Distinct cytoplasmic dynein complexes are transported by different mechanisms in axons

In neurons, cytoplasmic dynein is synthesized in the cell body, but its function is to move cargo from the axon back to the cell body. Dynein must therefore be delivered to the axon and its motor activity must be regulated during axonal transport. Cytoplasmic dynein is a large protein complex composed of a number of different subunits. The dynein heavy chains contain the motor domains and the intermediate chains are involved in binding the complex to cargo. Five different intermediate chain polypeptides, which are the result of the alternative splicing of the two intermediate chain genes, have been identified. We have characterized two distinct pools of dynein that are transported from the cell body along the axon by different mechanisms. One pool, which contains the ubiquitous intermediate chain, is associated with the membranous organelles transported by kinesin in the fast transport component. The other pool, which contains the other developmentally regulated intermediate chains, is transported in slow component b. The mechanism of dynein regulation will therefore depend on which pool of dynein is recruited to function as the retrograde motor. In addition, the properties of the large pool of dynein associated with actin in slow component b are consistent with the hypothesis that this dynein may be the motor for microtubule transport in the axon.     

Cytoplasmic dynein, the dynactin complex, and kinesin are interdependent and essential for fast axonal transport

In axons, organelles move away from (anterograde) and toward (retrograde) the cell body along microtubules. Previous studies have provided compelling evidence that conventional kinesin is a major motor for anterograde fast axonal transport. It is reasonable to expect that cytoplasmic dynein is a fast retrograde motor, but relatively few tests of dynein function have been reported with neurons of intact organisms. In extruded axoplasm, antibody disruption of kinesin or the dynactin complex (a dynein activator) inhibits both retrograde and anterograde transport. We have tested the functions of the cytoplasmic dynein heavy chain (cDhc64C) and the p150(Glued) (Glued) component of the dynactin complex with the use of genetic techniques in Drosophila. cDhc64C and Glued mutations disrupt fast organelle transport in both directions. The mutant phenotypes, larval posterior paralysis and axonal swellings filled with retrograde and anterograde cargoes, were similar to those caused by kinesin mutations. Why do specific disruptions of unidirectional motor systems cause bidirectional defects? Direct protein interactions of kinesin with dynein heavy chain and p150(Glued) were not detected. However, strong dominant genetic interactions between kinesin, dynein, and dynactin complex mutations in axonal transport were observed. The genetic interactions between kinesin and either Glued or cDhc64C mutations were stronger than those between Glued and cDhc64C mutations themselves. The shared bidirectional disruption phenotypes and the dominant genetic interactions demonstrate that cytoplasmic dynein, the dynactin complex, and conventional kinesin are interdependent in fast axonal transport.     

Dynactin is required for bidirectional organelle transport

Kinesin II is a heterotrimeric plus end-directed microtubule motor responsible for the anterograde movement of organelles in various cell types. Despite substantial literature concerning the types of organelles that kinesin II transports, the question of how this motor associates with cargo organelles remains unanswered. To address this question, we have used Xenopus laevis melanophores as a model system. Through analysis of kinesin II-mediated melanosome motility, we have determined that the dynactin complex, known as an anchor for cytoplasmic dynein, also links kinesin II to organelles. Biochemical data demonstrates that the putative cargo-binding subunit of Xenopus kinesin II, Xenopus kinesin II-associated protein (XKAP), binds directly to the p150Glued subunit of dynactin. This interaction occurs through aa 530-793 of XKAP and aa 600-811 of p150Glued. These results reveal that dynactin is required for transport activity of microtubule motors of opposite polarity, cytoplasmic dynein and kinesin II, and may provide a new mechanism to coordinate their activities.     

Dynein, dynactin, and kinesin II's interaction with microtubules is regulated during bidirectional organelle transport

The microtubule motors, cytoplasmic dynein and kinesin II, drive pigmented organelles in opposite directions in Xenopus melanophores, but the mechanism by which these or other motors are regulated to control the direction of organelle transport has not been previously elucidated. We find that cytoplasmic dynein, dynactin, and kinesin II remain on pigment granules during aggregation and dispersion in melanophores, indicating that control of direction is not mediated by a cyclic association of motors with these organelles. However, the ability of dynein, dynactin, and kinesin II to bind to microtubules varies as a function of the state of aggregation or dispersion of the pigment in the cells from which these molecules are isolated. Dynein and dynactin bind to microtubules when obtained from cells with aggregated pigment, whereas kinesin II binds to microtubules when obtained from cells with dispersed pigment. Moreover, the microtubule binding activity of these motors/dynactin can be reversed in vitro by the kinases and phosphatase that regulate the direction of pigment granule transport in vivo. These findings suggest that phosphorylation controls the direction of pigment granule transport by altering the ability of dynein, dynactin, and kinesin II to interact with microtubules.     

Brain dynein (MAP1C) localizes on both anterogradely and retrogradely transported membranous organelles in vivo

Brain dynein is a microtubule-activated ATPase considered to be a candidate to function as a molecular motor to transport membranous organelles retrogradely in the axon. To determine whether brain dynein really binds to retrogradely transported organelles in vivo and how it is transported to the nerve terminals, we studied the localization of brain dynein in axons after the ligation of peripheral nerves by light and electron microscopic immunocytochemistry using affinity-purified anti-brain dynein antibodies. Different classes of organelles preferentially accumulated at the regions proximal and distal to the ligated part. Interestingly, brain dynein accumulated both at the regions proximal and distal to the ligation sites and localized not only on retrogradely transported membranous organelles but also on anterogradely transported ones. This is the first evidence to show that brain dynein associates with retrogradely transported organelles in vivo and that brain dynein is transported to the nerve terminal by fast flow. This also suggests that there may be some mechanism that activates brain dynein only for retrograde transport.     

The interaction of neurofilaments with the microtubule motor cytoplasmic dynein

Neurofilaments are synthesized in the cell body of neurons and transported outward along the axon via slow axonal transport. Direct observation of neurofilaments trafficking in live cells suggests that the slow outward rate of transport is due to the net effects of anterograde and retrograde microtubule motors pulling in opposition. Previous studies have suggested that cytoplasmic dynein is required for efficient neurofilament transport. In this study, we examine the interaction of neurofilaments with cytoplasmic dynein. We used fluid tapping mode atomic force microscopy to visualize single neurofilaments, microtubules, dynein/dynactin, and physical interactions between these neuronal components. AFM images suggest that neurofilaments act as cargo for dynein, associating with the base of the motor complex. Yeast two-hybrid and affinity chromatography assays confirm this hypothesis, indicating that neurofilament subunit M binds directly to dynein IC. This interaction is blocked by monoclonal antibodies directed either to NF-M or to dynein. Together these data suggest that a specific interaction between neurofilament subunit M and cytoplasmic dynein is involved in the saltatory bidirectional motility of neurofilaments undergoing axonal transport in the neuron.     

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.     

mNUDC is required for plus‐end‐directed transport of cytoplasmic dynein and dynactins by kinesin‐1

Lissencephaly is a devastating neurological disorder caused by defective neuronal migration. The LIS1 (or PAFAH1B1) gene was identified as the gene mutated in lissencephaly patients, and was found to regulate cytoplasmic dynein function and localization. In particular, LIS1 is essential for anterograde transport of cytoplasmic dynein as a part of the cytoplasmic dynein–LIS1–microtubule complex in a kinesin‐1‐dependent manner. However, the underlying mechanism by which a cytoplasmic dynein–LIS1–microtubule complex binds kinesin‐1 is unknown. Here, we report that mNUDC (mammalian NUDC) interacts with kinesin‐1 and is required for the anterograde transport of a cytoplasmic dynein complex by kinesin‐1. mNUDC is also required for anterograde transport of a dynactin‐containing complex. Inhibition of mNUDC severely suppressed anterograde transport of distinct cytoplasmic dynein and dynactin complexes, whereas motility of kinesin‐1 remained intact. Reconstruction experiments clearly demonstrated that mNUDC mediates the interaction of the dynein or dynactin complex with kinesin‐1 and supports their transport by kinesin‐1. Our findings have uncovered an essential role of mNUDC for anterograde transport of dynein and dynactin by kinesin‐1.     

Cytoplasmic dynein subunit heterogeneity: implications for axonal transport

The formation and maintenance of neuronal synapses is dependent on the active transport of material between the cell body and the axon terminal. Cytoplasmic dynein is one motor for microtubule-based axonal transport. Two pools of cytoplasmic dynein have been identified in the axon. They are distinguished by their intermediate and light intermediate chain subunits. Each pool is transported at different rates down the axon in association with different proteins or organelles. This review presents several models to discuss the potential functional roles of these different pools of cytoplasmic dynein during axonal transport.     

Nudel Promotes Axonal Lysosome Clearance and Endo-lysosome Formation via Dynein-Mediated Transport

Axonal transport is critical for neuronal function and survival. Cytoplasmic dynein and its accessory complex dynactin form a microtubule minus end-directed motor in charge of retrograde transport. In this study, we show that Nudel, a dynein regulator, was highly expressed in dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons. Microinjection of anti-Nudel antibody into cultured DRG neurons abolished retrograde transport of membranous organelles in the axon and led to dispersions of Golgi cisternae in the soma. As a result, lysosomes, which are normally enriched in the soma, moved persistently into and thus accumulated in axons. Endo-lysosome formation was also markedly delayed. As anterograde motility of mitochondria was not inhibited, the antibody apparently did not abolish retrograde transport by destructing axonal microtubule tracks. Similar results were obtained by microinjecting N-terminal Nudel, anti-dynein antibody or a p150^Glued mutant capable of abrogating the dynein–dynactin association. These results indicate a critical role of Nudel in dynein-mediated axonal transport. Moreover, the effects of dynein on endolysosome formation and regional sequestration of lysosomes may contribute to defects in the endocytic pathway seen in neurons of patients or animals with malfunction of dynein.     

Molecular Requirements for Bi-directional Movement of Phagosomes Along Microtubules

Microtubules facilitate the maturation of phagosomes by favoring their interactions with endocytic compartments. Here, we show that phagosomes move within cells along tracks of several microns centrifugally and centripetally in a pH- and microtubuledependent manner. Phagosome movement was reconstituted in vitro and required energy, cytosol and membrane proteins of this organelle. The activity or presence of these phagosome proteins was regulated as the organelle matured, with “late” phagosomes moving threefold more frequently than “early” ones. The majority of moving phagosomes were minus-end directed; the remainder moved towards microtubule plus-ends and a small subset moved bi-directionally. Minus-end movement showed pharmacological characteristics expected for dyneins, was inhibited by immunodepletion of cytoplasmic dynein and could be restored by addition of cytoplasmic dynein. Plus-end movement displayed pharmacological properties of kinesin, was inhibited partially by immunodepletion of kinesin and fully by addition of an anti-kinesin IgG. Immunodepletion of dynactin, a dynein-activating complex, inhibited only minus-end directed motility. Evidence is provided for a dynactin-associated kinase required for dyneinmediated vesicle transport. Movement in both directions was inhibited by peptide fragments from kinectin (a putative kinesin membrane receptor), derived from the region to which a motility-blocking antibody binds. Polypeptide subunits from these microtubule-based motility factors were detected on phagosomes by immunoblotting or immunoelectron microscopy. This is the first study using a single in vitro system that describes the roles played by kinesin, kinectin, cytoplasmic dynein, and dynactin in the microtubule-mediated movement of a purified membrane organelle.     

Dynactin polices two-way organelle traffic

How is the bidirectional motion of organelles controlled? In this issue, Deacon et al. (2003) reveal the unexpected finding that dynactin (previously known to control dynein-based motility) binds to kinesin II and regulates anterograde movement of Xenopus melanosomes. This result suggests that dynactin may be a key player in coordinating vesicle traffic in this system.The movement of intracellular cargo is essential for cell survival. In animal cells, membranous organelles are propelled through the cytoplasm by microtubule-based motor proteins. Anterograde movement toward microtubule plus ends at the cell periphery is driven by motor proteins of the kinesin superfamily, whereas retrograde movement toward minus ends at the cell center is largely accomplished by cytoplasmic dynein. In most cells, organelles do not travel smoothly in one direction but frequently switch between plus and minus end–directed travel. The net time spent traveling in the plus versus the minus end direction determines the steady-state distribution of an organelle population within a cell. A long-standing question for those studying organelle transport is how this bidirectional trafficking is coordinated. Is the binding of kinesin and dynein to vesicles mutually exclusive, or are these motors bound at the same time but with their activities coordinately regulated? What molecule(s) might be responsible for linking kinesin and dynein activities? In this issue, Vladimir Gelfand''s group (Deacon et al., 2003) addresses these questions by studying the motor proteins kinesin II and cytoplasmic dynein that move pigment granules in Xenopus melanophore cells. Their results are surprising; the dynactin complex, previously known to bind to cytoplasmic dynein and anchor it to organelles, also interacts with kinesin II and is necessary for plus end–directed motion. The ability of dynactin to physically interact with these two opposite polarity motors suggests that it may be the long sought-after molecular switch that coordinates bidirectional movement in this system.Previous studies hinted that the actions of dynein and kinesin may be controlled via dynactin. Dynactin is a large, multimeric protein complex. Its p150^Glued subunit has binding sites for both microtubules and the intermediate chain of dynein and is thought to be responsible for the association of dynein with many of its cargo organelles (Karki and Holzbaur, 1995; Vaughan and Vallee, 1995; Waterman-Storer et al., 1995). Curiously, the treatment of extruded squid axoplasm with antibodies against p150^Glued inhibited both the anterograde and retrograde movement of organelles along microtubules (Waterman-Storer et al., 1997). These antibodies were known to inhibit the interaction of dynactin with dynein, but their effect on anterograde movement was more difficult to explain. However, genetic studies yielded similar results. Martin et al. (1999) found that mutations in either p150^Glued, the cytoplasmic dynein heavy chain, or kinesin I inhibited both retrograde and anterograde fast axonal transport in Drosophila larvae. This phenotype potentially could be explained by stalled retrograde vesicles sterically blocking the movement of anterograde cargo, but the authors also suggested the possibility of a physical linkage between kinesin, dynein, and dynactin. This theory was further tested by tracking the movement of lipid droplets in Drosophila embryos (Gross et al., 2002b). A mild defect in the dynein heavy chain impaired several aspects of minus end–directed transport of lipid droplets: run lengths, velocities, and the opposing optical trap force required to halt droplet movement were all decreased. Surprisingly, this mutation produced similar effects on droplets moving toward the microtubule plus ends. Embryos expressing a mutant p150^Glued protein that partially impaired dynactin function also exhibited impaired movement in both the plus and minus end directions. Collectively, these results suggested that dynactin might be involved in coordinating the bidirectional movement of organelles. However, these studies did not provide a molecular explanation of how this mechanism might work.To study the mechanism of coordination of bidirectional vesicle movement, Deacon et al. (2003) used Xenopus melanophores due to the unique ability to experimentally control the directional movement of their pigmented melanosomes (Daniolos et al., 1990). Upon treatment of melanophores with melatonin, the cAMP concentration in the cytoplasm drops and the melanosomes move with a net minus end–directed bias and aggregate toward the cell center. Treatment with melanocyte-stimulating hormone (MSH)^* restores cAMP levels, and the melanosomes exhibit a plus end–directed bias and disperse throughout the cell. Aggregation is accomplished by cytoplasmic dynein (Nilsson and Wallin, 1997), whereas dispersion requires the combined actions of kinesin II and the actin-based motor myosin V (Rogers and Gelfand, 1998; Tuma et al., 1998; Gross et al., 2002a). Kinesin II is a heterotrimeric protein consisting of two motor subunits and a third nonmotor subunit known as kinesin-associated protein (KAP) (Cole et al., 1992). KAP is thought to be involved in binding kinesin II to its cargo, although the mechanism for this interaction is not known.The role of dynactin in melanosome transport was investigated by disrupting dynactin function via the overexpression of dynamitin (Echeverri et al., 1996), a crucial subunit that holds the dynactin complex together. To ensure that all observed melanosome movement occurred on the microtubule cytoskeleton, actin filaments were depolymerized with latrunculin B. Here, the authors report that melanosome movement to both the plus and minus ends of microtubules was inhibited by dynamitin overexpression, suggesting a role for dynactin in coordinating bidirectional movement. They considered whether this result might be explained if both kinesin II and dynein bound to dynactin and thereby docked onto membranes. To test this idea, kinesin II was immunoprecipitated with a series of antibodies, and the authors found that dynactin was pulled down along with this kinesin motor in all cases. The reverse experiment of immunoprecipitating with p150^Glued antibodies also brought down kinesin II. Blot overlays of purified melanosomes with p150^Glued detected an interaction with a 115-kD protein, the expected size of Xenopus KAP. Subsequent overlay and affinity pull-down experiments with purified proteins confirmed the direct binding of p150^Glued to KAP. By constructing a series of GST fusion proteins, Deacon et al. (2003) were able to map the site of this interaction to residues 600–811 of p150^Glued and the COOH-terminal domain of KAP. Interestingly, this region of p150^Glued also interacts with the dynein intermediate chain, which raised the question of whether kinesin II and dynein might compete for binding to dynactin. Using a blot overlay competition assay, the authors found that the COOH-terminal KAP domain blocked the binding of p150^Glued to the dynein intermediate chain, whereas the NH₂-terminal KAP domain, used as a control, did not. This result confirms that the two motors cannot bind dynactin simultaneously.If these biochemical results are relevant to melanosome movement, then overexpression of KAP should inhibit both anterograde and retrograde traffic. Indeed, overexpession of Xenopus KAP or just its COOH-terminal fragment inhibited bidirectional melanosome movement. As a control, NH₂-terminal KAP had no effect on retrograde movement and only a small effect on anterograde movement, perhaps due to interactions with the kinesin II motor subunits. Together, the results of Deacon et al. (2003) demonstrate that kinesin II, via its KAP subunit, binds to the p150^Glued subunit of dynactin and that this interaction is important for kinesin II–mediated movement of melanosomes.Although the authors identify the p150^Glued subunit of dynactin as a key player in coordinating the bidirectional movement of melanosomes, the mechanism is still unclear. Their biochemical results showing competitive binding to dynactin suggest that binding of kinesin II and dynein to melanosomes may be mutually exclusive events; however, previous work has shown that this is not the case. In a recent paper from the same authors (Gross et al., 2002a), as well as an earlier study from Reese and Haimo (Reese and Haimo, 2000), the relative amounts of kinesin II and dynein bound to purified melanosomes did not change when cells were treated with melatonin to stimulate aggregation or with MSH to stimulate dispersion. Thus, it is possible that proteins other than dynactin might bind kinesin II and dynein to melanosomes. This question also could be addressed by determining if motor binding to melanophores is diminished in cells overexpressing KAP or dynamitin. Unfortunately, Deacon et al. (2003) were not able to answer this question by biochemical isolation of melanosomes and motor quantitation because transfected cells were only a small percentage of the total population. Another possible model is that dynactin is not needed for recruiting kinesin II and dynein to melanosomes but is somehow involved in regulating the activation or organization of motors already bound to the membrane.Future studies will no doubt explore whether dynactin is involved in bidirectional transport in systems other than melanophores. In intraflagellar transport, kinesin II and cytoplasmic dynein 2 are involved in moving nonmembranous particles between the cell body and the tip of the flagella or cilia (Rosenbaum and Witman, 2002). It will be interesting to determine whether dynactin plays a role in this type of cargo transport. In neurons, kinesin I is responsible for moving organelles from the cell body to the axon terminal. As discussed above, Martin et al. (1999) found that mutations in either kinesin I heavy chain, dynein, or p150^Glued all produced the same phenotype in Drosophila larvae neurons, suggesting that dynactin may play a role in coordinating bidirectional movement in this system as well. Immunoprecipitation of neuronal p150^Glued, however, brought down only dynein but not kinesin I. This finding may result from the fact that kinesin I, which possesses a light chain unrelated to the KAP subunit, could be linked indirectly to dynactin by another protein. Thus, this study by Deacon et al. (2003) has opened up a new area of exploration and dynactin will undoubtedly receive closer scrutiny from kinesin researchers in the future.     

Microtubule binding by dynactin is required for microtubule organization but not cargo transport

Dynactin links cytoplasmic dynein and other motors to cargo and is involved in organizing radial microtubule arrays. The largest subunit of dynactin, p150(glued), binds the dynein intermediate chain and has an N-terminal microtubule-binding domain. To examine the role of microtubule binding by p150(glued), we replaced the wild-type p150(glued) in Drosophila melanogaster S2 cells with mutant DeltaN-p150 lacking residues 1-200, which is unable to bind microtubules. Cells treated with cytochalasin D were used for analysis of cargo movement along microtubules. Strikingly, although the movement of both membranous organelles and messenger ribonucleoprotein complexes by dynein and kinesin-1 requires dynactin, the substitution of full-length p150(glued) with DeltaN-p150(glued) has no effect on the rate, processivity, or step size of transport. However, truncation of the microtubule-binding domain of p150(glued) has a dramatic effect on cell division, resulting in the generation of multipolar spindles and free microtubule-organizing centers. Thus, dynactin binding to microtubules is required for organizing spindle microtubule arrays but not cargo motility in vivo.     

Kinesin and dynein mutants provide novel insights into the roles of vesicle traffic during cell morphogenesis in Neurospora.

BACKGROUND: Kinesin and cytoplasmic dynein are force-generating molecules that move in opposite directions along microtubules. They have been implicated in the directed transport of a wide variety of cellular organelles, but it is unclear whether they have overlapping or largely independent functions. RESULTS: We analyzed organelle transport in kinesin and dynein single mutants, and in a kinesin and dynein double mutant of Neurospora crassa. Remarkably, the simultaneous mutation of kinesin and dynein was not lethal and resulted in an additive phenotype that combined the features of the single mutants. The mutation of kinesin and dynein had opposite effects on the apical and retrograde transport, respectively, of vesicular organelles. In the kinesin mutant, apical movement of submicroscopic, secretory vesicles to the Spitzenk?rper - an organelle in the hyphal apex - was defective, whereas the predominantly retrograde movement of microscopic organelles was only slightly reduced. In contrast, the dynein mutant still had a prominent Spitzenk?rper, demonstrating that apical transport was intact, but retrograde transport was essentially inhibited completely. A major defect in vacuole formation and dynamics was also evident. In agreement with the observations on apical transport, protein secretion into the medium was markedly inhibited in the kinesin mutant but not in the dynein mutant. CONCLUSIONS: Transport of secretory vesicles is necessary but not sufficient for normal apical extension. A component of retrograde transport, presumably precursors of the vacuole system, is also essential. Our findings provide new information on the role microtubule motors play in cell morphogenesis and suggest that kinesin and cytoplasmic dynein have largely independent functions within separate pathways.     

Mammalian Golgi-associated Bicaudal-D2 functions in the dynein-dynactin pathway by interacting with these complexes

Genetic analysis in Drosophila suggests that Bicaudal-D functions in an essential microtubule-based transport pathway, together with cytoplasmic dynein and dynactin. However, the molecular mechanism underlying interactions of these proteins has remained elusive. We show here that a mammalian homologue of Bicaudal-D, BICD2, binds to the dynamitin subunit of dynactin. This interaction is confirmed by mass spectrometry, immunoprecipitation studies and in vitro binding assays. In interphase cells, BICD2 mainly localizes to the Golgi complex and has properties of a peripheral coat protein, yet it also co-localizes with dynactin at microtubule plus ends. Overexpression studies using green fluorescent protein-tagged forms of BICD2 verify its intracellular distribution and co-localization with dynactin, and indicate that the C-terminus of BICD2 is responsible for Golgi targeting. Overexpression of the N-terminal domain of BICD2 disrupts minus-end-directed organelle distribution and this portion of BICD2 co-precipitates with cytoplasmic dynein. Nocodazole treatment of cells results in an extensive BICD2-dynactin-dynein co-localization. Taken together, these data suggest that mammalian BICD2 plays a role in the dynein- dynactin interaction on the surface of membranous organelles, by associating with these complexes.     

Modeling bidirectional transport of quantum dot nanoparticles in membrane nanotubes

This paper develops a model of transport of quantum dot (QD) nanoparticles in membrane nanotubes (MNTs). It is assumed that QDs are transported inside intracellular organelles (called here nanoparticle-loaded vesicles, NLVs) that are propelled by either kinesin or dynein molecular motors while moving on microtubules (MTs). A vesicle may have both types of motors attached to it, but the motors are assumed to work in a cooperative fashion, meaning that at a given time the vesicle is moved by either kinesin or dynein motors. The motors are assumed not to work against each other, when one type of motors is pulling the vesicle, the other type is inactive. From time to time the motors may switch their roles: passive motors can become active motors and vice versa, resulting in the change of the vesicle’s direction of motion. It is further assumed that QDs can escape NLVs and become free QDs, which are then transported by diffusion. Free QDs can be internalized by NLVs. The effects of two possible types of MT orientation in MNTs are investigated: when all MTs have a uniform polarity orientation, with their plus-ends directed toward one of the cells connected by an MNT, and when MTs have a mixed polarity orientation, with half of MTs having their plus-ends directed toward one of the cells and the other half having their plus-ends directed toward the other cell. Computational results are presented for three cases. The first case is when organelles are as likely to be transported by kinesin motors as by dynein motors. The second case is when organelles are more likely to be transported by kinesin motors than by dynein motors, and the third case is when NLVs do not associate with dynein motors at all.     

Slow axonal transport: fast motors in the slow lane.

The bulk of neuronally synthesized proteins destined for the axon is transported in a phase of transport approximately 100 times slower (1mm/day) than the vesicular traffic of fast axonal transport (100mm/day). Of late, a number of studies have shed considerable light on the controversies and mechanisms surrounding this slow phase of axonal transport. Along-standing controversy has centered on the form of the transported proteins. One major transport cargo, neurofilament protein, has now been seen in a number of contexts to be transported primarily in a polymeric form, whereas a second cargo tubulin is transported as a small oligomer. The development of techniques to visualize the slow transport process in live cells has demonstrated that instantaneous motions of transported neurofilaments, and presumably other slow transport cargoes, are fast, bidirectional and interspersed with long pauses. This and additional biochemical efforts indicate that traditional fast motors, such as conventional kinesin and dynein, are responsible for these fast motions.     

KIF3A is a new microtubule-based anterograde motor in the nerve axon

Neurons are highly polarized cells composed of dendrites, cell bodies, and long axons. Because of the lack of protein synthesis machinery in axons, materials required in axons and synapses have to be transported down the axons after synthesis in the cell body. Fast anterograde transport conveys different kinds of membranous organelles such as mitochondria and precursors of synaptic vesicles and axonal membranes, while organelles such as endosomes and autophagic prelysosomal organelles are conveyed retrogradely. Although kinesin and dynein have been identified as good candidates for microtubule-based anterograde and retrograde transporters, respectively, the existence of other motors for performing these complex axonal transports seems quite likely. Here we characterized a new member of the kinesin super-family, KIF3A (50-nm rod with globular head and tail), and found that it is localized in neurons, associated with membrane organelle fractions, and accumulates with anterogradely moving membrane organelles after ligation of peripheral nerves. Furthermore, native KIF3A (a complex of 80/85 KIF3A heavy chain and a 95-kD polypeptide) revealed microtubule gliding activity and baculovirus-expressed KIF3A heavy chain demonstrated microtubule plus end-directed (anterograde) motility in vitro. These findings strongly suggest that KIF3A is a new motor protein for the anterograde fast axonal transport.     

Kinesin‐1/Hsc70‐dependent mechanism of slow axonal transport and its relation to fast axonal transport

Cytoplasmic protein transport in axons (‘slow axonal transport’) is essential for neuronal homeostasis, and involves Kinesin‐1, the same motor for membranous organelle transport (‘fast axonal transport’). However, both molecular mechanisms of slow axonal transport and difference in usage of Kinesin‐1 between slow and fast axonal transport have been elusive. Here, we show that slow axonal transport depends on the interaction between the DnaJ‐like domain of the kinesin light chain in the Kinesin‐1 motor complex and Hsc70, scaffolding between cytoplasmic proteins and Kinesin‐1. The domain is within the tetratricopeptide repeat, which can bind to membranous organelles, and competitive perturbation of the domain in squid giant axons disrupted cytoplasmic protein transport and reinforced membranous organelle transport, indicating that this domain might have a function as a switchover system between slow and fast transport by Hsc70. Transgenic mice overexpressing a dominant‐negative form of the domain showed delayed slow transport, accelerated fast transport and optic axonopathy. These findings provide a basis for the regulatory mechanism of intracellular transport and its intriguing implication in neuronal dysfunction.     

Functional cooperation between the microtubule and actin cytoskeletons

In diverse cell types, microtubule (MT) and actin filament networks cooperate functionally during a wide variety of processes, including vesicle and organelle transport, cleavage furrow placement, directed cell migration, spindle rotation, and nuclear migration. The mechanisms by which MTs and actin filaments cooperate to mediate these different processes can be grouped into two broad categories: coordinated MT- and actin-based transport to move vesicles, organelles, and cell fate determinants; and targeting and capture of MT ends at cortical actin sites. Over the past several years, a growing number of cellular factors that bridge these cytoskeletal systems have been identified. These include 'hetero-motor' complexes (physically associated myosin and kinesin), myosin-CLIP170 complexes, formin homology (FH) proteins, dynein and the dynactin complex, Kar9p, coronin, Kelch repeat-containing proteins, and ERM proteins.