Literature DB >> 27125759

Gene-nutrient interaction markedly influences yeast chronological lifespan.

Daniel L Smith1, Crystal H Maharrey2, Christopher R Carey2, Richard A White3, John L Hartman4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Research into the genetic mechanisms of aging has expanded rapidly over the past two decades. This has in part been the result of the use of model organisms (particularly yeast, worms and flies) and high-throughput technologies, combined with a growing interest in aging research. Despite this progress, widespread consensus regarding the pathways that are fundamental to the modulation of cellular aging and lifespan for all organisms has been limited due to discrepancies between different studies. We have compared results from published genome-wide, chronological lifespan (CLS) screens of individual gene deletion strains in Saccharomyces cerevisiae in order to identify gene deletion strains with consistent influences on longevity as possible indicators of fundamental aging processes from this single-celled, eukaryotic model organism.
METHODS: Three previous reports have described genetic modifiers of chronological aging in the budding yeast (S. cerevisiae) using the yeast gene deletion strain collection. We performed a comparison among the data sets using correlation and decile distribution analysis to describe concordance between screens and identify strains that consistently increased or decreased CLS. We used gene enrichment analysis in an effort to understand the biology underlying genes identified in multiple studies. We attempted to replicate the different experimental conditions employed by the screens to identify potential sources of variability in CLS worth further investigating.
RESULTS: Among 3209 strains present in all three screens, nine deletions strains were in common in the longest-lived decile (2.80%) and thirteen were in common in the shortest-lived decile (4.05%) of all three screens. Similarly, pairwise overlap between screens was low. When the same comparison was extended to three deciles to include more mutants studied in common between the three screens, enrichment of cellular processes based on gene ontology analysis in the long-lived strains remained very limited. To test the hypothesis that different parental strain auxotrophic requirements or media formulations employed by the respective genome-wide screens might contribute to the lack of concordance, different CLS assay conditions were assessed in combination with strains having different ploidy and auxotrophic requirements (all relevant to differences in the way the three genome-wide CLS screens were performed). This limited but systematic analysis of CLS with respect to auxotrophy, ploidy, and media revealed several instances of gene-nutrient interaction.
CONCLUSIONS: There is surprisingly little overlap between the results of three independently performed genome-wide screens of CLS in S. cerevisiae. However, differences in strain genetic background (ploidy and specific auxotrophic requirements) were present, as well as different media and experimental conditions (e.g., aeration and pooled vs. individual culturing), which, along with stochastic effects such as genetic drift or selection of secondary mutations that suppress the loss of function from gene deletion, could in theory account for some of the lack of consensus between results. Considering the lack of overlap in CLS phenotypes among the set of genes reported by all three screens, and the results of a CLS experiment that systematically tested (incorporating extensive controls) for interactions between variables existing between the screens, we propose that discrepancies can be reconciled through deeper understanding of the influence of cell intrinsic factors such as auxotrophic requirements ploidy status, extrinsic factors such as media composition and aeration, as well as interactions that may occur between them, for example as a result of different pooling vs. individually aging cultures. Such factors may have a more significant impact on CLS outcomes than previously realized. Future studies that systematically account for these contextual factors, and can thus clarify the interactions between genetic and nutrient factors that alter CLS phenotypes, should aid more complete understanding of the underlying biology so that genetic principles of CLS in yeast can be extrapolated to differential cellular aging observed in animal models.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aging; Chronological lifespan (CLS); Gene-nutrient interaction; Genome-wide screen; Longevity; Quantitative high throughput cell array phenotyping; Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Yeast gene deletion strain library

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27125759      PMCID: PMC5079838          DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2016.04.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Gerontol        ISSN: 0531-5565            Impact factor:   4.032


  56 in total

1.  Widespread aneuploidy revealed by DNA microarray expression profiling.

Authors:  T R Hughes; C J Roberts; H Dai; A R Jones; M R Meyer; D Slade; J Burchard; S Dow; T R Ward; M J Kidd; S H Friend; M J Marton
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 38.330

2.  An intervention resembling caloric restriction prolongs life span and retards aging in yeast.

Authors:  J C Jiang; E Jaruga; M V Repnevskaya; S M Jazwinski
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Use of mixture models in a microarray-based screening procedure for detecting differentially represented yeast mutants.

Authors:  Rafael A Irizarry; Siew Loon Ooi; Zhijin Wu; Jef D Boeke
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2003-03-18

4.  Conserved role of medium acidification in chronological senescence of yeast and mammalian cells.

Authors:  Paola Fabrizio; Min Wei
Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.682

5.  Saccharomyces Genome Database: the genomics resource of budding yeast.

Authors:  J Michael Cherry; Eurie L Hong; Craig Amundsen; Rama Balakrishnan; Gail Binkley; Esther T Chan; Karen R Christie; Maria C Costanzo; Selina S Dwight; Stacia R Engel; Dianna G Fisk; Jodi E Hirschman; Benjamin C Hitz; Kalpana Karra; Cynthia J Krieger; Stuart R Miyasato; Rob S Nash; Julie Park; Marek S Skrzypek; Matt Simison; Shuai Weng; Edith D Wong
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  Accurate, precise modeling of cell proliferation kinetics from time-lapse imaging and automated image analysis of agar yeast culture arrays.

Authors:  Najaf A Shah; Richard J Laws; Bradley Wardman; Lue Ping Zhao; John L Hartman
Journal:  BMC Syst Biol       Date:  2007-01-08

7.  Improved microarray methods for profiling the Yeast Knockout strain collection.

Authors:  Daniel S Yuan; Xuewen Pan; Siew Loon Ooi; Brian D Peyser; Forrest A Spencer; Rafael A Irizarry; Jef D Boeke
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2005-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

8.  Lifespan regulation by evolutionarily conserved genes essential for viability.

Authors:  Sean P Curran; Gary Ruvkun
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 5.917

Review 9.  The yeast deletion collection: a decade of functional genomics.

Authors:  Guri Giaever; Corey Nislow
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  Within- and between-strain variability in longevity of inbred and outbred rats under the same environmental conditions.

Authors:  O Ghirardi; R Cozzolino; D Guaraldi; A Giuliani
Journal:  Exp Gerontol       Date:  1995 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.032

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Dietary restriction and lifespan: Lessons from invertebrate models.

Authors:  Pankaj Kapahi; Matt Kaeberlein; Malene Hansen
Journal:  Ageing Res Rev       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 10.895

2.  High-resolution yeast quiescence profiling in human-like media reveals complex influences of auxotrophy and nutrient availability.

Authors:  Sean M Santos; Samantha Laflin; Audrie Broadway; Cosby Burnet; Joline Hartheimer; John Rodgers; Daniel L Smith; John L Hartman
Journal:  Geroscience       Date:  2020-10-05       Impact factor: 7.713

3.  Old yeasts, young beer-The industrial relevance of yeast chronological life span.

Authors:  Ruben Wauters; Scott J Britton; Kevin J Verstrepen
Journal:  Yeast       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 3.239

Review 4.  Emerging Omics Approaches in Aging Research.

Authors:  Jared S Lorusso; Oleg A Sviderskiy; Vyacheslav M Labunskyy
Journal:  Antioxid Redox Signal       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 7.468

5.  An Optimized Competitive-Aging Method Reveals Gene-Drug Interactions Underlying the Chronological Lifespan of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  J Abraham Avelar-Rivas; Michelle Munguía-Figueroa; Alejandro Juárez-Reyes; Erika Garay; Sergio E Campos; Noam Shoresh; Alexander DeLuna
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 4.599

6.  Barcode sequencing and a high-throughput assay for chronological lifespan uncover ageing-associated genes in fission yeast.

Authors:  Catalina A Romila; StJohn Townsend; Michal Malecki; Stephan Kamrad; María Rodríguez-López; Olivia Hillson; Cristina Cotobal; Markus Ralser; Jürg Bähler
Journal:  Microb Cell       Date:  2021-05-10

7.  A Yeast Chronological Lifespan Assay to Assess Activity of Proteasome Stimulators.

Authors:  Marianne E Maresh; Panyue Chen; Tony R Hazbun; Darci J Trader
Journal:  Chembiochem       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 3.461

8.  A yeast phenomic model for the influence of Warburg metabolism on genetic buffering of doxorubicin.

Authors:  Sean M Santos; John L Hartman
Journal:  Cancer Metab       Date:  2019-10-23

9.  A cell-nonautonomous mechanism of yeast chronological aging regulated by caloric restriction and one-carbon metabolism.

Authors:  Elisa Enriquez-Hesles; Daniel L Smith; Nazif Maqani; Margaret B Wierman; Matthew D Sutcliffe; Ryan D Fine; Agata Kalita; Sean M Santos; Michael J Muehlbauer; James R Bain; Kevin A Janes; John L Hartman; Matthew D Hirschey; Jeffrey S Smith
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 5.157

10.  Genome-wide screens in yeast models towards understanding chronological lifespan regulation.

Authors:  Luc Legon; Charalampos Rallis
Journal:  Brief Funct Genomics       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 4.241

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.