ALBERT

Notes: Abstract An earlier theory of cell differentiation and morphogenesis (Wassermann, 1972, 1973, 1978) is combined with the genetic control model of Davidson and Britten (e.g. 1979). The resulting new theory suggests how, bysystematic process algorithms, specifically enumerated combinations of batteries of structural genes can become switched on in particularly enumerated cells, via battery-specific enumerable regulator genes. The systematization is idealized. Up to a certain stage of development in each mitotically arising cell a unique cell-specific combination of structural genes called ‘marker genes’ is active. Marker genes are assumed to code for cell-specifying marker proteins (CSMPs) which permit cells carrying related markers to recognize each other, thus permitting specific cell sorting.Batteries of marker genes could ensure great developmental precision and can safeguard—via redundancies of CSMP types—against accidental loss or detrimental mutational modification of CSMPs or marker genes, respectively. This paper is much concerned with cell lineage in relation to ‘microdifferentiation’, where ‘microdifferentiation’ of a cell refers to a cell's active marker genes and its syntheses of CSMPs. A drastic distinction is made between ‘microdifferentiation’ and ‘gross’ differentiation of a cell, where the same ‘gross’ differentiation may be shared by a large number of cells that could each be uniquely ‘microdifferentiated’. Typical ‘gross’ differentiation could manifest itself in tissue specificity, whereas, up to certain stages of development, all cells of the same gross differentiation type (say tissue specificity) could each be uniquely ‘microdifferentiated’. The theory also assumes that at certain stages of the developmental process some (or in some organisms all) of the previously uniquely specified cells could give rise to small (or occasionally large) clones of equispecified cells, some of which might form clusters that represent complete ‘morphogenetic fields’ Tentative implementation mechanisms are proposed which suggest how the theory could operate in molecular biological terms. In particular, CSMPs could endow cell surface membranes with a highly specific protein network, and an associated equally specific cell surface coat. It is suggested how these highly specified cell surface coats and other systems could provide an ‘extracellular guidance network’ which could help to direct cells to attain energetically optimal locations relative to each other based on the matching of their surface specificities. In numerous experimental situations, where normally present optimal matching of cells is excluded, ‘alternative matching’ based on experiment-specific suboptimal matching could explain many data, notably in experimental development neurobiology (Wassermann, 1978).