Quantitative analysis of the effect of Acanthamoeba profilin on actin filament nucleation and elongation

The current view of the mechanism of action of Acanthamoeba profilin is that it binds to actin monomers, forming a complex that cannot polymerize [Tobacman, L. S., & Korn, E. D. (1982) J. Biol. Chem. 257, 4166-4170; Tseng, P., & Pollard, T. D. (1982) J. Cell Biol. 94, 213-218; Tobacman, L. S., Brenner, S. L., & Korn, E. D. (1983) J. Biol. Chem. 258, 8806-8812]. This simple model fails to predict two new experimental observations made with Acanthamoeba actin in 50 mM KC1, 1 mM MgCl2, and 1 mM EGTA. First, Acanthamoeba profilin inhibits elongation of actin filaments far more at the pointed end than at the barbed end. According, to the simple model, the Kd for the profilin-actin complex is less than 5 microM on the basis of observations at the pointed end and greater than 50 microM for the barbed end. Second, profilin inhibits nucleation more strongly than elongation. According to the simple model, the Kd for the profilin-actin complex is 60-140 microM on the basis of two assays of elongation but 2-10 microM on the basis of polymerization kinetics that reflect nucleation. These new findings can be explained by a new and more complex model for the mechanism of action that is related to a proposal of Tilney and co-workers [Tilney, L. G., Bonder, E. M., Coluccio, L. M., & Mooseker, M. S. (1983) J. Cell Biol. 97, 113-124]. In this model, profilin can bind both to actin monomers with a Kd of about 5 microM and to the barbed end of actin filaments with a Kd of about 50-100 microM. An actin monomer bound to profilin cannot participate in nucleation or add to the pointed end of an actin filament. It can add to the barbed end of a filament. When profilin is bound to the barbed end of a filament, actin monomers cannot bind to that end, but the terminal actin protomer can dissociate at the usual rate. This model includes two different Kd's--one for profilin bound to actin monomers and one for profilin bound to an actin molecule at the barbed end of a filament. The affinity for the end of the filament is lower by a factor of 10 than the affinity for the monomer, presumably due to the difference in the conformation of the two forms of actin or to steric constraints at the end of the filament.     

Individual actin filaments in a microfluidic flow reveal the mechanism of ATP hydrolysis and give insight into the properties of profilin

The hydrolysis of ATP associated with actin and profilin-actin polymerization is pivotal in cell motility. It is at the origin of treadmilling of actin filaments and controls their dynamics and mechanical properties, as well as their interactions with regulatory proteins. The slow release of inorganic phosphate (Pi) that follows rapid cleavage of ATP gamma phosphate is linked to an increase in the rate of filament disassembly. The mechanism of Pi release in actin filaments has remained elusive for over 20 years. Here, we developed a microfluidic setup to accurately monitor the depolymerization of individual filaments and determine their local ADP-Pi content. We demonstrate that Pi release in the filament is not a vectorial but a random process with a half-time of 102 seconds, irrespective of whether the filament is assembled from actin or profilin-actin. Pi release from the depolymerizing barbed end is faster (half-time of 0.39 seconds) and further accelerated by profilin. Profilin accelerates the depolymerization of both ADP- and ADP-Pi-F-actin. Altogether, our data show that during elongation from profilin-actin, the dissociation of profilin from the growing barbed end is not coupled to Pi release or to ATP cleavage on the terminal subunit. These results emphasize the potential of microfluidics in elucidating actin regulation at the scale of individual filaments.     

Actin filament barbed end elongation with nonmuscle MgATP-actin and MgADP-actin in the presence of profilin

We have quantitated the in vitro interactions of profilin and the profilin-actin complex (PA) with the actin filament barbed end using profilin and nonmuscle beta,gamma-actin prepared from bovine spleen. Actin filament barbed end elongation was initiated from spectrin seeds in the presence of varying profilin concentrations and followed by light scattering. We find that profilin inhibits actin polymerization and that this effect is much more pronounced for beta,gamma-actin than for alpha-skeletal muscle actin. Profilin binds to beta,gamma-actin filament barbed ends with an equilibrium constant of 20 microM, decreases the filament elongation rate by blocking addition of actin monomers, and increases the dissociation rate of actin monomers from the filament end. PA containing bound MgADP supports elongation of the actin filament barbed end, indicating that ATP hydrolysis is not necessary for PA elongation of filaments. Initial analysis of the energetics for these reactions suggested an apparent greater negative free energy change for actin filament elongation from PA than elongation from monomeric actin. However, we calculate that the free energy changes for the two elongation pathways are equal if the profilin-induced weakening of nucleotide binding to actin is taken into consideration.     

Depolymerization of actin filaments by profilin. Effects of profilin on capping protein function

Profilin interacts with the barbed ends of actin filaments and is thought to facilitate in vivo actin polymerization. This conclusion is based primarily on in vitro kinetic experiments using relatively low concentrations of profilin (1-5 microm). However, the cell contains actin regulatory proteins with multiple profilin binding sites that potentially can attract millimolar concentrations of profilin to areas requiring rapid actin filament turnover. We have studied the effects of higher concentrations of profilin (10-100 microm) on actin monomer kinetics at the barbed end. Prior work indicated that profilin might augment actin filament depolymerization in this range of profilin concentration. At barbed-end saturating concentrations (final concentration, approximately 40 microm), profilin accelerated the off-rate of actin monomers by a factor of four to six. Comparable concentrations of latrunculin had no detectable effect on the depolymerization rate, indicating that profilin-mediated acceleration was independent of monomer sequestration. Furthermore, we have found that high concentrations of profilin can successfully compete with CapG for the barbed end and uncap actin filaments, and a simple equilibrium model of competitive binding could explain these effects. In contrast, neither gelsolin nor CapZ could be dissociated from actin filaments under the same conditions. These differences in the ability of profilin to dissociate capping proteins may explain earlier in vivo data showing selective depolymerization of actin filaments after microinjection of profilin. The finding that profilin can uncap actin filaments was not previously appreciated, and this newly discovered function may have important implications for filament elongation as well as depolymerization.     

Actin filament attachments for sustained motility in vitro are maintained by filament bundling

We reconstructed cellular motility in vitro from individual proteins to investigate how actin filaments are organized at the leading edge. Using total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy of actin filaments, we tested how profilin, Arp2/3, and capping protein (CP) function together to propel thin glass nanofibers or beads coated with N-WASP WCA domains. Thin nanofibers produced wide comet tails that showed more structural variation in actin filament organization than did bead substrates. During sustained motility, physiological concentrations of Mg(2+) generated actin filament bundles that processively attached to the nanofiber. Reduction of total Mg(2+) abolished particle motility and actin attachment to the particle surface without affecting actin polymerization, Arp2/3 nucleation, or filament capping. Analysis of similar motility of microspheres showed that loss of filament bundling did not affect actin shell formation or symmetry breaking but eliminated sustained attachments between the comet tail and the particle surface. Addition of Mg(2+), Lys-Lys(2+), or fascin restored both comet tail attachment and sustained particle motility in low Mg(2+) buffers. TIRF microscopic analysis of filaments captured by WCA-coated beads in the absence of Arp2/3, profilin, and CP showed that filament bundling by polycation or fascin addition increased barbed end capture by WCA domains. We propose a model in which CP directs barbed ends toward the leading edge and polycation-induced filament bundling sustains processive barbed end attachment to the leading edge.     

The fission yeast cytokinesis formin Cdc12p is a barbed end actin filament capping protein gated by profilin

Cytokinesis in most eukaryotes requires the assembly and contraction of a ring of actin filaments and myosin II. The fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe requires the formin Cdc12p and profilin (Cdc3p) early in the assembly of the contractile ring. The proline-rich formin homology (FH) 1 domain binds profilin, and the FH2 domain binds actin. Expression of a construct consisting of the Cdc12 FH1 and FH2 domains complements a conditional mutant of Cdc12 at the restrictive temperature, but arrests cells at the permissive temperature. Cells overexpressing Cdc12(FH1FH2)p stop growing with excessive actin cables but no contractile rings. Like capping protein, purified Cdc12(FH1FH2)p caps the barbed end of actin filaments, preventing subunit addition and dissociation, inhibits end to end annealing of filaments, and nucleates filaments that grow exclusively from their pointed ends. The maximum yield is one filament pointed end per six formin polypeptides. Profilins that bind both actin and poly-l-proline inhibit nucleation by Cdc12(FH1FH2)p, but polymerization of monomeric actin is faster, because the filaments grow from their barbed ends at the same rate as uncapped filaments. On the other hand, Cdc12(FH1FH2)p blocks annealing even in the presence of profilin. Thus, formins are profilin-gated barbed end capping proteins with the ability to initiate actin filaments from actin monomers bound to profilin. These properties explain why contractile ring assembly requires both formin and profilin and why viability depends on the ability of profilin to bind both actin and poly-l-proline.     

How ATP hydrolysis controls filament assembly from profilin-actin: implication for formin processivity

Formins catalyze rapid filament growth from profilin-actin, by remaining processively bound to the elongating barbed end. The sequence of elementary reactions that describe filament assembly from profilin-actin at either free or formin-bound barbed ends is not fully understood. Specifically, the identity of the transitory complexes between profilin and actin terminal subunits is not known; and whether ATP hydrolysis is directly or indirectly coupled to profilin-actin assembly is not clear. We have analyzed the effect of profilin on actin assembly at free and FH1-FH2-bound barbed ends in the presence of ADP and non-hydrolyzable CrATP. Profilin blocked filament growth by capping the barbed ends in ADP and CrATP/ADP-Pi states, with a higher affinity when formin is bound. We confirm that, in contrast, profilin accelerates depolymerization of ADP-F-actin, more efficiently when FH1-FH2 is bound to barbed ends. To reconcile these data with effective barbed end assembly from profilin-MgATP-actin, the nature of nucleotide bound to both terminal and subterminal subunits must be considered. All data are accounted for quantitatively by a model in which a barbed end whose two terminal subunits consist of profilin-ATP-actin cannot grow until ATP has been hydrolyzed and Pi released from the penultimate subunit, thus promoting the release of profilin and allowing further elongation. Formin does not change the activity of profilin but simply uses it for its processive walk at barbed ends. Finally, if profilin release from actin is prevented by a chemical cross-link, formin processivity is abolished.     

Polymerization and depolymerization of actin with nucleotide states at filament ends

Polymerization induces hydrolysis of ATP bound to actin, followed by γ-phosphate release, which helps advance the disassembly of actin filaments into ADP-G-actin. Mechanical understanding of this correlation between actin assembly and ATP hydrolysis has been an object of intensive studies in biochemistry and structural biology for many decades. Although actin polymerization and depolymerization occur only at either the barbed or pointed ends and the kinetic and equilibrium properties are substantially different from each other, characterizing their properties is difficult to do by bulk assays, as these assays report the average of all actin filaments in solution and are therefore not able to discern the properties of individual actin filaments. Biochemical studies of actin polymerization and hydrolysis were hampered by these inherent properties of actin filaments. Total internal reflection fluorescence (TIRF) microscopy overcame this problem by observing single actin filaments. With TIRF, we now know not only that each end has distinct properties, but also that the rate of γ-phosphate release is much faster from the terminals than from the interior of actin filaments. The rate of γ-phosphate release from actin filament ends is even more accelerated when latrunculin A is bound. These findings highlight the importance of resolving structural differences between actin molecules in the interior of the filament and those at either filament end. This review provides a history of observing actin filaments under light microscopy, an overview of dynamic properties of ATP hydrolysis at the end of actin filament, and structural views of γ-phosphate release.     

Actin binding proteins that change extent and rate of actin monomer-polymer distribution by different mechanisms

Actin binding proteins control actin assembly and disassembly by altering the critical concentration and by changing the kinetics of polymerization. All of these control mechanisms in some way or the other make use of the energy of hydrolysis of actin-bound ATP. Capping of barbed filament ends increases the critical concentration as long as ATP hydrolysis maintains a difference in the actin monomer binding constants of the two ends. A further increase in the critical concentration on adding a second cap, tropomodulin, to the other, pointed filament end also requires ATP hydrolysis as described by the model presented here. Changes in the critical concentration are amplified into much larger changes of the monomer pool by actin sequestering proteins, provided their actin binding equilibrium constants fall within a relatively narrow range around the values for the two critical concentrations of actin. Cofilin greatly speeds up treadmilling, which requires ATP hydroysis, by increasing the rate constant of depolymerization. Profilin increases the rate of elongation at the barbed filament end, coupled to a lowering of the critical concentration, only if ATP hydrolysis makes profilin binding to the barbed end independent of its binding constant for actin monomers.     

Model of formin-associated actin filament elongation

Formin FH2 domains associate processively with actin-filament barbed ends and modify their rate of growth. We modeled how the elongation rate depends on the concentrations of profilin and actin for four different formins. We assume that (1) FH2 domains are in rapid equilibrium among conformations that block or allow actin addition and that (2) profilin-actin is transferred rapidly to the barbed end from multiple profilin binding sites in formin FH1 domains. In agreement with previous experiments discussed below, we find an optimal profilin concentration with a maximal elongation rate that can exceed the rate of actin alone. High profilin concentrations suppress elongation, largely because free profilin displaces profilin-actin from FH1. The model supports a common polymerization mechanism for the four formin FH1FH2 constructs with differences attributed to varying parameter values. The mechanism does not require ATP hydrolysis by polymerized actin, but we cannot exclude that formins accelerate hydrolysis.     

Single molecule kinetic analysis of actin filament capping. Polyphosphoinositides do not dissociate capping proteins

We investigated how heterodimeric capping proteins bind to and dissociate from the barbed ends of actin filaments by observing single muscle actin filaments by total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy. The barbed end rate constants for mouse capping protein (CP) association of 2.6 x 10(6) M(-1) s(-1) and dissociation of 0.0003 s(-1) agree with published values measured in bulk assays. The polyphosphoinositides (PPIs), phosphatidylinositol 3,4-bisphosphate (PI(3,4)P(2)), PI(4,5)P(2), and PI(3,4,5)P(3), prevent CP from binding to barbed ends, but three different assays showed that none of these lipids dissociate CP from filaments at concentrations that block CP binding to barbed ends. The affinity of fission yeast CP for barbed ends is a thousandfold less than mouse CP, because of a slower association rate constant (1.1 x 10(5) M(-1) s(-1)) and a faster dissociation rate constant (0.004 s(-1)). PPIs do not inhibit binding of fission yeast CP to filament ends. Comparison of homology models revealed that fission yeast CP lacks a large patch of basic residues along the actin-binding surface on mouse CP. PPIs binding to this site might interfere sterically with capping, but this site would be inaccessible when CP is bound to the end of a filament.     

Electron microscopic determination of the actin filament end at which cytochalasin B blocks monomer addition using the acrosomal actin bundle from horseshoe crab sperm

G-actin freed from exogenous ATP was added to the pieces of isolated acrosomal actin bundles from horseshoe crab sperm to form filaments as reported earlier (Tilney, L.G., Bonder, E.M., & DeRosier, D.J. (1981) J. Cell Biol. 90, 485-494). The growth of a filament was far more rapid at one end (the preferred end) than the other end. These ends were shown to correspond to the barbed and pointed ends, respectively, by decoration of the filaments with myosin subfragment 1. Cytochalasin B inhibited the monomer addition at the preferred end. This technique is useful in determining the ends to which actin filament end-binding proteins from nonmuscle cells bind, which are considered to regulate the actin polymerization in the cells.     

Profilin-mediated competition between capping protein and formin Cdc12p during cytokinesis in fission yeast

Fission yeast capping protein SpCP is a heterodimer of two subunits (Acp1p and Acp2p) that binds actin filament barbed ends. Neither acp1 nor acp2 is required for viability, but cells lacking either or both subunits have cytokinesis defects under stressful conditions, including elevated temperature, osmotic stress, or in combination with numerous mild mutations in genes important for cytokinesis. Defects arise as the contractile ring constricts and disassembles, resulting in delays in cell separation. Genetic and biochemical interactions show that the cytokinesis formin Cdc12p competes with capping protein for actin filament barbed ends in cells. Deletion of acp2 partly suppresses cytokinesis defects in temperature-sensitive cdc12-112 cells and mild overexpression of capping protein kills cdc12-112 cells. Biochemically, profilin has opposite effects on filaments capped with Cdc12p and capping protein. Profilin depolymerizes actin filaments capped by capping protein but allows filaments capped by Cdc12p to grow at their barbed ends. Once associated with a barbed end, either Cdc12p or capping protein prevents the other from influencing polymerization at that end. Given that capping protein arrives at the division site 20 min later than Cdc12p, capping protein may slowly replace Cdc12p on filament barbed ends in preparation for filament disassembly during ring constriction.     

Profilin-actin complexes directly elongate actin filaments at the barbed end.

We demonstrate that the profilin-G-actin complex can elongate actin filaments directly at the barbed end but cannot bind to the pointed end. During elongation, the profilin-actin complex binds to the barbed filament end, whereupon profilin is released, leaving the actin molecule behind. This was first proposed by Tilney [Tilney, L. G., et al. (1983) J. Cell Biol. 97, 112-124] and demonstrated by Pollard and Cooper [(1984) Biochemistry 23, 6631-6641] by electron microscopy. We show that a model without any outside energy supply, in contrast to the mechanism proposed by Pollard and Cooper, can be fitted to our and their [Kaiser et al. (1986) J. Cell Biol. 102, 221-226] findings. Input of outside energy is necessary only if profilin-mediated elongation continues after free G-actin has been lowered to or below the critical concentration observed at the barbed end in the absence of profilin.     

Ena/VASP proteins capture actin filament barbed ends

Ena/VASP (vasodialator-stimulated protein) proteins regulate many actin-dependent events, including formation of protrusive structures, fibroblast migration, neurite extension, cell-cell adhesion, and Listeria pathogenesis. In vitro, Ena/VASP activities on actin are complex and varied. They promote actin assembly, protect filaments from cappers, bundle filaments, and inhibit filament branching. To determine the mechanisms by which Ena/VASP proteins regulate actin dynamics at barbed ends, we monitored individual actin filaments growing in the presence of VASP and profilin using total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy. Filament growth was unchanged by VASP, but filaments grew faster in profilin-actin and VASP than with profilin-actin alone. Actin filaments were captured directly by VASP-coated surfaces via interactions with growing barbed ends. End-attached filaments transiently paused but resumed growth after becoming bound to the surface via a filament side attachment. Thus, Ena/VASP proteins promote actin assembly by interacting directly with actin filament barbed ends, recruiting profilin-actin, and blocking capping.     

The cytokinesis formins from the nematode worm and fission yeast differentially mediate actin filament assembly

Formins drive actin filament assembly for diverse cellular processes including motility, establishing polarity, and cell division. To investigate the mechanism of contractile ring assembly in animal cells, we directly compared the actin assembly properties of formins required for cytokinesis in the nematode worm early embryo (CYK-1) and fission yeast (Cdc12p). Like Cdc12p and most other formins, CYK-1 nucleates actin filament assembly and remains processively associated with the elongating barbed end while facilitating the addition of profilin-actin above the theoretical diffusion-limited rate. However, specific properties differ significantly between Cdc12p and CYK-1. Cdc12p efficiently nucleates filaments that in the presence of profilin elongate at approximately the same rate as control filaments without formin (approximately 10.0 subunits/s). CYK-1 is an inefficient nucleator but allows filaments to elongate profilin-actin 6-fold faster than Cdc12p (approximately 60 subunits/s). Both Cdc12p and CYK-1 bind to pre-assembled actin filaments with low nanomolar affinity, but CYK-1 dissociates 2 orders of magnitude more quickly. However, CYK-1 rapidly re-associates with free barbed ends. Cdc12p allows barbed ends to elongate in the presence of excess capping protein, whereas capping protein inhibits CYK-1-mediated actin assembly. Therefore, these evolutionarily diverse formins can drive contractile ring assembly by a generally similar mechanism, but cells with unique dimensions and physical parameters might require proteins with carefully tuned actin assembly properties.     

A direct-transfer polymerization model explains how the multiple profilin-binding sites in the actoclampin motor promote rapid actin-based motility

The high actin-based motility rates observed in nonmuscle cells require the per-second addition of 400-500 monomers to the barbed ends of growing actin filaments. The chief polymerization-competent species is profilin.actin.ATP (present at 5-40 microM intracellular concentrations), whereas G-actin.ATP is much less abundant ( approximately 0.1-1 microM). While earlier studies unambiguously demonstrated that profilin.actin is highly concentrated within the polymerization zone, profilin-actin localization on the motile surface cannot increase the local solution-phase concentration of polymerizable actin. To explain these high rates of actin polymerization, we present and analyze a novel polymerization model in which monomers are directly transferred to growing filament ends in the actoclampin motor. This direct-transfer polymerization mechanism endows the polymerization zone with properties unavailable to bulk-phase actin monomers, and our model also indicates why profilin is the ideal mobile carrier for actin monomers.     

Arp2/3 Complex from Acanthamoeba Binds Profilin and Cross-links Actin Filaments

The Arp2/3 complex was first purified from Acanthamoeba castellanii by profilin affinity chromatography. The mechanism of interaction with profilin was unknown but was hypothesized to be mediated by either Arp2 or Arp3. Here we show that the Arp2 subunit of the complex can be chemically cross-linked to the actin-binding site of profilin. By analytical ultracentrifugation, rhodamine-labeled profilin binds Arp2/3 complex with a K_d of 7 μM, an affinity intermediate between the low affinity of profilin for barbed ends of actin filaments and its high affinity for actin monomers. These data suggest the barbed end of Arp2 is exposed, but Arp2 and Arp3 are not packed together in the complex exactly like two actin monomers in a filament. Arp2/3 complex also cross-links actin filaments into small bundles and isotropic networks, which are mechanically stiffer than solutions of actin filaments alone. Arp2/3 complex is concentrated at the leading edge of motile Acanthamoeba, and its localization is distinct from that of α-actinin, another filament cross-linking protein. Based on localization and actin filament nucleation and cross-linking activities, we propose a role for Arp2/3 in determining the structure of the actin filament network at the leading edge of motile cells.     

VASP is a processive actin polymerase that requires monomeric actin for barbed end association

Ena/VASP proteins regulate the actin cytoskeleton during cell migration and morphogenesis and promote assembly of both filopodial and lamellipodial actin networks. To understand the molecular mechanisms underlying their cellular functions we used total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy to visualize VASP tetramers interacting with static and growing actin filaments in vitro. We observed multiple filament binding modes: (1) static side binding, (2) side binding with one-dimensional diffusion, and (3) processive barbed end tracking. Actin monomers antagonize side binding but promote high affinity (K(d) = 9 nM) barbed end attachment. In low ionic strength buffers, VASP tetramers are weakly processive (K(off) = 0.69 s(-1)) polymerases that deliver multiple actin monomers per barbed end-binding event and effectively antagonize filament capping. In higher ionic strength buffers, VASP requires profilin for effective polymerase and anti-capping activity. Based on our observations, we propose a mechanism that accounts for all three binding modes and provides a model for how VASP promotes actin filament assembly.     

Interaction of cytochalasin D with actin filaments in the presence of ADP and ATP

Cytochalasin D strongly inhibits the faster components in the reactions of actin filament depolymerization and elongation in the presence of 10 mM Tris-Cl-, pH 7.8, 0.2 mM dithiothreitol, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mM CaCl2, and 0.2 mM ATP or ADP. Assuming an exclusive and total capping of the barbed end by the drug, the kinetic parameters derived at saturation by cytochalasin D refer to the pointed end and are 10-15-fold lower than at the barbed end. In ATP, the critical concentration increases with cytochalasin D up to 12-fold its value when both ends are free; as a result of the lowering of the free energy of nucleation by cytochalasin D, short oligomers of F-actin exist just above and below the critical concentration. Cytochalasin D interacts strongly with the barbed ends independently of the ADP-G-actin concentration (K = 0.5 nM-1). In contrast, the affinity of cytochalasin D decreases cooperatively with increasing ATP-G-actin concentration. These data are equally well accounted for by two different models: either cytochalasin D binds very poorly to ATP-capped filament ends whose proportion increases with actin concentration, or cytochalasin D binds equally well to ATP-ends and ADP-ends and also binds to actin dimers in ATP but not in ADP. A linear actin concentration dependence of the rate of growth was found at the pointed end, consistent with the virtual absence of an ATP cap at that end.