Keywords
signal transduction - mathematical models - computational systems biology - secondary
messengers - reduction
Introduction
Platelet activation is a key event in hemostasis and thrombosis. It transforms a relatively
passive resting cell into a novel state capable of performing its major hemostatic
functions. The essential physiological platelet activators include adenosine diphosphate
(ADP), thrombin, thromboxane A2, and collagen, each binding one or more specific receptors
on the plasmatic membrane to initiate signal transduction. The main negative regulators
are prostacyclin and NO. Platelet activation is additionally modulated by mechanosensing,
contact with fibrinogen and fibrin, epinephrine, and other molecules and conditions.
A vast signaling network composed of receptors with their primary effectors, protein
kinase cascades, secondary messengers, and signal-deciphering systems ([Fig. 1]) allows the platelet to rapidly process these signals and form physiological responses:
shape change, integrin activation, granule release, thromboxane A2 synthesis, and
procoagulant activity.[1]
[2] The main functions of such networks typically include: (1) filtering out noise and
preventing accidental activation; (2) regulation of the activation threshold by positive
and negative modulators; (3) transition of the activation signal and its transformation
into different degrees of response; (4) regulation of the signal transduction in time
(e.g., by inducing refractoriness or stopping transduction after some time); (5) integration
of different signals to form a unified response.
Fig. 1
The platelet signal transduction cascade used for modeling. The computer model includes four main modules: cytosol, mitochondria, dense tubular
system (DTS, derived from endoplasmic reticulum), and plasma membrane calcium channels.
Without activation, a low concentration of free calcium ions in the cytosol is maintained
despite leaks as a result of the action of calcium-dependent ATPase pump PMCA (plasmatic
membrane calcium ATPase). Binding of the agonist to the PAR1 receptor leads to the
activation of phospholipase C (PLC) and the release of inositol-3-phosphate (IP3)
into the cytosol. IP3 binds to its receptors (IP3R) in the DTS membrane (IM) and opens
channels for the release of calcium, which is usually contained in the DTS due to
the action of another ATPase pump, SERCA (sarcoplasmic/endoplasmic reticulum calcium
ATPase). A significant decrease in calcium concentration in the DTS leads to the activation
of the Stim1 sensor protein and the opening of the Orai1 calcium channel in the plasma
membrane (PM). Mitochondria are able to absorb calcium ions from the cytosol through
the uniporter (UNI), whose operation is determined by the mitochondrial transmembrane
potential Δψ (∼), and release it through the NCLX channel-exchanger. High concentrations
of free calcium ions in the matrix lead to the opening of the mitochondrial pore (mPTP).
This leads to the loss of Δψ and cell death.
Experimental approaches currently can reveal only some of the aspects of this complex
network functioning. Numerous unstable complexes formed by intermediate messengers,
often membrane-dependent and rapidly changing in time, are tremendously difficult
to investigate experimentally. For platelets, this is additionally complicated by
their small size and almost complete impossibility to use genetically encoded sensor
probes. Computational systems biology methods have been becoming increasingly useful
for the investigation of various biological networks, and they can play a particularly
important role for analyzing the platelet signal transduction.[3]
Systems Biology of Platelet Signal Transduction: Computational Models and Beyond
Systems Biology of Platelet Signal Transduction: Computational Models and Beyond
Computational modeling has been becoming increasingly popular as a tool for research
of complex biochemical systems since the beginning of the 21st century, and the term
“computational systems biology” itself was coined around that time. These models allowed
in-depth analysis of the biological systems' architecture in relationship with their
function.[4] Some theoretical approaches were focused on detailed description of the target systems'
biochemistry[5] (as a bottom-up approach), and others used simplified models to capture the essential
properties of the same systems, in this case, blood coagulation cascade[6]
[7] (top-down approach). Finally, it was possible to combine these approaches for the
same system, by systematically going from a detailed model to a simplified one by
means of formal reduction employing analysis of sensitivities and temporal hierarchy.[8]
Development of computational systems biology models for platelet signal transduction
lagged behind that for blood coagulation following the experimental discoveries. The
detailed reviews of the existing models and modeling approaches in the field could
be found elsewhere.[3]
[9] The pioneering study was that of Purvis et al in 2008,[10] where P2Y1-mediated signal transduction to calcium was simulated. Later computational
systems biology studies expanded the list of the studied activators, signaling pathways,
and physiological responses.[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15] In addition to these detailed mechanism-driven models, neural networks,[16] agent-based approaches,[17]
[18] and top-down models of signal transduction[19] were utilized to facilitate simulations, integrate platelet signaling with blood
coagulation, and allow use of learning algorithms for individual patients.
Finally, it is important to point out that, in addition to computational simulations,
there are other major tools in systems biology, such as causal pathway analysis and
others.[20] Recently, they significantly advanced the current understanding of platelet signal
transduction. Important examples include transcriptomic-based comparative analysis
of signal transduction in mice and humans,[21] and network analysis of genome-wide platelet transcriptome and proteome database.[22]
Although there are important studies and reviews on the subject, easy-to-understand
descriptions of the investigation process in computational systems biology of platelet
signal transduction are difficult to find. The purpose of this state-of-the-art mini-review
is to highlight the details of the process of the analysis of a computational systems
biology model for a specific case of platelet functional response. We shall illustrate
the utility of this approach to understand every step of platelet signal transduction
using a relatively simple example of signaling pathway leading to procoagulant platelet
formation upon stimulation by thrombin receptor agonist peptide SFLLRN.[23] The key signaling events along the main axis, from the binding of the peptide to
PAR1 receptor down to the mPTP opening, shall be tracked. Temporal dynamics, concentration
dependence, formation of calcium oscillations and their deciphering, and role of stochasticity
will be quantified at each step. The reduction techniques will be used to simplify
the system and explicitly identify key regulators of platelet signal transduction.
Procoagulant Platelets and Signaling
Procoagulant Platelets and Signaling
Procoagulant platelets are a subpopulation formed upon sufficiently strong platelet
activation and capable of supporting membrane-dependent reactions of blood coagulation
on their surface.[24] The phenomenon of the membrane-dependent reactions is ubiquitous in biochemistry,
because this makes it possible to achieve high reaction rates with a small number
of molecules by concentrating them on a small surface and limiting reaction to two
dimensions.[25] There could be other reasons for blood coagulation to adopt the membrane-based approach,
such as possibility to protect membrane-bound enzymes from blood flow,[26] or to control fibrin formation by controlling procoagulant platelets' spatial distribution.[27] The systems biology models of blood coagulation network need to consider formation
of procoagulant platelets during thrombin generation.[28]
Although some factors such as the resting cytosolic calcium level[13] or the number of mitochondria[13] may predispose a platelet to become procoagulant, the fate of the platelet is ultimately
decided in the course of its activation.[29]
[30] Depending on the stimulus, between 0 and 100% of resting platelets are capable of
becoming procoagulant.[31]
The procoagulant platelet is a terminal state, which is associated with many features
of necrosis. It has a typical balloon-shaped appearance,[32] with disrupted membrane integrity and cytoskeleton,[33] and inactivated integrins. Transition to this terminal state is determined by the
signal transduction network, where thrombin or collagens are obligatory activators,[34] while weaker ones such as ADP may only modulate the number of procoagulant platelets
but not cause them by themselves.[14] Cytosolic calcium and mitochondrial signaling is at the center of procoagulant platelet
formation.[35] Platelet activation induces a series of cytosolic calcium spikes, which leads to
calcium entry in the mitochondria and opening of mPTP,[36] followed by energy collapse and necrosis. Heterogeneity of platelets and stochastic
nature of the platelet signaling results in only part of them becoming procoagulant.[37] The events following permanent mPTP opening are not signaling anymore, because a
cell with extremely high cytosolic calcium and no ATP is already dead at this stage.
Although these high calcium concentrations activate scramblase TMEM16F and specific
calpain isoforms to produce the specific necrotic phenotype, these downstream events
are a separate “necrotic biochemistry” story. The mathematical models of signal transduction
for procoagulant platelet formation stop at the mPTP opening stage,[37] as the downstream events are already irreversible.
Procoagulant response is a relatively simple example because we only need to consider
the main signaling axis from receptor binding to calcium mobilization to mitochondria.
Although it may be modulated by other agonists and antagonists, this cascade is completely
capable of functioning by itself, and we shall henceforth consider it.
The Model for the Procoagulant Platelet Response
The Model for the Procoagulant Platelet Response
To illustrate the logic of platelet signal transduction, we shall use a mechanism-based
computational model of platelet signal transduction originally developed specifically
for SFLLRN-induced procoagulant platelet formation.[37] The model includes a number of reactions shown in [Fig. 1], although we shall predominantly analyze the main steps beginning from PAR1 and
ending with mPTP opening. When the opening is irreversible, it is equivalent to a
platelet becoming procoagulant.[36] Technically, the model is a set of ordinary differential equations (ODEs), where
every variable is concentration of a molecule, written in the form:
where Ai
is the concentration of a species, and F
+ and F
− are the rates of reactions where it is produced or destroyed respectively, based
on the physical and chemical kinetics laws. The model explicitly included several
compartments such as cytosol and mitochondria, where changes of the concentrations
were considered. Others, such as extracellular space and dense tubular system (DTS),
were not analyzed in such detail because we assumed that the concentrations of species
there were constant (we did not consider potent activation leading to DTS depletion).
The detailed description of the model design, validation, and principles can be found
elsewhere.[3]
[11]
[12]
[14]
[37]
[38]
[39] Briefly, it included 29 species with concentrations described by 27 differential
equations, and two species were fixed (see their list and initial values in [Table 1]). All reactions, along with the equations and parameters, are collected in [Table 2]. The model formally included four compartments: cytosol (3 fL), plasmatic membrane
equivalent (0.6 pL), DTS (1.5 fL), and mitochondria (0.3 fL). One important aspect
to be mentioned is that platelets are small (the total volume of about 5 fL) and therefore
the number of certain molecules in the cytosol is sometimes also small. One can easily
estimate that 10 nM of calcium ions for a 3 fL large cytosol means 10 × 10−9 × 6 × 1023 × 3 × 10−15 = 18. At many steps of signal transduction, there could be just single molecules.
In these cases, ODEs are not applicable anymore, and stochastic algorithms are used
to simulate the same chemical system.
Table 1
Model species[37]
[39]
Species
|
Variable (constant)
|
Compartment
|
Initial condition (µM)
|
Cytosolic calcium
|
|
Cytosol
|
0.013
|
IP3
|
|
Cytosol
|
0.05
|
IP3 state IP3Ra
|
|
Cytosol
|
0.024
|
IP3 state IP3Ri1
|
|
Cytosol
|
0.036
|
IP3 state IP3Ri2
|
|
Cytosol
|
0
|
IP3 state IP3Rn
|
|
Cytosol
|
0.3
|
IP3 state IP3Ro
|
|
Cytosol
|
0.24
|
IP3 state IP3Rs
|
|
Cytosol
|
0
|
Mitochondrial membrane potential
|
|
Cytosol
|
138.7
|
Calcium in DTS
|
|
DTS
|
1000
|
Mitochondrial calcium
|
|
Mitochondrion
|
0.1
|
Closed mPTP
|
|
Mitochondrion
|
1
|
Open mPTP
|
|
Mitochondrion
|
0
|
Resting PAR
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0.006
|
Activated PAR
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
PAR with a free Gq
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
PAR with GqGDP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
PAR with GqGTP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
PIP2
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
200
|
Phospholipase C (PLC), inactive
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0.06
|
PLC with GqGDP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
PLC with GqGTP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
PLCGqGTP with its substrate PIP2
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
GDP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
Gq with GDP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0.0043
|
Gq with GTP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
0
|
GTP
|
|
Plasma membrane
|
1
|
External thrombin
|
|
N/a (extracellular, parameter)
|
Indicated in the figures
|
External calcium
|
|
N/a (extracellular, parameter)
|
2,000 µM
|
Table 2
The model equations
Module
|
Name
|
Reaction
|
Flux, compartment
|
Parameters
|
Ref.
|
PAR
|
Activation of PAR1
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
Degradation of PAR1*
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
PAR
|
Simplified PI turnover
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
PM
|
Calcium PM leak
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
PM
|
PMCA
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
DTS
|
SERCA2b
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
DTS
|
SERCA3
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
DTS
|
Calcium DTS leak
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
DTS
|
Calcium release through IP3R
|
|
|
|
[49]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
DTS
|
IP3R
|
|
|
|
[50]
|
PM
|
SOCE
|
|
|
|
[51]
|
DTS
|
SOCE
|
|
|
|
[51]
|
PM
|
SOCE
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
Mit (*)
|
NCLX
|
|
|
|
[52]
|
Mit (*)
|
Uniporter
|
|
|
|
[53]
|
Mit
|
Uniporter
|
|
|
|
[53]
|
Mit
|
NCLX
|
|
|
|
[52]
|
Mit
|
Respiratory chain
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
Mit
|
mPTP
|
|
|
|
[37]
|
Mit
|
mPTP
|
|
|
|
[53]
|
It should be clearly stated that this model was chosen for the review purposes because
of its simplicity. It does not include a number of later computational systems biology
developments, such as feedback phospholipase C activation,[38] numerous mitochondrial compartments, or effects of mPTP opening on platelet energetics;[13] and none of the existing quantitative models include thousands of reactions potentially
involved in platelet calcium signaling.[20] All the models should be therefore used specifically for the purpose of hypothesis
testing. Any model is a simplification and biological models cannot ever exclude possibility
of some undiscovered reactions or molecules. Therefore, the results of computational
models should be viewed similarly to the experimental models: as predictions, whose
validity should be repeatedly tested.
The signal transformation during platelet activation will be considered in the following
order. First, the signal shape transformation will be reviewed. Second, transformation
of the signal information will be analyzed. Side-by-side with these steps, a comparison
with stochastic calculation will be made. Finally, the possibility of reducing part
of the system in order to speed up calculations and reduce the number of model parameters
will be performed.
Transformation of the Signal Shape
Transformation of the Signal Shape
The transformation of the signal shape during platelet activation by different thrombin
concentrations in the deterministic case is shown in [Fig. 2]. The activator concentration at time 0 changes abruptly to a given value, which
is essentially a step-type signal shape (or Heaviside step function). We can see decreasing
levels of intact-free PAR1 ([Fig. 2A]) and concentration-dependent increase of the active PAR1 ([Fig. 2B]). Afterwards, the signal is transformed into a clear peak-type shape at the PAR1-Gq-GDP
complex level ([Fig. 2C]), which is then retained for all intermediate variables including IP3 concentration
([Fig. 2D–K]) up to the calcium ion concentration.
Fig. 2
Transformation of the signal shape along the signaling cascade. Platelets are activated via PAR1 with thrombin at 0.1, 1, 10, and 100 nM. The panels
show concentrations of the indicated molecules and complexes as a function of time.
The plots were generated using the model[37] in the deterministic mode with parameters provided in [Tables 1] and [2].
The calcium ion concentration can also acquire a peak-type shape at low stimulation
levels, but oscillations are observed at high levels ([Fig. 2L]). However, at the next step, for the mitochondrial calcium concentration, the signal
shape again has a peak-type shape ([Fig. 2M]), and mPTP opening follows it ([Fig. 2N]). Thus, it can be expected that there is a system for integrating the oscillatory
calcium signal. Indeed, it can be shown that the maximum of the time integral of the
calcium ion concentration steadily increases with increasing activator concentration
([Fig. 2O]).
In the case of stochastic integration, individual curves do not carry the same meaning.
However, it is possible to consider the averaging of stochastic curves ([Fig. 3]). If we also consider the standard deviation of the variable value, we can evaluate
the deviations of the signal shape. As can be seen from the calculation results, the
signal transformation preserves the same type of transformation from “step” to a peak
“peak.” This holds even in the case when the concentration of a substance is very
low and individual runs of the model give only values 0 or 1 molecules. In this case,
the average concentration of calcium ions also acquires the form of a “peak,” which
is consistent with known experimental data.[40]
Fig. 3
Transformation of the stochastic signal shape. Platelets are activated via PAR1 with thrombin at 1 nM. Averaging is done for 1,000
stochastic runs. Mean values (blue) and standard deviation (red) are shown. The plots
were generated using the model[37] in the stochastic mode with parameters provided in [Tables 1] and [2].
This figure is also quite informative with regard to the identification of the “limiting”
steps in the signal transduction cascade. One may notice that the curve for PAR1 is
smooth ([Fig. 3A]) because there are more than 1,000 PAR1 molecules per platelet. However, the number
of active PAR1 at any given time does not exceed 10 molecules per cell ([Fig. 3B]), and all complexes with Gq are present at the level of not more than 4 molecules
per cell ([Fig. 3C–I]). The real low point is Gq-bound phospholipase C that has not yet bound substrate:
its concentration does not exceed one molecule per cell ([Fig. 3I]). Downstream from it, there are much more molecules but the “damage” has been done
by that time: the level of stochasticity beginning from the PLC-Gq-PIP2 complex is
huge, with average numbers greatly different from the individual runs ([Fig. 3J–M]).
Transformation of the Signal Information
Transformation of the Signal Information
The peak-shaped signal carries at least two pieces of information in the form of two
characteristic parameters, the peak amplitude and the peak width ([Fig. 4]). In order to understand how they “encode” the information about the activator concentration
along the signaling cascade, the dependences of these parameters on thrombin concentration
were constructed. For all variables of the system, the peak amplitude steadily increased
with the activation level, and the peak half-width steadily decreased ([Fig. 4B–N]). Thus, it is possible that the ratio of these variables is a constant value and
does not depend on activation. When the value of IP3 of 0.16 μM is exceeded, an oscillatory
regime may occur. This value can be considered as a threshold. The longer the IP3
concentration exceeds the specified value, the longer the oscillations will last in
the system. From this point of view, the peak half-width is a true characteristic
of the signal. On the other hand, the dependence of the maximum calcium concentration
in the mitochondrial matrix on the thrombin concentration is linear, while the half-width
is not ([Fig. 4M]). However, it should be noted that the peak half-width directly depends on the maximum,
while the duration of being above the threshold concentration does not directly depend
on it.
Fig. 4
Transformation of the signal characteristics. Platelets are activated via PAR1 with thrombin at 0 to 100 nM. (A) A typical peak-shaped signal and its characteristic parameters; (B–O) dependence of these signal parameters on thrombin concentration along the platelet
signaling cascade. The plots were generated using the model[37] in the deterministic mode with parameters provided in [Tables 1] and [2].
To illustrate the question of how the signal is integrated by mitochondria, [Fig. 5] shows a typical stochastic dependence of the calcium concentration in the mitochondrial
matrix on the calcium concentration in the cytosol for a model in which a second thrombin
receptor was added.
Fig. 5
Integration of the calcium signal by mitochondria. Platelets were activated by thrombin at 100 nM. Typical spiking dynamics of the free
calcium ions in the cytosol (Ca_cyt, gray) and mitochondrial matrix (Ca_mit, black)
leading to opening of mPTP (mPTP, dotted black) are shown. (A) total simulation run; (B) indicated interval enlarged. The plots were simulated using the model[37] in the stochastic mode with parameters provided in [Tables 1] and [2].
Reduction of the Model
The receptor module of the computational model describes the transmission of a signal
from a receptor to the concentration of IP3. This module is relatively isolated, meaning
that there is little feedback from the downstream, so it can be analyzed independently.
As can be seen from the previous analysis, the shape of the signal does not change
along the cascade, nor does the way the signal “encodes” information. This means that
a reduction of the corresponding system of equations without loss of information is
possible. As a first step, only first-order terms with regard to the resting state
were retained in the original model.[39] The equations of the module took the form:
where x
1 is the concentration of the resting PAR1 receptor, x
2 is that of the activated receptor, x
3 is the complex of the activated receptor with the inactivated G protein, x
4 is the activated complex of the receptor with the G protein, x
5 is the intermediate complex of the receptor with the G protein, s
1 is inactive phospholipase C, s
2 is phospholipase C in complex with the inactive G protein, s
3 is activated phospholipase C, s
4 is the complex of activated phospholipase C with its substrate, s
5 is the activated G protein, and s
ip3 is the product of phospholipase C (IP3). The variables are reduced for the case of
a thrombin concentration of 100 nM.
As can be seen from system (2), the first equation can be solved directly:
where T is the thrombin concentration. The variable s
1 (the concentration of inactivated phospholipase C) changes very slowly and can be
equated to 1, while several phospholipase complexes (s
2 to s
4) are, on the contrary, a subsystem of very fast variables converging to a quasi-stationary
solution in times of the order of 0.01 s. The exact proof of this can be produced
using Tikhonov's theorem and rules for slow–fast dynamics; examples of such approaches
are described in detail for other systems.[8]
[41]
[42] As a result, the equation for s
4, the complex of activated phospholipase C with its substrate, can be written as follows:
where s
4 actually reflects the dynamics of s
5 (GqGTP). While x
2 is a very fast variable, the three variables x
3, x
4, and x
5 form an intermediate group of successive signal transformations with characteristic
times of ∼0.5 s. When considering larger characteristic times, they can also be reduced
to a single equation for x
2:
Taking into account [eq. 3], we obtain the following solution for x2
:
This solution has the same properties as the original solution ([Fig. 6]). Given the dependence of x
4 on x
2 used here, [eq. 4] for s
4 (this variable now expresses the GqGTP pool) is also solved:
Fig. 6
The analytical solution for the activated receptor concentration over time. The result of the reduction ([eq. 6]). The color indicates thrombin. The plots were generated using the model[37] in the deterministic mode with parameters provided in [Tables 1] and [2].
Similarly, the formula for the relative concentration of IP3 is obtained:
The values of parameters A, B, C, and D depend on the concentration of thrombin and
the number of receptors (x
10), as well as on the initial concentration of IP3, which is generally zero. Therefore,
the following general dependence of the IP3 concentration on time can be assumed:
where x
ip3 is the relative concentration of inositol-3-phosphate, Thr is the concentration of the activator (thrombin), [PAR] is the initial concentration
of receptors to this activator, A, B, and α are some nonnegative parameters, and f() is some monotonic function. Importantly, such a reduction is not applicable for stochastic
integration of the model, since, as a result of it, the variable that determines the
stochastic nature of the system's behavior (the amount of the active form of G protein)
leaves the model.
The reduction of the calcium signaling block has been repeatedly carried out in various
studies.[43]
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47] The equations of the last, mitochondrial block are as follows:
The ability of this model to predict the proportion of platelets that pass into a
procoagulant state is comparable to that observed in the experiment,[13]
[14]
[37]
[39]
[48] indicating that the molecular mechanisms of mitochondrial collapse embedded in the
model operate comparably to real living systems. This mechanism consists of the accumulation
of calcium ions in the mitochondrial matrix with an increase in the calcium concentration
in the cell cytosol ([Fig. 5B]) due to the opening of a uniporter channel. Since the membrane potential changes
slowly during the process of calcium accumulation in mitochondria, its values can
be considered constant. Then the equation for the calcium concentration in mitochondria
is as follows:
where
is the concentration of free calcium ions in the mitochondrial matrix,
is the concentration of free calcium ions in the cell cytosol, Δψ is the potential difference on the inner mitochondrial membrane, Δψ* is the critical value of the potential difference, and α, γ, K, L are the model parameters. This equation reflects the mechanism of calcium ion accumulation
in the matrix: when the value of K is exceeded, calcium ions enter the matrix at a rate proportional to the parameter
α, while they leave the mitochondria at a rate monotonically dependent on
. The maximum concentration of calcium ions in the mitochondrial matrix during this
process is also proportional to the external stimulus. If
exceeds K often enough or for a long enough time, the mitochondria become overloaded with calcium
ions and open mPTP permanently.
Concluding Remarks
In this review, we used a simple systems biology model[37] to illustrate some of the basic principles behind the architecture of the platelet
signaling network produced by the computational studies of the last two decades,[3]
[10]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[18]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[48]
[49] as well as the tools used for dealing with these systems. A computational model
of a biological network could be explored by two major complementary approaches, either
direct simulation of the signaling events with every detail or utilization of sensitivity
analysis and temporal hierarchy to simplify and reduce the system in order to derive
analytical rules.
These approaches allow one to shed some additional light on what is likely to occur
once thrombin binds its receptor. One can see initial transformation and encoding
of the signal in the form of a peak, whose amplitude and duration encode information
about thrombin concentration. Due to the small size of the platelet and to the overall
tendency of the cell to minimize the number of signaling proteins when possible, the
early stages of the process are extremely stochastic funneling down at the level of
phospholipase C and G protein complex. Although the number of molecules per platelet
at this level is counted in single digits, encoding information not only in the amplitude,
but also in the duration, allows the cell to transmit it reliably. The level of phospholipase
C catalyzing the formation of inositol-3-phosphate is essential: the concentration
of IP3 relatively accurately reflects the concentration of the activator (except for
filtering out the noise, which prevents activation by thrombin below a definite threshold[38]). Then IP3 activates calcium ion channels of the dense tubular system, whose activity
nonlinearly depends on both IP3 and the concentration of calcium ions in the cytosol.
Thus, the channels and carriers of the DTS membrane can be considered as a next decision
point: at a low concentration of IP3 in the platelet cytosol, a slight increase in
the calcium concentration is observed, the height of which reflects the initial signal.
This might play a role in weaker physiological responses, but is not sufficient to
overcome a threshold to enter mitochondria. At a high concentration of IP3 in the
platelet cytosol, a series of calcium concentration spikes occurs, with the initial
signal being encoded by the number and total duration of spikes. In the case of a
series of calcium spikes, there are at least two integrating systems in the system,
namely mitochondria for procoagulant activity [37] and calcium-sensitive proteins of the cytosol such as CalDAGGEFI for integrin activation.[12] They function similarly, by capturing calcium ions above certain threshold and retaining
them. This converts the oscillating signal back into the peak shape. For the procoagulant
platelet formation pathway, with a sufficiently high number of calcium spikes per
unit time, the concentration of calcium ions in the mitochondrial matrix increases,
which leads to mitochondrial collapse and platelet necrosis. The system of calcium
ion accumulation in the mitochondrial matrix is the ultimate decision point in the
fate of the cell upon activation.
A number of points remain beyond the scope of this review. The most interesting of
them include differences in the signaling principles between the G-protein-dependent
pathways[10]
[49] and tyrosine kinase-dependent ones,[11]
[15]
[18] interaction of the signals from different receptors and interactions between pathways
mediated by different messengers,[14]
[39] simulation of other platelet functional responses such as integrin activation.[12] The current research has just touched upon these problems. A deeper analysis of
the physiological meaning of the signal encoding and decoding, regulation of the thresholds
and of the response amplitudes for different physiological responses of the platelet,
optimization of the signaling system in terms of the cost-efficiency balance, involvement
of the membrane-dependent reactions, and spatial aspects of the platelet signal transduction
are just some of the exciting subjects, where future prospects for the computational
systems biology methods are significant. From the methodological point of view, integration
of computational systems biology models with proteomic data[2]
[20]
[22] is a highly promising line of research and model personalization. Finally, the neural
networks approach could be combined with ODE-based models to significantly promote
versatility of their use.[16]
[19]