Advertisement

Systems Biology Approaches for Studying Sphingolipid Signaling

  • Xinghua LuEmail author
  • W. Jim Zheng
  • Yusuf A. Hannun

Abstract

The importance of sphingolipid metabolism and bioactive sphingolipid products in cancer development and disease progression is now well established (see other chapters in this volume). However, much remains unknown in terms of the signaling mechanisms and downstream pathways affected by sphingolipids in cancers, such as which sphingolipid pathway is involved, which sphingolipid species contributes to a specific cancer’s biologic response, and which regulatory pathways are modulated by these bioactive sphingolipids. Due to the connectivity of sphingolipid metabolic network, it is difficult to address the above questions using conventional experimental approaches because manipulation of any one enzyme often results in a metabolic “ripple effect” across the network that are not easy to predict. In this chapter, we introduce a systems biology framework for deciphering signaling roles of distinct sphingolipid species and enzymes and for exploring novel mechanisms involving these pathways. These approaches have been successfully developed, applied, and validated in yeast systems. One component of the framework involves systematically perturbing sphingolipid metabolism using physiological and pharmacological approaches while monitoring lipidomic and transcriptomic responses to the perturbations are monitored; then different computational models are designed and applied to reveal relationship between specific sphingolipid species with transcriptomic modules, as a means to reveal signaling roles of distinct sphingolipid species. This component has successfully identified specific signaling pathways regulated by phytosphingosine-1-phosphate and clearly demonstrated that distinct ceramides encode disparate cellular signals. Another component of the framework concentrates on systematically identifying novel genes that could influence the activity of sphingolipid pathways. More specifically, we mined the literatures of yeast genes, constructed an Ontology Fingerprint of for each gene and developed an Ontology Fingerprint derived gene network, which were used to discover novel genes that modulates the activities of the sphingolipid pathway. This approach expanded our knowledge of the sphingolipid pathway by finding novel genes whose functions have not been associated with the pathway before. In summary, we show that systems biology approaches can effectively complement the experimental research and have a great potential to enhance the research of sphingolipids in cancers.

Keywords

Sphingolipids Systems biology Modeling Signal transduction 

References

  1. 1.
    Breslow DK et al (2008) A comprehensive strategy enabling high-resolution functional analysis of the yeast genome. Nat Methods 5(8):711–718CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ryder E et al (2007) The DrosDel deletion collection: a Drosophila genomewide chromosomal deficiency resource. Genetics 177(1):615–629CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hughes TR et al (2000) Functional discovery via a compendium of expression profiles. Cell 102(1):109–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Giaever G et al (2002) Functional profiling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Nature 418(6896):387–391CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu S et al (2013) From data towards knowledge: Revealing the architecture of signaling systems by unifying knowledge mining and data mining of systematic perturbation data. PLoS One 8, e61134CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cowart LA et al (2010) Revealing a signaling role of phytosphingosine-1-phosphate in yeast. Mol Syst Biol 6:349CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Montefusco DJ et al (2013) Distinct signaling roles of ceramide species in yeast revealed through systematic perturbation and systems biology analyses. Sci Signal 6(299):rs14CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kolter T (2011) A view on sphingolipids and disease. Chem Phys Lipids 164(6):590–606CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hannun YA, Obeid LM (2011) Many ceramides. J Biol Chem 286(32):27855–27862CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cowart LA et al (2010) Revealing a signaling role of phytosphingosine-1-phosphate in yeast. Mol Syst Biol 6:349. doi: 10.1038/msb.2010.3 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dickson RC, Sumanasekera C, Lester RL (2006) Functions and metabolism of sphingolipids in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Prog Lipid Res 45(6):447–465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jenkins GM et al (2002) Acute activation of de novo sphingolipid biosynthesis upon heat shock causes an accumulation of ceramide and subsequent dephosphorylation of SR proteins. J Biol Chem 277(45):42572–42578CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jenkins GM, Hannun YA (2001) Role for de novo sphingoid base biosynthesis in the heat-induced transient cell cycle arrest of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biol Chem 276(11):8574–8581CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Monti S et al (2003) Consensus clustering: a resampling-based method for class discovery and visualization of gene expression microarray data. Mach Learn 52(1):91–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reshef DN et al (2011) Detecting novel associations in large data sets. Science 334(6062):1518–1524CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Forsburg SL, Guarente L (1989) Identification and characterization of HAP4: a third component of the CCAAT-bound HAP2/HAP3 heteromer. Genes Dev 3(8):1166–1178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2010) Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J Stat Softw 33(1):1–22CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boone C, Bussey H, Andrews BJ (2007) Exploring genetic interactions and networks with yeast. Nat Rev Genet 8(6):437–449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tong AH et al (2004) Global mapping of the yeast genetic interaction network. Science 303(5659):808–813CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Breitkreutz BJ et al (2008) The BioGRID interaction database: 2008 update. Nucleic Acids Res 36(Database issue):D637–D640PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tsoi LC et al (2009) Evaluation of genome-wide association study results through development of ontology fingerprint. Bioinformatics 25(10):1314–1320CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    da Huang W, Sherman BT, Lempicki RA (2009) Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources. Nat Protoc 4(1):44–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sambade M et al (2005) A genomic screen for yeast vacuolar membrane ATPase mutants. Genetics 170(4):1539–1551CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mira N, Teixeira M, Sa-Correia I (2010) Adaptation and tolerance to weak acid stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: a genome-wide view. OMICS 14(5):525–540CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Motshwene P et al (2004) LEA (late embryonic abundant)-like protein Hsp 12 (heat-shock protein 12) is present in the cell wall and enhances the barotolerance of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochem J 377(3):769–774CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Karreman RJ, Lindsey GG (2007) Modulation of Congo-red-induced aberrations in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae by the general stress response protein Hsp12p. Can J Microbiol 53(11):1203–1210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li S et al (2002) The eukaryotic two-component histidine kinase Sln1p regulates OCH1 via the transcription factor, Skn7p. Mol Biol Cell 13(2):412–424CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brombacher K et al (2006) The role of Yap1p and Skn7p-mediated oxidative stress response in the defence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae against singlet oxygen. Yeast 23(10):741–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biomedical InformaticsUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.School of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Stony Brook Cancer CenterStony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA

Personalised recommendations