Competition between Tropomyosin, Fimbrin, and ADF/Cofilin drives their sorting to distinct actin filament networks

  1. Jenna R Christensen
  2. Glen M Hocky
  3. Kaitlin E Homa
  4. Alisha N Morganthaler
  5. Sarah E Hitchcock-DeGregori
  6. Gregory A Voth
  7. David R Kovar  Is a corresponding author
  1. The University of Chicago, United States
  2. Rutgers University, United States

Abstract

The fission yeast actin cytoskeleton is an ideal, simplified system to investigate fundamental mechanisms behind cellular self-organization. By focusing on the stabilizing protein tropomyosin Cdc8, bundling protein fimbrin Fim1, and severing protein coffin Adf1, we examined how their pairwise and collective interactions with actin filaments regulate their activity and segregation to functionally diverse F-actin networks. Utilizing multi-color TIRF microscopy of in vitro reconstituted F-actin networks, we observed and characterized two distinct Cdc8 cables loading and spreading cooperatively on individual actin filaments. Furthermore, Cdc8, Fim1, and Adf1 all compete for association with F-actin by different mechanisms, and their cooperative association with actin filaments affects their ability to compete. Finally, competition between Fim1 and Adf1 for F-actin synergizes their activities, promoting rapid displacement of Cdc8 from a dense F-actin network. Our findings reveal that competitive and cooperative interactions between actin binding proteins help define their associations with different F-actin networks.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jenna R Christensen

    Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Glen M Hocky

    Department of Chemistry, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5637-0698
  3. Kaitlin E Homa

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Alisha N Morganthaler

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sarah E Hitchcock-DeGregori

    Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Gregory A Voth

    Department of Chemistry, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. David R Kovar

    Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    For correspondence
    drkovar@uchicago.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5747-0949

Funding

National Institutes of Health (GM079265)

  • David R Kovar

American Cancer Society (RSG-11-126-01-CSM)

  • David R Kovar

National Science Foundation (DGE-1144082)

  • Jenna R Christensen

National Institutes of Health (T32 GM0071832)

  • Jenna R Christensen
  • Kaitlin E Homa

National Institutes of Health (F32 GM113415-01)

  • Glen M Hocky

National Institutes of Health (GM093965)

  • Sarah E Hitchcock-DeGregori

National Science Foundation (DMR-1420709)

  • Gregory A Voth
  • David R Kovar

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Mohan K Balasubramanian, University of Warwick, United Kingdom

Version history

  1. Received: November 10, 2016
  2. Accepted: March 9, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 10, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 25, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Christensen et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,612
    Page views
  • 767
    Downloads
  • 53
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Jenna R Christensen
  2. Glen M Hocky
  3. Kaitlin E Homa
  4. Alisha N Morganthaler
  5. Sarah E Hitchcock-DeGregori
  6. Gregory A Voth
  7. David R Kovar
(2017)
Competition between Tropomyosin, Fimbrin, and ADF/Cofilin drives their sorting to distinct actin filament networks
eLife 6:e23152.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23152

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Bronwyn A Lucas, Benjamin A Himes, Nikolaus Grigorieff
    Research Advance

    Previously we showed that 2D template matching (2DTM) can be used to localize macromolecular complexes in images recorded by cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM) with high precision, even in the presence of noise and cellular background (Lucas et al., 2021; Lucas et al., 2022). Here, we show that once localized, these particles may be averaged together to generate high-resolution 3D reconstructions. However, regions included in the template may suffer from template bias, leading to inflated resolution estimates and making the interpretation of high-resolution features unreliable. We evaluate conditions that minimize template bias while retaining the benefits of high-precision localization, and we show that molecular features not present in the template can be reconstructed at high resolution from targets found by 2DTM, extending prior work at low-resolution. Moreover, we present a quantitative metric for template bias to aid the interpretation of 3D reconstructions calculated with particles localized using high-resolution templates and fine angular sampling.

    1. Plant Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Jinping Lu, Ingo Dreyer ... Rainer Hedrich
    Research Article

    To fire action-potential-like electrical signals, the vacuole membrane requires the two-pore channel TPC1, formerly called SV channel. The TPC1/SV channel functions as a depolarization-stimulated, non-selective cation channel that is inhibited by luminal Ca2+. In our search for species-dependent functional TPC1 channel variants with different luminal Ca2+ sensitivity, we found in total three acidic residues present in Ca2+ sensor sites 2 and 3 of the Ca2+-sensitive AtTPC1 channel from Arabidopsis thaliana that were neutral in its Vicia faba ortholog and also in those of many other Fabaceae. When expressed in the Arabidopsis AtTPC1-loss-of-function background, wild-type VfTPC1 was hypersensitive to vacuole depolarization and only weakly sensitive to blocking luminal Ca2+. When AtTPC1 was mutated for these VfTPC1-homologous polymorphic residues, two neutral substitutions in Ca2+ sensor site 3 alone were already sufficient for the Arabidopsis At-VfTPC1 channel mutant to gain VfTPC1-like voltage and luminal Ca2+ sensitivity that together rendered vacuoles hyperexcitable. Thus, natural TPC1 channel variants exist in plant families which may fine-tune vacuole excitability and adapt it to environmental settings of the particular ecological niche.