Projecting or moving up a chemical gradient is a universal behavior of living organisms. We tested the ability of S. cerevisiaea-cells to sense and respond to spatial gradients of the mating pheromone α-factor produced in a microfluidics chamber; the focus was on bar1Δ strains, which do not degrade the pheromone input. The yeast cells exhibited good accuracy with the mating projection typically pointing in the correct direction up the gradient (∼80% under certain conditions), excellent sensitivity to shallow gradients, and broad dynamic range so that gradient-sensing was relatively robust over a 1000-fold range of average α-factor concentrations. Optimal directional sensing occurred at lower concentrations (5 nM) close to the K_d of the receptor and with steeper gradient slopes. Pheromone supersensitive mutations (sst2Δ and ste2^300Δ) that disrupt the down-regulation of heterotrimeric G-protein signaling caused defects in both sensing and response. Interestingly, yeast cells employed adaptive mechanisms to increase the robustness of the process including filamentous growth (i.e. directional distal budding) up the gradient at low pheromone concentrations, bending of the projection to be more aligned with the gradient, and forming a more accurate second projection when the first projection was in the wrong direction. Finally, the cells were able to amplify a shallow external gradient signal of α-factor to produce a dramatic polarization of signaling proteins at the front of the cell. Mathematical modeling revealed insights into the mechanism of this amplification and how the supersensitive mutants can disrupt accurate polarization. Together, these data help to specify and elucidate the abilities of yeast cells to sense and respond to spatial gradients of pheromone.

Yeast cells form a single mating projection when exposed to mating pheromone, a classic example of cell polarity. Prolonged treatment with pheromone or specific mutations results in alternative cell polarity behaviours. The authors performed mathematical modelling to investigate these unusual cell morphologies from the perspective of balancing spatial amplification (i.e. positive feedback that localises components) with spatial tracking (i.e. negative feedback that allows sensing of gradient). First, they used generic models of cell polarity to explore different cell polarity behaviours that arose from changes in the model spatial dynamics. By exploring the positive and negative feedback loops in each stage of a two-stage model, they simulated a variety of cell morphologies including single bending projections, single straight projections, periodic multiple projections and simultaneous double projections. In the second half of the study, they used a two-stage mechanistic model of yeast cell polarity focusing on G-protein signalling to integrate the modelling results more closely with the authors' previously published experimental observations. In summary, the combination of modelling and experiments describes how yeast cells exhibit a diversity of cell morphologies arising from two-stage G-protein signalling dynamics modulated by positive and negative feedbacks.