Force transduction by the microtubule-bound Dam1 ring.
The coupling between the depolymerization of microtubules (MTs) and the motion of the Dam1 ring complex is now thought to play an important role in the generation of forces during mitosis. Our current understanding of this motion is based on a number of detailed computational models. Although these models realize possible mechanisms for force transduction, they can be extended by variation of any of a large number of poorly measured parameters and there is no clear strategy for determining how they might be distinguished experimentally. Here we seek to identify and analyze two distinct mechanisms present in the computational models. In the first, the splayed protofilaments at the end of the depolymerizing MT physically prevent the Dam1 ring from falling off the end, and in the other, an attractive binding secures the ring to the microtubule. Based on this analysis, we discuss how to distinguish between competing models that seek to explain how the Dam1 ring stays on the MT. We propose novel experimental approaches that could resolve these models for the first time, either by changing the diffusion constant of the Dam1 ring (e.g., by tethering a long polymer to it) or by using a time-varying load.
Armond
Jonathan W
JW
Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Turner
Matthew S
MS
D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D004058:Diffusion; D008870:Microtubules / Q000378:metabolism*; D008954:Models, Biological; D012441:Saccharomyces cerevisiae / Q000378:metabolism*; D029701:Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins / Q000378:metabolism*; D013816:Thermodynamics; D013997:Time Factors
D029701:Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins
Nature. 2005 Nov 17;438(7066):384-8
16292315
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Oct 7;105(40):15423-8
18824692
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Nov 20;98(24):13675-80
11698664
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2005 Feb;12(2):138-43
15640796
Curr Biol. 2005 Oct 25;15(20):1827-32
16243029
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Mar 22;102(12):4353-8
15767580
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jun 27;103(26):9873-8
16777964
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Apr 8;105(14):5378-83
18388201
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Apr 30;99(9):6035-40
11983898
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 May 13;105(19):6918-23
18460602
J Cell Sci. 2007 Oct 1;120(Pt 19):3345-51
17881496
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Nov 27;104(48):19017-22
18029449
J Cell Biol. 2001 Jan 8;152(1):197-212
11149931
J Cell Biol. 1995 Jun;129(5):1311-28
7775577
Nat Cell Biol. 2007 Jul;9(7):832-7
17572669
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 Jul;82(13):4404-8
3859869
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2008 Apr;77(4 Pt 1):040901
18517571
Cell. 2002 Oct 18;111(2):163-72
12408861
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2007 Mar;75(3 Pt 1):031910
17500729
Nat Cell Biol. 2008 Apr;10(4):407-14
18364702
J Cell Biol. 2008 May 19;181(4):587-94
18474626
Mol Biol Cell. 1995 Dec;6(12):1619-40
8590794
J Cell Biol. 1993 Feb;120(4):923-34
8432732
Biophys J. 1993 Jul;65(1):316-24
8369439
Mol Biol Cell. 1998 Oct;9(10):2857-71
9763448
Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2007 Aug;14(8):721-6
17643123
Biophys J. 2006 Mar 1;90(5):1687-96
16339879
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Dec 5;103(49):18432-7
17130449
Nature. 2006 Mar 23;440(7083):565-9
16415853
Mol Cell. 2005 Jan 21;17(2):277-90
15664196
J Cell Biol. 1991 Mar;112(6):1165-75
1999468
Mol Biol Cell. 2007 Jul;18(7):2503-10
17460120
Nature. 1988 Feb 11;331(6156):499-504
3340202
J Cell Biol. 1991 Sep;114(5):977-91
1874792
J Cell Biol. 2001 Dec 24;155(7):1137-45
11756468
Curr Biol. 2006 Aug 8;16(15):1489-501
16890524