FAK acts as a suppressor of RTK-MAP kinase signalling in Drosophila melanogaster epithelia and human cancer cells

Receptor Tyrosine Kinases (RTKs) and Focal Adhesion Kinase (FAK) regulate multiple signalling pathways, including mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase pathway. FAK interacts with several RTKs but little is known about how FAK regulates their downstream signalling. Here we investigated how FAK regulates signalling resulting from the overexpression of the RTKs RET and EGFR. FAK suppressed RTKs signalling in Drosophila melanogaster epithelia by impairing MAPK pathway. This regulation was also observed in MDA-MB-231 human breast cancer cells, suggesting it is a conserved phenomenon in humans. Mechanistically, FAK reduced receptor recycling into the plasma membrane, which resulted in lower MAPK activation. Conversely, increasing the membrane pool of the receptor increased MAPK pathway signalling. FAK is widely considered as a therapeutic target in cancer biology; however, it also has tumour suppressor properties in some contexts. Therefore, the FAK-mediated negative regulation of RTK/MAPK signalling described here may have potential implications in the designing of therapy strategies for RTK-driven tumours

Phospholipase iPLA2β averts ferroptosis by eliminating a redox lipid death signal

Ferroptosis, triggered by discoordination of iron, thiols and lipids, leads to the accumulation of 15-hydroperoxy (Hp)-arachidonoyl-phosphatidylethanolamine (15-HpETE-PE), generated by complexes of 15-lipoxygenase (15-LOX) and a scaffold protein, phosphatidylethanolamine (PE)-binding protein (PEBP)1. As the Ca^{2+} -independent phospholipase A2β (iPLA2β, PLA2G6 or PNPLA9 gene) can preferentially hydrolyze peroxidized phospholipids, it may eliminate the ferroptotic 15-HpETE-PE death signal. Here, we demonstrate that by hydrolyzing 15-HpETE-PE, iPLA_{2}β averts ferroptosis, whereas its genetic or pharmacological inactivation sensitizes cells to ferroptosis. Given that PLA2G6 mutations relate to neurodegeneration, we examined fibroblasts from a patient with a Parkinson’s disease (PD)-associated mutation (fPD^{R747W}) and found selectively decreased 15-HpETE-PE-hydrolyzing activity, 15-HpETE-PE accumulation and elevated sensitivity to ferroptosis. CRISPR-Cas9-engineered Pnpla9^{R748W/R748W} mice exhibited progressive parkinsonian motor deficits and 15-HpETE-PE accumulation. Elevated 15-HpETE-PE levels were also detected in midbrains of rotenone-infused parkinsonian rats and α-synuclein-mutant Snca^{A53T} mice, with decreased iPLA2β expression and a PD-relevant phenotype. Thus, iPLA_{2}β is a new ferroptosis regulator, and its mutations may be implicated in PD pathogenesis

Beyond quantitative and qualitative traits: three telling cases in the life sciences

This paper challenges the common assumption that some phenotypic traits are quantitative while others are qualitative. The distinction between these two kinds of traits is widely influential in biological and biomedical research as well as in scientific education and communication. This is probably due to both historical and epistemological reasons. However, the quantitative/qualitative distinction involves a variety of simplifications on the genetic causes of phenotypic variability and on the development of complex traits. Here, I examine three cases from the life sciences that show inconsistencies in the distinction: Mendelian traits (dwarfism and pigmentation in plant and animal models), Mendelian diseases (phenylketonuria), and polygenic mental disorders (schizophrenia). I show that these traits can be framed both quantitatively and qualitatively depending, for instance, on the methods through which they are investigated and on specific epistemic purposes (e.g., clinical diagnosis versus causal explanation). This suggests that the received view of quantitative and qualitative traits has a limited heuristic power—limited to some local contexts or to the specific methodologies adopted. Throughout the paper, I provide directions for framing phenotypes beyond the quantitative/qualitative distinction. I conclude by pointing at the necessity of developing a principled characterisation of what phenotypic traits, in general, are