How molecular motors are arranged on a cargo is important for vesicular transport

The spatial organization of the cell depends upon intracellular trafficking of cargos hauled along microtubules and actin filaments by the molecular motor proteins kinesin, dynein, and myosin. Although much is known about how single motors function, there is significant evidence that cargos in vivo are carried by multiple motors. While some aspects of multiple motor function have received attention, how the cargo itself--and motor organization on the cargo--affects transport has not been considered. To address this, we have developed a three-dimensional Monte Carlo simulation of motors transporting a spherical cargo, subject to thermal fluctuations that produce both rotational and translational diffusion. We found that these fluctuations could exert a load on the motor(s), significantly decreasing the mean travel distance and velocity of large cargos, especially at large viscosities. In addition, the presence of the cargo could dramatically help the motor to bind productively to the microtubule: the relatively slow translational and rotational diffusion of moderately sized cargos gave the motors ample opportunity to bind to a microtubule before the motor/cargo ensemble diffuses out of range of that microtubule. For rapidly diffusing cargos, the probability of their binding to a microtubule was high if there were nearby microtubules that they could easily reach by translational diffusion. Our simulations found that one reason why motors may be approximately 100 nm long is to improve their 'on' rates when attached to comparably sized cargos. Finally, our results suggested that to efficiently regulate the number of active motors, motors should be clustered together rather than spread randomly over the surface of the cargo. While our simulation uses the specific parameters for kinesin, these effects result from generic properties of the motors, cargos, and filaments, so they should apply to other motors as well.     

Molecular motors: strategies to get along

The majority of active transport in the cell is driven by three classes of molecular motors: the kinesin and dynein families that move toward the plus-end and minus-end of microtubules, respectively, and the unconventional myosin motors that move along actin filaments. Each class of motor has different properties, but in the cell they often function together. In this review we summarize what is known about their single-molecule properties and the possibilities for regulation of such properties. In view of new results on cytoplasmic dynein, we attempt to rationalize how these different classes of motors might work together as part of the intracellular transport machinery. We propose that kinesin and myosin are robust and highly efficient transporters, but with somewhat limited room for regulation of function. Because cytoplasmic dynein is less efficient and robust, to achieve function comparable to the other motors it requires a number of accessory proteins as well as multiple dyneins functioning together. This necessity for additional factors, as well as dynein's inherent complexity, in principle allows for greatly increased control of function by taking the factors away either singly or in combination. Thus, dynein's contribution relative to the other motors can be dynamically tuned, allowing the motors to function together differently in a variety of situations.     

Fractionation and characterization of kinesin II species in vertebrate brain

Recent research on kinesin motors has outlined the diversity of the superfamily and defined specific cargoes moved by kinesin family (KIF) members. Owing to the difficulty of purifying large amounts of native motors, much of this work has relied on recombinant proteins expressed in vitro. This approach does not allow ready determination of the complement of kinesin motors present in a given tissue, the relative amounts of different motors, or comparison of their native activities. To address these questions, we isolated nucleotide-dependent, microtubule-binding proteins from 13-day chick embryo brain. Proteins were enriched by microtubule affinity purification, then subjected to velocity sedimentation to separate the 20S dynein/dynactin pool from a slower sedimenting KIF containing pool. Analysis of the latter pool by anion exchange chromatography revealed three KIF species: kinesin I (KIF5), kinesin II (KIF3), and KIF1C (Unc104/KIF1). The most abundant species, kinesin I, exhibited the expected long range microtubule gliding activity. By contrast, KIF1C did not move microtubules. Kinesin II, the second most abundant KIF, could be fractionated into two pools, one containing predominantly A/B isoforms and the other containing A/C isoforms. The two motor species had similar activities, powering microtubule gliding at slower speeds and over shorter distances than kinesin I.     

Posterior localization of dynein and dorsal-ventral axis formation depend on kinesin in Drosophila oocytes

To establish the major body axes, late Drosophila oocytes localize determinants to discrete cortical positions: bicoid mRNA to the anterior cortex, oskar mRNA to the posterior cortex, and gurken mRNA to the margin of the anterior cortex adjacent to the oocyte nucleus (the "anterodorsal corner"). These localizations depend on microtubules that are thought to be organized such that plus end-directed motors can move cargoes, like oskar, away from the anterior/lateral surfaces and hence toward the posterior pole. Likewise, minus end-directed motors may move cargoes toward anterior destinations. Contradicting this, cytoplasmic dynein, a minus-end motor, accumulates at the posterior. Here, we report that disruption of the plus-end motor kinesin I causes a shift of dynein from posterior to anterior. This provides an explanation for the dynein paradox, suggesting that dynein is moved as a cargo toward the posterior pole by kinesin-generated forces. However, other results present a new transport polarity puzzle. Disruption of kinesin I causes partial defects in anterior positioning of the nucleus and severe defects in anterodorsal localization of gurken mRNA. Kinesin may generate anterodorsal forces directly, despite the apparent preponderance of minus ends at the anterior cortex. Alternatively, kinesin I may facilitate cytoplasmic dynein-based anterodorsal forces by repositioning dynein toward microtubule plus ends.     

Docking and rolling, a model of how the mitotic motor Eg5 works

Whereas kinesin I is designed to transport cargoes long distances in isolation, a closely related kinesin motor, Eg5, is designed to generate a sustained opposing force necessary for proper mitotic spindle formation. Do the very different roles for these evolutionarily related motors translate into differences in how they generate movement? We have addressed this question by examining when in the ATPase cycle the Eg5 motor domain and neck linker move through the use of a series of novel spectroscopic probes utilizing fluorescence resonance energy transfer, and we have compared our results to kinesin I. Our results are consistent with a model in which movement in Eg5 occurs in two sequential steps, an ATP-dependent docking of the neck linker, followed by a rotation or "rolling" of the entire motor domain on the microtubule surface that occurs with ATP hydrolysis. These two forms of movement are consistent with the functions of a motor designed to generate sustained opposing force, and hence, our findings support the argument that the mechanochemical features of a molecular motor are shaped more by the demands placed on it than by its particular family of origin.     

Velocity of myosin-based actin sliding depends on attachment and detachment kinetics and reaches a maximum when myosin-binding sites on actin saturate

Molecular motors such as kinesin and myosin often work in groups to generate the directed movements and forces critical for many biological processes. Although much is known about how individual motors generate force and movement, surprisingly, little is known about the mechanisms underlying the macroscopic mechanics generated by multiple motors. For example, the observation that a saturating number, N, of myosin heads move an actin filament at a rate that is influenced by actin–myosin attachment and detachment kinetics is accounted for neither experimentally nor theoretically. To better understand the emergent mechanics of actin–myosin mechanochemistry, we use an in vitro motility assay to measure and correlate the N-dependence of actin sliding velocities, actin-activated ATPase activity, force generation against a mechanical load, and the calcium sensitivity of thin filament velocities. Our results show that both velocity and ATPase activity are strain dependent and that velocity becomes maximized with the saturation of myosin-binding sites on actin at a value that is 40% dependent on attachment kinetics and 60% dependent on detachment kinetics. These results support a chemical thermodynamic model for ensemble motor mechanochemistry and imply molecularly explicit mechanisms within this framework, challenging the assumption of independent force generation.     

Single fungal kinesin motor molecules move processively along microtubules

Conventional kinesins are two-headed molecular motors that move as single molecules micrometer-long distances on microtubules by using energy derived from ATP hydrolysis. The presence of two heads is a prerequisite for this processive motility, but other interacting domains, like the neck and K-loop, influence the processivity and are implicated in allowing some single-headed kinesins to move processively. Neurospora kinesin (NKin) is a phylogenetically distant, dimeric kinesin from Neurospora crassa with high gliding speed and an unusual neck domain. We quantified the processivity of NKin and compared it to human kinesin, HKin, using gliding and fluorescence-based processivity assays. Our data show that NKin is a processive motor. Single NKin molecules translocated microtubules in gliding assays on average 2.14 micro m (N = 46). When we tracked single, fluorescently labeled NKin motors, they moved on average 1.75 micro m (N = 182) before detaching from the microtubule, whereas HKin motors moved shorter distances (0.83 micro m, N = 229) under identical conditions. NKin is therefore at least twice as processive as HKin. These studies, together with biochemical work, provide a basis for experiments to dissect the molecular mechanisms of processive movement.     

One axon,many kinesins: What's the logic?

A large number of membrane-bounded organelles, protein complexes, and mRNAs are transported along microtubules to different locations within the neuronal axon. Axonal transport in the anterograde direction is carried out by members of a superfamily of specialized motor proteins, the kinesins. All kinesins contain a conserved motor domain that hydrolyses ATP to generate movement along microtubules. Regions outside the motor domain are responsible for cargo binding and regulation of motor activity. Present in a soluble, inactive form in the cytoplasm, kinesins are activated upon cargo binding. Selective targeting of different types of kinesin motors to specific cargoes is directed by amino acid sequences situated in their variable tails. Cargo proteins with specific function at their destination, bind directly to specific kinesins for transport. Whereas most kinesins move to microtubule plus-ends, a small number of them move to microtubule minus-ends, and may participate in retrograde axonal transport. Axonal transport by kinesins has a logic: Fully assembled, multisubunit, functional complexes (e.g., ion channel complexes, signaling complexes, RNA-protein complexes) are transported to their destination by kinesin motors that interact transiently (i.e., during transport only) with one of the complexes' subunits.     

Force–velocity relationship for multiple kinesin motors pulling a magnetic bead

Although the velocity of single kinesin motors against an opposing force F of 0–10 pN is well known, the behavior of multiple kinesin motors working to overcome a larger load is still poorly understood. We have carried out gliding assays in which 3–7 Drosophila kinesin-1 motors moved a microtubule at 200–700 μm/s against a 0–31 pN load at saturating [ATP]. The load F was generated by applying a spatially uniform magnetic field gradient to a superparamagnetic bead attached to the (+) end of the microtubule. When F was scaled by the average number of motors 〈n〉, the force–velocity relationship for multiple motors was similar to the force–velocity relationship for a single motor, supporting a minimal load-sharing model. The velocity distribution at low load has a single mode consistent with rapid fluctuations of n. However, against a load of 2.5–4.7 pN/motor, additional modes appeared at lower velocity. These observations support the Klumpp–Lipowsky model of multimotor transport [Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102. 17284–17289 (2005)].     

Moving on to the cargo problem of microtubule-dependent motors in neurons

Vigorous investigation has finally begun to shed light on the cargo problem of the microtubule-dependent motors, kinesin and dynein superfamily proteins. Biochemical observations have suggested that the potential cargoes of certain populations of motor proteins seem to be in vesicle-form, each vesicle possessing specific functional marker molecules. In addition to the close relationship between microtubule-dependent motors and cargoes in vesicle-form, kinesin has also been highlighted as an apparent driving force for another cargo in non-vesicle-form, cytoplasmic protein. On the basis of new biophysical and cell-biological evidence, the controversy over the movement of cytoplasmic cargoes has entered a new phase.     

Cargo-carrying motor vehicles on the neuronal highway: transport pathways and neurodegenerative disease

Within axons vital cargoes must be transported over great distances along microtubule tracks to maintain neuronal viability. Essential to this system are the molecular motors, kinesin and dynein, which transport a variety of neuronal cargoes. Elucidating the transport pathways, the identity of the cargoes transported, and the regulation of motor-cargo complexes are areas of intense investigation. Evidence suggests that essential components, including signaling proteins, neuroprotective and repair molecules, and vesicular and cytoskeletal components are all transported. In addition newly emerging data indicate that defects in axonal transport pathways may contribute to the initiation or progression of chronic neuronal dysfunction. In this review we concentrate on microtubule-based motor proteins, their linkers, and cargoes and discuss how factors in the axonal transport pathway contribute to disease states. As additional cargo complexes and transport pathways are identified, an understanding of the role these pathways play in the development of human disease will hopefully lead to new diagnostic and treatment strategies.     

Measuring Molecular Motor Forces In Vivo: Implications for Tug-of-War Models of Bidirectional Transport

Molecular motor proteins use the energy released from ATP hydrolysis to generate force and haul cargoes along cytoskeletal filaments. Thus, measuring the force motors generate amounts to directly probing their function. We report on optical trapping methodology capable of making precise in vivo stall-force measurements of individual cargoes hauled by molecular motors in their native environment. Despite routine measurement of motor forces in vitro, performing and calibrating such measurements in vivo has been challenging. We describe the methodology recently developed to overcome these difficulties, and used to measure stall forces of both kinesin-1 and cytoplasmic dynein-driven lipid droplets in Drosophila embryos. Critically, by measuring the cargo dynamics in the optical trap, we find that there is memory: it is more likely for a cargo to resume motion in the same direction—rather than reverse direction—after the motors transporting it detach from the microtubule under the force of the optical trap. This suggests that only motors of one polarity are active on the cargo at any instant in time and is not consistent with the tug-of-war models of bidirectional transport where both polarity motors can bind the microtubules at all times. We further use the optical trap to measure in vivo the detachment rates from microtubules of kinesin-1 and dynein-driven lipid droplets. Unlike what is commonly assumed, we find that dynein’s but not kinesin’s detachment time in vivo increases with opposing load. This suggests that dynein’s interaction with microtubules behaves like a catch bond.     

Molecular motors: how to make models that can be used to convey the concept of molecular ratchets and thermal capture

A wide variety of cellular processes use molecular motors, including processive motors that move along some form of track (e.g., myosin with actin, kinesin or dynein with tubulin) and polymerases that move along a template (e.g., DNA and RNA polymerases, ribosomes). In trying to understand how these molecular motors actually move, many apply their understanding of how man-made motors work: the latter use some form of energy to exert a force or torque on its load. However, quite a different mechanism has been proposed to possibly account for the movement of molecular motors. Rather than hydrolyzing ATP to push or pull their load, they might use their own thermal vibrational energy as well as that of their load and their environment to move the load, capturing those movements that occur along a desired vector or axis and resisting others; ATP hydrolysis is required to make backward movements impossible. This intriguing thermal capture or Brownian ratchet model is relatively more difficult to convey to students. In this report, we describe several teaching aids that are very easily constructed using widely available household materials to convey the concept of a molecular ratchet.     

What are the functions of kinesin?

A variety of intracellular motile processes involve the directed movement of particles along microtubules, including organelle transport, endoplasmic reticulum extension, and movements in mitosis. Recently, a microtubule-dependent motor protein, kinesin, was purified and was found to be present in a soluble form in a wide variety of organisms and tissues. Because microtubules provide polar pathways over long distances within cells, kinesin and the motors which move in the opposite direction to kinesin on microtubules provide a mechanism for directed communications within cells. The possible roles of kinesin and other soluble microtubule-dependent motors in intracellular motile functions are discussed in the light of recent studies of the reconstitution of organelle motility with isolated components.     

Controlling kinesin by reversible disulfide cross-linking. Identifying the motility-producing conformational change

Conventional kinesin, a dimeric molecular motor, uses ATP-dependent conformational changes to move unidirectionally along a row of tubulin subunits on a microtubule. Two models have been advanced for the major structural change underlying kinesin motility: the first involves an unzippering/zippering of a small peptide (neck linker) from the motor catalytic core and the second proposes an unwinding/rewinding of the adjacent coiled-coil (neck coiled-coil). Here, we have tested these models using disulfide cross-linking of cysteines engineered into recombinant kinesin motors. When the neck linker motion was prevented by cross-linking, kinesin ceased unidirectional movement and only showed brief one-dimensional diffusion along microtubules. Motility fully recovered upon adding reducing agents to reverse the cross-link. When the neck linker motion was partially restrained, single kinesin motors showed biased diffusion towards the microtubule plus end but could not move effectively against a load imposed by an optical trap. Thus, partial movement of the neck linker suffices for directionality but not for normal processivity or force generation. In contrast, preventing neck coiled-coil unwinding by disulfide cross-linking had relatively little effect on motor activity, although the average run length of single kinesin molecules decreased by 30-50%. These studies indicate that conformational changes in the neck linker, not in the neck coiled-coil, drive processive movement by the kinesin motor.     

CRMP-2 directly binds to cytoplasmic dynein and interferes with its activity

The active transport of proteins and organelles is critical for cellular organization and function in eukaryotic cells. A substantial portion of long-distance transport depends on the opposite polarity of the kinesin and dynein family molecular motors to move cargo along microtubules. It is increasingly clear that many cargo molecules are moved bi-directionally by both sets of motors; however, the regulatory mechanism that determines the directionality of transport remains unclear. We previously reported that collapsin response mediator protein-2 (CRMP-2) played key roles in axon elongation and neuronal polarization. CRMP-2 was also found to associate with the anterograde motor protein Kinesin-1 and was transported with other cargoes toward the axon terminal. In this study, we investigated the association of CRMP-2 with a retrograde motor protein, cytoplasmic dynein. Immunoprecipitation assays showed that CRMP-2 interacted with cytoplasmic dynein heavy chain. Dynein heavy chain directly bound to the N-terminus of CRMP-2, which is the distinct side of CRMP-2's kinesin light chain-binding region. Furthermore, over-expression of the dynein-binding fragments of CRMP-2 prevented dynein-driven microtubule transport in COS-7 cells. Given that CRMP-2 is a key regulator of axon elongation, this interference with cytoplasmic dynein function by CRMP-2 might have an important role in axon formation, and neuronal development.     

Coordination of opposite-polarity microtubule motors

Many cargoes move bidirectionally, frequently reversing course between plus- and minus-end microtubule travel. For such cargoes, the extent and importance of interactions between the opposite-polarity motors is unknown. In this paper we test whether opposite-polarity motors on lipid droplets in Drosophila embryos are coordinated and avoid interfering with each other's activity, or whether they engage in a tug of war. To this end we impaired the minus-end transport machinery using dynein and dynactin mutations, and then investigated whether plus-end motion was improved or disrupted. We observe a surprisingly severe impairment of plus-end motion due to these alterations of minus-end motor activity. These observations are consistent with a coordination hypothesis, but cannot be easily explained with a tug of war model. Our measurements indicate that dynactin plays a crucial role in the coordination of plus- and minus-end-directed motors. Specifically, we propose that dynactin enables dynein to participate efficiently in bidirectional transport, increasing its ability to stay "on" during minus-end motion and keeping it "off" during plus-end motion.     

Autophagosomes initiate distally and mature during transport toward the cell soma in primary neurons

Autophagy is an essential cellular degradation pathway in neurons; defects in autophagy are sufficient to induce neurodegeneration. In this paper, we investigate autophagosome dynamics in primary dorsal root ganglion neurons. Autophagosome biogenesis occurs distally in a constitutive process at the neurite tip. Autophagosomes initially move bidirectionally and then switch to unidirectional, processive movement toward the cell soma driven by dynein. Autophagosomes copurify with anterograde and retrograde motors, suggesting that the activity of bound kinesin motors is effectively down-regulated to yield robust retrograde motility driven by dynein. Both organelle and soluble cargoes are internalized into autophagosomes, including mitochondria and ubiquitin. As autophagosomes move distally to proximally, they undergo maturation and become increasingly acidified, consistent with the formation of an autolysosomal compartment that may more efficiently degrade cargo. This maturation is accompanied by a switch to bidirectional motility characteristic of lysosomes. Together, autophagosome biogenesis and maturation in primary neurons is a constitutive process that is spatially and temporally regulated along the axon.     

Transport of beads by several kinesin motors

The movements of beads pulled by several kinesin-1 (conventional kinesin) motors are studied both theoretically and experimentally. While the velocity is approximately independent of the number of motors pulling the beads, the walking distance or run-length is strongly increased when more motors are involved. Run-length distributions are measured for a wide range of motor concentrations and matched to theoretically calculated distributions using only two global fit parameters. In this way, the maximal number of motors pulling the beads is estimated to vary between two and seven motors for total kinesin concentrations between 0.1 and 2.5 μg/ml or between 0.27 and 6.7 nM. In the same concentration regime, the average number of pulling motors is found to lie between 1.1 and 3.2 motors.     

A determinant for directionality of organelle transport in Drosophila embryos

BACKGROUND: Motor-driven transport along microtubules is a primary cellular mechanism for moving and positioning organelles. Many cargoes move bidirectionally by using both minus and plus end-directed motors. How such cargoes undergo controlled net transport is unresolved. RESULTS: Using a combination of genetics, molecular biology, and biophysics, we have identified Halo, a novel regulator of lipid droplet transport in early Drosophila embryos. In embryos lacking Halo, net transport of lipid droplets, but not that of other cargoes, is specifically altered; net transport is minus-end directed at developmental stages when it is normally plus-end directed. This reversal is due to an altered balance of motion at the level of individual organelles; without Halo, travel distances and stall forces are reduced for plus-end and increased for minus-end motion. During development, halo mRNA is highly upregulated just as net plus-end transport is initiated (phase II), and its levels drop precipitously shortly before transport becomes minus-end directed (phase III). Exogenously provided Halo prevents the switch to net minus-end transport in phase III in wild-type embryos and induces net plus-end transport during phase II in halo mutant embryos. This mechanism of regulation is likely to be of general importance because the Drosophila genome encodes a family of related proteins with similar sequences, each transiently expressed in distinct domains. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that Halo acts as a directionality determinant for embryonic droplet transport and is the first member of a new class of transport regulators.