Mechanism of action of cytochalasin B on actin

Substoichiometric cytochalasin B (CB) inhibits both the rate of actin polymerization and the interaction of actin filaments in solution. The polymerization rate is reduced by inhibition of actin monomer addition to the "barbed" end of the filaments where monomers normally add more rapidly. 2 microM CB reduces the polymerization rate by up to 90%, but has little effect on the rate of monomer addition at the slow ("pointed") end of the filaments and no effect on the rate of filament annealing. Under most ionic conditions tested, 2 microM CB reduces the steady state high shear viscosity by 10-20% and increases the steady state monomer concentration by a factor of 2.5 or less. In addition to the effects on the polymerization process, 2 microM CB strongly reduces the low shear viscosity of actin filaments alone and actin filaments cross-linked by a variety of macromolecules. This may be due to inhibition of actin filament-filament interactions which normally contribute to network formation. Since the inhibition of monomer addition and of actin filament network formation have approximately the same CB concentration dependence, a common CB binding site, probably the barbed end of the filament, may be responsible for both effects.     

Talin binds to actin and promotes filament nucleation

Platelet talin binds to actin in vitro and hence is an actin binding protein. By four different non-interfering assay conditions (fluorescence, fluorescence recovery after photobleaching, (FRAP), dynamic light scattering and DNase-I inhibition) we show that talin promotes filament nucleation, raises the filament number concentration and increases the net rate of actin polymerization but has no inhibitory effect on filament elongation. Binding of talin to actin occurs at a maximal molar ratio of 1:3 as determined by fluorescencetitration under G-buffer conditions. The overall binding constant was approximately 0.25 microM.     

The dynamic instability of actin filament barbed ends

The turnover of actin filament networks in cells has long been considered to reflect the treadmilling behavior of pure actin filaments in vitro, where only the pointed ends depolymerize. Newly discovered molecular mechanisms challenge this notion, as they provide evidence of situations in which growing and depolymerizing barbed ends coexist.

IntroductionIn cells, actin assembles into filament networks with diverse architectures and lifetimes, playing key roles in functions such as endocytosis, cell motility, and cell division. These filament networks are maintained and renewed by actin turnover, which implies that assembly and disassembly must take place simultaneously and in a controlled manner within the networks. Each actin filament end has the ability to either grow or shrink, depending on the concentration of actin and regulatory proteins, but pure actin treadmills at steady state: ATP-actin is added at the barbed end at a rate matching the departure of ADP-actin from the pointed end, and ATP hydrolysis takes place within the filament. This hallmark feature of actin dynamics has been known for decades (Wegner, 1976) and has been generalized to the cell context, in which it is commonly assumed that actin polymerization takes place at the barbed end, while depolymerization takes place only at the pointed end (whether it be the ends of filaments within the network or the ends of fragments that have detached from it). This notion is reinforced by the fact that the cytoplasm contains high concentrations of monomeric actin (G-actin) in complex with profilin (Funk et al., 2019), which is unable to bind to pointed ends and should drive the elongation of all noncapped barbed ends.Recently, however, in vitro studies have identified two seemingly independent mechanisms in which, in the presence of profilin-actin, filament barbed ends alternate between phases of growth and depolymerization. This behavior, referred to as “dynamic instability,” is widely observed for microtubules but was unexpected for actin filaments. It suggests that cells could use barbed ends for both elongation and disassembly.Driving the depolymerization of barbed ends with cofilin side-decorationProteins of the actin depolymerizing factor (ADF)/cofilin family (henceforth cofilin) are composed of a single ADF-homology (ADF-H) domain and are mostly known for their actin filament–severing activity (De La Cruz, 2009). Cofilin binds cooperatively to the sides of actin filaments, forming clusters where the conformation of the filament is locally altered, leading to its severing at cofilin cluster boundaries. In addition, the barbed ends of cofilin-decorated filaments steadily depolymerize, despite the presence of G-actin and profilin-actin (Fig. 1 A) and even capping protein (CP) in solution (Wioland et al., 2017, 2019). This unexpected result likely originates from the conformational change of actin subunits at the barbed end, induced by cofilin side-binding. As a consequence, filaments exposed to G-actin (with or without profilin), CP, and cofilin alternate between phases of barbed-end elongation and barbed-end depolymerization. In these conditions, actin filament barbed ends thus exhibit a form of dynamic instability.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Two mechanisms that give rise to barbed-end depolymerization in elongation-promoting conditions. (A) When a cofilin side-decorated region reaches the barbed end, adding a new actin or profilin-actin becomes very difficult, and the barbed end depolymerizes. Not represented: Capping by CP can lead to depolymerization, as it allows the cofilin cluster to reach the barbed end, which then has a much weaker affinity for CP and steadily depolymerizes. Also, severing events occur at cofilin cluster boundaries, creating new barbed ends, either bare or cofilin-decorated. (B) Twinfilin binds to the barbed end, preventing its elongation and causing its depolymerization. Whether twinfilin remains processively attached to the depolymerizing barbed end or departs with the actin subunits is still unknown. Twinfilin has no impact on the elongation of mDia1-bearing barbed ends.Driving the depolymerization of barbed ends with twinfilin end-targetingTwinfilin has two ADF-H domains, but unlike cofilin, it binds poorly to the sides of actin filaments. Rather, twinfilin appears to mainly sequester ADP-actin monomers and target the barbed end to modulate its elongation and capping. Recent in vitro studies have shown that the interaction of twinfilin with actin filament barbed ends could drive their depolymerization, even in the presence of G-actin and profilin-actin (Johnston et al., 2015; Hakala et al., 2021; Shekhar et al., 2021). Very interestingly, the processive barbed-end elongator formin mDia1 is able to protect barbed ends from twinfilin, allowing them to sustain elongation (Shekhar et al., 2021). This leads to a situation in which, as filaments are exposed to profilin-actin and twinfilin, mDia1-bearing barbed ends elongate while bare barbed ends depolymerize (Fig. 1 B). It is safe to assume that, if filaments were continuously exposed to this protein mix including formin in solution, they would alternate between phases of growth and shrinkage over time, as formins come on and fall off the barbed end. This mix of proteins would therefore constitute another situation causing actin filament dynamic instability.From actin treadmilling to dynamic instability, in cells?This newly identified versatile behavior of actin filaments is reminiscent of microtubules. While dynamic instability is the hallmark behavior of microtubules, they can also be made to treadmill steadily by adding 4 microtubule-associated proteins (Arpağ et al., 2020). In cells, both microtubule dynamic instability and treadmilling have been clearly observed (Wittmann et al., 2003). In contrast, the disassembly of single actin filaments, either embedded in a network or severed from it, has not yet been directly observed in cells. Despite insights from techniques such as single-molecule speckle microscopy, it is still unclear from which end actin filaments depolymerize, even in networks that appear to globally treadmill, such as the lamellipodium. Pointed end depolymerization alone cannot account for what is observed in cells (Miyoshi et al., 2006) and alternative mechanisms have been proposed, including brutal filament-to-monomer transitions occurring in bursts, driven by cofilin, coronin, and Aip1 (Brieher, 2013; Tang et al., 2020).In cells, the high amounts of available G-actin (tens of micromolars; Funk et al., 2019) should limit barbed-end depolymerization. Based on the reported on-rate for ATP–G-actin at the barbed ends of cofilin-decorated filaments (Wioland et al., 2017, 2019), we can estimate that these barbed ends, under such conditions, would depolymerize for tens of seconds before being “rescued,” which is enough to remove tens of subunits from each filament. In contrast, twinfilin concentrations similar to those of G-actin appear necessary to drive barbed-end depolymerization (Hakala et al., 2021; Shekhar et al., 2021). As proteomics studies in HeLa cells report that twinfilin is 50-fold less abundant than actin, this may be difficult to achieve in cells (Bekker-Jensen et al., 2017). However, future studies may uncover proteins, or posttranslational modifications of actin, that enhance the ability of twinfilin to drive barbed-end depolymerization in the presence of high concentrations of profilin-actin.Molecular insights and possible synergiesWhile cofilin and twinfilin both interact with actin via ADF-H domains, they appear to drive barbed-end depolymerization through different mechanisms: twinfilin by directly targeting the barbed end, and cofilin by decorating the filament sides, thereby changing the conformation of the filament and putting its barbed end in a depolymerization-prone state.The two mechanisms, nonetheless, share clear similarities. For instance, cofilin side-binding and twinfilin end-targeting both slow down ADP-actin barbed-end depolymerization, compared with bare ADP-actin filaments (Wioland et al., 2017; Hakala et al., 2021; Shekhar et al., 2021). Strikingly, a crystal structure of the actin/twinfilin/CP complex indicates that the actin conformational change induced by twinfilin binding at the barbed end is similar to that induced by cofilin decorating the sides (Mwangangi et al., 2021). It is thus possible that the dynamic instability of actin filament barbed ends reflects the same conformation changes, triggered either by cofilin side-decoration or twinfilin end-targeting.In addition to decorating the filament sides, cofilin targets ADP-actin barbed ends. Unlike twinfilin, the direct interaction of cofilin with the barbed end cannot cause its depolymerization in the presence of ATP-actin monomers. Indeed, cofilin end-targeting accelerates the depolymerization of ADP-actin barbed ends in the absence of G-actin, but cofilin does not appear to interact with growing ATP-actin barbed ends (Wioland et al., 2017). This is in stark contrast with twinfilin end-targeting, which slows down ADP-actin depolymerization and accelerates ADP–Pi-actin depolymerization (Shekhar et al., 2021). These different behaviors regarding the nucleotide state of actin are intriguing and should be investigated further.Cofilin thus needs to decorate the filament sides in order to have an impact on barbed-end dynamics in elongation-promoting conditions. However, it is unknown whether cofilin side-decoration extends all the way to the terminal subunits and occupies sites that twinfilin would target. Thus, it is unclear whether cofilin and twinfilin would compete or synergize to drive barbed-end depolymerization.Synergies with other proteins are also worth further investigation, CP being an interesting candidate. Cofilin side-decoration drastically decreases the barbed-end affinity for CP, and capped filaments are thereby an efficient intermediate to turn growing barbed ends into depolymerizing barbed ends (Wioland et al., 2017). Twinfilin interacts with CP and the barbed end to enhance uncapping (Hakala et al., 2021; Mwangangi et al., 2021). Since CP can bind mDia1-bearing barbed ends and displace mDia1 (Bombardier et al., 2015; Shekhar et al., 2015), perhaps CP can also contribute to turn growing, mDia1-bearing barbed ends into depolymerizing barbed ends, by removing mDia1 from barbed ends and subsequently getting displaced from the barbed end by twinfilin.Finally, it is worth noting that profilin, which does not contain an ADF-H domain, also interacts with the barbed face of G-actin and with the barbed end of the filament. When profilin is in sufficient excess, it is able to promote barbed-end depolymerization in the presence of ATP–G-actin (Pernier et al., 2016). Unlike twinfilin, its depolymerization-promoting activity is not prevented by formin mDia1, and it thus does not lead to dynamic instability (bare and mDia1-bearing barbed ends all either grow or depolymerize). The coexistence of growing, mDia1-bearing barbed ends and depolymerizing, twinfilin-targeted barbed ends (Fig. 1 B) was observed in the presence of profilin (Shekhar et al., 2021), but profilin actually may not be required. Future studies should determine the exact role of profilin in this mechanism.ConclusionThe extent to which barbed-end dynamic instability contributes to actin turnover in cells is not known, but possible molecular mechanisms have now been identified. They should change the way we envision actin network dynamics, as we must now consider the possibility that cells also exploit the barbed end for disassembly. More work is needed to further document these mechanisms, but the idea of a “generalized treadmilling” has now been contradicted at its source: in vitro experiments.     

Control of actin assembly and disassembly at filament ends

The most important discovery in the field is that the Arp2/3 complex nucleates assembly of actin filaments with free barbed ends. Arp2/3 also binds the sides of actin filaments to create a branched network. Arp2/3's nucleation activity is stimulated by WASP family proteins, some of which mediate signaling from small G-proteins. Listeria movement caused by actin polymerization can be reconstituted in vitro using purified proteins: Arp2/3 complex, capping protein, actin depolymerizing factor/cofilin, and actin. actin depolymerizing factor/cofilin increases the rate at which actin subunits leave pointed ends, and capping protein caps barbed ends.     

Mechanism of actin filament nucleation

We used computational methods to analyze the mechanism of actin filament nucleation. We assumed a pathway where monomers form dimers, trimers, and tetramers that then elongate to form filaments but also considered other pathways. We aimed to identify the rate constants for these reactions that best fit experimental measurements of polymerization time courses. The analysis showed that the formation of dimers and trimers is unfavorable because the association reactions are orders of magnitude slower than estimated in previous work rather than because of rapid dissociation of dimers and trimers. The 95% confidence intervals calculated for the four rate constants spanned no more than one order of magnitude. Slow nucleation reactions are consistent with published high-resolution structures of actin filaments and molecular dynamics simulations of filament ends. One explanation for slow dimer formation, which we support with computational analysis, is that actin monomers are in a conformational equilibrium with a dominant conformation that cannot participate in the nucleation steps.     

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 C terminus of formin FMNL3 accelerates actin polymerization and contains a WH2 domain-like sequence that binds both monomers and filament barbed ends

Formin proteins are actin assembly factors that accelerate filament nucleation then remain on the elongating barbed end and modulate filament elongation. The formin homology 2 (FH2) domain is central to these activities, but recent work has suggested that additional sequences enhance FH2 domain function. Here we show that the C-terminal 76 amino acids of the formin FMNL3 have a dramatic effect on the ability of the FH2 domain to accelerate actin assembly. This C-terminal region contains a WASp homology 2 (WH2)-like sequence that binds actin monomers in a manner that is competitive with other WH2 domains and with profilin. In addition, the C terminus binds filament barbed ends. As a monomer, the FMNL3 C terminus inhibits actin polymerization and slows barbed end elongation with moderate affinity. As a dimer, the C terminus accelerates actin polymerization from monomers and displays high affinity inhibition of barbed end elongation. These properties are not common to all formin C termini, as those of mDia1 and INF2 do not behave similarly. Interestingly, mutation of two aliphatic residues, which blocks high affinity actin binding by the WH2-like sequence, has no effect on the ability of the C terminus to enhance FH2-mediated polymerization. However, mutation of three successive basic residues at the C terminus of the WH2-like sequence compromises polymerization enhancement. These results illustrate that the C termini of formins are highly diverse in their interactions with actin.     

Study of actin filament ends in the human red cell membrane

There is conflicting evidence concerning the state of the actin protofilaments in the membrane cytoskeleton of the human red cell. To resolve this uncertainty, we have analysed their characteristics with respect to nucleation of G-actin polymerization. The effects of cytochalasin E on the rate of elongation of the protofilaments have been measured in a medium containing 0.1 M-sodium chloride and 5 mM-magnesium chloride, using pyrene-labelled G-actin. At an initial monomer concentration far above the critical concentration for the negative ("pointed") end of F-actin, high concentrations of cytochalasin reduce the elongation rate of free F-actin by about 70%. The residual rate is presumed to correspond to the elongation rate at the negative ends. By contrast, the elongation rate on red cell ghosts or cytoskeletons falls to zero, allowing for the background of self-nucleated polymerization of the G-actin. The critical concentration of the actin in the red cell membrane has been measured after elongation of the filaments by added pyrenyl-G-actin in the same solvent. It was found to be 0.07 microM, compared with 0.11 microM under the same conditions for actin alone. This is consistent with prediction for the case of blocked negative ends on the red cell actin. The rate of elongation of actin filaments, free and in the red cell membrane cytoskeleton, has been measured as a function of the concentration of an added actin-capping protein, plasma gelsolin, with a high affinity for the positive ends. The elongation rate falls linearly with increasing gelsolin concentration until it approaches a minimum when the gelsolin has bound to all positive filament ends. The elongation rate at this point corresponds to the activity of the negative ends, and its ratio to the unperturbed polymerization rate (in the absence of capping proteins) is indistinguishable from zero in the case of ghosts, but about 1 : 4 in the case of F-actin. When ATP is replaced in the system by ADP, so that the critical concentrations at the two filament ends are equalized, the difference is equally well-marked: for F-actin, the rate at the equivalence point is about 40% of that in the absence of capping protein, whereas for ghosts the nucleated polymerization rate at the equivalence point is again zero, indicating that under these conditions the negative ends contribute little or not at all to the rate of elongation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

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.     

Tropomodulin binds two tropomyosins: a novel model for actin filament capping

Tropomodulin, a tropomyosin-binding protein, caps the slow-growing (pointed) end of the actin filament regulating its dynamics. Tropomodulin, therefore, is important for determining cell morphology, cell movement, and muscle contraction. For the first time we show that one tropomodulin molecule simultaneously binds two tropomyosin molecules in a cooperative manner. On the basis of the tropomodulin solution structure and predicted secondary structure, we introduced a series of point mutations in regions important for tropomyosin binding and actin capping. Capping activity of these mutants was assayed by measuring actin polymerization using pyrene fluorescence. Using direct methods (circular dichroism and native gel electrophoresis) for detecting tropomodulin/tropomyosin binding, we localized the second tropomyosin-binding site to residues 109-144. Despite previous reports that the second binding site is for erythrocyte tropomyosin only, we found that both short nonmuscle and long muscle alpha-tropomyosins bind there as well, though with different affinities. We propose a model for actin capping where one tropomodulin molecule can bind to two tropomyosin molecules at the pointed end.     

Direct proof that the primary site of action of cytochalasin on cell motility processes is actin

We have previously described the isolation of a mutant KB cell (Cyt 1 mutant) resistant to the cytotoxic effect of cytochalasin B (CB). The Cyt 1 mutant carries an altered form of beta-actin (beta'-actin) and lacks normal beta-actin (Toyama, S., and S. Toyama. 1984. Cell. 37:609-614). Increased resistance of the Cyt 1 mutant to CB in vivo is reflected in altered properties of beta'-actin in vitro (Toyama, S., and S. Toyama. 1988. J. Cell Biol. 107:1499-1504). Here, we show that the mutation in beta-actin is solely responsible for the cytochalasin-resistant phenotype of the Cyt mutant. We have isolated a cDNA clone encoding beta'-actin from Cyt 1 cells. Sequence analysis reveals two mutations in the coding region that substitute two amino acid residues (Val139----Met and Ala295----Asp). Expression of the beta'-actin cDNA confers cytochalasin resistance upon transformed cytochalasin-sensitive KB cells. Levels of resistance to CB in the transformed cell clones correlate well with amounts of beta'-actin polypeptide. Both of the two mutations in beta'-actin are necessary for the high level expression of cytochalasin resistance. Overall, we conclude that the primary site of action of cytochalasin on cell motility processes in vivo is actin.     

Mechanism of actin filament bundling by fascin

Fascin is the main actin filament bundling protein in filopodia. Because of the important role filopodia play in cell migration, fascin is emerging as a major target for cancer drug discovery. However, an understanding of the mechanism of bundle formation by fascin is critically lacking. Fascin consists of four β-trefoil domains. Here, we show that fascin contains two major actin-binding sites, coinciding with regions of high sequence conservation in β-trefoil domains 1 and 3. The site in β-trefoil-1 is located near the binding site of the fascin inhibitor macroketone and comprises residue Ser-39, whose phosphorylation by protein kinase C down-regulates actin bundling and formation of filopodia. The site in β-trefoil-3 is related by pseudo-2-fold symmetry to that in β-trefoil-1. The two sites are ～5 nm apart, resulting in a distance between actin filaments in the bundle of ～8.1 nm. Residue mutations in both sites disrupt bundle formation in vitro as assessed by co-sedimentation with actin and electron microscopy and severely impair formation of filopodia in cells as determined by rescue experiments in fascin-depleted cells. Mutations of other areas of the fascin surface also affect actin bundling and formation of filopodia albeit to a lesser extent, suggesting that, in addition to the two major actin-binding sites, fascin makes secondary contacts with other filaments in the bundle. In a high resolution crystal structure of fascin, molecules of glycerol and polyethylene glycol are bound in pockets located within the two major actin-binding sites. These molecules could guide the rational design of new anticancer fascin inhibitors.     

How capping protein binds the barbed end of the actin filament

Cytoskeletal filaments are often capped at one end, regulating assembly and cellular location. The actin filament is a right-handed, two-strand long-pitch helix. The ends of the two protofilaments are staggered in relation to each other, suggesting that capping could result from one protein binding simultaneously to the ends of both protofilaments. Capping protein (CP), a ubiquitous alpha/beta heterodimer in eukaryotes, tightly caps (K(d) approximately 0.1-1 nM) the barbed end of the actin filament (the end favored for polymerization), preventing actin subunit addition and loss. CP is critical for actin assembly and actin-based motility in vivo and is an essential component of the dendritic nucleation model for actin polymerization at the leading edge of cells. However, the mechanism by which CP caps actin filaments is not well understood. The X-ray crystal structure of CP has inspired a model where the C termini ( approximately 30 amino acids) of the alpha and beta subunits of CP are mobile extensions ("tentacles"), and these regions are responsible for high-affinity binding to, and functional capping of, the barbed end. We tested the tentacle model in vitro with recombinant mutant CPs. Loss of both tentacles causes a complete loss of capping activity. The alpha tentacle contributes more to capping affinity and kinetics; its removal reduces capping affinity by 5000-fold and the on-rate of capping by 20-fold. In contrast, removal of the beta tentacle reduced the affinity by only 300-fold and did not affect the on-rate. These two regions are not close to each other in the three-dimensional structure, suggesting CP uses two independent actin binding tentacles to cap the barbed end. CP with either tentacle alone can cap, as can the isolated beta tentacle alone, suggesting that the individual tentacles interact with more than one actin subunit at a subunit interface at the barbed end.     

A Plasmodium actin-depolymerizing factor that binds exclusively to actin monomers

ADF/cofilins (AC) are essential F- and G-actin binding proteins that modulate microfilament turnover. The genome of Plasmodium falciparum, the parasite causing malaria, contains two members of the AC family. Interestingly, P. falciparum ADF1 lacks the F-actin binding residues of the AC consensus. Reverse genetics in the rodent malaria model system suggest that ADF1 performs vital functions during the pathogenic red blood cell stages, whereas ADF2 is not present in these stages. We show that recombinant PfADF1 interacts with monomeric actin but does not bind to actin polymers. Although other AC proteins inhibit nucleotide exchange on monomeric actin, the Plasmodium ortholog stimulates nucleotide exchange. Thus, PfADF1 differs in its biochemical properties from previously known AC proteins and seems to promote turnover exclusively by interaction with actin monomers. These findings provide important insights into the low cytosolic abundance and unique turnover characteristics of actin polymers in parasites of the phylum Apicomplexa.     

The availability of filament ends modulates actin stochastic dynamics in live plant cells

A network of individual filaments that undergoes incessant remodeling through a process known as stochastic dynamics comprises the cortical actin cytoskeleton in plant epidermal cells. From images at high spatial and temporal resolution, it has been inferred that the regulation of filament barbed ends plays a central role in choreographing actin organization and turnover. How this occurs at a molecular level, whether different populations of ends exist in the array, and how individual filament behavior correlates with the overall architecture of the array are unknown. Here we develop an experimental system to modulate the levels of heterodimeric capping protein (CP) and examine the consequences for actin dynamics, architecture, and cell expansion. Significantly, we find that all phenotypes are the opposite for CP-overexpression (OX) cells compared with a previously characterized cp-knockdown line. Specifically, CP OX lines have fewer filament–filament annealing events, as well as reduced filament lengths and lifetimes. Further, cp-knockdown and OX lines demonstrate the existence of a subpopulation of filament ends sensitive to CP concentration. Finally, CP levels correlate with the biological process of axial cell expansion; for example, epidermal cells from hypocotyls with reduced CP are longer than wild-type cells, whereas CP OX lines have shorter cells. On the basis of these and other genetic studies in this model system, we hypothesize that filament length and lifetime positively correlate with the extent of axial cell expansion in dark-grown hypocotyls.     

Coordinated regulation of platelet actin filament barbed ends by gelsolin and capping protein

Exposure of cryptic actin filament fast growing ends (barbed ends) initiates actin polymerization in stimulated human and mouse platelets. Gelsolin amplifies platelet actin assembly by severing F-actin and increasing the number of barbed ends. Actin filaments in stimulated platelets from transgenic gelsolin-null mice elongate their actin without severing. F-actin barbed end capping activity persists in human platelet extracts, depleted of gelsolin, and the heterodimeric capping protein (CP) accounts for this residual activity. 35% of the approximately 5 microM CP is associated with the insoluble actin cytoskeleton of the resting platelet. Since resting platelets have an F- actin barbed end concentration of approximately 0.5 microM, sufficient CP is bound to cap these ends. CP is released from OG-permeabilized platelets by treatment with phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate or through activation of the thrombin receptor. However, the fraction of CP bound to the actin cytoskeleton of thrombin-stimulated mouse and human platelets increases rapidly to approximately 60% within 30 s. In resting platelets from transgenic mice lacking gelsolin, which have 33% more F-actin than gelsolin-positive cells, there is a corresponding increase in the amount of CP associated with the resting cytoskeleton but no change with stimulation. These findings demonstrate an interaction between the two major F-actin barbed end capping proteins of the platelet: gelsolin-dependent severing produces barbed ends that are capped by CP. Phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate release of gelsolin and CP from platelet cytoskeleton provides a mechanism for mediating barbed end exposure. After actin assembly, CP reassociates with the new actin cytoskeleton.     

Association of actin with chromaffin granule membranes and the effect of cytochalasin B on the polarity of actin filament elongation

Membranes of chromaffin granules isolated from bovine adrenal medulla are shown to bind dihydrocytochalasin B with high affinity. These membranes also bound [3H]actin in a time- and Mg2+-dependent manner and electron microscopy showed the presence of membrane-attached actin filaments following addition of exogenous actin. Binding of [3H]actin was partially inhibited by cytochalasin B. Electron microscopic analysis of heavy meromyosin-decorated, membrane-attached filaments showed terminally (end-on) attached filaments with both possible polarities (i.e., filaments with arrowheads pointing both towards and away from the membranes). Treatment of samples with cytochalasin B preferentially inhibited growth of filaments with their 'barbed' ends pointing away from membranes. These results are discussed with respect to the role of actin in secretory granule function and the mechanism of cytochalasin action.     

Arabidopsis VILLIN1 generates actin filament cables that are resistant to depolymerization

Dynamic cytoplasmic streaming, organelle positioning, and nuclear migration use molecular tracks generated from actin filaments arrayed into higher-order structures like actin cables and bundles. How these arrays are formed and stabilized against cellular depolymerizing forces remains an open question. Villin and fimbrin are the best characterized actin-filament bundling or cross-linking proteins in plants and each is encoded by a multigene family of five members in Arabidopsis thaliana. The related villins and gelsolins are conserved proteins that are constructed from a core of six homologous gelsolin domains. Gelsolin is a calcium-regulated actin filament severing, nucleating and barbed end capping factor. Villin has a seventh domain at its C terminus, the villin headpiece, which can bind to an actin filament, conferring the ability to crosslink or bundle actin filaments. Many, but not all, villins retain the ability to sever, nucleate, and cap filaments. Here we have identified a putative calcium-insensitive villin isoform through comparison of sequence alignments between human gelsolin and plant villins with x-ray crystallography data for vertebrate gelsolin. VILLIN1 (VLN1) has the least well-conserved type 1 and type 2 calcium binding sites among the Arabidopsis VILLIN isoforms. Recombinant VLN1 binds to actin filaments with high affinity (K(d) approximately 1 microM) and generates bundled filament networks; both properties are independent of the free Ca(2+) concentration. Unlike human plasma gelsolin, VLN1 does not nucleate the assembly of filaments from monomer, does not block the polymerization of profilin-actin onto barbed ends, and does not stimulate depolymerization or sever preexisting filaments. In kinetic assays with ADF/cofilin, villin appears to bind first to growing filaments and protects filaments against ADF-mediated depolymerization. We propose that VLN1 is a major regulator of the formation and stability of actin filament bundles in plant cells and that it functions to maintain the cable network even in the presence of stimuli that result in depolymerization of other actin arrays.     

Direct observation of the conformational states of formin mDia1 at actin filament barbed ends and along the filament

The fine regulation of actin polymerization is essential to control cell motility and architecture and to perform essential cellular functions. Formins are key regulators of actin filament assembly, known to processively elongate filament barbed ends and increase their polymerization rate. Different models have been extrapolated to describe the molecular mechanism governing the processive motion of formin FH2 domains at polymerizing barbed ends. Using negative stain electron microscopy, we directly identified for the first time two conformations of the mDia1 formin FH2 domains in interaction with the barbed ends of actin filaments. These conformations agree with the speculated open and closed conformations of the “stair-stepping” model. We observed the FH2 dimers to be in the open conformation for 79% of the data, interacting with the two terminal actin subunits of the barbed end while they interact with three actin subunits in the closed conformation. In addition, we identified and characterized the structure of single FH2 dimers encircling the core of actin filaments, and reveal their ability to spontaneously depart from barbed ends.