![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 32, 28774-28779, August 9, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,
¶
From the
Department of Cell Biology, The Wenner-Gren
Institute, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden and
§ Henry Hoyt Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Princeton
University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544
Received for publication, April 8, 2002, and in revised form, May 30, 2002
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Tropomyosin has been shown to cause annealing of
gelsolin-capped actin filaments. Here we show that tropomyosin is
highly efficient in transforming even the smallest gelsolin-actin
complexes into long actin filaments. At low concentrations of
tropomyosin, the effect of tropomyosin depends on the length of the
actin oligomer, and the cooperative nature of the process is a direct
indication that tropomyosin induces a conformational change in the
gelsolin-actin complexes, altering the structure at the actin (+) end
such that capping by gelsolin is abolished. At increased concentrations of tropomyosin, heterodimers, trimers, and tetramers are converted to
actin filaments. In addition, evidence is presented demonstrating that
gelsolin, once removed from the (+) end of the actin, can reassociate
with the newly formed tropomyosin-decorated actin filaments.
Interestingly, the binding of gelsolin to the tropomyosin-actin filament complexes saturates at 2 gelsolin molecules per 14 actin and 2 tropomyosins, i.e. two gelsolins per tropomyosin-regulatory unit along the filament. These observations support the view that both
tropomyosin and gelsolin are likely to have important functions in
addition to those proposed earlier.
In response to extracellular signals, cells change shape and
activity through processes that affect the dynamics of the actin-based microfilament system. The plasticity of this chemo-mechanical transduction system is regulated by a large number of diverse proteins,
binding either monomeric or filamentous actin. The regulation involves
proteins controlling actin assembly, organizing filaments by
cross-linking, and translocating formed actin filament ensembles (1-4).
Gelsolin is an abundant actin binding protein thought to be
involved in cell shape regulation by controlling actin assembly at the
(+) end (fast growing end) of actin filaments and by severing actin
filaments (5). Gelsolin consists of six homologous domains (6, 7),
three of which bind to actin (8-11). Domain 1 of gelsolin has a
calcium-insensitive high affinity actin-binding site
(Kd 5 pM), and domain 4 a
calcium-sensitive, lower affinity actin-binding site
(Kd 1.8 µM) (12). Domain 2 has been
shown to bind to actin filaments with a Kd of 2-7
µM (13, 14). Gelsolin can nucleate filament formation by
forming a complex with two actin monomers. In this process, gelsolin
binds to the (+) end of the monomers, thereby initiating growth of a
filament, where monomers are added to the ( Actin filaments in lamellipodia and filopodia at the periphery of cells
are organized with their fast growing (+) ends toward advancing cell
edges (20, 21), where there appears to be specific protein modules
involved in the addition of actin monomers (22-25). Gelsolin has been
detected at this location by electron microscopy using gold-labeled
gelsolin antibodies (26). With the use of such antibodies in indirect
immunofluorescence, gelsolin has also been shown to colocalize with
both actin stress fibers in non-muscle cells (27, 28) and with the
I-bands in sarcomeres of myofibrils (29). The function of gelsolin in
these structures is unknown.
Skeletal muscle tropomyosin is a 40-nm-long coiled-coil heterodimeric
protein with seven actin-binding sites (30), displaying strong
cooperative binding to actin filaments (31). At saturation, both sides
of the actin filament are associated with tropomyosin, creating
regulatory units along the filament consisting of 14 consecutive actin
monomers. Studies on truncated forms of tropomyosin show that the N-
and C-terminal ends of the protein have major influences on its actin
binding capacity and its regulatory properties (32, 33). The multiple
binding sites and end-to-end binding are the likely basis for the
cooperative regulation by calcium via troponin of the actomyosin
interaction in skeletal muscle fibers (34).
Myofibers express two isoforms of tropomyosin, whereas non-muscle
cells express 6-8 isoforms, whose pattern of expression depends on the
type of cell and the physiological conditions (35-37). There is also a
variation in the cellular distribution of the tropomyosin isoforms,
suggesting different tropomyosins in functionally different actin
organizations in the cell (38-40). Tropomyosin has been shown to
stabilize and increase the rigidity of actin filaments (41, 42) and to
restore the polymerization of a polymerization-defective actin mutant,
implying that tropomyosin strengthens the intermonomer bonds in the
actin filament (43). Furthermore, tropomyosin inhibits gelsolin
severing of Despite all the available information about tropomyosin, its role in
regulating the actomyosin system in both non-muscle and muscle cells is
still unclear. Smooth and non-muscle cells do not express troponin;
instead, these cells seem to control their actomyosin system by other
mechanisms, involving either calcium/calmodulin-regulated caldesmon, a
tropomyosin-interacting protein with some homology to troponin (46), or
phosphorylation of myosin (47).
The observations reported here indicate that tropomyosin as well as
gelsolin might have important functions in addition to those described
before. First, tropomyosin is remarkably effective in transforming
gelsolin-actin complexes into long filaments. In fact, even short
gelsolin-actin complexes (heterodimers,
GA1; heterotrimers,
GA2; and heterotetramers, GA3) can be converted into long filaments by tropomyosin. Second, the appearance of free
gelsolin demonstrates that tropomyosin actually dissociates the
gelsolin-actin complexes. Finally, tropomyosin-decorated actin filaments were found to bind gelsolin with a distinct stoichiometry of
2 gelsolin molecules per 14 actins and 2 tropomyosins.
Protein Purification--
Bovine Sedimentation Assay--
The effect of tropomyosin binding to
gelsolin-capped actin filaments was monitored using a sedimentation
assay. For this, samples of Fluorescence Measurements--
Polymerization of actin was
monitored by recording the increase in fluorescence of co-polymerized
2% pyrenyl-labeled bovine Electron Microscopy--
An aliquot (20 µl) of the sample was
placed on a glow-discharged carbon-coated Formvar copper grid for
60 s, after which a 15-µl drop of 1% uranyl acetate was placed
on the grid for 15 s (repeated seven times). Grids were viewed
with a Philips CM120 electron microscope at 80 kV and with 45,000× or
60,000× nominal magnification.
Size Exclusion Gel Chromatography--
Actin (30 µM) was mixed with gelsolin (3 µM) and
tropomyosin (4 µM) and treated as described above. After
ultracentrifugation of the sample, the supernatant was loaded onto a
Superdex 200 gel filtration column (Amersham Biosciences) calibrated
using standard proteins provided by the manufacturer (Amersham
Biosciences). The column was equilibrated with F buffer (5 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.6, 0.5 mM ATP, 0.1 mM CaCl2, 0.5 mM DTT, 2 mM MgCl2, and 100 mM KCl) and
eluted at a rate of 12 cm/h. The protein peaks were analyzed by
SDS-PAGE and native PAGE gel electrophoresis. The molecular weight of
the complex was determined by interpolation of Rf versus Mr using the
molecular weight standard curve. Gel filtration chromatography was
performed at 4 °C.
Gelsolin Interaction with Non-muscle Uncapping of Filament (+) Ends by Tropomyosin and Filament
Annealing--
It was observed earlier that the addition of
tropomyosin to short gelsolin-capped actin filaments resulted in longer
filaments (44, 45). The experiments described here establish the highly efficient nature of this process. As shown in Fig.
2a, gelsolin and actin mixed
in a 1:50 molar ratio gave rise to short actin filaments of an average
length of 120 nm, in good agreement with the expected length (50 monomers × 2.7 nm = 135 nm). The electron micrograph in Fig.
2b illustrates that tropomyosin added to such gelsolin-actin
complexes resulted in the formation of long filaments several
micrometers in length. With gelsolin and actin mixed in a 1:3 molar
ratio (Fig. 2c), the product appeared as short, mainly globular structures. Tropomyosin had the capacity to convert these gelsolin-actin complexes into long actin filaments (Fig.
2d). The filaments obtained here are clearly different in
appearance compared with those in Fig. 2b. Most likely, this
is due to the association of the filaments with significant amounts of
gelsolin (see below).
The efficiency by which tropomyosin transforms gelsolin-actin complexes
was studied by mixing
To further investigate the cooperativity of the process, three series
of actin (20 µM) and gelsolin (20-0.1 µM)
mixtures were prepared to which 3, 5, and 10 µM
tropomyosin was added, respectively. As shown in Fig. 3 (open
symbols), the higher the concentration of tropomyosin, the higher
the yield of sedimentable actin. Remarkably, in the presence of
increased concentrations of tropomyosin, 80% of the actin from the
shortest gelsolin-actin complexes were recovered in the pellet. This
suggests that, in addition to the multi-site cooperative binding of
tropomyosin to actin oligomers, there is a novel mechanism of
tropomyosin displacing the tightly bound actin from gelsolin.
Further Evidence for Two Mechanisms in the Interaction of
Tropomyosin with Gelsolin-Actin Complexes--
With 10 µM tropomyosin and increasing concentrations of gelsolin,
there was a dip in the recovery of sedimentable actin filaments (Fig.
4, open circles), with a minimum reached at a 1:4 GA
molar ratio. An indication of such a dip is also seen in Fig. 3
(diamonds). Annealing of longer gelsolin-actin oligomers,
GA80-GA8, should represent the effect of
multiple-site interactions with tropomyosin. The interaction of
tropomyosin with smaller gelsolin-actin complexes (GA2 and
GA) shows that tropomyosin was very efficient also in dissociating
gelsolin-actin heterodimers and trimers, resulting in sedimentation of
more than 90% of the actin. The addition of gelsolin in molar excess
over actin did not decrease the effect of tropomyosin. Furthermore, the
corresponding supernatants (Fig. 4,
closed circles) contained increased amounts of actin up to a
maximum, which coincided with the minimum described above. Up to this
point, the supernatants contained a 3-fold excess of actin (closed circles) to gelsolin (open diamonds),
indicating the existence of GA3 complexes. Supernatants
obtained after annealing of gelsolin-actin heterodimers and trimers, on
the other hand, contained up to a 10-fold molar excess of gelsolin over
actin, confirming that tropomyosin released gelsolin from actin and
induced actin filament formation. To test whether the excess gelsolin
was associated with tropomyosin or appeared in the free form, a
corresponding sample was analyzed by gel chromatography on Superdex
200. Analysis of the fractions from the chromatography by SDS-PAGE gave
no evidence for complex formation between tropomyosin and gelsolin. In
fact, the two proteins appeared in the eluate completely separated from
each other (data not shown).
To characterize the status of the proteins remaining in the
supernatant, a gelsolin-capped actin oligomer (1:10 molar ratio) was
incubated with tropomyosin as described earlier, and the supernatant was collected and analyzed by gel chromatography (Fig.
5). After tropomyosin annealing a
gelsolin-actin complex of this length, one major component
(I) with an approximate molecular mass of 200 kDa was found
in the supernatant (Fig. 5a). Analysis of this material by
SDS-PAGE and subsequent densitometry showed gelsolin and actin in a 1:3
molar ratio (Fig. 5b). In addition to the GA3 peak, there were two smaller peaks containing free gelsolin
(II) and actin (III). Electrophoresis under
non-denaturing conditions (Fig. 5c) confirmed the existence
of one component, whose molecular mass appeared to be 260 kDa.
Gelsolin Binding to Tropomyosin-decorated Actin
Filaments--
Observations of significant amounts of gelsolin
cosedimenting with the tropomyosin-decorated actin filaments prompted a
more systematic analysis. For this, mixtures of actin with increasing concentrations of gelsolin were incubated with tropomyosin (10 µM), the mixtures were centrifuged, and pellets were
analyzed by SDS-PAGE (Fig.
6a). As seen in Fig.
6b, increasing the concentrations of gelsolin resulted in
increasing amounts of gelsolin cosedimenting with tropomyosin-decorated
actin filaments. Saturation of the tropomyosin-actin filaments was
reached at 0.15 mol of gelsolin per mol of actin, suggesting 2 gelsolin molecules per 14 actin monomers and 2 tropomyosins. The
gelsolin bound to tropomyosin-decorated actin filaments with an
apparent Kd of 1.4 µM. Control experiments show that ultracentrifugation of mixtures containing gelsolin and tropomyosin in the absence of actin resulted in the appearance of only small amounts of gelsolin in the pellet.
Control of the Actin Filament (+) End--
Gelsolin caps the actin
filament (+) end with high affinity (Kd in
nM range). Partial dissociation of gelsolin from actin can
be accomplished by the addition of calcium-chelating agents. Efficient
dissociation of gelsolin from the (+) end of actin monomers or
filaments in vitro has been accomplished only by the
addition of polyphosphoinositides (18), and evidence for the
involvement of polyphosphoinositides in the control of actin
polymerization in vivo has been reported (5). Our
observations that tropomyosin can dissociate GA complexes, including
the high affinity-bound actin monomer strongly suggests that
tropomyosin is an important element in the control of actin
polymerization in the cell. Both the generation of free (+) ends and
the tropomyosin-induced polymerization of small GA complexes could be
important in this context. Actin filament (+) ends may be capped by
other members of the gelsolin/villin family of actin regulatory
proteins or by the ubiquitously expressed Cap Z (58, 59). Therefore,
the effects of tropomyosin isoforms on filaments of the Mechanisms in Tropomyosin-induced Dissociation of GA
Complexes--
There appear to be two mechanisms involved in the
dissociation of gelsolin from actin oligomers by tropomyosin. One
mechanism depends on multi-site association of tropomyosin with
gelsolin-capped actin oligomers. It can be detected with gelsolin-actin
oligomers containing six or more actin monomers even at low
concentrations of tropomyosin. The midpoint of the transition from
gelsolin-actin complexes to tropomyosin-bound actin polymers occurred
when the complexes were about 14 monomers long. The cooperativity of
the interaction seen in this case suggests that there is an underlying conformational change in the actin oligomer that causes the
dissociation of gelsolin.
A second mechanism operating at higher concentrations of tropomyosin
causes the dissociation of small gelsolin-actin complexes, GA,
GA2, and GA3, with lesser efficiency. This
effect was unexpected, since the affinity of gelsolin for the actin
filament (+) ends (Kd <5 nM) is much
higher than that of tropomyosin for filamentous actin
(Kd 0.2 µM) (60). It has been
reported, however, that there is a calcium-dependent
interaction between intact gelsolin and tropomyosin in vitro
(Kd 0.6 µM) (61) and that the actin
filament binding domain 2 of gelsolin also binds to tropomyosin (62).
It is reasonable therefore to suggest that the tropomyosin effect on
small gelsolin-actin complexes is due to tropomyosin causing a
conformational change in the gelsolin molecule, resulting in its
release from actin.
The appearance of a minimum in the curve describing tropomyosin-driven
conversion of GA complexes of varying lengths (Fig. 4) suggested that
complexes consisting of gelsolin and three to five actins are more
stable than either smaller or larger complexes. Analysis of the
supernatants obtained in these experiments showed that GA3
was the major, non-sedimentable component obtained from mixtures
initially containing gelsolin and more than three actins. The
explanation to GA3 being the most stable complex could be related to the fact that three of the domains of gelsolin interact with
actin. It is possible that these domains bind to three different actin
monomers and that this provides stability to a gelsolin-bound actin
trimer. The dip in the curve mentioned above would then reflect the
operation of the two mechanisms of tropomyosin-driven dissociation of
GA complexes, annealing of longer gelsolin-bound actin complexes
through multi-site interactions and annealing of shorter complexes due
to tropomyosin-induced conformational change in gelsolin.
The initial phase of the interaction involving both short and long GA
complexes might result in the release of free gelsolin. In the case of
long GA complexes, released gelsolin would reassociate with actin
monomers to form stable GA3 complexes. Alternatively, multi-site interactions between tropomyosin and longer GA complexes could weaken the actin-actin bonds three monomers away from gelsolin, resulting in the direct dissociation of GA3 complexes. The
observation that GA3 complexes are particularly stable is
in agreement with results obtained in a systematic study of the
appearance of stable complexes formed with gelsolin and actin mixed in
different proportions and under different
conditions.2
Conformational Changes in Actin--
Several lines of evidence
indicate that actin filaments can exist in at least two different
conformational states depending on the type of ligand bound to the
polymer. Gelsolin binding to the (+) end of an actin filament changes
the polymer conformation, stabilizing the filament in a state that
binds proteins of the ADF/cofilin family with increased
affinity. Biochemical data suggest that this effect propagates 10-20
monomers from the (+) end of the filament (63). Evidence obtained by
electron microscopy and time-resolved phosphorescence and absorption
anisotropy indicate that the effect of gelsolin extends over longer
distances and involves changes in the helicity and torsional
flexibility of the actin filament (64, 65). Furthermore, it has been
demonstrated that binding of ADF/cofilin to F-actin changes the helical
twist of actin filaments (66).
ADF/cofilin and tropomyosin display mutually exclusive binding to actin
filaments (67-69). This appears not to be due to steric hindrance,
since the two proteins do not have overlapping binding sites on actin
filaments (70, 71). Phalloidin can bind to tropomyosin-decorated actin
filaments (72), whereas it cannot bind to cofilin-decorated filaments
(63), suggesting that cofilin and tropomyosin stabilize different
conformers of actin. Also, as mentioned above, the relative affinity of
ADF/cofilin for actin filaments is increased by gelsolin (63), whereas
phalloidin is displaced by the binding of gelsolin (73). Thus,
tropomyosin and phalloidin appear to stabilize one state of the actin
filament and gelsolin and ADF/cofilin another.
The observations reported here further support the idea of multiple
conformations of actin filaments accessible via cooperative transitions
along the length of the filaments induced by binding of various
actin-binding proteins. How an interplay between tropomyosin and
ADF/cofilin might be used by cells to control actin polymerization is
unclear. It is possible that signal transduction pathways controlling the activity of ADF/cofilin (74, 75) in turn control the activity of
tropomyosin described here.
Connections between Gelsolin and Tropomyosin in the Generation of
Force--
Our observation that tropomyosin establishes the position
of gelsolin along actin filaments points to an intimate functional connection between these two proteins. This recalls observations that
gelsolin is colocalized with actin stress fibers in tissue-cultured cells (27, 28) and in myofibrils (29). Gelsolin was shown to be
important for stress fiber contractility in vivo (28), and
in vitro gelsolin enhances the actomyosin Mg-ATPase activity (76, 77), an effect potentiated by tropomyosin and dependent on calcium
ions (76, 78).
In muscle cells, the calcium-sensitive troponin complex forms a
regulatory unit with tropomyosin, controlling the actomyosin ATPase. It
has long been held, dating back to Bremel and Weber (79), that
conformational changes propagated along tropomyosin-decorated actin
filaments confer cooperativity to the regulation of force development.
Stress fibers in non-muscle cells consist of bundles of actin filaments
with periodic arrangements of both myosin and tropomyosin, perhaps
forming regulatory units similar to those in sarcomeres of muscle cells
(80). A possible mechanistic implication of the observations discussed
here is that gelsolin-tropomyosin-decorated actin filaments can sustain
the directional propagation of force progressively from one regulatory
unit to the next. In this model, gelsolin conditions actin filaments
for tension development, a role similar to that of troponin in muscle cells.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
) end of the
gelsolin-actin nucleus (15, 16). Gelsolin remains bound as a cap on the
(+) end of the filament, inhibiting the further addition of actin
monomers at that site. Similarly, gelsolin remains bound to the (+) end
of one of the fragments after a severing event. These gelsolin
activities can be regulated by Ca2+ and
polyphosphoinositides (17-19).
-actin filaments (44) and anneals gelsolin-capped
filaments, an effect enhanced by caldesmon (45).
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-actin was purified from
calf thymus (48). The actin was stored in G buffer pH 7.6 (5 mM Tris-HCl, 0.5 mM ATP, 0.1 mM
CaCl2, and 0.5 mM DTT) and used within a week
or drop-frozen in (25-µl aliquots) liquid nitrogen. Bovine plasma
gelsolin was purified from calf serum utilizing
Ca2+-dependent absorption to DEAE-cellulose
based on earlier protocols with some modifications (49, 50). Bovine
blood obtained fresh from the slaughterhouse was clotted at room
temperature for 2 h, and the clot was removed by centrifugation.
Five hundred milliliters of serum was dialyzed in 25 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, at 4 °C, 45 mM NaCl, 0.5 mM CaCl2, and 0.1 mM DTT (buffer A)
with continuous buffer changes. The dialyzed solution was applied to a
DEAE-cellulose (DE52, Whatman) column pre-equilibrated with the same
buffer. In the presence of Ca2+, gelsolin is recovered in
the flow-through. After the addition of EGTA to the flow-through (2 mM final concentration), the solution was directly applied
to a second DEAE-cellulose column equilibrated with buffer A containing
1 mM EGTA, allowing gelsolin to bind to the matrix.
Gelsolin was eluted with a 1-4 mM CaCl2 linear gradient in 25 mM Tris HCl, 30 mM NaCl, and 1 mM DTT. Finally, EGTA was added to the eluate to a
concentration of 5 mM. The purity was checked by SDS-PAGE,
and the protein was dialyzed into a storage buffer containing 10 mM Tris HCl, pH 7.6, at 4 °C, 2 mM EGTA, and
0.2 mM DTT. Rabbit skeletal muscle tropomyosin was purified as described earlier (51) and stored at
20 °C. Protein
concentrations were determined spectrophotometrically using the
extinction coefficients of 0.63 ml·mg·cm
1 for actin
at 290 nm, 1.538 ml·mg·cm
1 for gelsolin at 280 nm,
and 0.3 ml·mg·cm
1 for tropomyosin at 280 nm.
-actin (20 or 10 µM) mixed
with increasing concentrations of gelsolin (0.1-20 µM)
in G buffer was prepared. Polymerization was initiated by the addition
of MgCl2 and KCl to final concentrations of 2 and 100 mM, respectively. The mixture was incubated at room temperature for 2 h, then tropomyosin was added to final
concentrations of 1.5, 3.0, 5.0, or 10 µM, and the
mixtures were incubated for another hour. The samples were
ultracentrifuged at room temperature for 30 min at 30 p.s.i. in a
Beckman Airfuge. The supernatants were removed, and the pellets were
briefly washed with F-buffer and resuspended in equal volumes of G
buffer. Pellets and supernatants were analyzed by SDS-PAGE using 10%
gels (52). Gel electrophoresis under non-denaturing conditions was
performed using 4-15% Tris-HCl precast gels according to the
manufacturer's recommendations (Bio-Rad). The proteins were visualized
by Coomassie Blue staining, and the amount of protein was estimated by
densitometry using ImageQuant 5.0 (Molecular Dynamics). The molar ratio
between the actin, gelsolin, and tropomyosin was calculated using
values corrected for the differential uptake of Coomassie stain in the
proteins. To determine protein concentrations, a standard curve
(0.05-0.6 nmol of bovine serum albumin) was included when scanning the
gels. The experimental data were fit to a nonlinear curve using the
Hill equation (53) (Microcal ORIGIN), which provides a measure of the
cooperativity of the reaction. The fraction of sedimented actin was
normalized to 1.0 by dividing the amount of actin recovered in the
pellet with the total amount of actin in the reaction mix.
-actin (54) using a Fluoroscan II plate
reader (Labsystems) (55). The nucleation assay studied the conversion
of monomeric actin to polymeric actin in samples containing
Ca2+-G-actin (2.5 µM) and increasing
concentrations of gelsolin (0-120 nM) in G buffer. The
polymerization reaction was initiated by the addition of
MgCl2 and KCl to 2 and 100 mM, respectively.
The salts were added to all wells simultaneously with a Multitip
pipette (Finnpipette) with a delay between the addition of salt and the first measurement of 15 s.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-Actin--
Previous
workers have used skeletal muscle
-actin in their studies of the
gelsolin-actin interaction. We have presented evidence that muscle
-
and non-muscle
-actin differ in the timing and release of inorganic
phosphate from polymerizing actin (56). Here, the interaction between
plasma gelsolin and non-muscle
-actin was studied by following the
gelsolin-induced nucleation of
-actin polymerization. For this, a
series of polymerization experiments were performed by varying the
concentration of gelsolin (Fig. 1). The
polymerization rate was calculated from the slope of the curves in the
region where the increase in fluorescence intensity versus
time was approximately linear. In the gelsolin-nucleated reaction, the
polymerization rate was directly proportional to the concentration of
active gelsolin molecules added, and the apparent rate constant for
polymerization can be described by the expression
d[F-actin]/dt = k+
[gelsolin][actin monomer]. The gelsolin nucleation of
-actin
polymerization gives an apparent rate constant
(k+) of 0.2 µM
1s
1 for the addition of
monomers at the (
) end. Thus, the rate of polymerization relative to
gelsolin concentration obtained with non-muscle
-actin was more than
three times higher than that previously reported for gelsolin-nucleated
polymerization of muscle
-actin (57).

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Effect of gelsolin on
-actin polymerization. The rate of actin
polymerization in a solutions containing 2.5 µM
Ca2+-G-actin mixed with increasing concentrations of
gelsolin (0-120 nM) was measured immediately after the
addition of polymerizing salts. Actin alone (
), actin mixed with 30 nM gelsolin (
), 60 nM gelsolin (×), 90 nM gelsolin (
), and 120 nM gelsolin
(circle with horizontal bar). The polymerization rate
(d[F-actin]/dt) was calculated from the slopes
of the plots where the increase in the fluorescence intensity with time
is approximately linear. The inset shows the rate of
polymerization (µM F-actin/min) versus the
concentration of gelsolin (nM), and the on-rate
(k+) was calculated to 0.2 µM
1s
1.

View larger version (206K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Annealing of gelsolin-capped actin filaments
analyzed by electron microscopy. Panel a shows gelsolin
and actin mixed in a 1:50 molar ratio; b, mixture as in
a after the addition of tropomyosin. c shows
gelsolin and actin mixed in a 1:3 molar ratio; d, mixture as
in c after the addition of tropomyosin. The scale
bar represents 100 nm and applies to all panels.
-actin (10 µM) with decreasing concentrations (10-0.2 µM) of gelsolin to form
gelsolin-capped actin oligomers of lengths varying from 1 to 200 monomers. After 1 h of incubation in the presence or absence of
tropomyosin, the samples were centrifuged, and the material in the
pellets and supernatants was analyzed by SDS-PAGE (see "Materials and
Methods"). The addition of 1.5 µM tropomyosin resulted
in a sigmoidal increase in sedimentable tropomyosin-decorated actin
filaments (Fig. 3, closed
circles). The transition began at a point where the gelsolin-actin complexes were expected to contain 6-7 actin monomers, implying that
each side of the actin oligomers presented only three consecutive binding sites for the seven complementary sites on tropomyosin. The
midpoint of the transition occurred at an estimated actin oligomer
length of 14 actin monomers. The process was characterized by a Hill
coefficient of 2.0 ± 0.4, corresponding to 2 tropomyosins per 14 actin monomers. In control experiments (Fig. 3, ×) involving only
-actin and gelsolin, actin did not appear in the pellets unless the
gelsolin-capped actin oligomers contained at least 100 actin
monomers.

View larger version (17K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Annealing of gelsolin-actin complexes of
increasing lengths with increasing concentrations of tropomyosin.
The amount of actin recovered in the pellet after ultracentrifugation
was estimated by densitometry of SDS-PAGE gels as described under
"Materials and Methods." Fraction of actin in the pellet (of total
actin in the sample) was plotted versus the molar ratio of
gelsolin to actin (1:1-1:200) in the sample mixture in the presence of
increasing concentrations of tropomyosin, 1.5 µM (
), 3 µM (
), 5 µM (
), and 10 µM (
). Sedimentation of gelsolin-actin complexes in
the absence of tropomyosin is shown as ×.

View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Amount of actin and gelsolin recovered in the
supernatant and pellet after tropomyosin induced annealing. Actin
(20 µM) was mixed with increasing concentrations of
gelsolin (0.25-30 µM) to obtain gelsolin:actin oligomers
of decreasing lengths (GA80 to GA0.5).
Tropomyosin was (10 µM) was added to these mixtures, the
supernatants and pellets were analyzed by SDS-PAGE, and concentrations
of actin and gelsolin were estimated by densitometry. The plot shows
actin in the pellets (
), actin in the supernatants (
), and
gelsolin in the supernatants (
). Data points are mean values from
three independent experiments.

View larger version (31K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Non-sedimentable components obtained after
tropomyosin induced annealing. Panel a shows the
separation of the components in the supernatant by gel filtration; the
asterisk indicates the start of elution. A major peak
(I) of 200 kDa and two smaller peaks containing free
gelsolin (II) and actin (III) are separated. The
protein absorbance was followed at 280 nm. b, analysis of
the protein content from the major peak (I) by
electrophoresis under denaturing conditions shows that the 200-kDa
complex contains one gelsolin (90 kDa) and three actins (42 kDa) in a
1:3 molar ratio. c, characterization of the total
non-sedimentable material by native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
showed the presence of 1 component with an approximate molecular mass
of 260 kDa.

View larger version (47K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Association of gelsolin with
tropomyosin-decorated actin filaments. Panel a,
cosedimentation of
-actin (20 µM), gelsolin (0.25-20
µM), and tropomyosin (10 µM). Pellets were
analyzed by SDS-PAGE, and the concentrations of actin, gelsolin, and
tropomyosin (TM) were estimated by densitometry. In
panel b, bound gelsolin (
) and bound tropomyosin (
)
are expressed as molar ratios to actin monomers. Bound gelsolin and
tropomyosin molecules per actin 14-mer is demonstrated by the
right-side y axis. Nonlinear least squares fitting to data
points (mean values, n = 7) shows a maximum binding at
0.15 gelsolin/actin (i.e. 2 gelsolin/14 actin) and a
Kd of 1.4 µM for gelsolin binding to
the tropomyosin-decorated filaments.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-,
-, and
-actin isoforms, capped by different (+) end binding proteins, need
to be systematically investigated.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
|---|
We are grateful to Svenja Frischholz for providing skeletal tropomyosin.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by the Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education (STINT), the Swedish Cancer Society, the Swedish Natural Science Research Council (NFR) (to U. L.) and National Institutes of Health Grant GM44038 (to C. E. S.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶ To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 46-8-164101; Fax: 46-8-159837; E-mail: uno@cellbio.su.se.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 4, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M203360200
2 K. Narayan, M. Nyåhern-Meazza, S. Irischholz, C. E. Schutt, and U. Lindberg, submitted for publication.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: GA complex, gelsolin-actin complex; DTT, dithiothreitol; ADF, actin depolymerizing factor.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Sheterline, P., Handel, S. E., Molloy, C., and Hendry, K. A. (1991) Acta Histochem. Suppl. 41, 303-309[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. | Pollard, T. D., Blanchoin, L., and Mullins, R. D. (2000) Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 29, 545-576[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. | Pawlak, G., and Helfman, D. M. (2001) Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11, 41-47[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. | Small, J. V., Stradal, T., Vignal, E., and Rottner, K. (2002) Trends Cell Biol. 12, 112-120[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. |
Sun, H. Q.,
Yamamoto, M.,
Mejillano, M.,
and Yin, H. L.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
33179-33182 |
| 6. | Burtnick, L. D., Koepf, E. K., Grimes, J., Jones, E. Y., Stuart, D. I., McLaughlin, P. J., and Robinson, R. C. (1997) Cell 90, 661-670[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 7. | Kwiatkowski, D. J., Stossel, T. P., Orkin, S. H., Mole, J. E., Colten, H. R., and Yin, H. L. (1986) Nature 323, 455-458[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. |
Bryan, J.
(1988)
J. Cell Biol.
106,
1553-1562 |
| 9. |
Way, M.,
Gooch, J.,
Pope, B.,
and Weeds, A. G.
(1989)
J. Cell Biol.
109,
593-605 |
| 10. |
McGough, A.,
Chiu, W.,
and Way, M.
(1998)
Biophys. J.
74,
764-772 |
| 11. | Renoult, C., Blondin, L., Fattoum, A., Ternent, D., Maciver, S. K., Raynaud, F., Benyamin, Y., and Roustan, C. (2001) Eur. J. Biochem. 268, 6165-6175[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 12. | Pope, B., Maciver, S., and Weeds, A. (1995) Biochemistry 34, 1583-1588[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
Sun, H. Q.,
Wooten, D. C.,
Janmey, P. A.,
and Yin, H. L.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
9473-9479 |
| 14. | Puius, Y. A., Fedorov, E. V., Eichinger, L., Schleicher, M., and Almo, S. C. (2000) Biochemistry 39, 5322-5331[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. |
Yin, H. L.,
Hartwig, J. H.,
Maruyama, K.,
and Stossel, T. P.
(1981)
J. Biol. Chem.
256,
9693-9697 |
| 16. | Janmey, P. A., Chaponnier, C., Lind, S. E., Zaner, K. S., Stossel, T. P., and Yin, H. L. (1985) Biochemistry 24, 3714-3723[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. | Yin, H. L., and Stossel, T. P. (1979) Nature 281, 583-586[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. | Janmey, P. A., and Stossel, T. P. (1987) Nature 325, 362-364[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 19. |
Kinosian, H. J.,
Newman, J.,
Lincoln, B.,
Selden, L. A.,
Gershman, L. C.,
and Estes, J. E.
(1998)
Biophys. J.
75,
3101-3109 |
| 20. | Small, J. V., Isenberg, G., and Celis, J. E. (1978) Nature 272, 638-639[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 21. |
Wang, Y. L.
(1985)
J. Cell Biol.
101,
597-602 |
| 22. | Hoglund, A. S., Karlsson, R., Arro, E., Fredriksson, B. A., and Lindberg, U. (1980) J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 1, 127-146[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 23. |
Small, J. V.,
Herzog, M.,
and Anderson, K.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
129,
1275-1286 |
| 24. | Reinhard, M., Jarchau, T., and Walter, U. (2001) Trends Biochem. Sci. 26, 243-249[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 25. |
Dickinson, R. B.,
and Purich, D. L.
(2002)
Biophys. J.
82,
605-617 |
| 26. |
Hartwig, J. H.,
Chambers, K. A.,
and Stossel, T. P.
(1989)
J. Cell Biol.
108,
467-479 |
| 27. | Dissmann, E., and Hinssen, H. (1994) Eur. J. Cell Biol. 63, 336-344[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 28. | Arora, P. D., Janmey, P. A., and McCulloch, C. A. (1999) Exp. Cell Res. 250, 155-167[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. | Gonsior, S., and Hinssen, H. (1995) Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 31, 196-206[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 30. | Hitchcock-DeGregori, S. E., and Varnell, T. A. (1990) J. Mol. Biol. 214, 885-896[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. | Wegner, A. (1979) J. Mol. Biol. 131, 839-853[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 32. | Maytum, R., Geeves, M. A., and Konrad, M. (2000) Biochemistry 39, 11913-11920[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 33. | Moraczewska, J., and Hitchcock-DeGregori, S. E. (2000) Biochemistry 39, 6891-6897[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 34. | Lehrer, S. S., and Geeves, M. A. (1998) J. Mol. Biol. 277, 1081-1089[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 35. | Lees-Miller, J. P., and Helfman, D. M. (1991) Bioessays 13, 429-437[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. | Lin, J. J., Warren, K. S., Wamboldt, D. D., Wang, T., and Lin, J. L. (1997) Int. Rev. Cytol. 170, 1-38[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 37. | Gunning, P., Hardeman, E., Jeffrey, P., and Weinberger, R. (1998) Bioessays 20, 892-900[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 38. |
Lin, J. J.,
Hegmann, T. E.,
and Lin, J. L.
(1988)
J. Cell Biol.
107,
563-572 |
| 39. | Schevzov, G., Gunning, P., Jeffrey, P. L., Temm-Grove, C., Helfman, D. M., Lin, J. J., and Weinberger, R. P. (1997) Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 8, 439-454[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 40. | Percival, J. M., Thomas, G., Cock, T. A., Gardiner, E. M., Jeffrey, P. L., Lin, J. J., Weinberger, R. P., and Gunning, P. (2000) Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 47, 189-208[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 41. | Broschat, K. O., Weber, A., and Burgess, D. R. (1989) Biochemistry 28, 8501-8506[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 42. |
Kojima, H.,
Ishijima, A.,
and Yanagida, T.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
12962-12966 |
| 43. |
Wen, K. K.,
Kuang, B.,
and Rubenstein, P. A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
40594-40600 |
| 44. |
Ishikawa, R.,
Yamashiro, S.,
and Matsumura, F.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
7490-7497 |
| 45. |
Ishikawa, R.,
Yamashiro, S.,
and Matsumura, F.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
16764-16770 |
| 46. |
Marston, S. B.,
and Redwood, C. S.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
12317-12320 |
| 47. | Redowicz, M. J. (2001) J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 22, 163-173[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 48. | Lindberg, U., Schutt, C. E., Hellsten, E., Tjader, A. C., and Hult, T. (1988) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 967, 391-400[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 49. | Kurokawa, H., Fujii, W., Ohmi, K., Sakurai, T., and Nonomura, Y. (1990) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 168, 451-457[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 50. | Bryan, J. (1992) Methods Enzymol. 215, 88-99[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 51. | Smillie, L. B. (1982) Methods Enzymol. 85, 234-241 |
| 52. | Laemmli, U. K. (1970) Nature 227, 680-685[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 53. | Hill, A. V. (1910) J. Physiol. (Lond.) 40, 4-8 |
| 54. | Kouyama, T., and Mihashi, K. (1981) Eur. J. Biochem. 114, 33-38[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 55. | Schüler, H., Korenbaum, E., Schutt, C. E., Lindberg, U., and Karlsson, R. (1999) Eur. J. Biochem. 265, 210-220[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 56. | Nyman, T., Schuler, H., Korenbaum, E., Schutt, C. E., Karlsson, R., and Lindberg, U. (2002) J. Mol. Biol. 317, 577-589[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 57. | Janmey, P. A., and Stossel, T. P. (1986) J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 7, 446-454[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 58. | Kwiatkowski, D. J. (1999) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 11, 103-108[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 59. |
Witke, W., Li, W.,
Kwiatkowski, D. J.,
and Southwick, F. S.
(2001)
J. Cell Biol.
154,
775-784 |
| 60. | Hitchcock-DeGregori, S. E. (1994) Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 358, 85-96[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 61. | Koepf, E. K., and Burtnick, L. D. (1992) FEBS Lett. 309, 56-58[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 62. | Maciver, S. K., Ternent, D., and McLaughlin, P. J. (2000) FEBS Lett. 473, 71-75[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 63. |
Ressad, F.,
Didry, D.,
Xia, G. X.,
Hong, Y.,
Chua, N. H.,
Pantaloni, D.,
and Carlier, M. F.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
20894-20902 |
| 64. | Orlova, A., Prochniewicz, E., and Egelman, E. H. (1995) J. Mol. Biol. 245, 598-607[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 65. | Prochniewicz, E., Zhang, Q., Janmey, P. A., and Thomas, D. D. (1996) J. Mol. Biol. 260, 756-766[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 66. |
McGough, A.,
Pope, B.,
Chiu, W.,
and Weeds, A.
(1997)
J. Cell Biol.
138,
771-781 |
| 67. | Bernstein, B. W., and Bamburg, J. R. (1982) Cell Motil. 2, 1-8[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 68. | Nishida, E., Maekawa, S., and Sakai, H. (1984) Biochemistry 23, 5307-5313[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 69. | Bamburg, J. R. (1999) Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 15, 185-230[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 70. | McGough, A. (1998) Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 8, 166-176[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 71. |
Ono, S.,
and Ono, K.
(2002)
J. Cell Biol.
156,
1065-1076 |
| 72. | De La Cruz, E., and Pollard, T. D. (1994) Biochemistry 33, 14387-14392[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 73. |
Allen, P. G.,
and Janmey, P. A.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
32916-32923 |
| 74. | Amano, T., Tanabe, K., Eto, T., Narumiya, S., and Mizuno, K. (2001) Biochem. J. 354, 149-159[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 75. |
Dan, C.,
Kelly, A.,
Bernard, O.,
and Minden, A.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
32115-32121 |
| 76. | Onji, T., Takagi, M., and Shibata, N. (1988) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 155, 91-99[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 77. |
Albanesi, J. P.,
Coue, M.,
Fujisaki, H.,
and Korn, E. D.
(1985)
J. Biol. Chem.
260,
13276-13280 |
| 78. | Dabrowska, R., Hinssen, H., Galazkiewicz, B., and Nowak, E. (1996) Biochem. J. 315, 753-759 |
| 79. | Bremel, R. D., and Weber, A. (1972) Nat. New Biol. 238, 97-101[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 80. |
Lazarides, E.
(1976)
J. Cell Biol.
68,
202-219 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. Gunning, G. O'neill, and E. Hardeman Tropomyosin-Based Regulation of the Actin Cytoskeleton in Time and Space Physiol Rev, January 1, 2008; 88(1): 1 - 35. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |