Cells that secrete a signaling molecule while also sensing it — the secrete-and-sense motif — realize behaviors from bacterial quorum sensing to autocrine growth-factor signaling. Youk and Lim (2014, Science) established, in a synthetic yeast circuit, quantitative phase diagrams that predict population-level social behaviors from circuit parameters (per-cell secretion rate, receptor abundance, positive-feedback strength, signal-degradation activity), but only for well-mixed cultures with a single molecule and receptor. Later research advanced individual threads — the authors' spatial-patterning theory, demonstrations of self-sensing in natural bacterial quorum sensing, density-dependent quorum regulation of T cells and other immune cells, a macroscopic quorum-sensing study in differentiating embryonic stem cells, and multi-channel communication toolkits — but no work has produced experimentally validated phase diagrams for cells fixed in space with signaling gradients and positional information, or single-cell measurements of secretion rate and receptor abundance that place natural secrete-and-sense cell types (cytokine-secreting T cells, hedgehog-secreting embryonic cells) in the framework's phase diagrams. The generalization problem therefore remains open.

Background

Many cells both secrete a signaling molecule and express the receptor for that same molecule. Bacteria regulate density-dependent collective behaviors this way, secreting and sensing diffusible signal molecules called autoinducers — a mechanism known as quorum sensing. T cells of the immune system drive clonal expansion by secreting and sensing the cytokine interleukin-2 (IL-2). Epithelial cells can turn cancerous through misregulated secreting and sensing of epidermal growth factor (EGF). A cell's response to molecules it secreted itself is called self-communication (in animals, autocrine signaling); its response to molecules secreted by other cells is neighbor communication (paracrine signaling, or quorum sensing when the response depends on population density). Redfield proposed in 2002 that bacteria might use such circuits for 'diffusion sensing' — gauging their diffusive environment rather than cell density — but the idea lacked a clear experimental demonstration.

Youk and Lim (2014) made this motif quantitative. They built a synthetic secrete-and-sense circuit in budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae): cells secreted the mating pheromone α-factor and expressed its G-protein-coupled receptor Ste2, with the per-cell secretion rate and the receptor abundance tuned independently, and they added two regulatory modules found in natural circuits — a positive-feedback link in which detection of the molecule induces more of it to be secreted, and active degradation of the signal by a secreted protease (Bar1). Using single-cell measurements in well-mixed cultures, they showed that this single molecule–receptor pair tunes the cells' 'sociability,' the balance of self- versus neighbor communication, across the full range from quorum sensing to autocrine signaling. Their results were summarized as phase diagrams (design tables): maps over the circuit parameters that partition parameter space into regions with qualitatively distinct population behaviors, including purely social behavior (quorum sensing; neighbor communication only), purely asocial behavior (self communication only), self-activation (a cell's activation driven by its own self-communication, which can occur with or without neighbor communication), and bimodal activation, in which signal degradation together with positive feedback differentiates an isogenic population into two coexisting activation states with a defined ratio through cell-to-cell variability in the threshold for activation. The regulatory phase diagram (Fig. 4D) maps positive-feedback strength against Bar1 abundance and was constructed separately at low (OD=0.001) and high (OD=0.1) cell density; at sufficiently high density neighbor activation dominates and the bimodal activation can disappear, as cell-to-cell variability becomes less relevant. The framework thereby connected circuit-level parameters to multicellular social behaviors in a predictive way.

The framework was established and experimentally validated only for well-mixed liquid cultures of a synthetic yeast circuit with one signaling molecule and one receptor. In the discussion the authors state what remains open. First, 'spatially organized cells — an important scenario that our work did not address': in tissues, epithelial layers, and developing embryos, cells are fixed in place, signaling molecules form concentration gradients, and positional information (a cell's response depending on where it sits in a gradient) shapes outcomes, so the well-mixed phase diagrams do not directly apply. Second, applying the design principles to natural systems requires measuring the cell density and the individual cell's receptor expression and secretion rate through single-cell measurement techniques in natural secrete-and-sense cell types, for example naive helper T cells whose secretion and sensing of cytokines such as IL-2, interferon-γ, and interleukin-4 govern their fate distributions ('the details are unknown'), or embryonic cells that secrete and sense hedgehog-family morphogens such as Sonic hedgehog, where the role of self- versus neighbor communication 'has not received much attention'; acquiring such measurements and testing the framework's predictions in those natural contexts is open. The authors further note that their bottom-up synthetic approach 'may be generalized to reveal how cells use fundamental cell signaling circuits to achieve complex multicellular behaviors' beyond the secrete-and-sense motif itself. The engineering uses the authors sketch — microbes that achieve diffusion sensing, or engineered yeast for large-scale bio-fermentation — inherit the same open question of how the design principles transfer.

Problem Statement

Determine whether the phase-diagram design principles of the secrete-and-sense motif — established in well-mixed synthetic yeast cultures for a single signaling molecule and receptor — generalize to the conditions under which natural secrete-and-sense cells actually operate. Concretely: (1) construct the behavioral phase diagrams for secrete-and-sense cells in spatially structured populations, where cells are fixed in space and signaling gradients and positional information shape each cell's response, as in epithelial layers and developing embryos, identifying how the source's behavioral classes — purely social (quorum sensing; neighbor communication only), purely asocial (self communication only), self-activation, and bimodal activation (signal degradation coupled with positive feedback, acting through cell-to-cell variability in the activation threshold) — and the regions of its regulatory phase diagram (positive-feedback strength against Bar1 abundance, constructed separately at OD=0.001 and OD=0.1 cell density) deform or reorganize; and (2) measure, through single-cell measurement techniques, the cell density and the individual cell's receptor expression and secretion rate in natural secrete-and-sense cell types — for example naive or differentiating T cells secreting and sensing cytokines such as IL-2, interferon-γ, and interleukin-4, or embryonic cells secreting and sensing hedgehog-family morphogens such as Sonic hedgehog — determine where those cells lie in the framework's phase diagrams, and test whether the framework's predicted population behaviors follow. These two components jointly test one scientific claim — that the design framework is general rather than specific to the original synthetic well-mixed setting — for the spatially structured and natural-system settings that the source paper itself identifies as unaddressed. A solution takes the form of a written research program: it constructs the spatial behavioral phase diagrams through a model, stating the resulting changes to the source's behavioral classes and to the regions of its regulatory phase diagram, and it specifies a concrete single-cell measurement protocol — the quantities to measure, the techniques, and the natural cell types — together with the predicted placements of those cells in the phase diagrams and the falsifiable population-level predictions those measurements would test. A program containing both parts suffices and requires no new experimental data; the framework counts as general across the spatial geometries and natural cell types named above when these design principles predict their population-level behaviors without re-fitting the parameters of the original well-mixed synthetic circuit.

References

  1. Youk H, Lim WA (2014) Secreting and sensing the same molecule allows cells to achieve versatile social behaviors. Science 343(6171):1242782. DOI: 10.1126/science.1242782. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1242782
  2. Maire T, Youk H (2015) Molecular-level tuning of cellular autonomy controls the collective behaviors of cell populations. Cell Systems 1(5):349-360. DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2015.10.012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2015.10.012
  3. Doğaner BA, Yan LKQ, Youk H (2016) Autocrine signaling and quorum sensing: Extreme ends of a common spectrum. Trends in Cell Biology 26(4):262-271. DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2015.11.002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2015.11.002
  4. Olimpio EP, Dang Y, Youk H (2018) Statistical dynamics of spatial-order formation by communicating cells. iScience 2:27-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2018.03.013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2018.03.013
  5. Dang Y, Grundel DAJ, Youk H (2020) Cellular dialogues: Cell-cell communication through diffusible molecules yields dynamic spatial patterns. Cell Systems 10:82-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2019.12.001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2019.12.001
  6. Daneshpour H, van den Bersselaar P, Chao C-H, Fazzio TG, Youk H (2023) Macroscopic quorum sensing sustains differentiating embryonic stem cells. Nature Chemical Biology 19(5):596-606. DOI: 10.1038/s41589-022-01225-x. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-022-01225-x
  7. Bareia T, Pollak S, Eldar A (2018) Self-sensing in Bacillus subtilis quorum-sensing systems. Nature Microbiology 3:83-89. DOI: 10.1038/s41564-017-0044-z. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-017-0044-z
  8. Zenke S, Palm MM, Braun J, Gavrilov A, Meiser P, Böttcher JP, Beyersdorf N, Ehl S, Gerard A, Lämmermann T, Schumacher TN, Beltman JB, Rohr JC (2020) Quorum regulation via nested antagonistic feedback circuits mediated by the receptors CD28 and CTLA-4 confers robustness to T cell population dynamics. Immunity 52(2):313-327. DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2020.01.018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2020.01.018
  9. Muldoon JJ, Chuang Y, Bagheri N, Leonard JN (2020) Macrophages employ quorum licensing to regulate collective activation. Nature Communications 11:878. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-14547-y. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14547-y
  10. Bardou M, Postat J, Loaec C, Lemaître F, Ronteix G, Garcia Z, Bousso P (2021) Quorum sensing governs collective dendritic cell activation in vivo. The EMBO Journal 40(15):e107176. DOI: 10.15252/embj.2020107176. https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.2020107176
  11. Van Eyndhoven LC, Vreezen CC, Tiemeijer BM, Tel J (2024) Immune quorum sensing dictates IFN-I response dynamics in human plasmacytoid dendritic cells. European Journal of Immunology 54(7):2350955. DOI: 10.1002/eji.202350955. https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.202350955
  12. Altan-Bonnet G, Mukherjee R (2019) Cytokine-mediated communication: a quantitative appraisal of immune complexity. Nature Reviews Immunology 19(4):205-217. DOI: 10.1038/s41577-019-0131-x. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-019-0131-x
  13. Billerbeck S, Brisbois J, Agmon N, Jimenez M, Temple J, Shen M, Boeke JD, Cornish VW (2018) A scalable peptide-GPCR language for engineering multicellular communication. Nature Communications 9:5057. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-07610-2. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07610-2
  14. Krink N, Loechner AC, Anders A, Kahnt J, Rensing S, Hochberg GA, Sourjik V (2021) Construction of multicellular yeast networks using the communication toolkit with variable specificity and attenuation. bioRxiv preprint. DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.27.462023. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.09.27.462023
  15. Cole J, Schulman R (2024) Limiting the broadcast range of a secreting cell during intercellular signaling using protease-mediated degradation. ACS Synthetic Biology 13(7):2019-2028. DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.4c00042. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00042
  16. Anders A, Malengo G, Kley L, Sourjik V (2026) Cell-internal autocrine receptor inactivation supports maintenance of mating-type identity in yeast. Science Advances 12(17):eaeb1729. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aeb1729. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aeb1729
  17. Qiao L, Sinha S, Abd El-Hafeez AA, Lo I-C, Midde KK, Ngo T, Aznar N, Lopez-Sanchez I, Gupta V, Farquhar MG, Rangamani P, Ghosh P (2023) A circuit for secretion-coupled cellular autonomy in multicellular eukaryotic cells. Molecular Systems Biology 19(4):e11127. DOI: 10.15252/msb.202211127. https://doi.org/10.15252/msb.202211127
  18. Dieterle PB, Min J, Irimia D, Amir A (2020) Dynamics of diffusive cell signaling relays. eLife 9:e61771. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.61771. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61771
  19. Grant PK, Szep G, Patange O, Halatek J, Coppard V, Csikász-Nagy A, Haseloff J, Locke JC, Dalchau N, Phillips A (2020) Interpretation of morphogen gradients by a synthetic bistable circuit. Nature Communications 11:5545. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-19098-w. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19098-w
  20. Vitale S, Di Pietro A, Turrà D (2019) Autocrine pheromone signalling regulates community behaviour in the fungal pathogen Fusarium oxysporum. Nature Microbiology 4:1443-1449. DOI: 10.1038/s41564-019-0456-z. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-019-0456-z
  21. Solé R, Conde-Pueyo N, Pla-Mauri J, Garcia-Ojalvo J, Montserrat N, Levin M (2024) Open problems in synthetic multicellularity. npj Systems Biology and Applications 10:151. DOI: 10.1038/s41540-024-00477-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41540-024-00477-8