Mechanics of microtubules: effects of protofilament orientation.
Microtubules are hollow cylindrical polymers of the protein tubulin that play a number of important dynamic and structural roles in eukaryotic cells. Both in vivo and in vitro microtubules can exist in several possible configurations, differing in the number of protofilaments, helical rise of tubulin dimers, and protofilament skew angle with respect to the main tube axis. Here, finite element modeling is applied to examine the mechanical response of several known microtubule types when subjected to radial deformation. The data presented here provide an important insight into microtubule stiffness and reveal that protofilament orientation does not affect radial stiffness. Rather, stiffness is primarily dependent on the effective Young's modulus of the polymerized material and the effective radius of the microtubule. These results are also directly correlated to atomic force microscopy nanoindentation measurements to allow a more detailed interpretation of previous experiments. When combined with experimental data that show a significant difference between microtubules stabilized with a slowly hydrolyzable GTP analog and microtubules stabilized with paclitaxel, the finite element data suggest that paclitaxel increases the overall radial flexibility of the microtubule wall.
Donhauser
Zachary J
ZJ
Department of Chemistry, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York, USA. zadonhauser@vassar.edu
Jobs
William B
WB
Binka
Edem C
EC
D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D020342:Finite Element Analysis; D055595:Mechanical Phenomena; D018625:Microscopy, Atomic Force; D008870:Microtubules / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000378:metabolism*; D008958:Models, Molecular; D008968:Molecular Conformation
J Biol Chem. 1994 Dec 16;269(50):31785-92
7989352
ACS Nano. 2008 Jul;2(7):1466-72
19206316
J Biol Chem. 1994 May 6;269(18):13353-60
7909808
J Cell Biol. 1982 Apr;93(1):15-23
7068753
J Cell Biol. 1995 Jan;128(1-2):117-25
7822409
Biophys J. 1996 Jan;70(1):146-66
8770194
J Mol Biol. 1990 Apr 20;212(4):775-86
2329582
Biophys J. 2006 Mar 1;90(5):1687-96
16339879
Phys Rev Lett. 1996 May 20;76(21):4078-4081
10061186
J Phys Chem B. 2007 May 17;111(19):5053-7
17441764
J Cell Biol. 1992 Jun;117(5):1031-40
1577866
J Cell Biol. 1978 Jan;76(1):223-8
618894
J Cell Biol. 1997 Sep 8;138(5):1067-75
9281584
J Biol Chem. 1998 Dec 11;273(50):33803-10
9837970
Structure. 2002 Oct;10(10):1317-28
12377118
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jul 5;103(27):10248-10253
16801537
Cell Motil Cytoskeleton. 1995;30(3):221-8
7758138
Cell. 1999 Jan 8;96(1):79-88
9989499
Chemphyschem. 2004 Feb 20;5(2):252-7
15038290
J Cell Biol. 1993 Feb;120(4):923-34
8432732
Curr Biol. 1995 Aug 1;5(8):900-8
7583148
Biophys J. 2002 Aug;83(2):663-80
12124255
J Mol Biol. 1992 Jul 5;226(1):169-84
1352357
J Cell Biol. 1995 Aug;130(4):909-17
7642706
Eur Biophys J. 2000;28(8):611-20
10663528
J Struct Biol. 2007 Jun;158(3):282-92
17329123
Phys Rev Lett. 2003 Aug 29;91(9):098101
14525215
Biophys J. 2006 Aug 15;91(4):1521-31
16731557
J Cell Sci. 1996 Feb;109 ( Pt 2):509-16
8838674
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Sep 12;103(37):13706-11
16945903
Biochemistry. 2001 Jul 10;40(27):8000-8
11434769
Biol Cell. 2007 Feb;99(2):117-28
17222084
Biophys J. 2006 Jul 15;91(2):767-74
16632508
Biophys J. 2008 Oct;95(7):3252-8
18621813
Science. 1997 Oct 31;278(5339):856-60
9346483
Biophys J. 2006 Aug 15;91(4):1248-63
16731564
Eur Biophys J. 2004 Aug;33(5):462-7
14762705
Biophys J. 2002 Aug;83(2):858-79
12124270
Biochemistry. 1995 Oct 17;34(41):13374-80
7577923
Biophys J. 2005 Nov;89(5):2911-26
15951387
Phys Rev Lett. 2002 Dec 9;89(24):248101
12484982
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Apr 18;103(16):6184-9
16606825
J Mol Biol. 2000 May 12;298(4):663-76
10788328
J Mol Biol. 2005 May 13;348(4):927-38
15843023
Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct. 1994;23:115-39
7919779