Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1Developmental Biology and Gene RegulationMarine Invertebrate Physiology and EcologyBiochemical and Molecular Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 148 of the 148 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Extracellular adenosine deamination primes tip organizer development in Dictyostelium

Open access
Hathi, Pavani, Ramamurthy, Baskar·2025·eLife
DOI 10.7554/elife.104855PMC PMC12711200

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Ammonia is a morphogen in Dictyostelium and is known to arise from the catabolism of proteins and RNA. However, we show that extracellular adenosine deamination catalysed by ‘adenosine deaminase-related growth factor’ (ADGF) is a major source of ammonia and demonstrate a direct role of ammonia in tip organizer development. The tip formed during early development in Dictyostelium functions analogously to the embryonic organizer of higher vertebrates. Dictyostelium strains carrying mutations in the gene adgf fail to establish an organizer, and this could be reversed by exposing the mutants to volatile ammonia. Interestingly, Klebsiella pneumoniae physically separated from the Dictyostelium adgf mutants in a partitioned dish also rescues the mound arrest phenotype. Both the substrate, adenosine and the product, ammonia, regulate adgf expression, and ADGF acts downstream of the histidine kinase DhkD in regulating tip formation. Thus, the consecutive transformation of extracellular cAMP to adenosine, and adenosine to ammonia is integral steps during Dictyostelium development. Remarkably, in higher vertebrates, adgf expression is elevated during gastrulation and thus adenosine deamination may be a conserved process driving organizer development in different organisms.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7554/elife.104855

Cites

148 of 148 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. adgf mutant validation. (A) Schematic representation of adgf locus showing the relative positions of the primers (P1–P4) and the blasticidin resistance cassette (bsr). Primer P1 (adgf fwd) is at the start codon of adgf, and primer P4 (adgf rev) is 264 bp upstream of the stop codon, flanking the insertion site. Primers P2 (pGWD2) and P3 (pGWD1) are located within the bsr cassette. bsr insertion is in exon 2 of adgf. (B) PCR analyses using P1 and P4 primers. A 1.4-kb shift in the adgf mutant. PCR using P1 and P2 primers showed an amplicon from the mutant (M) and not from the wild-type (WT). PCR using P3 and P4 primers showed an amplicon with the adgf mutant while WT did not show any amplicon. (C) Semi-quantitative RT-PCR of the internal control, rnlA and adgf−. adgf expression during development in Dictyostelium. (D) Total RNA was isolated from Dictyostelium during vegetative growth and development using TRIzol method. To quantify adgf expression, qRT-PCR was carried out with rnlA as a control and the fold-change was calculated accordingly. Time points are shown in hours (bottom). Error bars represent the mean and SEM (n = 3).
Figure 1. adgf mutant validation. (A) Schematic representation of adgf locus showing the relative positions of the primers (P1–P4) and the blasticidin resistance cassette (bsr). Primer P1 (adgf fwd) is at the start codon of adgf, and primer P4 (adgf rev) is 264 bp upstream of the stop codon, flanking the insertion site. Primers P2 (pGWD2) and P3 (pGWD1) are located within the bsr cassette. bsr insertion is in exon 2 of adgf. (B) PCR analyses using P1 and P4 primers. A 1.4-kb shift in the adgf mutant. PCR using P1 and P2 primers showed an amplicon from the mutant (M) and not from the wild-type (WT). PCR using P3 and P4 primers showed an amplicon with the adgf mutant while WT did not show any amplicon. (C) Semi-quantitative RT-PCR of the internal control, rnlA and adgf−. adgf expression during development in Dictyostelium. (D) Total RNA was isolated from Dictyostelium during vegetative growth and development using TRIzol method. To quantify adgf expression, qRT-PCR was carried out with rnlA as a control and the fold-change was calculated accordingly. Time points are shown in hours (bottom). Error bars represent the mean and SEM (n = 3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 1—figure supplement 1. Bioinformatic analyses of ADGF. (A) BLAST analysis of ADGF. (B) SMART analysis depicting different ADA domains within ADGF. ADGF has an ADA and an N-terminal deaminase domain similar to human ADA2. Multiple sequence alignment of Dictyostelium ADGF with ADGF from other organisms. (C) The shaded region depicts the N-terminal signal sequence characteristic of extracellular proteins. (D) The active site residue highlighted in red is conserved between D. discoideum and human ada2. (E) Phylogenetic analysis of ADGF across different organisms. The maximum likelihood method was used for constructing the tree using molecular evolutionary genetic analysis X (MEGAX). Structural comparison of human ADA2 and Dictyostelium ADGF. Identical tertiary structures of human ADA2 and Dictyostelium ADGF. (F) ADA2 (CECR1) Homo sapiens and (G) DdADGF. (H) Alignment of Dictyostelium ADGF with human ADA2 (CECR1).
Figure 1—figure supplement 1. Bioinformatic analyses of ADGF. (A) BLAST analysis of ADGF. (B) SMART analysis depicting different ADA domains within ADGF. ADGF has an ADA and an N-terminal deaminase domain similar to human ADA2. Multiple sequence alignment of Dictyostelium ADGF with ADGF from other organisms. (C) The shaded region depicts the N-terminal signal sequence characteristic of extracellular proteins. (D) The active site residue highlighted in red is conserved between D. discoideum and human ada2. (E) Phylogenetic analysis of ADGF across different organisms. The maximum likelihood method was used for constructing the tree using molecular evolutionary genetic analysis X (MEGAX). Structural comparison of human ADA2 and Dictyostelium ADGF. Identical tertiary structures of human ADA2 and Dictyostelium ADGF. (F) ADA2 (CECR1) Homo sapiens and (G) DdADGF. (H) Alignment of Dictyostelium ADGF with human ADA2 (CECR1).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Aggregates formed by adgf mutants were larger in size. (A) The graph shows the mound size and the number of aggregates formed by WT and adgf−. A minimum of 20 aggregates were analyzed per experiment. The values represent mean ± SEM; n = 3 independent biological replicates. Significance level is indicated as ***p< 0.001 (Student’s t-test). (B) Expression levels of the genes, countin (ctn) and small aggregates (smlA) during aggregation in adgf− compared to WT. rnlA was used as the internal control. Data represent mean ± SEM (n=3). Significance level is indicated as *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01 (Student’s t-test). (C) WT and adgf− cells were developed on KK2 agar, and after 16 hr, the multicellular mounds/slugs were dissociated by vigorous vortexing in KK2 buffer. Individual cells were counted using a hemocytometer and resuspended in a phosphate buffer. Non-adherent single cells were counted 45 min after incubation. The percent cell–cell adhesion was plotted by normalizing the values to the non-adherent WT count to 100%. Error bars represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). The level of significance is ****p< 0.0001 by Student’s t-test. (D) qRT-PCR analysis of cadherin (cadA) and contact site (csA) during aggregation. The fold-change in RNA transcript levels is relative to WT at the indicated time points. Error bar is mean and SEM (n = 3). Significance level is indicated as ****p < 0.0001 (Student’s t-test). (E) Under agarose chemotaxis assay. The average cell speed in response to 10 μM cAMP was recorded. A minimum of 25 cells were tracked for each experiment. The graph represents the mean ± SEM (n = 3). ns, non significant, by Student’s t-test. Developmental phenotype of adgf−. (F) WT and adgf− cells were washed, plated on 1% KK2 agar plates at a density of 5 × 105 cells/cm2, incubated in a dark, moist chamber and images were taken at different time intervals. (G) WT cells treated with 100 nM of DCF mimicked the mound arrest phenotype of the mutant. The time points are indicated in hours at the top of the figure. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). (H) WT and adgf− cells after 36 hr of development. Scale bar: 0.5 mm (n=3). (I) Fruiting bodies of WT and adgf−. Scale bar: 2 mm. Atleast 30 fruiting bodies were analyzed for each experiment, n = 3 independent biological replicates.
Figure 2. Aggregates formed by adgf mutants were larger in size. (A) The graph shows the mound size and the number of aggregates formed by WT and adgf−. A minimum of 20 aggregates were analyzed per experiment. The values represent mean ± SEM; n = 3 independent biological replicates. Significance level is indicated as ***p< 0.001 (Student’s t-test). (B) Expression levels of the genes, countin (ctn) and small aggregates (smlA) during aggregation in adgf− compared to WT. rnlA was used as the internal control. Data represent mean ± SEM (n=3). Significance level is indicated as *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01 (Student’s t-test). (C) WT and adgf− cells were developed on KK2 agar, and after 16 hr, the multicellular mounds/slugs were dissociated by vigorous vortexing in KK2 buffer. Individual cells were counted using a hemocytometer and resuspended in a phosphate buffer. Non-adherent single cells were counted 45 min after incubation. The percent cell–cell adhesion was plotted by normalizing the values to the non-adherent WT count to 100%. Error bars represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). The level of significance is ****p< 0.0001 by Student’s t-test. (D) qRT-PCR analysis of cadherin (cadA) and contact site (csA) during aggregation. The fold-change in RNA transcript levels is relative to WT at the indicated time points. Error bar is mean and SEM (n = 3). Significance level is indicated as ****p < 0.0001 (Student’s t-test). (E) Under agarose chemotaxis assay. The average cell speed in response to 10 μM cAMP was recorded. A minimum of 25 cells were tracked for each experiment. The graph represents the mean ± SEM (n = 3). ns, non significant, by Student’s t-test. Developmental phenotype of adgf−. (F) WT and adgf− cells were washed, plated on 1% KK2 agar plates at a density of 5 × 105 cells/cm2, incubated in a dark, moist chamber and images were taken at different time intervals. (G) WT cells treated with 100 nM of DCF mimicked the mound arrest phenotype of the mutant. The time points are indicated in hours at the top of the figure. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). (H) WT and adgf− cells after 36 hr of development. Scale bar: 0.5 mm (n=3). (I) Fruiting bodies of WT and adgf−. Scale bar: 2 mm. Atleast 30 fruiting bodies were analyzed for each experiment, n = 3 independent biological replicates.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3. adgf mounds have reduced ADA activity and high adenosine levels. (A) ADA activity in WT and adgf− harvested at 12 and 16 hr. The enzymatic assay for ADA was performed in adgf− with the corresponding WT control. Error bars represent the mean and SEM (n = 3). Significance level is indicated as **p < 0.01 (Student’s t-test). (B) Quantification of adenosine levels in WT and adgf mutants at 12 and 16 h. Level of significance is indicated as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 by Student’s t-test. Data represent mean and SEM (n = 3). (C) Expression profile of 5′ nucleotidase (5′nt) and phosphodiesterases (regA, pdsA) involved in cAMP-to-adenosine conversion. The fold-change in RNA transcript levels is relative to WT at the indicated time points. rnlA was used as an internal control. Error bars represent the mean and SEM (n = 3). Level of significance is indicated as *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01, ***p< 0.001.
Figure 3. adgf mounds have reduced ADA activity and high adenosine levels. (A) ADA activity in WT and adgf− harvested at 12 and 16 hr. The enzymatic assay for ADA was performed in adgf− with the corresponding WT control. Error bars represent the mean and SEM (n = 3). Significance level is indicated as **p < 0.01 (Student’s t-test). (B) Quantification of adenosine levels in WT and adgf mutants at 12 and 16 h. Level of significance is indicated as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 by Student’s t-test. Data represent mean and SEM (n = 3). (C) Expression profile of 5′ nucleotidase (5′nt) and phosphodiesterases (regA, pdsA) involved in cAMP-to-adenosine conversion. The fold-change in RNA transcript levels is relative to WT at the indicated time points. rnlA was used as an internal control. Error bars represent the mean and SEM (n = 3). Level of significance is indicated as *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01, ***p< 0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4. Overexpression of adgf rescued the mound arrest phenotype. (A) adgf− mounds were treated with 5 and 10 U ADA enzyme, and imaged at 16 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). (B) The full-length adgf gene was cloned in the vector pDXA-GFP2. The overexpression construct was verified by restriction digestion with HindIII and KpnI enzymes. (C) adgf overexpression in the mutant rescued the mound arrest. (D) Overexpression of adgf in WT background. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). The time points in hours are shown at the top. WT cells mixed with adgf− rescued the adgf mutant phenotype. (E) Mixing of WT with adgf− in a 1:4 ratio showed a partial rescue, and a full rescue of the adgf− mound arrest phenotype in a 1:1 ratio with WT. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (F) Development of adgf mutants in the presence of adgf− CM and WT CM on KK2 agar plates. WT CM rescued the mound arrest. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (G) Development of WT in the presence of WT CM and adgf− CM on KK2 agar plates. adgf− CM induced mound arrest in WT cells. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3).
Figure 4. Overexpression of adgf rescued the mound arrest phenotype. (A) adgf− mounds were treated with 5 and 10 U ADA enzyme, and imaged at 16 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). (B) The full-length adgf gene was cloned in the vector pDXA-GFP2. The overexpression construct was verified by restriction digestion with HindIII and KpnI enzymes. (C) adgf overexpression in the mutant rescued the mound arrest. (D) Overexpression of adgf in WT background. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). The time points in hours are shown at the top. WT cells mixed with adgf− rescued the adgf mutant phenotype. (E) Mixing of WT with adgf− in a 1:4 ratio showed a partial rescue, and a full rescue of the adgf− mound arrest phenotype in a 1:1 ratio with WT. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (F) Development of adgf mutants in the presence of adgf− CM and WT CM on KK2 agar plates. WT CM rescued the mound arrest. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (G) Development of WT in the presence of WT CM and adgf− CM on KK2 agar plates. adgf− CM induced mound arrest in WT cells. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5. Adenosine deamination reaction rescues the mound arrest of adgf. (A) Quantification of ammonia using the ammonia assay kit. WT and adgf− mounds were harvested and lysed using a cell lysis buffer. Cell debris was removed by centrifugation, and the supernatant was used to quantify ammonia. Error bars represent mean and SEM (n=3). **p<0.01, by Student’s t-test. (B) Treatment of adgf− mounds with ammonia. Ammonia was generated by mixing 2 ml of NH4Cl and 2 ml of 1 N NaOH. The mixture was poured on top of the lid and the KK2 plates with the mounds were inverted and sealed thereafter. Images were taken 3.5 hr post treatment. Dose-dependent effect of ammonia on the rescue. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). (C) WT and adgf− cells on either side of a compartmentalized Petri dish led to tip formation in adgf−. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (D) adgf− cells on one side and KK2 buffer containing adenosine and ADA on the other side of the compartmentalized dish, rescued the mound defect. Caffeine rescues the large mound size of adgf mutant. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (E) adgf− cells were treated with different concentrations of caffeine (100 nM, 1 µM) while plating, and images were taken during mound stage. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (F) Exposure to ammonia does not rescue the mound size of adgf mutant. adgf− mounds were exposed to 0.01 M ammonia and images were captured 3.5 hr post chemical treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3).
Figure 5. Adenosine deamination reaction rescues the mound arrest of adgf. (A) Quantification of ammonia using the ammonia assay kit. WT and adgf− mounds were harvested and lysed using a cell lysis buffer. Cell debris was removed by centrifugation, and the supernatant was used to quantify ammonia. Error bars represent mean and SEM (n=3). **p<0.01, by Student’s t-test. (B) Treatment of adgf− mounds with ammonia. Ammonia was generated by mixing 2 ml of NH4Cl and 2 ml of 1 N NaOH. The mixture was poured on top of the lid and the KK2 plates with the mounds were inverted and sealed thereafter. Images were taken 3.5 hr post treatment. Dose-dependent effect of ammonia on the rescue. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). (C) WT and adgf− cells on either side of a compartmentalized Petri dish led to tip formation in adgf−. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (D) adgf− cells on one side and KK2 buffer containing adenosine and ADA on the other side of the compartmentalized dish, rescued the mound defect. Caffeine rescues the large mound size of adgf mutant. Scale bar: 2 mm; (n=3). (E) adgf− cells were treated with different concentrations of caffeine (100 nM, 1 µM) while plating, and images were taken during mound stage. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (F) Exposure to ammonia does not rescue the mound size of adgf mutant. adgf− mounds were exposed to 0.01 M ammonia and images were captured 3.5 hr post chemical treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5—figure supplement 1. Total protein and RNA levels during mound stage of development. (A) Total protein levels were estimated using BCA assay. (B) Total RNA levels in the WT and adgf−. The error bars represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). ns = not significant (Student’s t-test).
Figure 5—figure supplement 1. Total protein and RNA levels during mound stage of development. (A) Total protein levels were estimated using BCA assay. (B) Total RNA levels in the WT and adgf−. The error bars represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). ns = not significant (Student’s t-test).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5—figure supplement 2. Volatiles released from K. pneumoniae rescue the mound arrest phenotype of adgf−. Picture depicting K. pneumoniae and adgf− cells on either side of a compartmentalized Petri dish. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). K. pneumoniae and adgf− cells were developed on either side of compartmentalized dish, and photographs were captured at 16 hr.
Figure 5—figure supplement 2. Volatiles released from K. pneumoniae rescue the mound arrest phenotype of adgf−. Picture depicting K. pneumoniae and adgf− cells on either side of a compartmentalized Petri dish. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). K. pneumoniae and adgf− cells were developed on either side of compartmentalized dish, and photographs were captured at 16 hr.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5—figure supplement 3. Treatment with adenosine and other purines does not induce mound arrest in WT. (A) WT cells were treated with adenosine (10 µM) while plating, and imaged at different time intervals. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (B) WT cells were treated with 10 µM guanosine and 10 µM 2-deoxy adenosine, plated for development and images were taken after 16 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (C) adgf− mounds were treated with inosine and images were captured 3.5 hr post chemical treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3.
Figure 5—figure supplement 3. Treatment with adenosine and other purines does not induce mound arrest in WT. (A) WT cells were treated with adenosine (10 µM) while plating, and imaged at different time intervals. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (B) WT cells were treated with 10 µM guanosine and 10 µM 2-deoxy adenosine, plated for development and images were taken after 16 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (C) adgf− mounds were treated with inosine and images were captured 3.5 hr post chemical treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6. Impaired cAMP signalling in adgf−. (A) Total cAMP levels in WT and adgf− mounds were quantified using cAMP-XP assay kit (Cell Signaling, USA). Level of significance is indicated as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, by Student’s t-test. Error bars are mean ± SEM (n = 3). (B) acaA expression was quantified using qRT-PCR. The error bars represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01 (Student’s t-test). (C) adgf− mounds. (D) Time course of adgf− mounds treated with 8-Br-cAMP and imaged at different intervals. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). Treatment with cyclic di-GMP and caffeine rescues the mound arrest phenotype. (E) Addition of cyclic-di-GMP restored tip formation in adgf− 3.5 hr after the treatment. Scale bar: 1 mm (n = 3). (F) PDE inhibitor (IBMX) treatment failed to rescue the adgf− mound arrest. Scale bar 1 mm (n = 3). (G) adgf− mounds treated with caffeine formed tips 3.5 hr post treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). Altered cAMP wave pattern in adgf mutants. (H) Optical density waves depicting cAMP wave generating centres in WT and adgf−. WT shows spiral and adgf− exhibits circular wave propagation. Scale bar 1 mm; (n=3).
Figure 6. Impaired cAMP signalling in adgf−. (A) Total cAMP levels in WT and adgf− mounds were quantified using cAMP-XP assay kit (Cell Signaling, USA). Level of significance is indicated as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, by Student’s t-test. Error bars are mean ± SEM (n = 3). (B) acaA expression was quantified using qRT-PCR. The error bars represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01 (Student’s t-test). (C) adgf− mounds. (D) Time course of adgf− mounds treated with 8-Br-cAMP and imaged at different intervals. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). Treatment with cyclic di-GMP and caffeine rescues the mound arrest phenotype. (E) Addition of cyclic-di-GMP restored tip formation in adgf− 3.5 hr after the treatment. Scale bar: 1 mm (n = 3). (F) PDE inhibitor (IBMX) treatment failed to rescue the adgf− mound arrest. Scale bar 1 mm (n = 3). (G) adgf− mounds treated with caffeine formed tips 3.5 hr post treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). Altered cAMP wave pattern in adgf mutants. (H) Optical density waves depicting cAMP wave generating centres in WT and adgf−. WT shows spiral and adgf− exhibits circular wave propagation. Scale bar 1 mm; (n=3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7. Expression levels of adgf, acaA, and pde4 in response to adenosine and ammonia treatment. (A) Expression levels of adgf, acaA, and pde4 in response to adenosine treatment (100 nM, 500 nM, and 1 µM). (B) And ammonia treatment (0.1, 1, and 10 mM). Data represent mean and SEM. Level of significance is indicated as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001, ns-non significant (n = 3) by one way ANOVA analysis. (C) cAMP levels in adgf mutants rescued with ammonia. Level of significance is indicated as **p < 0.01 (n = 3, Student’s t-test). Expression levels of prestalk (pst), ecmA, ecmB and prespore (psp), pspA cell type markers in adgf−. The expression profile of (D) pst (ecmA, ecmB) and psp (pspA) specific markers in WT and adgf− was quantified using qRT-PCR. Error bars represent mean and SEM. Level of significance is indicated as **p < 0.01 and ****p < 0.0001 (n = 3) by Student’s t-test. The fold-change in RNA transcript levels is relative to WT at the indicated time points. rnlA was used as the internal control.
Figure 7. Expression levels of adgf, acaA, and pde4 in response to adenosine and ammonia treatment. (A) Expression levels of adgf, acaA, and pde4 in response to adenosine treatment (100 nM, 500 nM, and 1 µM). (B) And ammonia treatment (0.1, 1, and 10 mM). Data represent mean and SEM. Level of significance is indicated as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001, ns-non significant (n = 3) by one way ANOVA analysis. (C) cAMP levels in adgf mutants rescued with ammonia. Level of significance is indicated as **p < 0.01 (n = 3, Student’s t-test). Expression levels of prestalk (pst), ecmA, ecmB and prespore (psp), pspA cell type markers in adgf−. The expression profile of (D) pst (ecmA, ecmB) and psp (pspA) specific markers in WT and adgf− was quantified using qRT-PCR. Error bars represent mean and SEM. Level of significance is indicated as **p < 0.01 and ****p < 0.0001 (n = 3) by Student’s t-test. The fold-change in RNA transcript levels is relative to WT at the indicated time points. rnlA was used as the internal control.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8. Mixing of WT cells with adgf− following DIL staining. (A–C) DIL labelled cells were mixed with unlabelled cells and plated on KK2 agar. Images were captured during the migrating slug stage. The left panel shows bright field, and the right panel shows the corresponding fluorescence images. Scale bar: 0.5 mm (n = 3).
Figure 8. Mixing of WT cells with adgf− following DIL staining. (A–C) DIL labelled cells were mixed with unlabelled cells and plated on KK2 agar. Images were captured during the migrating slug stage. The left panel shows bright field, and the right panel shows the corresponding fluorescence images. Scale bar: 0.5 mm (n = 3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8—figure supplement 1. Neutral red staining of mounds and slugs. (A) WT and adgf− cells were stained with NR, plated and images were captured at different time intervals. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). Pst/psp marker expression in slugs after inhibitor treatment. (B) ecmA-GFP. (C) ecmO-GFP. (D) pspA-RFP expression in the slugs after DCF treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm, n=3.
Figure 8—figure supplement 1. Neutral red staining of mounds and slugs. (A) WT and adgf− cells were stained with NR, plated and images were captured at different time intervals. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3). Pst/psp marker expression in slugs after inhibitor treatment. (B) ecmA-GFP. (C) ecmO-GFP. (D) pspA-RFP expression in the slugs after DCF treatment. Scale bar: 2 mm, n=3.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 9. Sorting of pst-GFP- and psp-GFP+ Dictyostelium cells by fluorescence activated cell sorter. (A) Forward scatter (FSC) vs. side scatter (SSC) plot used to gate total cells. (B) Singlets were gated based on FSC-H vs. FSC-A to exclude doublets and aggregates. (C) GFP fluorescence profile of gated single cells reveals two populations: pst-GFP⁻ and psp-GFP+, corresponding to pst and psp cells, respectively. (D) GFP⁻ (pst) and (E) GFP+ (psp) fractions. (F) adgf expression in FACS sorted samples was quantified by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). Error bars are mean ± SEM. Level of significance is indicated as **p < 0.01 (n = 3) by Student’s t-test.
Figure 9. Sorting of pst-GFP- and psp-GFP+ Dictyostelium cells by fluorescence activated cell sorter. (A) Forward scatter (FSC) vs. side scatter (SSC) plot used to gate total cells. (B) Singlets were gated based on FSC-H vs. FSC-A to exclude doublets and aggregates. (C) GFP fluorescence profile of gated single cells reveals two populations: pst-GFP⁻ and psp-GFP+, corresponding to pst and psp cells, respectively. (D) GFP⁻ (pst) and (E) GFP+ (psp) fractions. (F) adgf expression in FACS sorted samples was quantified by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). Error bars are mean ± SEM. Level of significance is indicated as **p < 0.01 (n = 3) by Student’s t-test.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 10. adgf acts downstream of the histidine kinase dhkD. (A) dhkD mutants on KK2 agar plates. Scale bar 1 mm; (n=3). (B) 5 and 10 U ADA rescued the mound arrest phenotype in a dose-dependent manner. Scale bar: 1 mm (n = 3). Images were taken 3.5 hr post treatment. (C) Addition of 20 U ADA led to formation of multiple tips. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3).
Figure 10. adgf acts downstream of the histidine kinase dhkD. (A) dhkD mutants on KK2 agar plates. Scale bar 1 mm; (n=3). (B) 5 and 10 U ADA rescued the mound arrest phenotype in a dose-dependent manner. Scale bar: 1 mm (n = 3). Images were taken 3.5 hr post treatment. (C) Addition of 20 U ADA led to formation of multiple tips. Scale bar: 2 mm (n = 3).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 10—figure supplement 1. Treatment of mounds with ADA and DCF. (A) ADA enzyme was directly added on top of the mound arrest mutants at 12 hr, and images were taken after 3.5 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (B) Ammonia restores tip formation in dhkD -mounds. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (C) cAMP levels in dhkD mutants rescued with ammonia. Error bars are mean ± SEM. *p< 0.05, n=3 (Student’s t-test). (D) Multi-tipped mutants were treated with 1 mM DCF, plated for development and images were taken after 16 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3.
Figure 10—figure supplement 1. Treatment of mounds with ADA and DCF. (A) ADA enzyme was directly added on top of the mound arrest mutants at 12 hr, and images were taken after 3.5 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (B) Ammonia restores tip formation in dhkD -mounds. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3. (C) cAMP levels in dhkD mutants rescued with ammonia. Error bars are mean ± SEM. *p< 0.05, n=3 (Student’s t-test). (D) Multi-tipped mutants were treated with 1 mM DCF, plated for development and images were taken after 16 hr. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 10—figure supplement 2. Developmental phenotype of different deaminase gene knockouts. (A) Deoxy-cytidine triphosphate deaminase, (B) N-acetyl glucosamine, (C) glucosamine-6-phosphate deaminase, (D) 2-amino muconate deaminase, (E) threonine deaminase, and (F) adenosine monophosphate deaminase. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3.
Figure 10—figure supplement 2. Developmental phenotype of different deaminase gene knockouts. (A) Deoxy-cytidine triphosphate deaminase, (B) N-acetyl glucosamine, (C) glucosamine-6-phosphate deaminase, (D) 2-amino muconate deaminase, (E) threonine deaminase, and (F) adenosine monophosphate deaminase. Scale bar: 2 mm; n = 3.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 11. Model illustrating the role of adgf in development. adgf suppresses the expression of genes involved in cell adhesion, cadA and csaA, and regulates the mound size and tip development by directly acting on adenosine, ammonia levels and cAMP signalling. Line ending in an arrow indicates that the previous gene/factor either directly or indirectly raises the activity or levels of the second; line ending in a cross-bar indicates inhibition. Dotted lines indicate ADGF interacting with APRA.
Figure 11. Model illustrating the role of adgf in development. adgf suppresses the expression of genes involved in cell adhesion, cadA and csaA, and regulates the mound size and tip development by directly acting on adenosine, ammonia levels and cAMP signalling. Line ending in an arrow indicates that the previous gene/factor either directly or indirectly raises the activity or levels of the second; line ending in a cross-bar indicates inhibition. Dotted lines indicate ADGF interacting with APRA.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 148 references

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Bonner, 1952, Morphogenesis: An Essay on Development
  2. Bonner, 1988, The possible role of ammonia in phototaxis of migrating slugs of Dictyostelium discoideum, PNAS, 85, 3885, 10.1073/pnas.85.11.3885 · DOI
  3. Bonner, 1989, Ammonia and thermotaxis: Further evidence for a central role of ammonia in the directed cell mass movements of Dictyostelium discoideum, PNAS, 86, 2733, 10.1073/pnas.86.8.2733 · DOI
  4. Burg, 1975, Effect of orally-administered caffeine and theophylline on tissue concentrations of 3’, 5’cyclic-amp and phospho-diesterase, Federation Proceedings, 34
  5. Daly, 1993, Mechanism of action of caffeine, 97
  6. Farnsworth, 1974, A barrier to diffusion in pseudoplasmodia of Dictyostelium discoideum, Developmental Biology, 41, 77, 10.1016/0012-1606(74)90284-x · DOI
  7. Feit, 1987, Ammonia is the gas used for the spacing of fruiting bodies in the cellular slime mold, Dictyostelium discoideum, Differentiation, 33, 193, 10.1111/j.1432-0436.1987.tb01557.x · DOI
  8. Feit, 1990, Regulation of the anterior-like cell state by ammonia in Dictyostelium discoideum, Developmental Genetics, 11, 442, 10.1002/dvg.1020110519 · DOI
  9. Gödecke, 2008, cAMP: fuel for extracellular adenosine formation?, British Journal of Pharmacology, 153, 1087, 10.1038/bjp.2008.7 · DOI
  10. Gross, 1983, Intracellular pH and the control of cell differentiation in Dictyostelium discoideum, Nature, 303, 244, 10.1038/303244a0 · DOI
  11. Gross, 1988, Plasma membrane proton pump inhibition and stalk cell differentiation in Dictyostelium discoideum, Differentiation, 38, 91, 10.1111/j.1432-0436.1988.tb00202.x · DOI
  12. Gross, 1994, Developmental decisions in Dictyostelium discoideum, Microbiological Reviews, 58, 330, 10.1128/mr.58.3.330-351.1994 · DOI
  13. Gross, 2009, Acidic Ca2+ stores, excitability, and cell patterning in Dictyostelium discoideum, Eukaryotic Cell, 8, 696, 10.1128/EC.00360-08 · DOI
  14. Headrick, 1989, 5’-Nucleotidase activity and adenosine formation in stimulated, hypoxic and underperfused rat heart, The Biochemical Journal, 261, 541, 10.1042/bj2610541 · DOI
  15. Hopper, 1993, Activation of the prespore and spore cell pathway of Dictyostelium differentiation by cAMP-dependent protein kinase and evidence for its upstream regulation by ammonia, The EMBO Journal, 12, 2459, 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1993.tb05900.x · DOI
  16. Jaiswal, 2012, Regulation of aggregate size and pattern by adenosine and caffeine in cellular slime molds, BMC Developmental Biology, 12, 1, 10.1186/1471-213X-12-5 · DOI
  17. Jang, 2011, Initial cell type choice in Dictyostelium, Eukaryotic Cell, 10, 150, 10.1128/EC.00219-10 · DOI
  18. Li, 2000, A family of genes with growth factor and adenosine deaminase similarity are preferentially expressed in the salivary glands of Glossina m. morsitans, Gene, 252, 83, 10.1016/s0378-1119(00)00226-2 · DOI
  19. Nadin, 2000, The regulative capacity of prespore amoebae as demonstrated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting and green fluorescent protein, Developmental Biology, 217, 173, 10.1006/dbio.1999.9530 · DOI
  20. Notarangelo, 2016, T cell immunodeficiencies, 80, 10.1016/B978-0-323-29875-9.00009-4 · DOI
  21. Oyama, 1986, Cyclic AMP and NH3/NH4+ both regulate cell-type-specific mRNA accumulation in the cellular slime mold, Dictyostelium discoideum, Developmental Biology, 117, 557, 10.1016/0012-1606(86)90324-6 · DOI
  22. Palková, 1997, Ammonia mediates communication between yeast colonies, Nature, 390, 532, 10.1038/37398 · DOI
  23. Palková, 2000, Yeast colonies synchronise their growth and development, Journal of Cell Science, 113 (Pt 11), 1923, 10.1242/jcs.113.11.1923 · DOI
  24. Poole, 1981, Effect of weak bases on the intralysosomal pH in mouse peritoneal macrophages, The Journal of Cell Biology, 90, 665, 10.1083/jcb.90.3.665 · DOI
  25. Raper, 1940, Pseudoplasmodium formation and organization in Dictyostelium discoideum, Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society, 56, 241
  26. Ratner, 1983, Comparison of differentiating Dictyostelium discoideum cell types separated by an improved method of density gradient centrifugation, Experimental Cell Research, 143, 1, 10.1016/0014-4827(83)90103-9 · DOI
  27. Ribeiro, 2010, Caffeine and Adenosine, Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 20, S3, 10.3233/JAD-2010-1379 · DOI
  28. Sawai, 2002, Rapid patterning and zonal differentiation in a two-dimensional Dictyostelium cell mass: the role of pH and ammonia, The Journal of Experimental Biology, 205, 2583, 10.1242/jeb.205.17.2583 · DOI
  29. Schultz, 2012, Visualization of Caenorhabditis elegans cuticular structures using the lipophilic vital dye diI, Journal of Visualized Experiments, 59, 10.3791/3362-v · DOI
  30. Sternfeld, 1979, Ammonia plus another factor are necessary for differentiation in submerged clumps of Dictyostelium, Journal of Cell Science, 38, 181, 10.1242/jcs.38.1.181 · DOI
  31. Torija, 2006, Functional genomics in Dictyostelium: MidA, a new conserved protein, is required for mitochondrial function and development, Journal of Cell Science, 119, 1154, 10.1242/jcs.02819 · DOI
  32. Ubeidat, 2002, Expression pattern of 5’-nucleotidase in Dictyostelium, Mechanisms of Development, 110, 237, 10.1016/s0925-4773(01)00580-9 · DOI
  33. Van Duijn, 1991, Regulation of movement speed by intracellular pH during Dictyostelium discoideum chemotaxis, PNAS, 88, 4951, 10.1073/pnas.88.11.4951 · DOI
  34. Weeks, 1994, The Dictyostelium cell cycle and its relationship to differentiation, FEMS Microbiology Letters, 124, 123, 10.1016/0378-1097(94)90239-9 · DOI
  35. Weijer, 1985, Influence of cyclic AMP and hydrolysis products on cell type regulation in Dictyostelium discoideum, Development, 86, 19, 10.1242/dev.86.1.19 · DOI
  36. Woznica, 2006, Under-agarose chemotaxis of Dictyostelium discoideum, 311, 10.1385/1-59745-144-4:311 · DOI
  37. Yamamoto, 1983, Vital staining of autophagic vacuoles in differentiating cells of Dictyostelium discoideum, Differentiation, 24, 83, 10.1111/j.1432-0436.1983.tb01307.x · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Hathi, P., & Ramamurthy, B.
Affiliations
  • Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IN)
  • Bhupat and Jyoti Mehta School of Biosciences, Department of Biotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology-Madras
ORCID
Venue
eLife
Publisher
eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
Published
2025-12-17
Volume
14
ISSN
2050-084X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.7554/elife.104855
PMC
PMC12711200
OpenAlex
W4408337314
Cited by
1
References
148
Citations by year
2026: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • eLife (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Indian Council of Medical Research (53/18/2012-CMB/BMS)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Marine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biochemical and Molecular Research
Keywords
Dictyostelium, adenosine deamination, ammonia, morphogen signaling, cyclic AMP, gastrulation, Klebsiella pneumoniae, morphogen gradients
MeSH terms
Histidine Kinase, Adenosine, Cyclic AMP, Adenosine Deaminase, Ammonia, Deamination, Dictyostelium, Isoenzymes, Mutation, Protozoan Proteins, Gene Expression Regulation, Developmental

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Extracellular adenosine deamination primes tip organizer development in Dictyostelium. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7554/elife.104855
The paper
Hathi, P., & Ramamurthy, B. (2025). Extracellular adenosine deamination primes tip organizer development in Dictyostelium. eLife. https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.104855

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.