health (R35GM143042). EM received funding from the National Institutes of Health (R01GM098441) The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1. Fletcher DA, Mullins RD. Cell mechanics and the cytoskeleton. Nature. 2010;463(7280):485–492. doi: 10.1038/nature08908 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Salbreux G, Charras G, Paluch E. Actin cortex mechanics and cellular morphogenesis. Trends in cell biology. 2012;22(10):536–545. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2012.07.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Murrell M, Oakes PW, Lenz M, Gardel ML. Forcing cells into shape: the mechanics of actomyosin contractility. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2015;16(8):486–498. doi: 10.1038/nrm4012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Banerjee S, Gardel ML, Schwarz US. The Actin Cytoskeleton as an Active Adaptive Material. Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics. 2020;11(1):421–439. doi: 10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031218-013231 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Munro E, Nance J, Priess JR. Cortical flows powered by asymmetrical contraction transport PAR proteins to establish and maintain anterior-posterior polarity in the early C. elegans embryo. Developmental Cell. 2004;7(3):413–424. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2004.08.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Sedzinski J, Biro M, Oswald A, Tinevez JY, Salbreux G, Paluch E. Polar actomyosin contractility destabilizes the position of the cytokinetic furrow. Nature. 2011;476(7361):462–466. doi: 10.1038/nature10286 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Rauzi M, Lenne PF, Lecuit T. Planar polarized actomyosin contractile flows control epithelial junction remodelling. Nature. 2010;468(7327):1110–1114. doi: 10.1038/nature09566 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Mayer M, Depken M, Bois JS, Jülicher F, Grill SW. Anisotropies in cortical tension reveal the physical basis of polarizing cortical flows. Nature. 2010;467(7315):617–621. doi: 10.1038/nature09376 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Blanchoin L, Boujemaa-Paterski R, Sykes C, Plastino J. Actin dynamics, architecture, and mechanics in cell motility. Physiological Reviews. 2014;94(1):235–263. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00018.2013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Vignaud T, Copos C, Leterrier C, Tseng Q, Blanchoin L, Mogilner A, et al. Stress fibers are embedded in a contractile cortical network. Nature Materials. 2020; p. 1–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Martin AC. Pulsation and stabilization: contractile forces that underlie morphogenesis. Developmental biology. 2010;341(1):114–125. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.10.031 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Fernandez-Gonzalez R, Zallen JA. Oscillatory behaviors and hierarchical assembly of contractile structures in intercalating cells. Physical biology. 2011;8(4):045005. doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/8/4/045005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Martin AC, Kaschube M, Wieschaus EF. Pulsed contractions of an actin–myosin network drive apical constriction. Nature. 2009;457(7228):495–499. doi: 10.1038/nature07522 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Blanchard GB, Étienne J, Gorfinkiel N. From pulsatile apicomedial contractility to effective epithelial mechanics. Current opinion in genetics & development. 2018;51:78–87. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2018.07.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Bertet C, Sulak L, Lecuit T. Myosin-dependent junction remodelling controls planar cell intercalation and axis elongation. Nature. 2004;429(6992):667–671. doi: 10.1038/nature02590 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Tan TH, Liu J, Miller PW, Tekant M, Dunkel J, Fakhri N. Topological turbulence in the membrane of a living cell. Nature Physics. 2020; p. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Michaux JB, Robin FB, McFadden WM, Munro EM. Excitable RhoA dynamics drive pulsed contractions in the early C. elegans embryo. Journal of Cell Biology. 2018;217(12):4230–4252. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201806161 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Nishikawa M, Naganathan SR, Jülicher F, Grill SW. Controlling contractile instabilities in the actomyosin cortex. Elife. 2017;6:e19595. doi: 10.7554/eLife.19595 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Yoneda M, Kobayakawa Y, Kubota HY, Sakai M. Surface contraction waves in amphibian eggs. Journal of cell science. 1982;54(1):35–46. doi: 10.1242/jcs.54.1.35 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Bischof J, Brand CA, Somogyi K, Májer I, Thome S, Mori M, et al. A cdk1 gradient guides surface contraction waves in oocytes. Nature communications. 2017;8(1):1–10. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-00979-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Bement WM, Mandato CA, Kirsch MN. Wound-induced assembly and closure of an actomyosin purse string in Xenopus oocytes. Current biology. 1999;9(11):579–587. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(99)80261-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Brugués A, Anon E, Conte V, Veldhuis JH, Gupta M, Colombelli J, et al. Forces driving epithelial wound healing. Nature physics. 2014;10(9):683–690. doi: 10.1038/nphys3040 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Maniou E, Staddon MF, Marshall AR, Greene ND, Copp AJ, Banerjee S, et al. Hindbrain neuropore tissue geometry determines asymmetric cell-mediated closure dynamics in mouse embryos. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2021;118(19). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2023163118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Murthy K, Wadsworth P. Myosin-II-dependent localization and dynamics of F-actin during cytokinesis. Current biology. 2005;15(8):724–731. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2005.02.055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Vavylonis D, Wu JQ, Hao S, O’Shaughnessy B, Pollard TD. Assembly mechanism of the contractile ring for cytokinesis by fission yeast. Science. 2008;319(5859):97–100. doi: 10.1126/science.1151086 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Turing A. The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences. 1952;237(641):37–72. [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Bement WM, Leda M, Moe AM, Kita AM, Larson ME, Golding AE, et al. Activator–inhibitor coupling between Rho signalling and actin assembly makes the cell cortex an excitable medium. Nature cell biology. 2015;17(11):1471–1483. doi: 10.1038/ncb3251 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Goryachev AB, Leda M, Miller AL, von Dassow G, Bement WM. How to make a static cytokinetic furrow out of traveling excitable waves. Small GTPases. 2016;7(2):65–70. doi: 10.1080/21541248.2016.1168505 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Kamps D, Koch J, Juma VO, Campillo-Funollet E, Graessl M, Banerjee S, et al. Optogenetic Tuning Reveals Rho Amplification-Dependent Dynamics of a Cell Contraction Signal Network. Cell reports. 2020;33(9):108467. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108467 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Howard J, Grill SW, Bois JS. Turing’s next steps: the mechanochemical basis of morphogenesis. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2011;12(6):392–398. doi: 10.1038/nrm3120 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Banerjee S, Marchetti MC. Instabilities and oscillations in isotropic active gels. Soft Matter. 2011;7(2):463–473. doi: 10.1039/C0SM00494D [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Banerjee S, Utuje KJ, Marchetti MC. Propagating stress waves during epithelial expansion. Physical review letters. 2015;114(22):228101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.228101 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Bois JS, Jülicher F, Grill SW. Pattern formation in active fluids. Physical review letters. 2011;106(2):028103. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.028103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Gross P, Kumar KV, Grill SW. How active mechanics and regulatory biochemistry combine to form patterns in development. Annual Review of Biophysics. 2017;46:337–356. doi: 10.1146/annurev-biophys-070816-033602 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Kumar KV, Bois JS, Jülicher F, Grill SW. Pulsatory patterns in active fluids. Physical Review Letters. 2014;112(20):208101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.208101 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Banerjee DS, Munjal A, Lecuit T, Rao M. Actomyosin pulsation and flows in an active elastomer with turnover and network remodeling. Nature communications. 2017;8(1):1–13. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-01130-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Charras G. Stress fibres and the cortex work in tandem. Nature Materials. 2021;20(3):281–283. doi: 10.1038/s41563-021-00944-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Ramaswamy R, Jülicher F. Activity induces traveling waves, vortices and spatiotemporal chaos in a model actomyosin layer. Scientific Reports. 2016;6(1):1–11. doi: 10.1038/srep20838 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Saha A, Nishikawa M, Behrndt M, Heisenberg CP, Jülicher F, Grill SW. Determining physical properties of the cell cortex. Biophysical journal. 2016;110(6):1421–1429. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2016.02.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Chugh P, Clark AG, Smith MB, Cassani DA, Dierkes K, Ragab A, et al. Actin cortex architecture regulates cell surface tension. Nature Cell Biology. 2017;19(6):689–697. doi: 10.1038/ncb3525 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Virtanen P, Gommers R, Oliphant TE, Haberland M, Reddy T, Cournapeau D, et al. SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nature methods. 2020;17(3):261–272. doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Buttenschön A, Liu Y, Edelstein-Keshet L. Cell size, mechanical tension, and GTPase signaling in the single cell. Bulletin of mathematical biology. 2020;82(2):1–33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Charras GT, Yarrow JC, Horton MA, Mahadevan L, Mitchison T. Non-equilibration of hydrostatic pressure in blebbing cells. Nature. 2005;435(7040):365–369. doi: 10.1038/nature03550 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Mogilner A, Manhart A. Intracellular fluid mechanics: Coupling cytoplasmic flow with active cytoskeletal gel. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 2018;50:347–370. doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010816-060238 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Munjal A, Philippe JM, Munro E, Lecuit T. A self-organized biomechanical network drives shape changes during tissue morphogenesis. Nature. 2015;524(7565):351–355. doi: 10.1038/nature14603 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Guyer JE, Wheeler D, Warren JA. FiPy: Partial differential equations with Python. Computing in Science & Engineering. 2009;11(3):6–15. doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2009.52 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Bement WM, Benink HA, Von Dassow G. A microtubule-dependent zone of active RhoA during cleavage plane specification. Journal of Cell Biology. 2005;170(1):91–101. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200501131 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Bement WM, Miller AL, von Dassow G. Rho GTPase activity zones and transient contractile arrays. Bioessays. 2006;28(10):983–993. doi: 10.1002/bies.20477 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Mason FM, Xie S, Vasquez CG, Tworoger M, Martin AC. RhoA GTPase inhibition organizes contraction during epithelial morphogenesis. Journal of Cell Biology. 2016;214(5):603–617. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201603077 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Priya R, Gomez GA, Budnar S, Verma S, Cox HL, Hamilton NA, et al. Feedback regulation through myosin II confers robustness on RhoA signalling at E-cadherin junctions. Nature Cell Biology. 2015;17(10):1282–1293. doi: 10.1038/ncb3239 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Priya R, Gomez GA, Budnar S, Acharya BR, Czirok A, Neufeld Z, et al. Bistable front dynamics in a contractile medium: Travelling wave fronts and cortical advection define stable zones of RhoA signaling at epithelial adherens junctions. PLoS computational biology. 2017;13(3):e1005411. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005411 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. van Loon AP, Erofeev IS, Maryshev IV, Goryachev AB, Sagasti A. Cortical contraction drives the 3D patterning of epithelial cell surfaces. Journal of Cell Biology. 2020;219(3). doi: 10.1083/jcb.201904144 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Bray A. Velocity distribution of topological defects in phase-ordering systems. Physical Review E. 1997;55(5):5297. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.55.5297 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Brinkmann F, Mercker M, Richter T, Marciniak-Czochra A. Post-Turing tissue pattern formation: Advent of mechanochemistry. PLoS Computational Biology. 2018;14(7):e1006259. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006259 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Staddon MF, Cavanaugh KE, Munro EM, Gardel ML, Banerjee S. Mechanosensitive Junction Remodeling Promotes Robust Epithelial Morphogenesis. Biophysical Journal. 2019;117(9):1739–1750. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2019.09.027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Cavanaugh KE, Staddon MF, Munro E, Banerjee S, Gardel ML. RhoA mediates epithelial cell shape changes via mechanosensitive endocytosis. Developmental Cell. 2020;52(2):152–166. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2019.12.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Armon S, Bull MS, Aranda-Diaz A, Prakash M. Ultrafast epithelial contractions provide insights into contraction speed limits and tissue integrity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(44):E10333–E10341. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1802934115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Armon S, Bull MS, Moriel A, Aharoni H, Prakash M. Modeling epithelial tissues as active-elastic sheets reproduce contraction pulses and predict rip resistance. Communications Physics. 2021;4(1):1–9. doi: 10.1038/s42005-021-00712-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Comput Biol. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009981.r001

Decision Letter 0

Mark Alber, Alex Mogilner

16 Nov 2021

Dear Prof. Banerjee,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Pulsatile contractions and pattern formation in excitable actomyosin cortex" for consideration at PLOS Computational Biology.

As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. In light of the reviews (below this email), we would like to invite the resubmission of a significantly-revised version that takes into account the reviewers' comments.

All 3 reviewers appreciated the study, but all have a number of critiques, some of them major,

which you will have to address. We cannot make any decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments. Your revised manuscript is also likely to be sent to at least one of the reviewers for further evaluation.

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript. Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 60 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email. Please note that revised manuscripts received after the 60-day due date may require evaluation and peer review similar to newly submitted manuscripts.

Thank you again for your submission. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Alex Mogilner

Guest Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

Mark Alber

Deputy Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

***********************

Dear Authors, all 3 reviewers appreciated the study, but all have a number of critiques, some of them major,

which you will have to address. I will send the revised manuscript to at least one of the reviewers for the

second look.

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: Review on the manuscript "Pulsatile contractions and pattern formation in excitable actomyosin cortex"

by M.F. Staddon, E.M. Munro and S. Banerjee submitted for publication to PlosCompBiol.

This is a modelling and simulation study motivated by recent experimental observations [17] on pulsed contractions in the cortex of C. Elegans. The authors formulate a mathematical model for the feedback between RhoA and Actomyosin which has both, a biochemical component (the know Activator-Inhibitor Loop between RhoA and actomyosin) and a mechanical component (the cytoskeleton flow in respone to actomyosin contraction).

The study highlights that

1) the activator-inhibitor system alone features a series of different steady state solutions, oscillating patterns and limit cycles depending on parameter values.

2) the spatially inhomogeneous version of this model coupled to contractile flow in one spatial dimension (periodic boundary cond.) features complex spatiotemporal patterns depending on paramters: either oscillating or non-oscillating paterns in time and convective or non-convective patterns in space, as well as any combination of these depending on parameter values.

3) the same observation is made for the model simulated for a 2-dimension spatial domain. The resulting patterns coincide qualitatively well with recent observations for patterns in the cortex of C. Elegans [17] (pulses) and starfish oocyte (propagating waves).

I appreciate that this is a very interesting study using an innovative and beautiful modelling approach which succeeds in explaining qualitatively some of the patterns observed in the cortices of various cell types. This alone I believe already deserves publication as I believe it will pave the way to even more intricate and powerful modelling of actomyosin contraction with realistic cell geometries.

The only concern I have is about the interpretation/parametrisation of the governing equations for the cytoskeleton flows. The derivation relates stress to drag in equ (7). The drag in this expression is taken as independent of the concentration of actomyosin m (the authors lump together the concentrations of F-Actin and of myosin into m). I'd argue that a more appropriate formulation of this relation should involve the density m at least as linear factor in the drag term (more actomyosin -> more drag and vice versa).

The way the authors write the equations allows them to derive the governing equation (8) without disturbing additional factors m and m_x, which would probably make it much harder to solve the resulting momentum equation (8) (I guess the velocity field would blow up where m is close to 0). I recognize that probably some sort of regularisation would be needed and omitting m from (7) appears to be the authors' approach of doing that. But that approach (assume the cytoskeleton density is constant) is inconsistent with the rest of the modelling, namely that for m a separate continuity equation (10) is stipulated and that according to simulations the value of m ranges between 0 (depending on parameters in most of the domain) and Max. I think all that has to do with not distinguishing between F-Actin concentration and myosin concentration and I believe that this has to be sorted out before publication so the model can be interpreted properly with regards to experimental observations.

On that note: it would be good a plot of the simulated velocity field could be added, e.g. to Figure 6 which only show the dynamics of the phase field so far, or to the SM.

Reviewer #2: The authors present a theoretical study of pattern formation in zero-, one- and two-dimensional systems of excitable actomyosin. The main scheme is presented in Fig. 1a and essentially based on experimental results from Ref. 17. The central element is RhoA, that is an activator because it promotes its own activity and governs many downstream targets. In contrast to most other work in this field, actomyosin is considered to be one entity only. Most importantly, there is negative feedback from actomyosin back to RhoA, through the GAP RGA-3/4, as described in Ref. 17 for C. elegans. Together, this biochemical system is similar to one of the activator-inhibitor systems envisioned by Turing. In a last step, it is coupled to the mechanics of the system. Here different models are discussed throughout the paper. First we have a very simple model where contractile strain leads to increase in concentration, thereby promoting RhoA and actomyosin. This model has no spatial domain. Later flow and advection are introduced, very similar to work from the Dresden group in Refs. 30 and 32, an considered for 1D and 2D. The authors report a large range of possible behaviour, including quiescence, contraction, pulsations, excitable excursions, solitons, chaos, turbulence. Phase diagrams are provided. The relation to experiments occurs mainly by several comments in the text pointing out similarities to observations in published work.

This work is rather theoretical in nature and in general is an interesting and original contribution to the large field of actomyosin as excitable medium. I especially like the nice progression from simple to more complex models throughout the course of the paper. Yet I also see two major weaknesses. First it is not entirely clear what really is new in regard to theory and how it compares to published work. Second the relation to experiments is unclear. Especially for PLOS Computational Biology (in contrast to a pure physics journal) one would like to see a stronger connection to experiments, especially when one of the authors is very well known for such experiments. Below I comment a bit more on both aspects.

Regarding theory work, I feel that much earlier work has to be cited and discussed. Regarding the scheme in Fig. a, the authors should also discuss Kamps, Dominic, et al. "Optogenetic Tuning Reveals Rho Amplification-Dependent Dynamics of a Cell Contraction Signal Network." Cell reports 33.9 (2020): 108467. Their biochemical model is rather similar but more detailed and therefore generates oscillations by itself, without the mechanics. Moreover the negative feedback from myosin to RhoA is another one than mentioned here (inhibition of GEF rather than upregulation of GAP). This leads to the question how specific the model here is to C. elegans and the particular GAP identified here, and which other models should be considered in general ? How would the authors’ results change when considered the model from Kamps et al. for their biochemistry part ?

My second comment is that the effect of concentration increase upon contraction is also not new and has been used for modelling e.g. in this paper: Buttenschön, Andreas, Yue Liu, and Leah Edelstein-Keshet. "Cell size, mechanical tension, and GTPase signaling in the single cell." Bulletin of mathematical biology 82.2 (2020): 1-33. Concentration effects are also often described in the context of cell growth, when volume is increasing. The authors should discuss better how their model compares with these other models. I also miss a discuss of the effect of three dimension: concentration might stay constant because due to the Poisson effect, contraction in one dimension comes with extension in another dimension. Is there experimental evidence that concentration effects are really relevant?

I am a bit confused about the mechanical model used. Eq. 3 looks like Kelvin-Voigt to me, but Eq. 6 is Maxwell. Why do the authors change the viscoelastic model and why is this not explained? Do the concentration effects of the 0D model also exist in the 1D and 2D model?

Regarding the phase plane analysis in Fig. 2, I wonder what happens to the third component u. The system is 3D and I do not understand how one can analyze this without the dynamics in u. Is there some kind of adiabatic approximation used here?

Recently there has been much work on excitable actomyosin coupled to shape changes, compare e.g. Brinkmann, Felix, et al. "Post-Turing tissue pattern formation: Advent of mechanochemistry." PLoS computational biology 14.7 (2018): e1006259 or the very recent work by the Turlier lab on "A viscous active shell theory of the cell cortex" (https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.12089). Maybe the authors want to comment on their model in this context.

I also want to comment that this statement here is not correct: “Travelling waves of actomyosin contraction can propagate across the cortical surface [16, 18].” Such a traveling wave has been described for starfish oocytes in Ref. 20, but not in Ref. 18, where it is explicitly shown that blebbistatin has no effects, so these waves are myosin-independent (in contrast to Ref. 20, where blebbistatin abolishes the wave). The model in that paper works without myosin and the negative feedback in the model is only through actin polymerization. The authors should consider how this fits into their framework and if e.g. the phase analysis for turbulence really depends on the specific model.

Finally I think that the authors should better explain the relation to experiments. In my view, they should include experimental data going beyond the two curves shown in Fig. 1b. For the bulk of the paper, there are only theoretical predictions and no direct comparison with experiments, although the authors make a large effort to parametrize with realistic values. For example, how do the correlation lengths from Fig. 5 and 6 correspond to structure formation in the C. elegans cortex? Actually this system shows many aster-like structures and it is not clear if they are predicted here. Can one compare theoretical and experimental flow fields, e.g. after local stimulation? Such comparison would strongly increase impact.

Reviewer #3: 1. The feedback loop of activator-inhibitor-strain (Fig.1) is of course a simplified network extracted from the more elaborate Rho-Rock network. Would the coarse graining implicit in this simplified network not lead to delay terms.

If so how would these affect the dynamics.

2. In the present study, the arrow from strain to Rho activation (Fig.1) arises from the dilution effect, \\partial_u c (1+u) = 0, doesn’t it ? Could there be explicit local strain sensing via signalling?

3. The flows that are discussed are cytoskeletal flows and not the cytosolic velocity that the system is embedded in. The cytoskeletal flows are therefore compressible. It would be good to clearly state this, as well as provide a justification

for how you have ignored the cytosolic velocity field. Does the dilution effect only apply to chemical species bound to the elastomer?

4. The dynamical transition of the front propagation of Rho from stationary to moving to diffusive might be associated with different front propagation dynamical exponents, and may be analysed using ideas from Van Sarloos seminal work.

5. In equation 11, shouldn’t the elastic response have both shear and compression? In which case the derivation of Eq. 11, would be more involved.

6. I did not see details of the numerical algorithm in the manuscript. Could this be provided please.

**********

Have the authors made all data and (if applicable) computational code underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data and code underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data and code should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data or code —e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No: The details of the numerical solutions need to be presented.

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example in PLOS Biology see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

PLoS Comput Biol. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009981.r003

Decision Letter 1

Mark Alber, Alex Mogilner

1 Mar 2022

Dear Prof. Banerjee,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Pulsatile contractions and pattern formation in excitable actomyosin cortex' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Computational Biology.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Computational Biology. 

Best regards,

Alex Mogilner

Guest Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

Mark Alber

Deputy Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

***********************************************************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #2: The authors have responded very well to all reviewer comments. In particular, they now cite and discuss the papers by Kamps et al. and Buttenschön et al., which are very relevant here. They also explain well that this work is well grounded in experimental results (mainly for C. elegans) and discuss better the relation to known observations in different model organisms. The nature of the different mechanical models has been clarified and new work on poroviscoelasticity has been added. I congratulate the authors to this very nice work.

**********

Have the authors made all data and (if applicable) computational code underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data and code underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data and code should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data or code —e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Ulrich S. Schwarz

PLoS Comput Biol. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009981.r004

Acceptance letter

Mark Alber, Alex Mogilner

25 Mar 2022

PCOMPBIOL-D-21-01832R1

Pulsatile contractions and pattern formation in excitable actomyosin cortex

Dear Dr Banerjee,

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Computational Biology. Your manuscript is now with our production department and you will be notified of the publication date in due course.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, unless you have opted out, the early version of your manuscript will be published online. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting PLOS Computational Biology and open-access publishing. We are looking forward to publishing your work!

With kind regards,

Zsofia Freund

PLOS Computational Biology | Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge CB4 3DN | United Kingdom ploscompbiol@plos.org | Phone +44 (0) 1223-442824 | ploscompbiol.org | @PLOSCompBiol

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Dynamics in the activator-inhibitor mechanochemical model in response to changes in RhoA stimulus S.

    (A-C) Dynamics of RhoA concentration (blue), actomyosin concentration (red), and contractile strain (yellow) in the (A) excitable phase (σa/E = 0.2, S = 0.002 s−1), (B) pulsatile phase (σa/E = 0.2, S = 0.025 s−1), and (C) the contractile phase (σa/E = 0.2, S = 0.075 s−1).

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Strain rate and RhoA kymographs in different phases of the continuum active gel model.

    Kymographs of (A) strain rate (∂x v), and (B) RhoA concentration for the different phases in the active gel model corresponding to the actomyosin kymographs shown in Fig 2C.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Reaction-diffusion alone is not sufficient to generate pulsatile flows and waves in RhoA-myosin systems.

    (A) Spatial wavelength, (B) temporal frequency, and (C) wave speed computed by linear stability analysis of the RhoA-myosin reaction-diffusion model with σa=0, for varying stimulus S and activator to inhibitor diffusivity ratio, Dr/Dm. White regions in the parameter space show homogeneous steady states. Default parameter value of Dr/Dm is 10. (D-E) Kymographs of actomyosin concentration (D) and RhoA concentration (E) showing pattern formation for low RhoA diffusivity (Dr/Dm = 0.01, S = 0.01 s−1). (F) Steady-state spatial profiles of RhoA and actomyosin concentrations for the patterns corresponding to (D) and (E). Overlapping peaks indicates Turing pattern formation.

    (TIF)

    S4 Fig. RhoA and actomyosin advection are necessary for stable pattern formation and propagating waves.

    (A-D) Kymographs of actomyosin concentration with (A, C) no RhoA advection, and (B, D) no actomyosin advection. For (A, B) S = 0.00 s−1, σa=100, and (C, D) S = 0.01 s−1, σa=100.

    (TIF)

    S5 Fig. Linear stability analysis predicts the frequency and wavelength of pulsatile contractions.

    (A) Spatial wavelength, and (B) temporal frequency computed by linear stability analysis for varying active contractility σa and RhoA stimulus S.

    (TIF)

    S6 Fig. Velocity field in two spatial dimensions.

    (A-C) Actomyosin concentration field obtained from simulations of the active gel model in two spatial dimensions, showing (A) contractile network formation (σa=80 μm2/s, S = 0), (B) propagating waves (σa=50 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1) and (C) localized pulsatile contractions (σa=100 μm2/s, S = 0.01 s−1). Scale bar indicates a distance of λ = 15 μm. Arrows indicate velocity field v and colour the local strain rate ∇⋅v.

    (TIF)

    S1 Video. Actomyosin network formation.

    (MP4)

    S2 Video. Propagating waves of actomyosin.

    (MP4)

    S3 Video. Pulsatile actomyosin contractions.

    (MP4)

    S4 Video. Topological turbulent flows of RhoA.

    (MP4)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewer Response.pdf

    Data Availability Statement

    Data and codes from this study are available at: https://github.com/BanerjeeLab/CortexPattern.


    Articles from PLoS Computational Biology are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES