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

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

Direct observation of regulated ribonucleoprotein transport across the nurse cell/oocyte boundary

In Drosophila, the asymmetric localization of specific mRNAs to discrete regions within the developing oocyte determines the embryonic axes. The microtubule motors dynein and kinesin are required for the proper localization of the determinant ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes, but the mechanisms that account for RNP transport to and within the oocyte are not well understood. In this work, we focus on the transport of RNA complexes containing bicoid (bcd), an anterior determinant. We show in live egg chambers that, within the nurse cell compartment, dynein actively transports green fluorescent protein-tagged Exuperantia, a cofactor required for bcd RNP localization. Surprisingly, the loss of kinesin I activity elevates RNP motility in nurse cells, whereas disruption of dynein activity inhibits RNP transport. Once RNPs are transferred through the ring canal to the oocyte, they no longer display rapid, linear movements, but they are distributed by cytoplasmic streaming and gradually disassemble. By contrast, bcd mRNA injected into oocytes assembles de novo into RNP particles that exhibit rapid, dynein-dependent transport. We speculate that after delivery to the oocyte, RNP complexes may disassemble and be remodeled with appropriate accessory factors to ensure proper localization.     

The cytoplasmic dynein and kinesin motors have interdependent roles in patterning the Drosophila oocyte

BACKGROUND: Motor proteins of the minus end-directed cytoplasmic dynein and plus end-directed kinesin families provide the principal means for microtubule-based transport in eukaryotic cells. Despite their opposing polarity, these two classes of motors may cooperate in vivo. In Drosophila circumstantial evidence suggests that dynein acts in the localization of determinants and signaling factors during oogenesis. However, the pleiotropic requirement for dynein throughout development has made it difficult to establish its specific role. RESULTS: We analyzed dynein function in the oocyte by disrupting motor activity through temporally restricted expression of the dynactin subunit, dynamitin. Our results indicate that dynein is required for several processes that impact patterning; such processes include localization of bicoid (bcd) and gurken (grk) mRNAs and anchoring of the oocyte nucleus to the cell cortex. Surprisingly, dynein function is sensitive to reduction in kinesin levels, and germ line clones lacking kinesin show defects in dorsal follicle cell fate, grk mRNA localization, and nuclear attachment that are similar to those resulting from the loss of dynein. Significantly, dynein and dynactin localization is perturbed in these animals. Conversely, kinesin localization also depends on dynein activity. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that dynein is required for nuclear anchoring and localization of cellular determinants during oogenesis. Strikingly, mutations in the kinesin motor also disrupt these processes and perturb dynein and dynactin localization. These results indicate that the activity of the two motors is interdependent and suggest a model in which kinesin affects patterning indirectly through its role in the localization and recycling of dynein.     

An RNA‐binding atypical tropomyosin recruits kinesin‐1 dynamically to oskar mRNPs

Localization and local translation of oskar mRNA at the posterior pole of the Drosophila oocyte directs abdominal patterning and germline formation in the embryo. The process requires recruitment and precise regulation of motor proteins to form transport‐competent mRNPs. We show that the posterior‐targeting kinesin‐1 is loaded upon nuclear export of oskar mRNPs, prior to their dynein‐dependent transport from the nurse cells into the oocyte. We demonstrate that kinesin‐1 recruitment requires the DmTropomyosin1‐I/C isoform, an atypical RNA‐binding tropomyosin that binds directly to dimerizing oskar 3′UTRs. Finally, we show that a small but dynamically changing subset of oskar mRNPs gets loaded with inactive kinesin‐1 and that the motor is activated during mid‐oogenesis by the functionalized spliced oskar RNA localization element. This inefficient, dynamic recruitment of Khc decoupled from cargo‐dependent motor activation constitutes an optimized, coordinated mechanism of mRNP transport, by minimizing interference with other cargo‐transport processes and between the cargo‐associated dynein and kinesin‐1.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The molecular motor dynein is involved in targeting swallow and bicoid RNA to the anterior pole of Drosophila oocytes

Localization of bicoid (bcd) messenger RNA to the anterior pole of the Drosophila oocyte requires the exuperantia ( exu), swallow (swa) and staufen (stau) genes. We show here that Swa protein transiently co-localizes with bcd RNA in mid-oogenesis. Swa also localizes to the anterior pole of the oocyte in the absence of bcd RNA. This localization does not require Exu, but depends on intact microtubules. In mutant ovaries with duplicated polarity of microtubules, Swa and bcd RNA are ectopically localized at the posterior pole, as well as being present at the anterior pole. We identify dynein light chain-1 (Ddlc-1), a component of the minus-end-directed microtubule motor cytoplasmic dynein, as a Swa-binding protein. We propose that Swa acts as an adaptor for the dynein complex and thereby enables dynein to transport bcd RNA along microtubules to their minus ends at the anterior pole of the oocyte.     

Load‐dependent detachment kinetics plays a key role in bidirectional cargo transport by kinesin and dynein

Bidirectional cargo transport along microtubules is carried out by opposing teams of kinesin and dynein motors. Despite considerable study, the factors that determine whether these competing teams achieve net anterograde or retrograde transport in cells remain unclear. The goal of this work is to use stochastic simulations of bidirectional transport to determine the motor properties that most strongly determine overall cargo velocity and directionality. Simulations were carried out based on published optical tweezer characterization of kinesin‐1 and kinesin‐2, and for available data for cytoplasmic dynein and the dynein‐dynactin‐BicD2 (DDB) complex. By varying dynein parameters and analyzing cargo trajectories, we find that net cargo transport is predicted to depend minimally on the dynein stall force, but strongly on dynein load‐dependent detachment kinetics. In simulations, dynein is dominated by kinesin‐1, but DDB and kinesin‐1 are evenly matched, recapitulating recent experimental work. Kinesin‐2 competes less well against dynein and DDB, and overall, load‐dependent motor detachment is the property that most determines a motor's ability to compete in bidirectional transport. It follows that the most effective intracellular regulators of bidirectional transport are predicted to be those that alter motor detachment kinetics rather than motor velocity or stall force.      

Tau directs intracellular trafficking by regulating the forces exerted by kinesin and dynein teams

Organelles, proteins, and mRNA are transported bidirectionally along microtubules by plus‐end directed kinesin and minus‐end directed dynein motors. Microtubules are decorated by microtubule‐associated proteins (MAPs) that organize the cytoskeleton, regulate microtubule dynamics and modulate the interaction between motor proteins and microtubules to direct intracellular transport. Tau is a neuronal MAP that stabilizes axonal microtubules and crosslinks them into bundles. Dysregulation of tau leads to a range of neurodegenerative diseases known as tauopathies including Alzheimer's disease (AD). Tau reduces the processivity of kinesin and dynein by acting as an obstacle on the microtubule. Single‐molecule assays indicate that kinesin‐1 is more strongly inhibited than kinesin‐2 or dynein, suggesting tau might act to spatially modulate the activity of specific motors. To investigate the role of tau in regulating bidirectional transport, we isolated phagosomes driven by kinesin‐1, kinesin‐2, and dynein and reconstituted their motility along microtubules. We find that tau biases bidirectional motility towards the microtubule minus‐end in a dose‐dependent manner. Optical trapping measurements show that tau increases the magnitude and frequency of forces exerted by dynein through inhibiting opposing kinesin motors. Mathematical modeling indicates that tau controls the directional bias of intracellular cargoes through differentially tuning the processivity of kinesin‐1, kinesin‐2, and dynein. Taken together, these results demonstrate that tau modulates motility in a motor‐specific manner to direct intracellular transport, and suggests that dysregulation of tau might contribute to neurodegeneration by disrupting the balance of plus‐ and minus‐end directed transport.      

Cytoplasmic dynein and microtubule transport in the axon: The action connection

The neuron uses two families of microtubule-based motors for fast axonal transport, kinesin, and cytoplasmic dynein. Cytoplasmic dynein moves membranous organelles from the distal regions of the axon to the cell body. Because dynein is synthesized in the cell body, it must first be delivered to the axon tip. It has recently been shown that cytoplasmic dynein is moved from the cell body along the axon by two different mechanisms. A small amount is associated with fast anterograde transport, the membranous organelles moved by kinesin. Most of the dynein is transported in slow component b, the actin-based transport compartment. Dynactin, a protein complex that binds dynein, is also transported in slow component b. The dynein in slow component b binds to microtubules in an ATP-dependent manner in vitro, suggesting that this dynein is enzymatically active. The finding that functionally active dynein, and dynactin, are associated with the actin-based transport compartment suggests a mechanism whereby dynein anchored to the actin cytoskeleton via dynactin provides the motive force for microtubule movement in the axon.     

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.     

Localization of bicoid mRNA in late oocytes is maintained by continual active transport

Localization of bicoid mRNA to the anterior of the Drosophila oocyte is essential to produce the Bicoid protein gradient that patterns the anterior-posterior axis of the embryo. Previous studies have characterized a microtubule-dependent pathway for bicoid mRNA localization during midoogenesis, when bicoid first accumulates at the anterior. We show that the majority of bicoid is actually localized later in oogenesis, when the only known mechanism for mRNA localization is based on passive trapping. Through live imaging of fluorescently tagged endogenous bicoid mRNA, we identify a temporally distinct pathway for bicoid localization in late oocytes that utilizes a specialized subpopulation of anterior microtubules and dynein. The directional movement of bicoid RNA particles within the oocyte observed here is consistent with dynein-mediated transport. Furthermore, our results indicate that association of bicoid with the anterior oocyte cortex is dynamic and support a model for maintenance of bicoid localization by continual active transport on microtubules.     

Motor proteins: kinesin can replace Myosin

Directional transport of specific cargos is tuned to specific molecular motors and specific cytoskeletal tracks. Myosin V transports its cargo on actin cables, whereas kinesin or dynein transport their cargo on microtubules. A recent study shows that an engineered kinesin can substitute for myosin V and its cargo-specific transport and subsequent cellular functions.     

Swallowing dynein: a missing link in RNA localization?

Localization of bicoid messenger RNA to the anterior cortex of the developing oocyte is essential for correct anterior-posterior patterning of the Drosophila embryo. It now seems that the Swallow protein functions as an adaptor, bridging bicoid mRNA to dynein, a molecular motor that would transport the complex anteriorly along microtubules.     

Single cytoplasmic dynein molecule movements: characterization and comparison with kinesin.

Cytoplasmic dynein is a major microtubule motor for minus-end directed movements including retrograde axonal transport. To better understand the mechanism by which cytoplasmic dynein converts ATP energy into motility, we have analyzed the nanometer-level displacements of latex beads coated with low numbers of cytoplasmic dynein molecules. Cytoplasmic dynein-coated beads exhibited greater lateral movements among microtubule protofilaments (ave. 5.1 times/microns of displacement) compared with kinesin (ave. 0.9 times/micron). In addition, dynein moved rearward up to 100 nm over several hundred milliseconds, often in correlation with off-axis movements from one protofilament to another. We suggest that single molecules of cytoplasmic dynein move the beads because 1) there is a linear dependence of bead motility on dynein/bead ratio, 2) the binding of beads to microtubules studied by laser tweezers is best fit by a first-order Poisson, and 3) the run length histogram of dynein beads follows a first-order decay. At the cellular level, the greater disorder of cytoplasmic dynein movements may facilitate transport by decreasing the duration of collisions between kinesin and cytoplasmic dynein-powered vesicles.     

Interactions and regulation of molecular motors in Xenopus melanophores

Many cellular components are transported using a combination of the actin- and microtubule-based transport systems. However, how these two systems work together to allow well-regulated transport is not clearly understood. We investigate this question in the Xenopus melanophore model system, where three motors, kinesin II, cytoplasmic dynein, and myosin V, drive aggregation or dispersion of pigment organelles called melanosomes. During dispersion, myosin V functions as a "molecular ratchet" to increase outward transport by selectively terminating dynein-driven minus end runs. We show that there is a continual tug-of-war between the actin and microtubule transport systems, but the microtubule motors kinesin II and dynein are likely coordinated. Finally, we find that the transition from dispersion to aggregation increases dynein-mediated motion, decreases myosin V--mediated motion, and does not change kinesin II--dependent motion. Down-regulation of myosin V contributes to aggregation by impairing its ability to effectively compete with movement along microtubules.     

A single protofilament is sufficient to support unidirectional walking of Dynein and Kinesin

Cytoplasmic dynein and kinesin are two-headed microtubule motor proteins that move in opposite directions on microtubules. It is known that kinesin steps by a 'hand-over-hand' mechanism, but it is unclear by which mechanism dynein steps. Because dynein has a completely different structure from that of kinesin and its head is massive, it is suspected that dynein uses multiple protofilaments of microtubules for walking. One way to test this is to ask whether dynein can step along a single protofilament. Here, we examined dynein and kinesin motility on zinc-induced tubulin sheets (zinc-sheets) which have only one protofilament available as a track for motor proteins. Single molecules of both dynein and kinesin moved at similar velocities on zinc-sheets compared to microtubules, clearly demonstrating that dynein and kinesin can walk on a single protofilament and multiple rows of parallel protofilaments are not essential for their motility. Considering the size and the motile properties of dynein, we suggest that dynein may step by an inchworm mechanism rather than a hand-over-hand mechanism.     

Coupling viruses to dynein and kinesin-1

It is now clear that transport on microtubules by dynein and kinesin family motors has an important if not critical role in the replication and spread of many different viruses. Understanding how viruses hijack dynein and kinesin motors using a limited repertoire of proteins offers a great opportunity to determine the molecular basis of motor recruitment. In this review, we discuss the interactions of dynein and kinesin-1 with adenovirus, the α herpes viruses: herpes simplex virus (HSV1) and pseudorabies virus (PrV), human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and vaccinia virus. We highlight where the molecular links to these opposite polarity motors have been defined and discuss the difficulties associated with identifying viral binding partners where the basis of motor recruitment remains to be established. Ultimately, studying microtubule-based motility of viruses promises to answer fundamental questions as to how the activity and recruitment of the dynein and kinesin-1 motors are coordinated and regulated during bi-directional transport.     

Cytoplasmic dynein: advances in microtubule-based motility

It is four years since the discovery that a cytoplasmic form of dynein was able to produce force along microtubules in the opposite direction to kinesin. Recent evidence has supported a role for this cytoplasmic dynein in retrograde organelle transport, as well as other forms of intracellular motility.