Endothelial junctional membrane protrusions serve as hotspots for neutrophil transmigration

  1. Janine JG Arts
  2. Eike K Mahlandt
  3. Max Grönloh
  4. Lilian Schimmel
  5. Ivar Noordstra
  6. Emma Gordon
  7. Abraham CI van Steen
  8. Simon Tol
  9. Barbara Walzog
  10. Jos van Rijssel
  11. Martijn A Nolte
  12. Marten Postma
  13. Satya Khuon
  14. John M Heddleston
  15. Eric Wait
  16. Teng Leong Chew
  17. Mark Winter
  18. Eloi Montanez
  19. Joachim Goedhart
  20. Jaap D van Buul  Is a corresponding author
  1. Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Netherlands
  2. SILS/UvA, Netherlands
  3. Uppsala University, Sweden
  4. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany
  5. Janelia Research Campus, United States
  6. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States
  7. University of Haifa, Israel
  8. University of Barcelona, Spain

Abstract

Upon inflammation, leukocytes rapidly transmigrate across the endothelium to enter the inflamed tissue. Evidence accumulates that leukocytes use preferred exit sites, though it is not yet clear how these hotspots in the endothelium are defined and how they are recognized by the leukocyte. Using lattice light sheet microscopy, we discovered that leukocytes prefer endothelial membrane protrusions at cell junctions for transmigration. Phenotypically, these junctional membrane protrusions are present in an asymmetric manner, meaning that one endothelial cell shows the protrusion and the adjacent one does not. Consequently, leukocytes cross the junction by migrating underneath the protruding endothelial cell. These protrusions depend on Rac1 activity and by using a photo-activatable Rac1 probe, we could artificially generate local exit-sites for leukocytes. Overall, we have discovered a new mechanism that uses local induced junctional membrane protrusions to facilitate/steer the leukocyte escape/exit from inflamed vessel walls.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files will be provided for Figures 4 and 6.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Janine JG Arts

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Eike K Mahlandt

    Molecular Cytology, SILS/UvA, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Max Grönloh

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0109-8225
  4. Lilian Schimmel

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0569-0464
  5. Ivar Noordstra

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Emma Gordon

    Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Abraham CI van Steen

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Simon Tol

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Barbara Walzog

    Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Planegg- Martinsried, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Jos van Rijssel

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8077-1371
  11. Martijn A Nolte

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Marten Postma

    Molecular Cytology, SILS/UvA, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Satya Khuon

    Advanced Imaging Center, Janelia Research Campus, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. John M Heddleston

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Eric Wait

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Teng Leong Chew

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Mark Winter

    Department of Marine Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1180-1957
  18. Eloi Montanez

    Department of Physiological Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4059-5056
  19. Joachim Goedhart

    Molecular Cytology, SILS/UvA, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0630-3825
  20. Jaap D van Buul

    Molecular Cell Biology, Sanquin Research and Landsteiner Laboratory, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    j.vanbuul@sanquin.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0054-7949

Funding

LSBR (1649)

  • Abraham CI van Steen

NWO-ZonMW Vici (91819632)

  • Max Grönloh
  • Jaap D van Buul

Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (PID2019-108902GB-I00)

  • Eloi Montanez

NWO ALW-OPEN (ALWOP.306)

  • Eike K Mahlandt

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 914/A02)

  • Barbara Walzog

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal experiments were conducted in accordance with German federal animal protection laws and were approved by the Bavarian Government (Regierung von Oberbayern, Munich, Germany)

Copyright

© 2021, Arts et al.

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

Metrics

  • 2,954
    views
  • 411
    downloads
  • 27
    citations

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

Download links

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

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

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

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

  1. Janine JG Arts
  2. Eike K Mahlandt
  3. Max Grönloh
  4. Lilian Schimmel
  5. Ivar Noordstra
  6. Emma Gordon
  7. Abraham CI van Steen
  8. Simon Tol
  9. Barbara Walzog
  10. Jos van Rijssel
  11. Martijn A Nolte
  12. Marten Postma
  13. Satya Khuon
  14. John M Heddleston
  15. Eric Wait
  16. Teng Leong Chew
  17. Mark Winter
  18. Eloi Montanez
  19. Joachim Goedhart
  20. Jaap D van Buul
(2021)
Endothelial junctional membrane protrusions serve as hotspots for neutrophil transmigration
eLife 10:e66074.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66074

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66074

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Yue Miao, Yongtao Du ... Mei Ding
    Research Article

    The spatiotemporal transition of small GTPase Rab5 to Rab7 is crucial for early-to-late endosome maturation, yet the precise mechanism governing Rab5-to-Rab7 switching remains elusive. USP8, a ubiquitin-specific protease, plays a prominent role in the endosomal sorting of a wide range of transmembrane receptors and is a promising target in cancer therapy. Here, we identified that USP8 is recruited to Rab5-positive carriers by Rabex5, a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) for Rab5. The recruitment of USP8 dissociates Rabex5 from early endosomes (EEs) and meanwhile promotes the recruitment of the Rab7 GEF SAND-1/Mon1. In USP8-deficient cells, the level of active Rab5 is increased, while the Rab7 signal is decreased. As a result, enlarged EEs with abundant intraluminal vesicles accumulate and digestive lysosomes are rudimentary. Together, our results reveal an important and unexpected role of a deubiquitinating enzyme in endosome maturation.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Heungjin Ryu, Kibum Nam ... Jung-Hoon Park
    Research Article

    In most murine species, spermatozoa exhibit a falciform apical hook at the head end. The function of the sperm hook is not yet clearly understood. In this study, we investigate the role of the sperm hook in the migration of spermatozoa through the female reproductive tract in Mus musculus (C57BL/6), using a deep tissue imaging custom-built two-photon microscope. Through live reproductive tract imaging, we found evidence indicating that the sperm hook aids in the attachment of spermatozoa to the epithelium and facilitates interactions between spermatozoa and the epithelium during migration in the uterus and oviduct. We also observed synchronized sperm beating, which resulted from the spontaneous unidirectional rearrangement of spermatozoa in the uterus. Based on live imaging of spermatozoa-epithelium interaction dynamics, we propose that the sperm hook plays a crucial role in successful migration through the female reproductive tract by providing anchor-like mechanical support and facilitating interactions between spermatozoa and the female reproductive tract in the house mouse.