Lissencephaly is a severe developmental human brain disease that is characterized by agyria – a lack of convolutions known as gyri or sulci – and a brain with a resulting smooth cerebral surface. This disease, which affects approximately 1 in 30,000 individuals (Dobyns et al., 1993; Reiner et al., 1993), is associated with severe cognitive and motor function impairment, epilepsy, and a shortened lifespan (Guerrini and Parrini, 2010). Classical lissencephaly is characterized by disorganization of the neuronal tissue architecture found in healthy individuals: instead of the well-defined six neuronal layers formed in normal brains, those from lissencephalic patients typically exhibit four disordered layers (Golden, 2018).

Like other developmental brain disorders (e.g., subcortical band heterotopia, focal cortical dysplasia) that result in reduced gyration, cell mass, or well organized tissue layers, lissencephaly is thought to be largely a result of defective neuronal migration (Guerrini and Parrini, 2010). The precursor cells for the majority of neurons and glia in the developed neocortex are radial glial progenitors (RGPs), highly elongated neuroepithelial cells that span the neural tube and developing cortex, from the ventricular to the pial surface (Figure 1B). The cell bodies for these key neuronal progenitors are found in the ventricular zone (VZ). Following an asymmetric cell division that results in a new RGP cell and a differentiated neuronal cell type (e.g., a neuronal precursor, or NP), the latter cells undergo extensive migration toward the pial surface, ultimately occupying positions within the cortical plate, the precursor to the cerebral cortex (Vallee et al., 2009). Thus, mutations in the molecular effectors of this process result in lissencephaly or related disorders.

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Unsurprisingly, this complex developmental process involves many molecular players. These include factors that affect microtubule function either indirectly (RELN, a serine protease [Hong et al., 2000]), or directly (TUB1A1, which encodes α-tubulin [Poirier et al., 2007]). However, the primary genetic drivers of lissencephaly are missense mutations in, or truncations and deletions of the LIS1 gene (lissencephaly-1) (Reiner et al., 1993), which was confirmed to be required for neuronal migration in a mouse model (Hirotsune et al., 1998), and in fly embryos (Swan et al., 1999). As a consequence of its central roles in lissencephaly and brain development, LIS1 has been a focus of intense scrutiny ever since its discovery 27 years ago. These studies have revealed invaluable insight into the cellular and biochemical roles for this molecule in neuronal function. LIS1 was initially identified as a subunit of brain platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase (beta subunit, or PAF-AH1B1) (Hattori et al., 1994) and can indeed modulate PAF-AH enzyme activity in vitro; however, superstoichiometric amounts of LIS1 are needed to do so (Manya et al., 1999). Mice lacking PAF-AH alpha subunits do not exhibit defects in brain development (Koizumi et al., 2003; Yan et al., 2003), suggesting that this function of LIS1 is not responsible for the lissencephaly phenotype. Subsequently, numerous studies have since shown that LIS1 is also a key effector of the molecular motor cytoplasmic dynein. Given the well-defined role for the dynein complex in effecting microtubule-based transport – and in neuronal migration – the molecular basis for LIS1-related lissencephalies is likely defective dynein-based transport.

In this review, we summarize the cell biological and genetic data defining the role for LIS1 in cell and organismal function, and the wealth of biochemical data that have shed invaluable light on the mechanism by which this molecule functions. In addition to describing a phylogenetic relationship between LIS1 and dynein autoinhibition, we will attempt to reconcile the numerous – and at times contradictory – biochemical findings with in vivo data to synthesize them into a coherent model for LIS1 function in the dynein pathway.

Cytoplasmic dynein-1 (hereafter referred to as dynein) is a minus end-directed microtubule motor complex comprised of several peptides, with the heavy chain – encoded by DYNC1H1 in humans – being responsible for the catalytic and microtubule-binding activities (reviewed in Schmidt and Carter, 2016). Dynein effects the majority of retrograde transport in organisms throughout the evolutionary spectrum, except in the plant kingdom, which has lost the cytoplasmic dynein machinery (Wickstead and Gull, 2007). Unlike the kinesin superfamily, which is composed of ~45 members in humans, there are only two genes encoding the cytoplasmic dynein heavy chains: DYNC1H1, and DYNC1H2, the latter of which encodes the heavy chain for cytoplasmic dynein-2, a motor restricted to ciliary and flagellar transport (i.e., intraflagellar transport, or IFT). Also unlike some kinesin family members, metazoan dynein is unable to move processively along microtubules without the assistance of other factors (McKenney et al., 2014; Schlager et al., 2014). These include the multi-subunit complex dynactin, and any one of a number of identified cargo adaptor proteins that mediate an interaction between dynein and dynactin (e.g., BicD2, BicDR1, Hook3, etc.) (reviewed in Reck-Peterson et al., 2018).

Recent elegant in vitro work has revealed the likely structural and biochemical basis for dynein’s reliance on these factors. Isolated dynein adopts an autoinhibited conformational state (called the ‘phi’ particle, due to its similar appearance to the Greek letter [Amos, 1989]) that reduces its microtubule on-rate, and also restricts its ability to interact with dynactin and an adaptor (Zhang et al., 2017). Upon adopting the ‘open’ (uninhibited) state, dynein readily binds to both, and assembles into a motility competent dynein-dynactin-adaptor (DDA) complex (Zhang et al., 2017). Dynactin helps activate dynein motility by promoting microtubule binding of the DDA complex, and by orienting the motor heads of dynein in a parallel manner that is conducive to motility (McKenney et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2017).

The reliance of dynein on these factors for processive motility provides the ability to fine-tune dynein-mediated transport within the cell. For example, different cargo adaptors can provide cargo specificity by recruiting dynein-dynactin complexes to different structures or regions of the cell. Moreover, those factors that promote DDA assembly enhance dynein activity, while those that prevent it have the opposite effect. Since the discovery of the autoinhibited state and its role in affecting dynein activity is fairly new, it is not surprising that the field is currently focused on characterizing factors that may affect it. Recent studies have revealed that LIS1 is in fact a key effector that promotes and/or stabilizes the uninhibited ‘open’ conformation, thus promoting DDA assembly and motility (discussed below).

The mechanism by which neurons undergo extensive migration from the ventricular zone to the pial surface has been examined in detail (Figure 1B). Similar to other forms of cell migration, neuronal migration appears to follow a three-step process: (1) the cell extends a leading process, which is a dynein-independent event (Tsai et al., 2007; Tsai et al., 2005); (2) the nucleus migrates into the leading process (‘nucleokinesis’); (3) the trailing process is retracted (Lambert de Rouvroit and Goffinet, 2001). Thus, nucleokinesis, or nuclear migration, is a key process in cell migration. Determining the mechanisms by which dynein effects this process – in which it plays a central role – is important to understand how LIS1 dysfunction leads to lissencephaly.

A role for dynein in effecting nuclear movements was first reported in budding yeast and filamentous fungi. Budding yeast mutants lacking a dynein heavy chain exhibited a binuclear phenotype (Eshel et al., 1993; Li et al., 1993), while Aspergillus nidulans and Neurospora crassa dynein mutants exhibited a nuclear distribution phenotype (Plamann et al., 1994; Xiang et al., 1994) (leading to the NUD names applied to genes implicated in this process [Morris, 1975]), in which the nuclei are aberrantly clustered at one end of the germ spore instead of being evenly distributed along the hyphae. In budding yeast, the nucleus, which is initially positioned within the mother cell, must be actively positioned to the site of cytokinesis (the mother-bud neck), such that at the moment of anaphase onset, the chromosomes are equally segregated to mother and daughter cells (Figure 1A, left) (Markus et al., 2012; Moore et al., 2009). In A. nidulans, an asexual spore containing a single nucleus undergoes polarized growth to form a germling (or germ tube). During this process, nuclear division occurs simultaneously with nuclear translocation into the germ tube (Figure 1A, right). In both model systems, nuclear migration relies on dynein pathway components and many of its regulators, including dynactin and LIS1 (Pac1 in S. cerevisiae, which possesses 27% identity and 44% similarity with LIS1; NudF in A. nidulans, which possesses 43% identity and 62% similarity with LIS1) (Eshel et al., 1993; Lee et al., 2003; Li et al., 1993; Moore et al., 2008; Xiang et al., 1994; Xiang et al., 1995; Xiang et al., 1999; Zhang et al., 2008).

Dynein-mediated nuclear migration is perhaps best understood in budding yeast, owing in part to the simplicity of the system, a well-defined ‘parts list’, and the fact that the only known transport function for dynein in this organism is to translocate the nucleus with the enclosed mitotic spindle (as a result of the ‘closed mitosis’ that takes place in this organism; Figure 1A, left). Numerous studies from several labs have provided evidence for the prevailing ‘offloading’ model for dynein function in this organism. In this model, dynein binds to Pac1/LIS1 in the cytoplasm, and the resulting dynein-Pac1 complex subsequently binds to Bik1 (homolog of human CLIP-170) that is associated with dynamic microtubule plus ends (by an as yet unknown EB1-independent mechanism) (Carvalho et al., 2004; Lee et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2003; Markus and Lee, 2011; Markus et al., 2011; Sheeman et al., 2003). Data indicate that this plus end-bound dynein pool recruits the dynactin complex, which is then competent for interaction with the cortical receptor, Num1 (Heil-Chapdelaine et al., 2000; Markus et al., 2011; Moore et al., 2008). Upon encountering cortically-anchored Num1, the plus end-bound dynein-dynactin complex is transferred, or ‘offloaded,’ and activated for effecting nuclear migration. Although the role of Num1 in this process is not entirely clear, it likely plays a role analogous to mammalian cargo adaptor proteins in that it promotes a stable, motility-competent dynein-dynactin complex (Lammers and Markus, 2015). It is interesting to note that in this system, dynactin appears to associate with the plus end-bound dynein complex before encountering the cargo adapter molecule Num1. Similar plus end localization of dynein and dynactin has been reported in mammalian cells and filamentous fungi (Han et al., 2001; Splinter et al., 2012; Valetti et al., 1999; Vaughan et al., 1999; Zhang et al., 2003), which has been proposed to precede cargo adaptor binding, and consequent activation of minus end motility (Baumbach et al., 2017; Egan et al., 2012; Jha et al., 2017; Lenz et al., 2006; Moon et al., 2014; Schmidt et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2010). Thus, dynein and dynactin appear to have the capacity to interact in a cargo adaptor-independent manner – at least in the context of plus end-targeting – a phenomenon that is distinct from what is observed in single-molecule motility assays (McKenney et al., 2014; Schlager et al., 2014). Further work is needed to explore the nature of this unique adaptor-independent dynein-dynactin complex, but we speculate that the well-defined interaction between the dynein intermediate chain (DIC) and the p150 subunit of dynactin are likely important (Karki and Holzbaur, 1995; McKenney et al., 2011; Nyarko et al., 2012; Stuchell-Brereton et al., 2011; Vaughan and Vallee, 1995).

Before a role for dynein in nuclear migration was apparent in higher eukaryotes, it was demonstrated that dynein could effect the position of the mitotic spindle in cultured epithelial (MDCK) cells (Busson et al., 1998). Numerous studies have also shown that cortically anchored dynein-dynactin plays a critical role in orienting the mitotic spindle in a manner analogous to budding yeast (Kiyomitsu and Cheeseman, 2012; Kiyomitsu and Cheeseman, 2013; O'Connell and Wang, 2000; Okumura et al., 2018; Peyre et al., 2011; Woodard et al., 2010). The position of the mitotic spindle in animal cells is indeed nonrandom, and is precisely tuned to match the specific needs of a cell and its surrounding tissue. The position of the spindle dictates the position of the cytokinetic contractile ring machinery; thus, by positioning the spindle offset from the cell center, the cell divides asymmetrically. In fact, directed positioning (e.g., center, or offset from center) or orientation of the spindle (e.g., parallel with, or orthogonal to the plane of the tissue) can dictate the fate of a cell (reviewed in [Knoblich, 2010; Morin and Bellaïche, 2011]) in part by asymmetrically distributing cellular factors to the resulting daughter cells. Given a reported role for LIS1 in dynein-mediated spindle orientation (Faulkner et al., 2000; Pawlisz et al., 2008; Siller and Doe, 2009; Xie et al., 2013; Yingling et al., 2008), and the importance of spindle orientation in neuronal cell differentiation and generation of progenitors (Bershteyn et al., 2017; Fish et al., 2006; Götz and Huttner, 2005), another potential confounding cause for lissencephaly is dysfunctional spindle orientation, in addition to defects in nuclear migration (Figure 1B; see Box 2).

A potential role for dynein in nuclear migration in metazoans was suggested from wound healing studies in cultured fibroblasts. During the healing process, cells at the wound edge reorient their centrosome (the microtubule organizing center) toward the wound prior to cell migration in this direction. Dynein and dynactin are both required for reorientation of the centrosome (Etienne-Manneville and Hall, 2001; Palazzo et al., 2001) – which precedes nuclear movements – and are also required for directed cell migration (Dujardin et al., 2003). Of note, dynein and LIS1 both accumulate at the leading edge of these migrating fibroblasts, implicating these cortically anchored molecules in directing centrosomal movement. In a similar process, the centrosome also precedes the nucleus during nuclear migration in neurons (Figure 1B, Box 3; Solecki et al., 2004), albeit in a manner that indicates they are not directly coupled. Notably, depletion of either dynein or LIS1 in embryonic neural precursor cells is sufficient to block nuclear movement (Tsai et al., 2007). Although the mechanism by which dynein and LIS1 effect nuclear movement in these radially migrating neocortical neurons is not entirely clear, the centrosome typically moves toward, and pauses when it reaches a ‘swelling’ – a bulge in the leading process that often appears, prior to nuclear movement (Figure 1B; Box 3). Fluorescence microscopy revealed an enrichment of dynein in this swelling, as well as a polar network of microtubules emanating from the centrosome with their plus ends oriented toward the leading process (Tsai et al., 2007). This raised the possibility that dynein anchored at the plasma membrane of the swelling pulls the nucleus-attached centrosome toward it via its minus end-directed activity. The actin-based motor myosin has also been implicated in supporting these nuclear movements; however, while inhibition of myosin reduced nuclear movement, it did not prevent advancement of the centrosome (Tsai et al., 2007). Evidence indicates that myosin effects nuclear movement from behind the nucleus (Bellion et al., 2005; Schaar and McConnell, 2005), rather than in front, as is the case for dynein. Thus, dynein likely mediates centrosome advancement, while actomyosin-based processes are required for nuclear movements. It has also been speculated that dynein effects nuclear movements from the nuclear surface (Vallee et al., 2009); given the separation between the centrosome and the nucleus (by up to 15 µm), minus end-directed motility of nuclear envelope-anchored dynein motors would conceivably also result in migration toward the leading process.

Evidence for dynein motor activity localized to the nuclear envelope is more apparent in RGP cells, in which the nucleus undergoes an oscillatory migratory behavior termed interkinetic nuclear migration (INM). In a process that relies on dynein and LIS1, the nucleus is translocated down toward the ventricular surface where mitosis takes place (Figure 1B; see Box 1). Movement in the opposite direction – towards the basal surface, where the nucleus undergoes S phase – is mediated by the kinesin-3 Kif1A (Tsai et al., 2010). At least two independent mechanisms recruit dynein and dynactin to the nuclear envelope: the cargo adaptor protein BicD2, which is tethered by the nucleoporin RanBP2 (Splinter et al., 2012; Splinter et al., 2010); and, the kinetochore protein CENP-F, which interacts with dynein via the paralogous proteins Nde1/Ndel1, and is tethered by the nucleoporin Nup133 (Bolhy et al., 2011). These pools of dynein independently effect nuclear migration during INM (Baffet et al., 2015; Hu et al., 2013). Thus, dynein is a key effector of nuclear migration during early stages of brain development, which is critical for cell cycle progression of RGPs, and the consequent generation of neurons and glia that ultimately comprise the adult brain.

It is worth noting that in addition to a role in effecting nuclear migration, dynein and LIS1 have also been implicated in promoting nuclear envelope breakdown at the onset of mitosis (Hebbar et al., 2008; Salina et al., 2002; Turgay et al., 2014). In fact, heterozygous LIS1 null mice exhibit delayed nuclear envelope breakdown, and a consequent increased fraction of progenitor cells near the VZ undergoing mitosis (with respect to wild-type mice), providing yet another potential LIS1-based mechanism to disrupt neurogenesis (Hebbar et al., 2008). Although the mechanisms by which dynein and LIS1 effect this process are not entirely clear, evidence indicates that dynein-dynactin recruitment to the nuclear envelope is mediated by the LINC (linker of nucleoskeleton and cytoskeleton) complex, which is comprised of SUN (Sad1p and UNC-84 homology) and KASH (Klarsicht/Anc-1/SYNE homology) family proteins. The LINC complex has also been implicated in nuclear migration, most notably in C. elegans (reviewed in Bone and Starr, 2016; Tapley and Starr, 2013).

In summary, dynein is a critical effector of nuclear migration, which is intimately linked to neuronal migration (the former throughout the evolutionary spectrum). Both processes are critical during brain development and other important physiological events. Although the role for dynactin in this process is likely to promote a motility-competent dynein complex, the role of LIS1 is less clear. However, recent studies have shed new light on the mechanism by which LIS1 impacts dynein function, and provide a model by which LIS1 dysfunction might lead to disease.

LIS1 is a well-conserved protein that possesses two distinct functional domains: a short N-terminal region comprised of a short coiled-coil and a LIS1-homology, or LisH, domain (found in over 100 eukaryotic proteins [Emes and Ponting, 2001]), followed by a larger C-terminal domain comprised of seven WD-40 repeats, which are typical of seven-bladed beta-propeller structures (Figure 2A and B). WD-40 domains often function as multi-protein interaction platforms, suggesting this surface could act as a scaffold for recruitment of various LIS1-interacting regulators and targets (Schapira et al., 2017). The N-terminal region is important for LIS1 dimerization (Ahn and Morris, 2001; Kim et al., 2004), while the beta-propeller domain interacts directly with dynein, PAF-AH, and the dynein regulator Nde1/Ndel1 (Sasaki et al., 2000; Tai et al., 2002; Tarricone et al., 2004; Toropova et al., 2014). Although a crystal structure of the full-length molecule remains to be determined, individual structures of the N- and C-terminal regions reveal a general overview of the LIS1 dimer (Figure 2B, left) (Kim et al., 2004; Tarricone et al., 2004). Mutagenesis studies combined with binding assays revealed at least two regions of one face of the beta-propeller that make contacts with dynein (Figure 2B, right; mutations in blue residues each lead to disrupted dynein binding; note that blue residue 1 is not as well conserved as residues 2 and 3) (Gutierrez et al., 2017; Pandey and Smith, 2011; Toropova et al., 2014). Cryoelectron microscopy (cryoEM) studies have further identified one key site of interaction within the dynein AAA+ ring (near AAA3; Figure 2C; ‘site 1’) that is required for dynein-Pac1 binding, with a secondary site that has been proposed to be important for tuning dynein function (‘site 2’; discussed below) (DeSantis et al., 2017; Toropova et al., 2014). Sequence alignment reveals a high degree of conservation for the C-terminal dynein-binding region of LIS1 (Figure 2D; R316 and W340), with two small clusters of nearly invariant residues surrounding those shown to be important for this interaction (Figure 2D, magenta residues).

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Although many of the lissencephaly-causing mutations result in truncated protein products (Cardoso et al., 2002; Fogli et al., 1999; Pilz et al., 1998; Uyanik et al., 2007), numerous cases of lissencephaly arise as a consequence of missense mutations that are scattered throughout the protein (Figure 2A, red residues) (Cardoso et al., 2002; Di Donato et al., 2018; Lo Nigro et al., 1997; Pilz et al., 1998; Torres et al., 2004). Of those mutations that are found within the beta-propeller region, only two map to the dynein-binding region (Figure 2A and B, red residues); the rest are buried within the beta-propeller structure, and likely lead to disease by destabilizing LIS1 structure (Caspi et al., 2003). However, both of the mutations within the dynein binding region were also shown to result in disruption of LIS1 structure and/or protein aggregation (Caspi et al., 2003; Gutierrez et al., 2017).

The first indication that LIS1 may participate in the dynein pathway, independently of its role as a subunit of the PAF-AH complex, was the finding of similar nuclear migration phenotypes in LIS1 (NUDF) and dynein (NUDA) A. nidulans mutants (Xiang et al., 1995). Further arguing against a role for PAF-AH in neuronal development, deletion of the catalytic alpha subunit of PAF-AH leads to defects in testicular, not brain development (Koizumi et al., 2003; Yan et al., 2003). Additionally, there are no clear PAF-AH subunits in some organisms with LIS1 homologues (e.g., fungi), arguing for an independent role of LIS1 in orthogonal pathways. Subsequent studies using cultured mammalian cells confirmed an interaction between LIS1 and dynein, and noted, among other things, an inward redistribution of dynein and dynactin to the centrosome (where microtubule minus ends are anchored) (Faulkner et al., 2000; Smith et al., 2000), and an incorporation of dynein and dynactin into higher molecular weight complexes upon LIS1 overexpression. Given the reliance of dynein on dynactin for processive motility, these data were the first indications that LIS1 may in fact promote assembly of dynein-dynactin complexes, thereby activating dynein motility (see below).

As described above, LIS1 is important for many dynein-mediated vesicular, nuclear, and neuronal migratory processes in lower and higher eukaryotes. However, the mechanism by which it functions has been controversial. What is clear is that LIS1 is important for recruitment of dynein-dynactin to various cellular structures, including: the nuclear envelope (Raaijmakers et al., 2013; Splinter et al., 2012), microtubule plus ends (Coquelle et al., 2002; Faulkner et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2003; Markus et al., 2009; Moon et al., 2014; Sheeman et al., 2003; Splinter et al., 2012), Rab6-positive vesicles (Splinter et al., 2012), kinetochores (Moon et al., 2014; Raaijmakers et al., 2013), the cell cortex (Markus et al., 2009; Moon et al., 2014), and ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes (Dix et al., 2013). As described above, LIS1-mediated targeting of dynein to the plus ends of dynamic microtubules has been implicated in delivering (or offloading) dynein-dynactin complexes to the cell cortex. This is best understood in budding yeast (Lee et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2003; Markus and Lee, 2011; Markus et al., 2011; Markus et al., 2009; Sheeman et al., 2003), although evidence suggests a similar mode of cortical delivery in C. elegans embryos and animal cells (Moon et al., 2014; Schmidt et al., 2017; Tame et al., 2014). A LIS1-dependent offloading mechanism has also been suggested for plus end-mediated delivery of dynein to vesicular cargo prior to their minus end-directed transport in filamentous fungi (Egan et al., 2012; Lenz et al., 2006). However, such an offloading mechanism for dynein recruitment is not universal. For instance, depolymerization of microtubules does not perturb dynein localization to kinetochores; rather, dynein accumulates to higher than normal levels due to the lack of kinetochore-microtubule attachments (Hoffman et al., 2001), which are ‘sensed’ by mitotic checkpoint machinery to ensure accurate chromosome segregation (reviewed in Foley and Kapoor, 2013; Sacristan and Kops, 2015).

Given the importance of LIS1 in dynein function, and the myriad cellular and developmental processes for which it is required, the precise molecular and biochemical basis by which LIS1 affects dynein function has been the focus of intense scrutiny in the field. These studies have yielded invaluable insight into LIS1 function; however, many of these findings have been contradictory, making it difficult to generate a unified hypothesis for LIS1 function. Most notably, evidence from several studies suggested that LIS1 inhibits dynein motor activity, while other work suggested the opposite: that LIS1 activates dynein.

LIS1 as activator of processive dynein motility: the ‘catalytic check valve’ model

Although it is difficult to rule out the possibility that one function of LIS1 is to promote a high microtubule affinity state of dynein, recent studies have posited a new model for the function of LIS1 and at least two of its orthologs: Pac1 (S. cerevisiae) and NudF (A. nidulans). Four new independent studies came to the same conclusion: that LIS1 promotes dynein activity by inducing and/or stabilizing its uninhibited, ‘open’ conformational state, which is likely a rate-limiting step in the assembly of the active dynein-dynactin-adapter (DDA) complex that is necessary for processive minus end-directed motility (Elshenawy et al., 2020; Htet et al., 2020; Marzo et al., 2020; Qiu et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2017).

The first indication that LIS1 might enhance rather than inhibit dynein motility came from single-molecule experiments performed with assembled dynein-dynactin-cargo adapter (DDA) complexes. This is in stark contrast to those experiments described above, in which LIS1 (or Pac1) was assayed with isolated dynein. Although one of these studies observed that LIS1 had no effect on the velocity of DDA complexes (Jha et al., 2017), the other two found that addition of LIS1 led to a significant increase in their velocity (by as much as ~2.5 fold) (Baumbach et al., 2017; Gutierrez et al., 2017). Of note, these studies all observed varying degrees of co-migration of motile DDA complexes with LIS1 using multi-color single-molecule imaging. Mutational analysis indicated that LIS1 is indeed bound to dynein’s AAA+ motor domain during these movements (Gutierrez et al., 2017). Thus, direct binding of LIS1 to dynein motor domains within motile DDA complexes is not sufficient to stall or reduce the velocity of dynein as posited by the clutch model detailed above. These data raised the question as to how LIS1 binding to the AAA+ ring in a manner that potentially stabilizes a high microtubule affinity state could increase DDA velocity? One clue came from the surprising recent finding that the dynactin complex – which is built upon a small actin filament (Schafer et al., 1994) – has the potential to scaffold not only one (DDA complex), but two dynein dimers (D₂DA complex) (Grotjahn et al., 2018; Urnavicius et al., 2018). As stated above, dynactin binding to dynein, which requires a cargo adaptor molecule such as BicD2, activates dynein motility by orienting the dynein motor heads in a parallel manner that is conducive for motility, and by enhancing the microtubule landing rate of the complex via the p150 subunit of dynactin (McKenney et al., 2014; McKenney et al., 2016; Nirschl et al., 2016). However, the finding that dynactin could also scaffold multiple dynein dimers within a single processive complex was quite surprising. Importantly, these D₂DA complexes exhibit increased velocity and force output with respect to DDA complexes (Urnavicius et al., 2018). These findings, along with the observation that LIS1 stimulates DDA velocity, hinted at the possibility that LIS1 may stimulate the formation of D₂DA complexes.

In two of the recent studies that employed mammalian proteins (Elshenawy et al., 2020; Htet et al., 2020), the authors found that addition of LIS1 increases the proportion of assembled DDA complexes, and increases the velocity and force output of these complexes by increasing the fraction of D₂DA complexes (with respect to DDA complexes, Figure 3). Consistent with this latter notion, the LIS1-mediated velocity increase required that both of the dynein dimers have intact motor domains, as addition of truncated dynein tail complexes abrogated the LIS1-mediated velocity increase (Elshenawy et al., 2020). In addition to providing evidence for LIS1 promoting DDA/D₂DA complex assembly through a mechanism that involves stabilization of the ‘open’ dynein conformation (see Figure 3; Box 1), these studies also found that LIS1 promotes complex assembly even when ‘open’ dynein mutants are used (see Figure 3, Box 2). Thus, LIS1 likely promotes dynein activity by at least two distinct mechanisms (see below).

Figure 3

Download asset Open asset

Following with the conserved nature of this process, another of the recent studies surprisingly found that the phi conformation is conserved in budding yeast, and that the potential to adopt the autoinhibited state is inversely related to the run length of single dynein molecules (Marzo et al., 2020). This provided the authors with the ability to directly assess the role of Pac1 in promoting the ‘open’ state. Using single-molecule assays, they noted that addition of Pac1 increased the run length of wild-type dynein, but not ‘open’ dynein mutants, similar to some of the results reported for the mammalian homologues. In budding yeast, Pac1 is required for targeting dynein to microtubule plus ends and the cell cortex, and is consequently required for dynein activity (Lee et al., 2003; Markus et al., 2009; Sheeman et al., 2003). Consistent with a role for Pac1 in promoting release from, or preventing reversion back to the phi conformation, cortical targeting and activity of dynein in cells lacking Pac1 could be rescued with ‘open’ dynein mutants (Marzo et al., 2020). Finally, a study employing A. nidulans also revealed a critical role of NudF in cargo-adapter-mediated dynein activation in vivo, and that cells harboring the analogous 'open' dynein mutations bypass the NudF requirement for dynein-mediated cargo transport (Qiu et al., 2019). It is worth noting that in both fungal systems, open dynein mutants were not sufficient to completely rescue loss of cellular Pac1/NudF function (Marzo et al., 2020; Qiu et al., 2019), furthering the notion that LIS1 and its homologs promote dynein activity by additional, as yet unclear mechanisms. Taken together, all these data support a model whereby LIS1 aids in the activation of dynein by: (1) induction and/or stabilization of its ‘open’ state; and, (2) promoting DDA/D₂DA complex assembly (Figure 3).

How might Pac1/LIS1 promote or stabilize dynein’s open conformation? Insights into this mechanism come from cryoEM structures of mammalian dynein in the autoinhibited phi state (Zhang et al., 2017), and a yeast dynein-bound Pac1 co-complex (DeSantis et al., 2017). Docking the latter model into the former revealed a large steric clash between Pac1 and the dynein motor domain to which Pac1 was not bound (Htet et al., 2020; Marzo et al., 2020), indicating that the phi conformation is incompatible with Pac1/LIS1 binding (Figure 4A). Consistent with this idea, both Pac1 and LIS1 were shown to bind dynein with higher affinity when the latter was in the ‘open’ state (Htet et al., 2020; Marzo et al., 2020). Taken together with the observation that single molecules of yeast dynein appear to stochastically adopt the autoinhibited state (Marzo et al., 2020), the data suggest a model whereby LIS1 could be an opportunistic binder: upon dynein stochastically switching into its ‘open’ state, LIS1 binding to dynein prevents its reversal back into the phi conformation. In this new model, LIS1 acts as a ‘catalytic check valve’, acting as both a catalyst for the assembly of DDA and D₂DA complexes, and a check valve that prevents the reverse ‘flow’ of dynein back into the autoinhibited phi conformation. Once it is ‘open’, assembly of dynein into the DDA (or D₂DA) complex occurs more readily (Zhang et al., 2017). This model is consistent with earlier observations that LIS1 could enhance the formation of dynein-dynactin complexes in Drosophila and Xenopus egg lysates (Dix et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2013). In support of a catalytic mode of action, it was noted that LIS1 does not need to remain bound to the D₂DA complexes to sustain higher velocities (Elshenawy et al., 2020; Htet et al., 2020). Dissociation of LIS1 from the fully assembled D₂DA complex therefore ‘regenerates’ a LIS1 molecule such that it could conceivably act again in another round of D₂DA assembly. These data are consistent with in vivo data from budding yeast and filamentous fungi that suggest that LIS1 dissociates from dynein-dynactin complexes prior to, coincident with, or shortly after initiation of transport (Egan et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2003; Lenz et al., 2006; Markus and Lee, 2011). In fact, dissociation of DDA/D₂DA complexes from LIS1 might be an important step in the initiation of dynein-mediated transport. Studies in budding yeast suggest that adaptor binding might play a role in triggering dissociation of LIS1 from dynein, and moreover, that preventing their dissociation leads to defects in dynein-mediated nuclear migration in this model system (Lammers and Markus, 2015; Markus et al., 2011). A similar adaptor-mediated dissociation of dynein from LIS1 has also been observed in vitro with human proteins (Jha et al., 2017), and may account for the varying degrees of DDA-LIS1 colocalization in single-molecule assays (Baumbach et al., 2017; Elshenawy et al., 2020; Gutierrez et al., 2017; Htet et al., 2020; Jha et al., 2017).

Figure 4 with 1 supplement see all

Download asset Open asset

As noted above, LIS1 also promotes D₂DA complex assembly in a manner that does not rely on stabilizing the ‘open’ conformation (see Figure 3; Box 2; Elshenawy et al., 2020; Htet et al., 2020). It is conceivable that LIS1 directly promotes the binding of dynein to dynactin (i.e., through an allosteric mechanism), or that LIS1 affects the binding of only the second dynein dimer (see Figure 3; ‘dimer B’) to dynactin. Although additional studies will be required to determine how LIS1 might do so, one potential mechanism might involve the dynein dimer A-bound LIS1 recruiting dynein dimer B to dynactin (by acting as a bridge between these two dynein dimers). To be clear, this mechanism is distinct from LIS1’s role in stabilizing the open state, since a monomeric LIS1 fragment – which only possesses one dynein-binding site – is sufficient to promote DDA/D₂DA complex assembly (Htet et al., 2020) and can partially rescue loss of Pac1 when overexpressed in yeast (Huang et al., 2012). Given a LIS1 monomer is likely sufficient to stabilize the open state (see Figure 4A), this fragment would be expected to stimulate DDA and D₂DA complex assembly. However, whether the monomeric LIS1 fragment can specifically promote D₂DA assembly when ‘open’ mutants are used (thus bypassing LIS1’s role in stabilizing the ‘open’ state) – in spite of its ability to only bind one dynein dimer – remains an open question. Another possibility, as posited by Htet et al., could be that by slowing down its velocity, the likelihood of dimer B being added to a motile DDA complex is increased. Given the variable reports for a dynein-bound LIS1 in affecting DDA velocity (from increase [Baumbach et al., 2017] to no change [Gutierrez et al., 2017] to a small reduction [Elshenawy et al., 2020; Htet et al., 2020]) and the small velocity reduction noted for these two latter studies (<20%), this mode of action for LIS1 seems unlikely.

How can we reconcile the apparent Pac1/LIS1 inhibitory activity described above with these new data? Marzo et al. noted that Pac1 robustly binds microtubules in the experimental conditions that were used for prior Pac1-dynein studies (DeSantis et al., 2017; Huang et al., 2012; Toropova et al., 2014) – an observation that had not been previously noted. Given that Pac1 does not appear to bind microtubules in cells, even upon its overexpression (Markus et al., 2011), the authors of this study sought to determine whether the Pac1-microtubule binding was the reason for the velocity reduction phenotype. The first indication that this might be the case was that the Pac1 velocity reduction effect did not require that Pac1 be stably bound to dynein. Specifically, Marzo et al. noted that those dynein complexes that comigrated with Pac1 moved with the same reduction in velocity as those that were not bound to Pac1 (note that all dyneins still encountered microtubule-bound Pac1 molecules). Then, by using two different means to reduce Pac1-microtubule binding – increasing ionic strength, and inclusion of cell extracts – the authors noted that the degree of microtubule binding by Pac1 directly correlates with its ability to reduce dynein velocity. Although a small Pac1-mediated velocity reduction (~20%) was still observed in the highest ionic strength buffer tested, it remains unclear whether this is due to residual Pac1-microtubule binding (which was observed in these conditions), or a bona fide Pac1 inhibition of dynein’s linker swing as posited by the clutch model (Toropova et al., 2014). It is worth noting that the related studies using mammalian proteins also observed a similar small velocity reduction of motile DDA complexes that were bound to LIS1 (Elshenawy et al., 2020; Htet et al., 2020), which contrasts with previous findings (Baumbach et al., 2017; Gutierrez et al., 2017). One of these studies noted a small degree of LIS1-microtubule binding, which could potentially account for the velocity reduction (Elshenawy et al., 2020). However, given the degree of this effect (<20% reduction in velocity), it is difficult to envision how this activity may directly promote DDA/D₂DA complex assembly, microtubule plus end-binding, or other localization phenotypes. Future studies will be needed to determine whether the small velocity reduction effect is indeed physiologically relevant, and how it may support dynein-mediated transport functions.

A prediction of this new model for LIS1 function is that its activity would be required in organisms in which dynein adopts the phi conformation. To determine whether this might be the case, we used a phylogenetic approach to predict whether dynein motors from various species adopt the autoinhibited state, and then correlated this predicted propensity with the presence or absence of a LIS1 homolog. We focused on those residues that were experimentally determined to stabilize the dynein phi conformation (see Figure 4A and B, and Figure 4—figure supplement 1; at surfaces ii through iv; numbering for human dynein): R1567, K1610, E3045, Y3451, I3455, E3624, and R3659 (Marzo et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2017). Potential LIS1 homologs were identified by sequence alignment, and by identification of two invariant residues among LIS1 homologs that have been shown to be important for dynein binding (Gutierrez et al., 2017; Toropova et al., 2014): R316 and W340 (see Figure 2D). This revealed that cytoplasmic dynein-1 heavy chain sequences from most species are predicted to have the capacity to adopt the phi conformation, with only four notable exceptions: Giardia intestinalis, Schizosaccharomyces pombe, Trypanosoma grayi, and Trypansoma brucei brucei (Figure 4C). Interestingly, all but one of the species with conserved dynein intermolecular contacts possess a clear LIS1 homolog (the unicellular protist Plasmodium falciparum). On the other hand, all four of those species that contain dynein heavy chains lacking the phi particle contact residues have no apparent LIS1 homolog. These data suggest that the autoinhibited conformation of dynein may have coevolved with LIS1, and further indicate that the reliance on LIS1 for dynein function strongly correlates with the presence of the autoinhibited state.

Cytoplasmic dynein-2, the retrograde motor that transports cargo within flagella and cilia (intraflagellar transport, or IFT), also adopts the phi conformation in vitro (Toropova et al., 2017; Toropova et al., 2019) and in vivo (Jordan et al., 2018). There is currently little evidence that LIS1 plays a role within cilia, although localization of mammalian LIS1 to motile cilia has indeed been reported (Pedersen et al., 2007). The authors of this study also identified a LIS1-related protein that is present in the Chlamydomonas flagellum (CrLis1; 30% identity/45% similarity with human LIS1), although it should be noted that CrLis1 lacks the two invariant residues discussed above (R316 and W340). Therefore, it is possible that LIS1 or LIS1-like proteins play similar roles for dynein motors specialized for cilia function. Further research into the autoinhibition and activation mechanisms of ciliary dyneins will be of high interest in the future.

In light of this new model for LIS1 function, the precise molecular mechanism by which it affects the various cellular and developmental processes in which it has been implicated needs to be reevaluated. For example, this newly described function for Pac1 addresses long unanswered questions in the yeast dynein field. It has been previously observed that dynein-dynactin complex assembly takes place at microtubule plus ends (Markus et al., 2011; Moore et al., 2008), a site where Pac1-bound dynein molecules localize (Lee et al., 2003). However, why the plus end was a platform for dynein-dynactin complex assembly has long been a mystery. The catalytic check valve model now answers this question, and indicates that Pac1-bound dynein molecules – which associate with plus ends via Bik1/CLIP-170 (Sheeman et al., 2003) – are in the ‘open’ state, and thus primed for interaction with dynactin. Offloading of these preassembled complexes to cortical Num1 receptors, which requires intact dynein-dynactin complexes (Lee et al., 2003; Markus and Lee, 2011; Tang et al., 2012), is therefore perfectly suited to follow plus end-association of Pac1-dynein complexes.

An analogous situation is likely at play for LIS1-dependent localization of dynein to its numerous cellular sites in higher eukaryotic cells, most of which have been shown to require dynactin (e.g., microtubule plus ends, nuclear envelope, kinetochores [Coquelle et al., 2002; Faulkner et al., 2000; Moon et al., 2014; Raaijmakers et al., 2013; Splinter et al., 2012]). In the case of targeting dynein to plus ends, the role of LIS1 could be easily explained by this new model. In human model systems, the association of dynein with microtubule plus ends is mediated by dynactin, either directly, or indirectly through dynactin’s association with EB1 (Duellberg et al., 2014; Jha et al., 2017). Thus, any condition in which dynein-dynactin interaction is enhanced (e.g., by addition of LIS1) will naturally promote dynein plus end-association, as has been observed in vitro (Baumbach et al., 2017; Jha et al., 2017). Similarly, recruitment of dynein to its various other cellular sites relies on adaptor proteins (e.g., BicD2), which interact only with dynein-dynactin, and not either complex alone (Splinter et al., 2012). Thus, depletion of LIS1 – or loss-of-function mutations – would be expected to reduce dynein-dynactin complex assembly, and consequently compromise localization and cargo transport. Heterozygous mutations of LIS1 are causative of lissencephaly (i.e., LIS1 exhibits haploinsufficiency), suggesting that cellular concentrations of LIS1, and thus activated dynein, are critically tuned for specific cellular processes.

Given the role of LIS1 in promoting assembly of D₂DA complexes (see Figure 3), loss-of-function LIS1 mutants would also be expected to compromise dynein force output (Elshenawy et al., 2020; Urnavicius et al., 2018), as has been observed in cultured cells microinjected with LIS1 function-blocking antibodies (Yi et al., 2011), or depleted of LIS1 (Reddy et al., 2016). Reduced D₂DA assembly would also compromise dynein’s ability to navigate the crowded microenvironment of MAP-decorated microtubules. One such MAP, tau, forms condensates on microtubules that can induce pausing of DDA complexes. LIS1 augments the ability of dynein to bypass tau condensates, possibly as a consequence of promoting assembly of D₂DA complexes (Tan et al., 2019).

Another important prediction of the catalytic check valve model is that LIS1 would be expected to increase the microtubule binding affinity for dynein alone, since the ‘open’ mutants exhibit a higher microtubule association rate than wild-type dynein (Zhang et al., 2017). This in turn could conceivably increase the rate of ATP hydrolysis given the role of microtubule-binding in the progression of the mechanochemical cycle. Lending further support to the catalytic check valve model, LIS1 has indeed been shown to increase the microtubule landing rate of purified dynein (i.e., it’s association rate) (Baumbach et al., 2017; Htet et al., 2020); however, its effects on dynein’s microtubule-stimulated ATPase rate have been variable, with most studies reporting little to no effect (McKenney et al., 2010; Yamada et al., 2008), and one reporting a significant increase (Mesngon et al., 2006). Given the data support a stochastic switching between ‘closed’ and ‘open’ states (Marzo et al., 2020), it is tempting to speculate that the increased microtubule affinity of dynein imparted by LIS1 in the optical trap (McKenney et al., 2010) is also a consequence of LIS1 stabilizing the ‘open’ state; moreover, this same reasoning could potentially account for the observed reduction in microtubule gliding velocity (Baumbach et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2013; Yamada et al., 2008). Since the phi conformation – which has been shown to be labile over time and experimental conditions in vitro – locks dynein’s linker domain in a pre-powerstroke state (Zhang et al., 2017), it will be important in the future to carefully determine how dynein’s enzymatic cycle is affected by the autoinhibition/activation cycle.

This new model also accounts for the nuclear and neuronal migration defect that is causative of lissencephaly. Either by disrupting dynein localization (e.g., to cortical sites) or by reducing the number of motile DDA or D₂DA complexes, loss-of-function LIS1 mutations or reduced cellular levels of LIS1 (due to heterozygous mutations) would globally impact dynein activity. Thus, loss-of-function LIS1 mutations would be expected to phenocopy loss-of-function dynein mutations. Surprisingly, however, dynein mutations correlate better with polymicrogyria, and not lissencephaly (Laquerriere et al., 2017; Poirier et al., 2013; Vissers et al., 2010; Willemsen et al., 2012). Although polymicrogyria (excessive number of abnormally small gyri) is also a neuronal migration disorder, the morphological differences between the diseased brains suggest a somewhat different underlying disease etiology. The reasons for this are unclear, but may be due to a role for LIS1 in other cellular processes that occur during early brain development. For instance, in addition to affecting dynein function, LIS1 has also been implicated in regulating actin-based processes (Chhatre et al., 2020; Kholmanskikh et al., 2003).

Given this torrent of new data that have led to the revised model for LIS1 function in the dynein pathway, what are the next questions pertaining to dynein regulation to be answered? One immediate challenge is to more fully understand how LIS1 facilitates the formation of DDA and D₂DA complexes, which will no doubt be aided by electron microscopy-based imaging methods. For instance, a high-resolution image of LIS1 bound to an open dynein complex will provide additional evidence for the check valve model. As stated above, additional experiments will also be needed to understand how LIS1 promotes D₂DA assembly beyond simply stabilizing the ‘open’ conformation. Moreover, whether additional factors play a role in supporting LIS1 function is unclear. Since WD-40 domains often act as multi-protein assembly scaffolds, perhaps LIS1 function can be facilitated by other available surfaces of the beta-propeller once bound to the dynein motor domain. It is possible that other regions of the dynein-bound LIS1 beta-propeller recruit additional factors to further promote (or hinder) DDA/D₂DA assembly. The role of LIS1 in other molecular pathways also remains to be more clearly established (e.g., phagocytosis, actin polymerization [Chhatre et al., 2020; Kholmanskikh et al., 2003]). For instance, is LIS1’s role in the PAF-AH pathway truly orthogonal to its functions with dynein, or does PAF signaling play a role in dynein function, as has been suggested by at least one study (Ding et al., 2009)?

One of the most pressing questions to address is the role of the LIS1 and dynein-binding proteins Nde1/Ndel1 (also known as NudE/NudEL). The fungal homologues of mammalian Nde1/Ndel1 were first identified in N. crassa (RO-11) (Minke et al., 1999) and A. nidulans (NudE) (Efimov and Morris, 2000), and were shown to directly bind to LIS1 and participate in the nuclear migration pathway in these organisms. Of interest, the nudE gene in Aspergillus was isolated as a multicopy suppressor of a temperature-sensitive nudF (LIS1 homolog) mutant (Efimov and Morris, 2000). Mammals evolved two paralogues of these proteins, Nde1 (formerly NudE) and Ndel1 (formerly NudEL), which have also been shown to bind directly to LIS1 and dynein, and to participate in mammalian brain development (Feng et al., 2000; Niethammer et al., 2000; Sasaki et al., 2000). These proteins contain a conserved elongated N-terminal coiled-coil domain that directly interacts with LIS1 and the dynein intermediate chain (DIC) (Sasaki et al., 2000; Wang and Zheng, 2011; Zyłkiewicz et al., 2011). An unstructured and alternatively spliced C-terminal domain has also been reported to interact with the dynein heavy chain and light chain (McKenney et al., 2011; Nyarko et al., 2012; Sasaki et al., 2000). Thus, the interactions required for assembly of the tripartite dynein-LIS1-Nde1/Ndel1 complex are poorly understood, and additional information is needed to more fully understand its organization, and the nature and contribution of each of these interactions.

How does Nde1/Ndel1 affect dynein-LIS1 function? There is strong biochemical evidence that Nde1/Ndel1 interacts with both LIS1 and dynein simultaneously (Huang et al., 2012; McKenney et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2013; Zyłkiewicz et al., 2011) and plays a role in coordinating dynein-LIS1 binding (McKenney et al., 2010). These interactions are thought to occur through the binding of the Nde1/Ndel1 N-termini with DIC and LIS1 (and possibly the Nde1/Ndel1 C-termini with the dynein light chain, LC8 [McKenney et al., 2011]). It has been hypothesized that the LIS1 WD-40 domain directly contacts dynein’s motor domain while being simultaneously bound to Nde1/Ndel1 (McKenney et al., 2010; Tarricone et al., 2004), and thus Nde1/Ndel1 are well positioned to link LIS1 to dynein. While it is clear that a tripartite complex of Nde1/Ndel1, dynein, and LIS1 can be biochemically isolated, it should be noted that the simultaneous engagement of all three of these contact surfaces (i.e., dynein motor-LIS1, DIC-Nde1/Ndel1, and Nde1/Ndel1-LIS1) has yet to be formally demonstrated. In fact, it is conceivable that such a complex could be formed without simultaneously engaging all three contact surfaces. These interactions, and the ability of Nde1/Ndel1 to recruit LIS1 to dynein in single-molecule assays, has led to the model that Nde1/Ndel1 act as a scaffold for the recruitment of LIS1 to dynein. Evidence from A. nidulans indeed suggest a role for NudE in promoting cargo adaptor-mediated dynein activation, at least in part by stabilizing and/or inducing the open conformation of dynein (Qiu et al., 2019), which would be an expected outcome of enhanced dynein-LIS1 binding. However, the nature of the tripartite dynein-LIS1-Nde1/Ndel1 complex and its assembly, and how Nde1/Ndel1 affects LIS1’s ability to catalyze DDA/D₂DA assembly needs to be addressed using the expanded single-molecule, biochemical, and structural biology toolkits that have been recently developed.

Adding an additional layer of complexity, the unstructured N-terminus of the DIC serves as a binding platform for both Nde1/Ndel1 and the p150^Glued subunit of dynactin, which compete with each other for this binding site on the dynein complex (McKenney et al., 2011; Nyarko et al., 2012; Siglin et al., 2013). The role of the DIC-p150^Glued interaction in the assembly of DDA/D₂DA complexes remains unclear due to this surface’s conspicuous absence from recent cryoEM structures of the dynein-dynactin structure (Urnavicius et al., 2018; Urnavicius et al., 2015). However, the competitive binding of Nde1/Ndel1 and p150^Glued for DIC suggests a potentially additional role for Nde1/Ndel1 in regulating the dynein-dynactin interaction beyond coordinating dynein-LIS1 binding. Further work will be needed to understand the sequence of interactions that occur for these numerous factors that ultimately leads to DDA/D₂DA assembly, any structural changes that occur as a consequence of the multitude of interaction surfaces coming together, and finally, how these events ultimately result in proper dynein regulation within cells.

It is interesting to note that mutations in human NDE1 are causative of microcephaly, not lissencephaly (Alkuraya et al., 2011; Doobin et al., 2016), revealing that these proteins likely have distinct roles during brain development. Additionally, evidence indicates that Nde1/Ndel1 can interact with a large number of binding partners, suggesting their roles are not restricted to dynein regulation (Houlihan and Feng, 2014). Nonetheless, the affinity of LIS1 for Nde1/Ndel1 is high (in the nanomolar range [Tarricone et al., 2004]), suggesting that the Nde1/Ndel1-LIS1 complex is highly relevant in cell physiology. The mysterious roles of these proteins, and potentially other LIS1-interacting proteins, and how they impinge on LIS1’s ability to regulate dynein activity represent a tantalizing next step in our understanding of this complicated motor’s regulation in cells and human disease.

1. 1. Ahn C
   2. Morris NR

   (2001) Nudf, a fungal homolog of the human LIS1 protein, functions as a dimer in vivo

   Journal of Biological Chemistry 276:9903–9909.

   https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M010233200

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Alkuraya FS
   2. Cai X
   3. Emery C
   4. Mochida GH
   5. Al-Dosari MS
   6. Felie JM
   7. Hill RS
   8. Barry BJ
   9. Partlow JN
   10. Gascon GG
   11. Kentab A
   12. Jan M
   13. Shaheen R
   14. Feng Y
   15. Walsh CA

   (2011) Human mutations in NDE1 cause extreme microcephaly with lissencephaly [corrected]

   The American Journal of Human Genetics 88:536–547.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.04.003

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Amos LA

   (1989)

   Brain dynein crossbridges microtubules into bundles

   Journal of Cell Science 93 ( Pt 1:19–28.

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Baffet AD
   2. Hu DJ
   3. Vallee RB

   (2015) Cdk1 activates Pre-mitotic nuclear envelope dynein recruitment and apical nuclear migration in neural stem cells

   Developmental Cell 33:703–716.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2015.04.022

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Baumbach J
   2. Murthy A
   3. McClintock MA
   4. Dix CI
   5. Zalyte R
   6. Hoang HT
   7. Bullock SL

   (2017) Lissencephaly-1 is a context-dependent regulator of the human dynein complex

   eLife 6:e21768.

   https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21768

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bellion A
   2. Baudoin JP
   3. Alvarez C
   4. Bornens M
   5. Métin C

   (2005) Nucleokinesis in tangentially migrating neurons comprises two alternating phases: forward migration of the golgi/centrosome associated with centrosome splitting and myosin contraction at the rear

   Journal of Neuroscience 25:5691–5699.

   https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1030-05.2005

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Belyy V
   2. Schlager MA
   3. Foster H
   4. Reimer AE
   5. Carter AP
   6. Yildiz A

   (2016) The mammalian dynein–dynactin complex is a strong opponent to kinesin in a tug-of-war competition

   Nature Cell Biology 18:1018–1024.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb3393

   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Bershteyn M
   2. Nowakowski TJ
   3. Pollen AA
   4. Di Lullo E
   5. Nene A
   6. Wynshaw-Boris A
   7. Kriegstein AR

   (2017) Human iPSC-Derived cerebral organoids model cellular features of lissencephaly and reveal prolonged mitosis of outer radial Glia

   Cell Stem Cell 20:435–449.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2016.12.007

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Bhabha G
   2. Cheng HC
   3. Zhang N
   4. Moeller A
   5. Liao M
   6. Speir JA
   7. Cheng Y
   8. Vale RD

   (2014) Allosteric communication in the dynein motor domain

   Cell 159:857–868.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2014.10.018

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Bolhy S
    2. Bouhlel I
    3. Dultz E
    4. Nayak T
    5. Zuccolo M
    6. Gatti X
    7. Vallee R
    8. Ellenberg J
    9. Doye V

    (2011) A Nup133-dependent NPC-anchored network tethers centrosomes to the nuclear envelope in prophase

    The Journal of Cell Biology 192:855–871.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201007118

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Bone CR
    2. Starr DA

    (2016) Nuclear migration events throughout development

    Journal of Cell Science 129:1951–1961.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.179788

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Busson S
    2. Dujardin D
    3. Moreau A
    4. Dompierre J
    5. Mey JRD
    6. De Mey JR

    (1998) Dynein and dynactin are localized to astral microtubules and at cortical sites in mitotic epithelial cells

    Current Biology 8:541–544.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(98)70208-8

    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Cardoso C
    2. Leventer RJ
    3. Dowling JJ
    4. Ward HL
    5. Chung J
    6. Petras KS
    7. Roseberry JA
    8. Weiss AM
    9. Das S
    10. Martin CL
    11. Pilz DT
    12. Dobyns WB
    13. Ledbetter DH

    (2002) Clinical and molecular basis of classical lissencephaly: mutations in the LIS1 gene (PAFAH1B1)

    Human Mutation 19:4–15.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.10028

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Carvalho P
    2. Gupta ML
    3. Hoyt MA
    4. Pellman D

    (2004) Cell cycle control of kinesin-mediated transport of Bik1 (CLIP-170) regulates microtubule stability and dynein activation

    Developmental Cell 6:815–829.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2004.05.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Caspi M
    2. Coquelle FM
    3. Koifman C
    4. Levy T
    5. Arai H
    6. Aoki J
    7. De Mey JR
    8. Reiner O

    (2003) LIS1 missense mutations: variable phenotypes result from unpredictable alterations in biochemical and cellular properties

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 278:38740–38748.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M301147200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Chhatre A
    2. Sanghavi P
    3. Mallik R

    (2020) Lis1 co‐localizes with actin in the phagocytic cup and regulates phagocytosis

    Cytoskeleton 269:21621.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cm.21621

    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Coquelle FM
    2. Caspi M
    3. Cordelières FP
    4. Dompierre JP
    5. Dujardin DL
    6. Koifman C
    7. Martin P
    8. Hoogenraad CC
    9. Akhmanova A
    10. Galjart N
    11. De Mey JR
    12. Reiner O

    (2002) LIS1, CLIP-170's key to the dynein/dynactin pathway

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 22:3089–3102.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.22.9.3089-3102.2002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. DeSantis ME
    2. Cianfrocco MA
    3. Htet ZM
    4. Tran PT
    5. Reck-Peterson SL
    6. Leschziner AE

    (2017) Lis1 has two opposing modes of regulating cytoplasmic dynein

    Cell 170:1197–1208.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.037

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. DeWitt MA
    2. Cypranowska CA
    3. Cleary FB
    4. Belyy V
    5. Yildiz A

    (2015) The AAA3 domain of cytoplasmic dynein acts as a switch to facilitate microtubule release

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 22:73–80.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.2930

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Di Donato N
    2. Timms AE
    3. Aldinger KA
    4. Mirzaa GM
    5. Bennett JT
    6. Collins S
    7. Olds C
    8. Mei D
    9. Chiari S
    10. Carvill G
    11. Myers CT
    12. Rivière JB
    13. Zaki MS
    14. Gleeson JG
    15. Rump A
    16. Conti V
    17. Parrini E
    18. Ross ME
    19. Ledbetter DH
    20. Guerrini R
    21. Dobyns WB
    22. University of Washington Center for Mendelian Genomics

    (2018) Analysis of 17 genes detects mutations in 81% of 811 patients with lissencephaly

    Genetics in Medicine 20:1354–1364.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2018.8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Ding C
    2. Liang X
    3. Ma L
    4. Yuan X
    5. Zhu X

    (2009) Opposing effects of Ndel1 and alpha1 or alpha2 on cytoplasmic dynein through competitive binding to Lis1

    Journal of Cell Science 122:2820–2827.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.048777

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Dix CI
    2. Soundararajan HC
    3. Dzhindzhev NS
    4. Begum F
    5. Suter B
    6. Ohkura H
    7. Stephens E
    8. Bullock SL

    (2013) Lissencephaly-1 promotes the recruitment of dynein and dynactin to transported mRNAs

    The Journal of Cell Biology 202:479–494.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201211052

    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Dobyns WB
    2. Reiner O
    3. Carrozzo R
    4. Ledbetter DH

    (1993) Lissencephaly. A human brain malformation associated with deletion of the LIS1 gene located at chromosome 17p13

    Jama 270:2838–2842.

    https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.270.23.2838

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Doobin DJ
    2. Kemal S
    3. Dantas TJ
    4. Vallee RB

    (2016) Severe NDE1-mediated microcephaly results from neural progenitor cell cycle arrests at multiple specific stages

    Nature Communications 7:12551.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12551

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Duellberg C
    2. Trokter M
    3. Jha R
    4. Sen I
    5. Steinmetz MO
    6. Surrey T

    (2014) Reconstitution of a hierarchical +TIP interaction network controlling microtubule end tracking of dynein

    Nature Cell Biology 16:804–811.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2999

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Dujardin DL
    2. Barnhart LE
    3. Stehman SA
    4. Gomes ER
    5. Gundersen GG
    6. Vallee RB

    (2003) A role for cytoplasmic dynein and LIS1 in directed cell movement

    Journal of Cell Biology 163:1205–1211.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200310097

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Efimov VP
    2. Morris NR

    (2000) The LIS1-related NUDF protein of Aspergillus nidulans interacts with the coiled-coil domain of the NUDE/RO11 protein

    Journal of Cell Biology 150:681–688.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.150.3.681

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Egan MJ
    2. Tan K
    3. Reck-Peterson SL

    (2012) Lis1 is an initiation factor for dynein-driven organelle transport

    The Journal of Cell Biology 197:971–982.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201112101

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Elshenawy MM
    2. Kusakci E
    3. Volz S
    4. Baumbach J
    5. Bullock SL
    6. Yildiz A

    (2020) Lis1 activates dynein motility by modulating its pairing with dynactin

    Nature Cell Biology 22:570–578.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-020-0501-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Emes RD
    2. Ponting CP

    (2001) A new sequence motif linking lissencephaly, Treacher Collins and oral-facial-digital type 1 syndromes, microtubule dynamics and cell migration

    Human Molecular Genetics 10:2813–2820.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/10.24.2813

    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Eshel D
    2. Urrestarazu LA
    3. Vissers S
    4. Jauniaux JC
    5. van Vliet-Reedijk JC
    6. Planta RJ
    7. Gibbons IR

    (1993) Cytoplasmic dynein is required for normal nuclear segregation in yeast

    PNAS 90:11172–11176.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.90.23.11172

    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Etienne-Manneville S
    2. Hall A

    (2001) Integrin-mediated activation of Cdc42 controls cell polarity in migrating astrocytes through PKCzeta

    Cell 106:489–498.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00471-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Faulkner NE
    2. Dujardin DL
    3. Tai C-Y
    4. Vaughan KT
    5. O'Connell CB
    6. Wang Y-li
    7. Vallee RB

    (2000) A role for the lissencephaly gene LIS1 in mitosis and cytoplasmic dynein function

    Nature Cell Biology 2:784–791.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/35041020

    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Feng Y
    2. Olson EC
    3. Stukenberg PT
    4. Flanagan LA
    5. Kirschner MW
    6. Walsh CA

    (2000) LIS1 regulates CNS lamination by interacting with mNudE, a central component of the centrosome

    Neuron 28:665–679.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00145-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Fischer R
    2. Timberlake WE

    (1995) Aspergillus nidulans apsA (anucleate primary sterigmata) encodes a coiled-coil protein required for nuclear positioning and completion of asexual development

    The Journal of Cell Biology 128:485–498.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.128.4.485

    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Fish JL
    2. Kosodo Y
    3. Enard W
    4. Pääbo S
    5. Huttner WB

    (2006) Aspm specifically maintains symmetric proliferative divisions of neuroepithelial cells

    PNAS 103:10438–10443.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0604066103

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Fogli A
    2. Guerrini R
    3. Moro F
    4. Fernandez-Alvarez E
    5. Odile Livet M
    6. Renieri A
    7. Cioni M
    8. Pilz DT
    9. Veggiotti P
    10. Rossi E
    11. Ballabio A
    12. Carrozzo R

    (1999) Intracellular levels of the LIS1 protein correlate with clinical and neuroradiological findings in patients with classical lissencephaly

    Annals of Neurology 45:154–161.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/1531-8249(199902)45:2<154::AID-ANA4>3.0.CO;2-P

    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Foley EA
    2. Kapoor TM

    (2013) Microtubule attachment and spindle assembly checkpoint signalling at the kinetochore

    Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 14:25–37.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3494

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. Book

    1. Golden JA

    (2018) Lissencephaly, Type I

    In: Adle-Biassette H, Golden J, Harding B. N, editors. Developmental Neuropathology (Second Edition ). John Wiley & Sons. pp. 63–73.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119013112

    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Götz M
    2. Huttner WB

    (2005) The cell biology of neurogenesis

    Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 6:777–788.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1739

    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Grotjahn DA
    2. Chowdhury S
    3. Xu Y
    4. McKenney RJ
    5. Schroer TA
    6. Lander GC

    (2018) Cryo-electron tomography reveals that dynactin recruits a team of dyneins for processive motility

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 25:203–207.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-018-0027-7

    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Guerrini R
    2. Parrini E

    (2010) Neuronal migration disorders

    Neurobiology of Disease 38:154–166.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2009.02.008

    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Gutierrez PA
    2. Ackermann BE
    3. Vershinin M
    4. McKenney RJ

    (2017) Differential effects of the dynein-regulatory factor Lissencephaly-1 on processive dynein-dynactin motility

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 292:12245–12255.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M117.790048

    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Han G
    2. Liu B
    3. Zhang J
    4. Zuo W
    5. Morris NR
    6. Xiang X

    (2001) The Aspergillus cytoplasmic dynein heavy chain and NUDF localize to microtubule ends and affect microtubule dynamics

    Current Biology 11:719–724.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00200-7

    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Hattori M
    2. Adachi H
    3. Tsujimoto M
    4. Arai H
    5. Inoue K

    (1994) Miller-Dieker lissencephaly gene encodes a subunit of brain platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase [corrected]

    Nature 370:216–218.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/370216a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Hebbar S
    2. Mesngon MT
    3. Guillotte AM
    4. Desai B
    5. Ayala R
    6. Smith DS

    (2008) Lis1 and Ndel1 influence the timing of nuclear envelope breakdown in neural stem cells

    Journal of Cell Biology 182:1063–1071.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200803071

    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Heil-Chapdelaine RA
    2. Oberle JR
    3. Cooper JA

    (2000) The cortical protein Num1p is essential for dynein-dependent interactions of microtubules with the cortex

    The Journal of Cell Biology 151:1337–1344.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.151.6.1337

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Hirotsune S
    2. Fleck MW
    3. Gambello MJ
    4. Bix GJ
    5. Chen A
    6. Clark GD
    7. Ledbetter DH
    8. McBain CJ
    9. Wynshaw-Boris A

    (1998) Graded reduction of Pafah1b1 (Lis1) activity results in neuronal migration defects and early embryonic lethality

    Nature Genetics 19:333–339.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/1221

    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Hoffman DB
    2. Pearson CG
    3. Yen TJ
    4. Howell BJ
    5. Salmon ED

    (2001) Microtubule-dependent changes in assembly of microtubule motor proteins and mitotic spindle checkpoint proteins at PtK1 kinetochores

    Molecular Biology of the Cell 12:1995–2009.

    https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.12.7.1995

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Hong SE
    2. Shugart YY
    3. Huang DT
    4. Shahwan SA
    5. Grant PE
    6. Hourihane JO
    7. Martin ND
    8. Walsh CA

    (2000) Autosomal recessive lissencephaly with cerebellar hypoplasia is associated with human RELN mutations

    Nature Genetics 26:93–96.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/79246

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Houlihan SL
    2. Feng Y

    (2014) The scaffold protein Nde1 safeguards the brain genome during S phase of early neural progenitor differentiation

    eLife 3:e03297.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03297

    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Htet ZM
    2. Gillies JP
    3. Baker RW
    4. Leschziner AE
    5. DeSantis ME
    6. Reck-Peterson SL

    (2020) LIS1 promotes the formation of activated cytoplasmic dynein-1 complexes

    Nature Cell Biology 22:518–525.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-020-0506-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Hu DJ
    2. Baffet AD
    3. Nayak T
    4. Akhmanova A
    5. Doye V
    6. Vallee RB

    (2013) Dynein recruitment to nuclear pores activates apical nuclear migration and mitotic entry in brain progenitor cells

    Cell 154:1300–1313.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.08.024

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Huang J
    2. Roberts AJ
    3. Leschziner AE
    4. Reck-Peterson SL

    (2012) Lis1 acts as a "clutch" between the ATPase and microtubule-binding domains of the dynein motor

    Cell 150:975–986.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.07.022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Jha R
    2. Roostalu J
    3. Cade NI
    4. Trokter M
    5. Surrey T

    (2017) Combinatorial regulation of the balance between dynein microtubule end accumulation and initiation of directed motility

    The EMBO Journal 36:3387–3404.

    https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201797077

    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Jordan MA
    2. Diener DR
    3. Stepanek L
    4. Pigino G

    (2018) The cryo-EM structure of intraflagellar transport trains reveals how dynein is inactivated to ensure unidirectional anterograde movement in cilia

    Nature Cell Biology 20:1250–1255.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-018-0213-1

    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Karki S
    2. Holzbaur EL

    (1995) Affinity chromatography demonstrates a direct binding between cytoplasmic dynein and the dynactin complex

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 270:28806–28811.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.270.48.28806

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Kholmanskikh SS
    2. Dobrin JS
    3. Wynshaw-Boris A
    4. Letourneau PC
    5. Ross ME

    (2003) Disregulated RhoGTPases and actin cytoskeleton contribute to the migration defect in Lis1-deficient neurons

    The Journal of Neuroscience 23:8673–8681.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-25-08673.2003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Kim MH
    2. Cooper DR
    3. Oleksy A
    4. Devedjiev Y
    5. Derewenda U
    6. Reiner O
    7. Otlewski J
    8. Derewenda ZS

    (2004) The structure of the N-terminal domain of the product of the lissencephaly gene Lis1 and its functional implications

    Structure 12:987–998.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2004.03.024

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Kiyomitsu T
    2. Cheeseman IM

    (2012) Chromosome- and spindle-pole-derived signals generate an intrinsic code for spindle position and orientation

    Nature Cell Biology 14:311–317.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2440

    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Kiyomitsu T
    2. Cheeseman IM

    (2013) Cortical dynein and asymmetric membrane elongation coordinately position the spindle in anaphase

    Cell 154:391–402.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.06.010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Knoblich JA

    (2010) Asymmetric cell division: recent developments and their implications for tumour biology

    Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 11:849–860.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Koizumi H
    2. Yamaguchi N
    3. Hattori M
    4. Ishikawa TO
    5. Aoki J
    6. Taketo MM
    7. Inoue K
    8. Arai H

    (2003) Targeted disruption of intracellular type I platelet activating factor-acetylhydrolase catalytic subunits causes severe impairment in spermatogenesis

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 278:12489–12494.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M211836200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Kon T
    2. Nishiura M
    3. Ohkura R
    4. Toyoshima YY
    5. Sutoh K

    (2004) Distinct functions of nucleotide-binding/hydrolysis sites in the four AAA modules of cytoplasmic dynein

    Biochemistry 43:11266–11274.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/bi048985a

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Lambert de Rouvroit C
    2. Goffinet AM

    (2001) Neuronal migration

    Mechanisms of Development 105:47–56.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-4773(01)00396-3

    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Lammers LG
    2. Markus SM

    (2015) The dynein cortical anchor Num1 activates dynein motility by relieving Pac1/LIS1-mediated inhibition

    Journal of Cell Biology 211:309–322.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201506119

    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Laquerriere A
    2. Maillard C
    3. Cavallin M
    4. Chapon F
    5. Marguet F
    6. Molin A
    7. Sigaudy S
    8. Blouet M
    9. Benoist G
    10. Fernandez C
    11. Poirier K
    12. Chelly J
    13. Thomas S
    14. Bahi-Buisson N

    (2017) Neuropathological hallmarks of brain malformations in extreme phenotypes related to DYNC1H1 mutations

    Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology 76:195–205.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/jnen/nlw124

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Lee WL
    2. Oberle JR
    3. Cooper JA

    (2003) The role of the lissencephaly protein Pac1 during nuclear migration in budding yeast

    Journal of Cell Biology 160:355–364.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200209022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Lee WL
    2. Kaiser MA
    3. Cooper JA

    (2005) The offloading model for dynein function: differential function of motor subunits

    The Journal of Cell Biology 168:201–207.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200407036

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Lenz JH
    2. Schuchardt I
    3. Straube A
    4. Steinberg G

    (2006) A dynein loading zone for retrograde endosome motility at microtubule plus-ends

    The EMBO Journal 25:2275–2286.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7601119

    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Li YY
    2. Yeh E
    3. Hays T
    4. Bloom K

    (1993) Disruption of mitotic spindle orientation in a yeast dynein mutant

    PNAS 90:10096–10100.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.90.21.10096

    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Lo Nigro C
    2. Chong SS
    3. Smith ACM
    4. Dobyns WB
    5. Carrozzo R
    6. Ledbetter DH

    (1997) Point mutations and an intragenic deletion in lis1, the lissencephaly causative gene in isolated lissencephaly sequence and miller-dieker syndrome

    Human Molecular Genetics 6:157–164.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/6.2.157

    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Mallik R
    2. Carter BC
    3. Lex SA
    4. King SJ
    5. Gross SP

    (2004) Cytoplasmic dynein functions as a gear in response to load

    Nature 427:649–652.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02293

    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Manya H
    2. Aoki J
    3. Kato H
    4. Ishii J
    5. Hino S
    6. Arai H
    7. Inoue K

    (1999) Biochemical characterization of various catalytic complexes of the brain platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 274:31827–31832.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.274.45.31827

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Markus SM
    2. Punch JJ
    3. Lee WL

    (2009) Motor- and tail-dependent targeting of dynein to microtubule plus ends and the cell cortex

    Current Biology 19:196–205.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.12.047

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Markus SM
    2. Plevock KM
    3. St. Germain BJ
    4. Punch JJ
    5. Meaden CW
    6. Lee W-L

    (2011) Quantitative analysis of Pac1/LIS1-mediated dynein targeting: Implications for regulation of dynein activity in budding yeast

    Cytoskeleton 68:157–174.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cm.20502

    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Markus SM
    2. Kalutkiewicz KA
    3. Lee W-L

    (2012) Astral microtubule asymmetry provides directional cues for spindle positioning in budding yeast

    Experimental Cell Research 318:1400–1406.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexcr.2012.04.006

    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Markus SM
    2. Lee WL

    (2011) Regulated offloading of cytoplasmic dynein from microtubule plus ends to the cortex

    Developmental Cell 20:639–651.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2011.04.011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Marzo MG
    2. Griswold JM
    3. Markus SM

    (2020) Pac1/LIS1 stabilizes an uninhibited conformation of dynein to coordinate its localization and activity

    Nature Cell Biology 22:559–569.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-020-0492-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. McKenney RJ
    2. Vershinin M
    3. Kunwar A
    4. Vallee RB
    5. Gross SP

    (2010) LIS1 and NudE induce a persistent dynein force-producing state

    Cell 141:304–314.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.02.035

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. McKenney RJ
    2. Weil SJ
    3. Scherer J
    4. Vallee RB

    (2011) Mutually exclusive cytoplasmic dynein regulation by NudE-Lis1 and dynactin

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 286:39615–39622.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.289017

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. McKenney RJ
    2. Huynh W
    3. Tanenbaum ME
    4. Bhabha G
    5. Vale RD

    (2014) Activation of cytoplasmic dynein motility by dynactin-cargo adapter complexes

    Science 345:337–341.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254198

    • Google Scholar
83. 1. McKenney RJ
    2. Huynh W
    3. Vale RD
    4. Sirajuddin M

    (2016) Tyrosination of α‐tubulin controls the initiation of processive dynein–dynactin motility

    The EMBO Journal 35:1175–1185.

    https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201593071

    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Mesngon MT
    2. Tarricone C
    3. Hebbar S
    4. Guillotte AM
    5. Schmitt EW
    6. Lanier L
    7. Musacchio A
    8. King SJ
    9. Smith DS

    (2006) Regulation of cytoplasmic dynein ATPase by Lis1

    Journal of Neuroscience 26:2132–2139.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5095-05.2006

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Minke PF
    2. Lee IH
    3. Tinsley JH
    4. Bruno KS
    5. Plamann M

    (1999) Neurospora crassa ro-10 and ro-11 genes encode novel proteins required for nuclear distribution

    Molecular Microbiology 32:1065–1076.

    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2958.1999.01421.x

    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Moon HM
    2. Youn YH
    3. Pemble H
    4. Yingling J
    5. Wittmann T
    6. Wynshaw-Boris A

    (2014) LIS1 controls mitosis and mitotic spindle organization via the LIS1–NDEL1–dynein complex

    Human Molecular Genetics 23:449–466.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddt436

    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Moore JK
    2. Li J
    3. Cooper JA

    (2008) Dynactin function in mitotic spindle positioning

    Traffic 9:510–527.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0854.2008.00710.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Moore JK
    2. Stuchell-Brereton MD
    3. Cooper JA

    (2009) Function of dynein in budding yeast: Mitotic spindle positioning in a polarized cell

    Cell Motility and the Cytoskeleton 66:546–555.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cm.20364

    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Morin X
    2. Bellaïche Y

    (2011) Mitotic spindle orientation in asymmetric and symmetric cell divisions during animal development

    Developmental Cell 21:102–119.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2011.06.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Morris NR

    (1975) Mitotic mutants of Aspergillus nidulans

    Genetical Research 26:237–254.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672300016049

    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Moughamian AJ
    2. Osborn GE
    3. Lazarus JE
    4. Maday S
    5. Holzbaur EL

    (2013) Ordered recruitment of dynactin to the microtubule plus-end is required for efficient initiation of retrograde axonal transport

    Journal of Neuroscience 33:13190–13203.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0935-13.2013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Nicholas MP
    2. Berger F
    3. Rao L
    4. Brenner S
    5. Cho C
    6. Gennerich A

    (2015) Cytoplasmic dynein regulates its attachment to microtubules via nucleotide state-switched mechanosensing at multiple AAA domains

    PNAS 112:6371–6376.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1417422112

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
93. 1. Niethammer M
    2. Smith DS
    3. Ayala R
    4. Peng J
    5. Ko J
    6. Lee MS
    7. Morabito M
    8. Tsai LH

    (2000) NUDEL is a novel Cdk5 substrate that associates with LIS1 and cytoplasmic dynein

    Neuron 28:697–711.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00147-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Nirschl JJ
    2. Magiera MM
    3. Lazarus JE
    4. Janke C
    5. Holzbaur EL

    (2016) α-Tubulin tyrosination and CLIP-170 phosphorylation regulate the initiation of Dynein-Driven transport in neurons

    Cell Reports 14:2637–2652.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.02.046

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Nyarko A
    2. Song Y
    3. Barbar E

    (2012) Intrinsic disorder in dynein intermediate chain modulates its interactions with NudE and dynactin

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 287:24884–24893.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M112.376038

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
96. 1. O'Connell CB
    2. Wang YL

    (2000) Mammalian spindle orientation and position respond to changes in cell shape in a dynein-dependent fashion

    Molecular Biology of the Cell 11:1765–1774.

    https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.11.5.1765

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Okumura M
    2. Natsume T
    3. Kanemaki MT
    4. Kiyomitsu T

    (2018) Dynein-Dynactin-NuMA clusters generate cortical spindle-pulling forces as a multi-arm ensemble

    eLife 7:e36559.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36559

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
98. 1. Palazzo AF
    2. Joseph HL
    3. Chen YJ
    4. Dujardin DL
    5. Alberts AS
    6. Pfister KK
    7. Vallee RB
    8. Gundersen GG

    (2001) Cdc42, dynein, and dynactin regulate MTOC reorientation independent of Rho-regulated microtubule stabilization

    Current Biology 11:1536–1541.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00475-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
99. 1. Pandey JP
    2. Smith DS

    (2011) A Cdk5-dependent switch regulates Lis1/Ndel1/dynein-driven organelle transport in adult axons

    Journal of Neuroscience 31:17207–17219.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4108-11.2011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Pawlisz AS
     2. Mutch C
     3. Wynshaw-Boris A
     4. Chenn A
     5. Walsh CA
     6. Feng Y

     (2008) Lis1–Nde1-dependent neuronal fate control determines cerebral cortical size and lamination

     Human Molecular Genetics 17:2441–2455.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddn144

     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Pedersen LB
     2. Rompolas P
     3. Christensen ST
     4. Rosenbaum JL
     5. King SM

     (2007) The lissencephaly protein Lis1 is present in motile mammalian cilia and requires outer arm dynein for targeting to Chlamydomonas flagella

     Journal of Cell Science 120:858–867.

     https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.03374

     • Google Scholar
102. 1. Pettersen EF
     2. Goddard TD
     3. Huang CC
     4. Couch GS
     5. Greenblatt DM
     6. Meng EC
     7. Ferrin TE

     (2004) UCSF Chimera?A visualization system for exploratory research and analysis

     Journal of Computational Chemistry 25:1605–1612.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.20084

     • Google Scholar
103. 1. Peyre E
     2. Jaouen F
     3. Saadaoui M
     4. Haren L
     5. Merdes A
     6. Durbec P
     7. Morin X

     (2011) A lateral belt of cortical LGN and NuMA guides mitotic spindle movements and planar division in neuroepithelial cells

     Journal of Cell Biology 193:141–154.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201101039

     • Google Scholar
104. 1. Pilz D
     2. Matsumoto N
     3. Minnerath S
     4. Mills P
     5. Gleeson JG
     6. Allen KM
     7. Walsh CA
     8. Barkovich AJ
     9. Dobyns WB
     10. Ledbetter DH
     11. Ross ME

     (1998) LIS1 and XLIS (DCX) mutations cause most classical lissencephaly, but different patterns of malformation

     Human Molecular Genetics 7:2029–2037.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/7.13.2029

     • Google Scholar
105. 1. Plamann M
     2. Minke PF
     3. Tinsley JH
     4. Bruno KS

     (1994) Cytoplasmic dynein and actin-related protein Arp1 are required for normal nuclear distribution in filamentous fungi

     The Journal of Cell Biology 127:139–149.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.127.1.139

     • Google Scholar
106. 1. Poirier K
     2. Keays DA
     3. Francis F
     4. Saillour Y
     5. Bahi N
     6. Manouvrier S
     7. Fallet-Bianco C
     8. Pasquier L
     9. Toutain A
     10. Tuy FPD
     11. Bienvenu T
     12. Joriot S
     13. Odent S
     14. Ville D
     15. Desguerre I
     16. Goldenberg A
     17. Moutard M-L
     18. Fryns J-P
     19. van Esch H
     20. Harvey RJ
     21. Siebold C
     22. Flint J
     23. Beldjord C
     24. Chelly J

     (2007) Large spectrum of lissencephaly and pachygyria phenotypes resulting from de novo missense mutations in tubulin alpha 1A ( TUBA1A )

     Human Mutation 28:1055–1064.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.20572

     • Google Scholar
107. 1. Poirier K
     2. Lebrun N
     3. Broix L
     4. Tian G
     5. Saillour Y
     6. Boscheron C
     7. Parrini E
     8. Valence S
     9. Pierre BS
     10. Oger M
     11. Lacombe D
     12. Geneviève D
     13. Fontana E
     14. Darra F
     15. Cances C
     16. Barth M
     17. Bonneau D
     18. Bernadina BD
     19. N'Guyen S
     20. Gitiaux C
     21. Parent P
     22. des Portes V
     23. Pedespan JM
     24. Legrez V
     25. Castelnau-Ptakine L
     26. Nitschke P
     27. Hieu T
     28. Masson C
     29. Zelenika D
     30. Andrieux A
     31. Francis F
     32. Guerrini R
     33. Cowan NJ
     34. Bahi-Buisson N
     35. Chelly J

     (2013) Mutations in TUBG1, DYNC1H1, KIF5C and KIF2A cause malformations of cortical development and microcephaly

     Nature Genetics 45:639–647.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2613

     • Google Scholar
108. 1. Qiu R
     2. Zhang J
     3. Xiang X

     (2019) LIS1 regulates cargo-adapter–mediated activation of dynein by overcoming its autoinhibition in vivo

     Journal of Cell Biology 218:3630–3646.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201905178

     • Google Scholar
109. 1. Raaijmakers JA
     2. Tanenbaum ME
     3. Medema RH

     (2013) Systematic dissection of dynein regulators in mitosis

     The Journal of Cell Biology 201:201–215.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201208098

     • Google Scholar
110. 1. Reck-Peterson SL
     2. Yildiz A
     3. Carter AP
     4. Gennerich A
     5. Zhang N
     6. Vale RD

     (2006) Single-molecule analysis of dynein processivity and stepping behavior

     Cell 126:335–348.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.05.046

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Reck-Peterson SL
     2. Redwine WB
     3. Vale RD
     4. Carter AP

     (2018) The cytoplasmic dynein transport machinery and its many cargoes

     Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 19:382–398.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-018-0004-3

     • Google Scholar
112. 1. Reddy BJN
     2. Mattson M
     3. Wynne CL
     4. Vadpey O
     5. Durra A
     6. Chapman D
     7. Vallee RB
     8. Gross SP

     (2016) Load-induced enhancement of Dynein force production by LIS1–NudE in vivo and in vitro

     Nature Communications 7:12259.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12259

     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Reiner O
     2. Carrozzo R
     3. Shen Y
     4. Wehnert M
     5. Faustinella F
     6. Dobyns WB
     7. Caskey CT
     8. Ledbetter DH

     (1993) Isolation of a Miller–Dicker lissencephaly gene containing G protein β-subunit-like repeats

     Nature 364:717–721.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/364717a0

     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Roberts AJ
     2. Goodman BS
     3. Reck-Peterson SL

     (2014) Reconstitution of dynein transport to the microtubule plus end by kinesin

     eLife 3:e02641.

     https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02641

     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Sacristan C
     2. Kops GJPL

     (2015) Joined at the hip: kinetochores, microtubules, and spindle assembly checkpoint signaling

     Trends in Cell Biology 25:21–28.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2014.08.006

     • Google Scholar
116. 1. Salina D
     2. Bodoor K
     3. Eckley DM
     4. Schroer TA
     5. Rattner JB
     6. Burke B

     (2002) Cytoplasmic dynein as a facilitator of nuclear envelope breakdown

     Cell 108:97–107.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00628-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
117. 1. Sasaki S
     2. Shionoya A
     3. Ishida M
     4. Gambello MJ
     5. Yingling J
     6. Wynshaw-Boris A
     7. Hirotsune S

     (2000) A LIS1/NUDEL/cytoplasmic dynein heavy chain complex in the developing and adult nervous system

     Neuron 28:681–696.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00146-X

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
118. 1. Schaar BT
     2. McConnell SK

     (2005) Cytoskeletal coordination during neuronal migration

     PNAS 102:13652–13657.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506008102

     • Google Scholar
119. 1. Schafer DA
     2. Gill SR
     3. Cooper JA
     4. Heuser JE
     5. Schroer TA

     (1994) Ultrastructural analysis of the dynactin complex: an actin-related protein is a component of a filament that resembles F-actin

     The Journal of Cell Biology 126:403–412.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.126.2.403

     • Google Scholar
120. 1. Schapira M
     2. Tyers M
     3. Torrent M
     4. Arrowsmith CH

     (2017) WD40 repeat domain proteins: a novel target class?

     Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 16:773–786.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd.2017.179

     • Google Scholar
121. 1. Schlager MA
     2. Hoang HT
     3. Urnavicius L
     4. Bullock SL
     5. Carter AP

     (2014) In vitro reconstitution of a highly processive recombinant human dynein complex

     The EMBO Journal 33:1855–1868.

     https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201488792

     • Google Scholar
122. 1. Schmidt H

     (2015) Dynein motors: How AAA+ ring opening and closing coordinates microtubule binding and linker movement

     BioEssays 37:532–543.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201400215

     • Google Scholar
123. 1. Schmidt R
     2. Fielmich L-E
     3. Grigoriev I
     4. Katrukha EA
     5. Akhmanova A
     6. van den Heuvel S

     (2017) Two populations of cytoplasmic dynein contribute to spindle positioning in C. elegans embryos

     Journal of Cell Biology 216:2777–2793.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201607038

     • Google Scholar
124. 1. Schmidt H
     2. Carter AP

     (2016) Review: Structure and mechanism of the dynein motor ATPase

     Biopolymers 105:557–567.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/bip.22856

     • Google Scholar
125. 1. Schuster M
     2. Kilaru S
     3. Ashwin P
     4. Lin C
     5. Severs NJ
     6. Steinberg G

     (2011) Controlled and stochastic retention concentrates dynein at microtubule ends to keep endosomes on track

     The EMBO Journal 30:652–664.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2010.360

     • Google Scholar
126. 1. Sheeman B
     2. Carvalho P
     3. Sagot I
     4. Geiser J
     5. Kho D
     6. Hoyt MA
     7. Pellman D

     (2003) Determinants of S. cerevisiae dynein localization and activation: implications for the mechanism of spindle positioning

     Current Biology : CB 13:364–372.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-9822(03)00013-7

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
127. 1. Siglin AE
     2. Sun S
     3. Moore JK
     4. Tan S
     5. Poenie M
     6. Lear JD
     7. Polenova T
     8. Cooper JA
     9. Williams JC

     (2013) Dynein and dynactin leverage their bivalent character to form a high-affinity interaction

     PLOS ONE 8:e59453.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059453

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
128. 1. Siller KH
     2. Doe CQ

     (2009) Spindle orientation during asymmetric cell division

     Nature Cell Biology 11:365–374.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb0409-365

     • Google Scholar
129. 1. Smith DS
     2. Niethammer M
     3. Ayala R
     4. Zhou Y
     5. Gambello MJ
     6. Wynshaw-Boris A
     7. Tsai L-H

     (2000) Regulation of cytoplasmic dynein behaviour and microtubule organization by mammalian Lis1

     Nature Cell Biology 2:767–775.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/35041000

     • Google Scholar
130. 1. Solecki DJ
     2. Model L
     3. Gaetz J
     4. Kapoor TM
     5. Hatten ME

     (2004) Par6α signaling controls glial-guided neuronal migration

     Nature Neuroscience 7:1195–1203.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1332

     • Google Scholar
131. 1. Splinter D
     2. Tanenbaum ME
     3. Lindqvist A
     4. Jaarsma D
     5. Flotho A
     6. Yu KL
     7. Grigoriev I
     8. Engelsma D
     9. Haasdijk ED
     10. Keijzer N
     11. Demmers J
     12. Fornerod M
     13. Melchior F
     14. Hoogenraad CC
     15. Medema RH
     16. Akhmanova A

     (2010) Bicaudal D2, Dynein, and kinesin-1 associate with nuclear pore complexes and regulate centrosome and nuclear positioning during mitotic entry

     PLOS Biology 8:e1000350.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000350

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
132. 1. Splinter D
     2. Razafsky DS
     3. Schlager MA
     4. Serra-Marques A
     5. Grigoriev I
     6. Demmers J
     7. Keijzer N
     8. Jiang K
     9. Poser I
     10. Hyman AA
     11. Hoogenraad CC
     12. King SJ
     13. Akhmanova A

     (2012) BICD2, dynactin, and LIS1 cooperate in regulating dynein recruitment to cellular structures

     Molecular Biology of the Cell 23:4226–4241.

     https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e12-03-0210

     • Google Scholar
133. 1. Straube A
     2. Enard W
     3. Berner A
     4. Wedlich-Söldner R
     5. Kahmann R
     6. Steinberg G

     (2001) A split motor domain in a cytoplasmic dynein

     The EMBO Journal 20:5091–5100.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/20.18.5091

     • Google Scholar
134. 1. Stuchell-Brereton MD
     2. Siglin A
     3. Li J
     4. Moore JK
     5. Ahmed S
     6. Williams JC
     7. Cooper JA

     (2011) Functional interaction between dynein light chain and intermediate chain is required for mitotic spindle positioning

     Molecular Biology of the Cell 22:2690–2701.

     https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e11-01-0075

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
135. 1. Swan A
     2. Nguyen T
     3. Suter B

     (1999) Drosophila Lissencephaly-1 functions with Bic-D and dynein in oocyte determination and nuclear positioning

     Nature Cell Biology 1:444–449.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/15680

     • Google Scholar
136. 1. Tai C-Y
     2. Dujardin DL
     3. Faulkner NE
     4. Vallee RB

     (2002) Role of dynein, dynactin, and CLIP-170 interactions in LIS1 kinetochore function

     Journal of Cell Biology 156:959–968.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200109046

     • Google Scholar
137. 1. Tame M
     2. Raaijmakers J
     3. van den Broek B
     4. Lindqvist A
     5. Jalink K
     6. Medema RH

     (2014) Astral microtubules control redistribution of dynein at the cell cortex to facilitate spindle positioning

     Cell Cycle 13:1162–1170.

     https://doi.org/10.4161/cc.28031

     • Google Scholar
138. 1. Tan R
     2. Lam AJ
     3. Tan T
     4. Han J
     5. Nowakowski DW
     6. Vershinin M
     7. Simó S
     8. Ori-McKenney KM
     9. McKenney RJ

     (2019) Microtubules gate tau condensation to spatially regulate microtubule functions

     Nature Cell Biology 21:1078–1085.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-019-0375-5

     • Google Scholar
139. 1. Tang X
     2. Germain BS
     3. Lee W-L

     (2012) A novel patch assembly domain in Num1 mediates dynein anchoring at the cortex during spindle positioning

     Journal of Cell Biology 196:743–756.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201112017

     • Google Scholar
140. 1. Tapley EC
     2. Starr DA

     (2013) Connecting the nucleus to the cytoskeleton by SUN–KASH bridges across the nuclear envelope

     Current Opinion in Cell Biology 25:57–62.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2012.10.014

     • Google Scholar
141. 1. Tarricone C
     2. Perrina F
     3. Monzani S
     4. Massimiliano L
     5. Kim MH
     6. Derewenda ZS
     7. Knapp S
     8. Tsai LH
     9. Musacchio A

     (2004) Coupling PAF signaling to dynein regulation: structure of LIS1 in complex with PAF-acetylhydrolase

     Neuron 44:809–821.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.11.019

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
142. 1. Torisawa T
     2. Nakayama A
     3. Furuta K
     4. Yamada M
     5. Hirotsune S
     6. Toyoshima YY

     (2011) Functional dissection of LIS1 and NDEL1 towards understanding the molecular mechanisms of cytoplasmic dynein regulation

     Journal of Biological Chemistry 286:1959–1965.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.169847

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
143. 1. Toropova K
     2. Zou S
     3. Roberts AJ
     4. Redwine WB
     5. Goodman BS
     6. Reck-Peterson SL
     7. Leschziner AE

     (2014) Lis1 regulates dynein by sterically blocking its mechanochemical cycle

     eLife 3:e03372.

     https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.03372

     • Google Scholar
144. 1. Toropova K
     2. Mladenov M
     3. Roberts AJ

     (2017) Intraflagellar transport dynein is autoinhibited by trapping of its mechanical and track-binding elements

     Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 24:461–468.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.3391

     • Google Scholar
145. 1. Toropova K
     2. Zalyte R
     3. Mukhopadhyay AG
     4. Mladenov M
     5. Carter AP
     6. Roberts AJ

     (2019) Structure of the dynein-2 complex and its assembly with intraflagellar transport trains

     Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 26:823–829.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-019-0286-y

     • Google Scholar
146. 1. Torres FR
     2. Montenegro MA
     3. Marques-de-Faria AP
     4. Guerreiro MM
     5. Cendes F
     6. Lopes-Cendes I

     (2004) Mutation screening in a cohort of patients with lissencephaly and subcortical band heterotopia

     Neurology 62:799–802.

     https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000113725.46254.FD

     • Google Scholar
147. 1. Tsai J-W
     2. Chen Y
     3. Kriegstein AR
     4. Vallee RB

     (2005) LIS1 RNA interference blocks neural stem cell division, morphogenesis, and motility at multiple stages

     Journal of Cell Biology 170:935–945.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200505166

     • Google Scholar
148. 1. Tsai J-W
     2. Bremner KH
     3. Vallee RB

     (2007) Dual subcellular roles for LIS1 and dynein in radial neuronal migration in live brain tissue

     Nature Neuroscience 10:970–979.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1934

     • Google Scholar
149. 1. Tsai J-W
     2. Lian W-N
     3. Kemal S
     4. Kriegstein AR
     5. Vallee RB

     (2010) Kinesin 3 and cytoplasmic dynein mediate interkinetic nuclear migration in neural stem cells

     Nature Neuroscience 13:1463–1471.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2665

     • Google Scholar
150. 1. Turgay Y
     2. Champion L
     3. Balazs C
     4. Held M
     5. Toso A
     6. Gerlich DW
     7. Meraldi P
     8. Kutay U

     (2014) SUN proteins facilitate the removal of membranes from chromatin during nuclear envelope breakdown

     The Journal of Cell Biology 204:1099–1109.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201310116

     • Google Scholar
151. 1. Urnavicius L
     2. Zhang K
     3. Diamant AG
     4. Motz C
     5. Schlager MA
     6. Yu M
     7. Patel NA
     8. Robinson CV
     9. Carter AP

     (2015) The structure of the dynactin complex and its interaction with dynein

     Science 347:1441–1446.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa4080

     • Google Scholar
152. 1. Urnavicius L
     2. Lau CK
     3. Elshenawy MM
     4. Morales-Rios E
     5. Motz C
     6. Yildiz A
     7. Carter AP

     (2018) Cryo-EM shows how dynactin recruits two dyneins for faster movement

     Nature 554:202–206.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25462

     • Google Scholar
153. 1. Uyanik G
     2. Morris-Rosendahl DJ
     3. Stiegler J
     4. Klapecki J
     5. Gross C
     6. Berman Y
     7. Martin P
     8. Dey L
     9. Spranger S
     10. Korenke GC
     11. Schreyer I
     12. Hertzberg C
     13. Neumann TE
     14. Burkart P
     15. Spaich C
     16. Meng M
     17. Holthausen H
     18. Ades L
     19. Seidel J
     20. Mangold E
     21. Buyse G
     22. Meinecke P
     23. Schara U
     24. Zeschnigk C
     25. Muller D
     26. Helland G
     27. Schulze B
     28. Wright ML
     29. Kortge-Jung S
     30. Hehr A
     31. Bogdahn U
     32. Schuierer G
     33. Kohlhase J
     34. Aigner L
     35. Wolff G
     36. Hehr U
     37. Winkler J

     (2007) Location and type of mutation in the LIS1 gene do not predict phenotypic severity

     Neurology 69:442–447.

     https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000266629.98503.d0

     • Google Scholar
154. 1. Valetti C
     2. Wetzel DM
     3. Schrader M
     4. Hasbani MJ
     5. Gill SR
     6. Kreis TE
     7. Schroer TA

     (1999) Role of dynactin in Endocytic traffic: effects of dynamitin overexpression and colocalization with CLIP-170

     Molecular Biology of the Cell 10:4107–4120.

     https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.10.12.4107

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
155. 1. Vallee RB
     2. Seale GE
     3. Tsai J-W

     (2009) Emerging roles for myosin II and cytoplasmic dynein in migrating neurons and growth cones

     Trends in Cell Biology 19:347–355.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2009.03.009

     • Google Scholar
156. 1. Vaughan KT
     2. Tynan SH
     3. Faulkner NE
     4. Echeverri CJ
     5. Vallee RB

     (1999)

     Colocalization of cytoplasmic dynein with dynactin and CLIP-170 at microtubule distal ends

     Journal of Cell Science 112 ( Pt 10:1437–1447.

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
157. 1. Vaughan KT
     2. Vallee RB

     (1995) Cytoplasmic dynein binds dynactin through a direct interaction between the intermediate chains and p150Glued

     The Journal of Cell Biology 131:1507–1516.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.131.6.1507

     • Google Scholar
158. 1. Veith D
     2. Scherr N
     3. Efimov VP
     4. Fischer R

     (2005) Role of the spindle-pole-body protein ApsB and the cortex protein ApsA in microtubule organization and nuclear migration in Aspergillus nidulans

     Journal of Cell Science 118:3705–3716.

     https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.02501

     • Google Scholar
159. 1. Vershinin M
     2. Carter BC
     3. Razafsky DS
     4. King SJ
     5. Gross SP

     (2007) Multiple-motor based transport and its regulation by Tau

     PNAS 104:87–92.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0607919104

     • Google Scholar
160. 1. Vissers LELM
     2. de Ligt J
     3. Gilissen C
     4. Janssen I
     5. Steehouwer M
     6. de Vries P
     7. van Lier B
     8. Arts P
     9. Wieskamp N
     10. del Rosario M
     11. van Bon BWM
     12. Hoischen A
     13. de Vries BBA
     14. Brunner HG
     15. Veltman JA

     (2010) A de novo paradigm for mental retardation

     Nature Genetics 42:1109–1112.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.712

     • Google Scholar
161. 1. Wang S
     2. Ketcham SA
     3. Schön A
     4. Goodman B
     5. Wang Y
     6. Yates J
     7. Freire E
     8. Schroer TA
     9. Zheng Y

     (2013) Nudel/NudE and Lis1 promote dynein and dynactin interaction in the context of spindle morphogenesis

     Molecular Biology of the Cell 24:3522–3533.

     https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e13-05-0283

     • Google Scholar
162. 1. Wang S
     2. Zheng Y

     (2011) Identification of a novel dynein binding domain in nudel essential for spindle pole organization in Xenopus egg extract

     Journal of Biological Chemistry 286:587–593.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.181578

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
163. 1. Wickstead B
     2. Gull K

     (2007) Dyneins across eukaryotes: a comparative genomic analysis

     Traffic 8:1708–1721.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0854.2007.00646.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
164. 1. Willemsen MH
     2. Vissers LEL
     3. Willemsen MAAP
     4. van Bon BWM
     5. Kroes T
     6. de Ligt J
     7. de Vries BB
     8. Schoots J
     9. Lugtenberg D
     10. Hamel BCJ
     11. van Bokhoven H
     12. Brunner HG
     13. Veltman JA
     14. Kleefstra T

     (2012) Mutations in DYNC1H1 cause severe intellectual disability with neuronal migration defects

     Journal of Medical Genetics 49:179–183.

     https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2011-100542

     • Google Scholar
165. 1. Woodard GE
     2. Huang NN
     3. Cho H
     4. Miki T
     5. Tall GG
     6. Kehrl JH

     (2010) Ric-8A and gi alpha recruit LGN, NuMA, and dynein to the cell cortex to help orient the mitotic spindle

     Molecular and Cellular Biology 30:3519–3530.

     https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.00394-10

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
166. 1. Xiang X
     2. Beckwith SM
     3. Morris NR

     (1994) Cytoplasmic dynein is involved in nuclear migration in Aspergillus nidulans

     PNAS 91:2100–2104.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.6.2100

     • Google Scholar
167. 1. Xiang X
     2. Osmani AH
     3. Osmani SA
     4. Xin M
     5. Morris NR

     (1995) NudF, a nuclear migration gene in Aspergillus nidulans, is similar to the human LIS-1 gene required for neuronal migration

     Molecular Biology of the Cell 6:297–310.

     https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.6.3.297

     • Google Scholar
168. 1. Xiang X
     2. Zuo W
     3. Efimov VP
     4. Morris NR

     (1999) Isolation of a new set of Aspergillus nidulans mutants defective in nuclear migration

     Current Genetics 35:626–630.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s002940050461

     • Google Scholar
169. 1. Xiang X
     2. Han G
     3. Winkelmann DA
     4. Zuo W
     5. Morris NR

     (2000) Dynamics of cytoplasmic dynein in living cells and the effect of a mutation in the dynactin complex actin-related protein Arp1

     Current Biology 10:603–606.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(00)00488-7

     • Google Scholar
170. 1. Xie Y
     2. Jüschke C
     3. Esk C
     4. Hirotsune S
     5. Knoblich JA

     (2013) The phosphatase PP4c controls spindle orientation to maintain proliferative symmetric divisions in the developing neocortex

     Neuron 79:254–265.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.05.027

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
171. 1. Yamada M
     2. Toba S
     3. Yoshida Y
     4. Haratani K
     5. Mori D
     6. Yano Y
     7. Mimori-Kiyosue Y
     8. Nakamura T
     9. Itoh K
     10. Fushiki S
     11. Setou M
     12. Wynshaw-Boris A
     13. Torisawa T
     14. Toyoshima YY
     15. Hirotsune S

     (2008) LIS1 and NDEL1 coordinate the plus-end-directed transport of cytoplasmic dynein

     The EMBO Journal 27:2471–2483.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.182

     • Google Scholar
172. 1. Yan W
     2. Assadi AH
     3. Wynshaw-Boris A
     4. Eichele G
     5. Matzuk MM
     6. Clark GD

     (2003) Previously uncharacterized roles of platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase 1b complex in mouse spermatogenesis

     PNAS 100:7189–7194.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1236145100

     • Google Scholar
173. 1. Yao X
     2. Zhang J
     3. Zhou H
     4. Wang E
     5. Xiang X

     (2012) In vivo roles of the basic domain of dynactin p150 in microtubule plus-end tracking and dynein function

     Traffic 13:375–387.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0854.2011.01312.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
174. 1. Yi JY
     2. Ori-McKenney KM
     3. McKenney RJ
     4. Vershinin M
     5. Gross SP
     6. Vallee RB

     (2011) High-resolution imaging reveals indirect coordination of opposite motors and a role for LIS1 in high-load axonal transport

     Journal of Cell Biology 195:193–201.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201104076

     • Google Scholar
175. 1. Yingling J
     2. Youn YH
     3. Darling D
     4. Toyo-Oka K
     5. Pramparo T
     6. Hirotsune S
     7. Wynshaw-Boris A

     (2008) Neuroepithelial stem cell proliferation requires LIS1 for precise spindle orientation and symmetric division

     Cell 132:474–486.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.01.026

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
176. 1. Zhang J
     2. Li S
     3. Fischer R
     4. Xiang X

     (2003) Accumulation of cytoplasmic dynein and dynactin at Microtubule plus ends in Aspergillus nidulans is kinesin dependent

     Molecular Biology of the Cell 14:1479–1488.

     https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e02-08-0516

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
177. 1. Zhang J
     2. Wang L
     3. Zhuang L
     4. Huo L
     5. Musa S
     6. Li S
     7. Xiang X

     (2008) Arp11 affects dynein-dynactin interaction and is essential for dynein function in Aspergillus nidulans

     Traffic 9:1073–1087.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0854.2008.00748.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
178. 1. Zhang J
     2. Zhuang L
     3. Lee Y
     4. Abenza JF
     5. Penalva MA
     6. Xiang X

     (2010) The microtubule plus-end localization of Aspergillus dynein is important for dynein-early-endosome interaction but not for dynein ATPase activation

     Journal of Cell Science 123:3596–3604.

     https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.075259

     • Google Scholar
179. 1. Zhang K
     2. Foster HE
     3. Rondelet A
     4. Lacey SE
     5. Bahi-Buisson N
     6. Bird AW
     7. Carter AP

     (2017) Cryo-EM reveals how human cytoplasmic dynein is Auto-inhibited and activated

     Cell 169:1303–1314.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.025

     • Google Scholar
180. 1. Zyłkiewicz E
     2. Kijańska M
     3. Choi WC
     4. Derewenda U
     5. Derewenda ZS
     6. Stukenberg PT

     (2011) The N-terminal coiled-coil of Ndel1 is a regulated scaffold that recruits LIS1 to dynein

     The Journal of Cell Biology 192:433–445.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201011142

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Steven M Markus

   Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, United States

   For correspondence

   steven.markus@colostate.edu

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3098-0236

2. Matthew G Marzo

   Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, United States

   Present address

   Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2571-6377

3. Richard J McKenney

   Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

• 2,742

  views

• 325

  downloads

• 55

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.