|
|
|
|
Vol. 9, Issue 4, 841-852, April 1998


*The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla California
92037;
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine,
Baltimore Maryland 21205; and
§Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore Maryland 21218
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Arp2/3 complex was first purified from Acanthamoeba
castellanii by profilin affinity chromatography. The mechanism
of interaction with profilin was unknown but was hypothesized to be
mediated by either Arp2 or Arp3. Here we show that the Arp2 subunit of
the complex can be chemically cross-linked to the actin-binding site of
profilin. By analytical ultracentrifugation,
rhodamine-labeled profilin binds Arp2/3 complex with a
Kd of 7 µM, an affinity intermediate between the low
affinity of profilin for barbed ends of actin filaments and its high
affinity for actin monomers. These data suggest the barbed end of Arp2
is exposed, but Arp2 and Arp3 are not packed together in the complex
exactly like two actin monomers in a filament. Arp2/3 complex also
cross-links actin filaments into small bundles and isotropic networks,
which are mechanically stiffer than solutions of actin filaments alone.
Arp2/3 complex is concentrated at the leading edge of motile
Acanthamoeba, and its localization is distinct from that
of
-actinin, another filament cross-linking protein. Based on
localization and actin filament nucleation and cross-linking
activities, we propose a role for Arp2/3 in determining the structure
of the actin filament network at the leading edge of motile cells.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Active motility and passive mechanical properties of eukaryotic
cells depend on the actin cytoskeleton. Motile cells move across a
substrate using actin polymerization to drive membrane protrusion at
the leading edge (Tilney et al., 1981
; Wang, 1985
). Adherent
cells transmit forces between sites of attachment via bundles and
orthogonal networks of cross-linked actin filaments. Even nonmotile
cells such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae and
Schizosaccharomyces pombe rely on actin filaments to
transport cellular components and to complete cell division. Despite
our detailed understanding of actin biochemistry and the impressive
catalog of known actin-binding proteins, a fundamental question remains
unanswered: How exactly do eukaryotic cells control the organization of
the actin cytoskeleton? To move or even to change shape, cells must
somehow regulate, both spatially and temporally, the de novo nucleation
of actin filaments as well as their organization into higher order
structures such as bundles or isotropic networks.
One potentially important regulator of cytoskeletal organization is the
Arp2/3 complex, a seven-subunit protein complex first identified by
profilin affinity chromatography (Machesky et al., 1994
).
The complex is composed of two actin-related proteins, Arp2 and Arp3,
and five novel proteins, p40, p35, p19, p18, and p14.
Five lines of evidence implicate Arp2/3 complex in regulation of the
actin cytoskeleton. (1) The complex is ubiquitous and essential. The
genes for Arp2 and Arp3 are highly conserved across eukaryotic phyla,
apparently as ancient as actin and essential in both budding and
fission yeast (for recent reviews see Frankel and Mooseker, 1996
;
Mullins et al., 1996
; Machesky, 1997
). This is not true for
many proteins associated with the actin cytoskeleton, which appear to
have overlapping or nonessential functions. (2) The Arp2/3 complex is
directly associated with the actin cytoskeleton. In
Acanthamoeba, Arp2/3 complex binds to and decorates the
sides of actin filaments (Mullins et al., 1997
), and in sea
urchin egg extracts the complex binds F-actin affinity columns and
cosediments with actin filaments (Terasaki et al., 1997
).
The complex also sediments with the cytoskeletal fraction after lysis
of human platelets (Welch et al., 1997a
). In vivo Arp2/3
complex is localized to actin-rich regions, especially the leading
edges of motile cells and the actin-rich comet tails of Listeria
monocytogenes (Machesky et al., 1994
; Kelleher et
al., 1995
; Mullins et al., 1997
, Welch et
al., 1997a
, 1997b
) as well as to actin-rich cortical patches in
S. pombe and S. cerevisiae (Balasubramanian
et al., 1996
; Moreau et al., 1996
; Winter
et al., 1997
). (3) Arp2/3 complex interacts with the
actin-regulatory protein, profilin. In vitro the complex binds profilin
affinity columns and in S. pombe, homologs of Arp3 and p40
interact genetically with profilin (Machesky et al., 1994
;
Balasubramanian et al., 1996
; McCollum et al.,
1996
). (4) In S. cerevisiae Arp3 function is required for
proper organization and motility of cortical actin patches (Moreau
et al., 1996
; Winter et al., 1997
) and for the
internalization step of endocytosis (Moreau et al., 1997
).
(5) Along with partially purified mammalian cytoskeletal extracts,
Arp2/3 complex is sufficient to reconstitute actin-based
Listeria motility (Welch et al., 1997a
).
Based on structural arguments, Kelleher et al. (1995)
suggested that the Arp2/3 complex might nucleate de novo assembly of actin filaments. Welch et al. (1997a)
invoked such a
nucleation activity to account for the ability of Arp2/3 complex to
induce the formation of actin clouds around Listeria cells.
And recently we demonstrated that Arp2/3 complex from
Acanthamoeba tightly caps the pointed ends of actin
filaments and nucleates formation of filaments that grow from their
barbed ends (Mullins and Pollard, unpublished data). These data suggest
that the Arp2/3 complex plays an important role in initiating
polymerization of actin at the leading edge of motile cells. Here we
show that profilin binds the Arp2/3 complex by direct interaction with
the Arp2 subunit. This is the first demonstration of direct binding
between an actin-related protein and a conventional actin-binding
protein, and it supports the idea of Kelleher et al. (1995)
that surfaces on the barbed end of conventional actin are conserved on
Arp2 and exposed at the surface of the Arp2/3 complex. We also show
that in vitro Arp2/3 organizes actin filaments into small bundles and
orthogonal networks of the type seen at the leading edges of motile
cells, suggesting that the Arp2/3 complex not only regulates actin
polymerization but also filament organization at the leading edge.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Protein Purification
We purified Arp2/3 complex from Acanthamoeba: extract
by both poly-L-proline affinity chromatography and by conventional
column chromatography essentially as previously described (Machesky
et al., 1994
; Mullins et al., 1997
) with some
modifications. Cells were homogenized in either pyrophosphate
extraction buffer as described before (Lynch et al., 1991
;
Machesky et al., 1994
) or sucrose extraction buffer (10 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 11.6% sucrose, 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM ATP, 1 mM
dithiothreitol (DTT), 0.1 mM benzamidine, 2 mg/l leupeptin, 20 mg/l
soybean trypsin inhibitor, and 10 mg/l pepstatin A). For preparations
using sucrose extraction, the extract was not dialyzed against a
low-salt pyrophosphate buffer but was loaded directly onto
diethylaminoethyl (DEAE)-cellulose equilibrated with 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH
8.0, 0.2 mM CaCl2, 0.5 mM DTT, 0.5 mM ATP, 0.5 mM
phenylmethylsulfonylfluoride, and 0.1 mM benzamidine (Tseng et
al., 1984
). For both sucrose and phosphate extraction procedures,
flow-through from the DEAE-cellulose column was collected and loaded
onto poly-L-proline Sepharose (Kaiser et al., 1989
). Arp2/3
complex was eluted from the poly-L-proline Sepharose with 0.4 M
MgCl2 in 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 100 mM NaCl, 100 mM
glycine, and 1 mM DTT. Profilin was subsequently eluted with 8 M urea.
Purification of Arp2/3 complex by ion exchange chromatography was
modified from the method originally used by Machesky et al.
(1994)
. Briefly, the DEAE flow-through was adjusted to pH 6.0 by the
addition of solid 2-[N-morpholino]ethanesulfonic acid (MES) and loaded onto P-11 phosphocellulose (PC) (Whatman, Maidstone, England) equilibrated with 25 mM MES, pH 6.0. The PC column was washed
with 300 mM NaCl and eluted with 500 mM NaCl. Peak fractions were
pooled, concentrated, and chromatographed in 300 mM NaCl on a Sephacryl
S-300 gel filtration column. The Arp-containing pool from this column
was then diluted to a final NaCl concentration of 100 mM and loaded
onto a Mono-S FPLC column (Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ). The
flow-through from this column, containing the majority of the Arp2/3
complex, was loaded onto hydroxyapatite Bio-Gel HT (Bio-Rad, Hercules,
CA), and the complex was eluted with 100 mM sodium pyrophosphate and
100 mM NaCl.
For storage, purified Arp2/3 complex was dialyzed into 10 mM imidazole (pH 7.5), 150 mM NaCl, 0.2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM ATP, and 1.0 mM dithiothreitol, concentrated by dialysis against solid sucrose, and stored on ice.
Acanthamoeba actin was purified from DEAE column fractions
by polymerization-depolymerization and gel filtration (Pollard, 1984
).
Rabbit skeletal muscle actin was purified from acetone powder by the
method of Spudich and Watt (1971)
followed by gel filtration
(MacLean-Fletcher and Pollard, 1980
).
Chemical Cross-linking
The zero-length chemical cross-linker
1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-carbodiimide hydrochloride (EDC),
along with N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS) were obtained from
Pierce (Rockford, IL). Stock solutions (20×) were made fresh in dry
dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) immediately before use. Final concentration of
DMSO in all reactions was
10%. Reactions were carried out for 1 h at room temperature.
Preparation of Fluorescently-labeled Proteins
Acanthamoeba actin was labeled with pyrene
iodoacetamide (Pollard, 1984
). Acanthamoeba profilin-II
mutants N58C and S38C were labeled with rhodamine maleimide
(Vinson, De La Cruz, Kaiser, Higgs, Pollard, unpublished data).
Profilin Binding by Equilibrium Ultracentrifugation
We did equilibrium analytical ultracentrifugation in a Beckman model XL-A ultracentrifuge. We loaded samples containing rhodamine-labeled profilin-II into six-hole, charcoal-filled Epon centerpieces and centrifuged them to equilibrium (at least 20 h at each speed) in a Beckman model An60ti rotor. We monitored absorption at 550 nm, a wavelength specific for the rhodamine-label and collected data sets every hour. To monitor the approach to equilibrium we calculated total root mean square (RMS) deviation of each data set from the final data set collected using the program MATCH (Jeff Lary, National Analytical Ultracentrifuge Facility, Storrs CT). We considered experiments to have reached equilibrium when there was no change in RMS deviation of consecutive data sets. We parsed the data from individual samples into separate data sets using the program REEDIT (Jeff Lary, National Analytical Ultracentrifuge Facility).
Absorption optics allow us to selectively monitor labeled profilin in
the presence of other proteins, to determine directly the distributions
of free and bound profilin, and to calculate equilibrium binding
constants (Schachman, 1960
; Schachman et al., 1962
). A
similar method has been used previously to measure equilibrium binding
of pyrene-labeled actobindin to actin (Bubb et al., 1994
). First we fit each data set to a sum of two exponential functions by
linear least squares methods
|
p and
pa are
the effective reduced molecular weights of profilin alone and profilin
bound to Arp2/3 complex or to actin monomers. The effective reduced
molecular weight is defined as
|
is the angular velocity
(rad/sec),
is the partial specific volume
(cm3/gm),
is the solvent density (gm/cm3),
R is the gas constant, and T is the absolute temperature (K). From
these fits we determined the total amounts of free and bound profilin
by
|
Ptotal = Pfree + Pbound
Atotal = CrPtotal
Where Cr is the ratio of the initial Arp2/3 complex or actin concentration to the initial profilin concentration. For a stoichiometry of 1:1, the amount of bound profilin will equal the amount of bound Arp2/3 complex or actin and we calculate the distribution of free Arp2/3 or actin
|
|
|
|
Rheometry
Rheological measurements were made with a cone and plate
Rheometrics rheometer (Rheometrics Inc., Piscataway, NJ) in the small amplitude(strain
2%), forced oscillation mode (Sato et
al., 1984
). Arp2/3 complex in KME buffer (50 mM KCl, 10 mM
imidazole, pH 7.0, 1 mM EGTA, and 1 mM MgCl2) was mixed
with actin in Buffer G [2 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 0.2 mM
CaCl2, 0.2 mM ATP, 0.5 mM DTT, and 1 mM NaN3],
polymerized by adding one-tenth volume of 10 × KME and
immediately placed between the metal plates of the rheometer to
polymerize at 25°C. The plates were kept in a water-saturated chamber
to prevent sample dehydration. Measurements of G' and G" were made
every 30 s using time sweep mode to observe the gel formation.
After G' and G" reached a plateau, frequency sweep mode was used to
measure the rheological parameters: the value of complex modulus
|G*|, where
|G*|=(G'2+G"2)1/2; and the
phase shift
, where
=tan-1(G"/G') (Ferry, 1980
).
Electron Microscopy
Acanthamoeba actin filaments in the presence and
absence of Arp2/3 complex were negatively stained with freshly prepared
1% uranyl formate (Aebi et al., 1981
). Other samples were
fixed, embedded, and sectioned (Maciver et al., 1991
).
Acanthamoeba actin (10 µM) was polymerized in the presence
or absence of 1 µM Arp2/3 complex in a 50 µl volume on a porcelain
tray in a humid chamber for 1 h at 24°C. Samples were overlaid
with 1% glutaraldehyde and 2 mg/ml tannic acid in 100 mM sodium
phosphate, pH 7.0, 50 mM KCl, and 5 mM MgCl2 for 30 min at
24°C, washed with 100 mM sodium phosphate, pH 7.0, and then with 100 mM sodium phosphate, pH 6.0, fixed again with 0.1% OsO4 in
100 mM sodium phosphate, pH 6.0, at 24°C for 30 min, and then
dehydrated with an ethanol series and embedded in Epon for thin
sectioning. All micrographs were made at 80 kV with a JEOL JEM100CX or
a Zeiss 10A electron microscope (Carl Zeiss, Thornwood, NY) at nominal
magnifications between 23,000× and 46,000×. Actual magnification was
determined by calibration with tropomyosin paracrystals. Negative
images were scanned digitally and prepared for presentation using Adobe Photoshop.
Monoclonal Antibodies
Mouse monoclonal antibodies against Acanthamoeba
profilin (Kaiser and Pollard, 1996
) and Acanthamoeba
-actinin (Kaiser, Sato, Karaki, and Pollard, unpublished) were
prepared by standard methods (Kiehart et al., 1984
).
Fluorescence Microscopy
Acanthamoeba were maintained and fixed as previously
described (Yonemura and Pollard, 1992
). Cells were incubated with
rabbit polyclonal antisera specific for Acanthamoeba Arp2,
Arp3 (Kelleher, et al., 1995
), p40, or p35 (Mullins et
al., 1997
) or mouse monoclonal antibodies specific for
Acanthamoeba
-actinin, for 1 h at 24°C. Preabsorbed (Yonemura and Pollard, 1992
) Cy-3 conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG secondary antibody (Amersham, Arlington Heights, IL)
was applied for 30 min. BODIPY-FL phallicidin (Molecular Probes, Sunnyvale, CA) was used to label filamentous actin. Cells were mounted
in 50% glycerol containing 20 mM DTT and 5.6 mM
p-phenylenediamine. We observed and photographed labeled
cells using both phase-contrast and fluorescence microscopy as
described previously (Fujiwara and Pollard, 1976
). Figures were
prepared using Adobe Photoshop from digitally scanned 35-mm negatives.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Profilin Binds the Arp2 Subunit of the Arp2/3 Complex
By optimizing conditions we were able to cross-link both
profilin-I and profilin-II to the Arp2/3 complex using the zero-length cross-linker EDC with NHS. At 20 µM profilin and 3 µM Arp2/3, EDC/NHS produces two new bands on SDS-PAGE of 56 kDa and 59 kDa that
react with antibodies against Acanthamoeba profilin (Figure 1A). Profilin-I and profilin-II produced
identical sets of bands. Both bands react with anti-Arp2 antibodies but
not with antibodies to Arp3 or any other member of the complex (Figure
1B). We conclude that the two bands are two different heterodimers of
Arp2 and profilin, cross-linked at different residues and with slightly different mobilities on SDS- PAGE gels. Under other conditions, chemical cross-linking agents that covalently cross-link actin to
profilin fail to cross-link profilin to any subunit of Arp2/3 complex
(Mullins et al., 1997
).
|
A panel of monoclonal antibodies to profilin reveals that the 56-kDa
product is similar to the profilin-actin complex cross-linked by
EDC/NHS. EDC/NHS cross-links E364 of Acanthamoeba actin to K115 of Acanthamoeba profilin-I or profilin-II
(Vandekerchove et al., 1989
). This binding site has been
studied with the aid of four epitope-mapped monoclonal anti-profilin
antibodies, P4, P5, P6 and P7 (Kaiser and Pollard, 1996
). P5 and P7
bind profilin near K115, and cross-linking profilin to actin by EDC/NHS
blocks binding of both antibodies (Kaiser and Pollard, 1996
).
Antibodies P4 and P6 bind to different regions of profilin and still
recognize profilin cross-linked to actin. All four antibodies recognize the upper band, but only P4 and P6 react with the 56-kDa band (Figure
2). P5 and P7 both fail to recognize this
band. We conclude that the lower band is Arp2 cross-linked to profilin
at or near K115, in the actin-binding site of profilin. The upper band
is a distinct cross-linked product of Arp2 and profilin with a
different mobility on SDS-PAGE in which Arp2 is probably cross-linked
to a residue of profilin other than K115. The presence of this product does not necessarily suggest two binding sites for profilin on Arp2 but
rather the proximity of another cross-linkable residue of profilin to a
residue on Arp2 that is not conserved on conventional actin.
|
Profilin Binds Actin More Strongly than the Arp2/3 Complex
We used sedimentation equilibrium ultracentrifugation to determine the affinity of profilin-II for actin and Arp2/3 complex. To measure the concentration of profilin in the presence of actin or Arp2/3 complex, we labeled profilin-II mutants in which either serine-38 or asparagine-58 was replaced by cysteine (S38C and N58C profilin-II) with rhodamine maleimide. Actin and poly-L-proline binding of these rhodamine-labeled constructs is indistinguishable from that of unlabeled profilin (Vinson, De La Cruz, Kaiser, Higgs, and Pollard, unpublished data). At equilibrium, both rhodamine-labeled mutants form exponential gradients characteristic of single, homogeneous, and thermodynamically ideal species. For N58C we calculated a native molecular weight of 12,930 Da, close to the value of 13,045 Da deduced from amino acid sequence.
Measuring the distribution of labeled profilin in the presence of actin
or Arp2/3 complex by absorbance at 550 nm gave a signal equal to the
sum of the absorbances of bound and free profilin. We determined
equilibrium dissociation constants for profilin binding actin and
Arp2/3 complex by least-squares fitting of the equilibrium distribution
of labeled profilin to a sum of two distributions, one determined by
the effective reduced molecular weight of profilin alone
(
p) and the other by that of profilin bound to the
larger protein (
pa). We measured the effective reduced
molecular weights of profilin, actin, and Arp2/3 complex individually,
at the same speeds and in the same buffers used in the binding
experiments and used these values in curve fitting. We independently
calculated and averaged equilibrium dissociation constants from six
data sets at three different protein concentrations spun at two speeds.
By this method N58C profilin-II binds Ca2+-ATP Acanthamoeba actin monomers with a Kd of 0.92 ± 1.0 µM (n = 6, Figure 3A) and Arp2/3 complex with a Kd of 7.4 ± 0.5 µM (n = 6, Figure 3B). The conditions differed in these two experiments. A low-ionic strength buffer was used in the actin binding experiments to keep actin monomers from polymerizing, while 150 mM NaCl was used in the Arp2/3 binding experiment to keep the complex from aggregating. The large uncertainty in the actin experiment arises from the fact that the concentration of profilin needed for detection (5 µM) is well above the Kd of the interaction. Similar results were obtained with the S38C mutant, indicating that the specific cysteine mutations and rhodamine labeling do not alter the binding to Arp2/3 complex.
|
Arp2/3 Complex Cross-links and Bundles Actin Filaments
Previously we found that Arp2/3 complex binds to the sides of
actin filaments (Mullins et al., 1997
) and hypothesized that it could cross-link filaments into networks or bundles. Preliminary experiments showed that Arp2/3 complex pellets with actin filaments under centrifugal forces where actin filaments alone do not pellet (our
unpublished results). We characterized these higher order structures by
quantitative rheometry and electron microscopy.
By quantitative rheometry, Arp2/3 complex increases the stiffness of
solutions of actin filaments in a concentration-dependent manner
(Figure 4). Addition of Arp2/3 complex
increases the complex modulus, |G*|
a measure of stiffness, and
decreases the phase shift, 
a measure of fluid- or solid-like
behavior (Figure 4B). In these assays,
= 0 radians for a solid and
= 1.6 radians for a Newtonian fluid. Viscoelastic materials like
actin filaments have intermediate values of
.
|
In the presence of Arp2/3 complex, actin filaments form networks of
individual filaments and bundles of filaments that are visible in electron micrographs of thin sections of samples imbedded in
Epon and of samples adsorbed to EM grids and negatively stained with
1% uranyl formate (Figure 5). Pure actin
filaments have a low tendency to associate, and the density of
individual filaments in thin sections of actin filaments alone is quite
uniform. Actin filament networks in the presence of Arp2/3 complex are
quite heterogeneous in thin sections cut from a single sample.
Individual filaments are visible, but many are aggregated into bundles
containing (within the thickness of the section) two to eight
filaments. Individual filaments appear to fray off the ends of these
bundles, and some appear to run from one bundle to another. Bundles
tend to associate over a wide range of angles from nearly parallel to
perpendicular and are studded with 10-nm particles not seen in samples
of pure actin filaments or in bundles induced by
-actinin (Wachsstock et al., 1993b
). The size of these particles is
consistent with the low resolution structure of the complex determined
by electron microscopy of rotary shadowed samples (Mullins et
al., 1997
). There was no obvious periodicity in the association of Arp2/3 complex with the filament bundles.
|
The Distributions of Arp2/3 Complex and
-Actinin Differ in
Motile Cells
Arp2/3 and
-actinin are both concentrated in cortical regions
of Acanthamoeba castellanii, but the leading edge is
enriched in Arp2/3 complex compared with
-actinin (Figure
6). As noted before (Kelleher et
al., 1995
; Mullins et al., 1997
), the staining for
Arp2/3 complex members in Acanthamoeba is concentrated at the leading edge of the cells where it has a distinctly fibrillar character. In contrast,
-actinin is enriched in peripheral, cortical regions of the cell that do not stain well for Arp2/3 complex subunits.
In the regions where it is most enriched,
-actinin staining extends
out to the plasma membrane but lacks the fibrillar character of Arp2/3
staining. At the leading edge,
-actinin staining becomes weak and
diffuse (as in the panels on the lower right of Figure 6, costained for
p35), or is undetectable (panels on the upper left of Figure 6,
costained for Arp3). Even in cells with diffuse staining near the
leading edge,
-actinin does not extend to the tip of the leading
edge like Arp2/3 complex. The localizations of Arp2/3 and
-actinin
overlap most frequently at the rear of the cell, directly opposite the
leading edge (Figure 6, especially lower right panel). Arp2/3 subunits,
Arp3, Arp2, p40, and p35, are also more abundant in the central
cytoplasm than
-actinin.
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Profilin Binding
From its discovery, Arp2/3 complex has been assumed to bind
profilin, since it can be purified by affinity chromatography directly
on profilin-agarose and indirectly on poly-L-proline Sepharose
(Machesky et al., 1994
). By analogy with actin, profilin was
assumed to bind one of the actin-related proteins. The profilin-binding site of actin is more conserved in structural models of Arp2 than of
Arp3 (Kelleher et al., 1995
). In line with these
predictions, we find that EDC/NHS cross-links both profilin-I and
profilin-II to Arp2 but not to Arp3.
With either profilin-I or profilin-II EDC/NHS produces two cross-linked
profilin-Arp2 conjugates with slightly different mobilities on SDS-PAGE
gels. Reaction of these cross-linked products with a panel of
epitope-mapped, anti-profilin monoclonal antibodies shows that the
56-kDa product is similar to profilin cross-linked to actin-E364 by
EDC, because cross-linked Arp2 blocks binding of two antibodies with
epitopes in the actin-binding site, just like cross-linked actin
(Kaiser and Pollard, 1996
). We conclude that Arp2 contacts the
actin-binding site of profilin. In cross-linking experiments there was
no detectable difference between profilin-I and profilin-II. Arp1
filaments are thought to bind spectrin (Holleran et al.,
1996
), but ours is the first direct experimental evidence that an Arp
binds to the actin-binding site of a conventional actin-binding
protein. Since the profilin binding site on actin is located at the
barbed end of the subunit, the barbed end of Arp2 is probably exposed
on the surface of the complex.
By sedimentation equilibrium ultracentrifugation, rhodamine-profilin-II
binds Arp2/3 with a Kd of 7.4 µM. This method yielded a
Kd for profilin binding to actin of 0.9 µM. Under similar
conditions, using fluorescence anisotropy, Vinson and Pollard
(unpublished data) measured a Kd of 0.2 µM for the same
rhodamine-labeled profilin mutant binding to
Acanthamoeba Ca2+-ATP-actin. By both
measurements the affinity of profilin for conventional actin monomers
is at least 10 times higher than for Arp2/3 complex. The dissociation
rate constant of profilin from actin is 4 s
1 (Vinson,
DeLaCruz, Kaiser, Higgs, and Pollard, unpublished data), so we predict
that profilin is in a rapid equilibrium with Arp2 at a rate of at least
50 s
1.
Arp2/3 Complex Cross-links Actin Filaments
Filament cross-linking proteins are traditionally classed as
either bundling or network-forming proteins, depending on their tendency to form either parallel bundles or randomly oriented isotropic
networks of filaments. However, many actin-binding proteins, such as
-actinin, induce the formation of both bundles and isotropic networks. Wachsstock et al. (1993a)
proposed a model to
describe the dependence of the mechanical properties of cross-linked
actin filament networks on the concentrations of actin and
cross-linker. At low concentrations of cross-linker, filaments are
bound in a random isotropic network that behaves like a single elastic solid. In this region, the complex modulus |G*| increases and the
phase shift
decreases as a function of cross-linker concentration. Above a threshold concentration that depends on the affinity of the
cross-linker, actin filaments become organized into bundles. These
bundles, although long and stiff, can slip past each other in solution
and behave more like a very viscous fluid. In this region |G*|
begins to decrease, and
begins to increase as a function of
cross-linker concentration.
To determine whether Arp2/3 complex preferentially forms bundles or
isotropic networks in solution we performed quantitative rheometry on
actin filaments cross-linked with Arp2/3 complex. With 15 µM
filamentous actin, concentrations of Arp2/3 complex from 0.1-3.0 µM
produced monotonically increasing values of |G*| and decreasing
values of
, indicating that this range of concentrations and
cross-linker:actin ratios produces primarily isotropic networks (Figure
4). At the same actin concentration,
-actinin from
Acanthamoeba undergoes a transition from network to bundle
formation at 0.1 µM, and
-actinin from chicken gizzard smooth
muscle undergoes the same transition at 1.0 µM. Arp2/3 complex,
therefore, has a greater tendency to form isotropic networks than
-actinin. In the electron microscope, however, we also observe
filament bundles induced by Arp2/3 complex. Therefore, Arp2/3 complex
probably belongs, along with
-actinin, to that class of
actin-binding proteins that can, under varying conditions of
concentration and shear, form both bundles and isotropic networks of
filaments.
Arp2/3 complex decorates the sides of actin filaments (Mullins et
al., 1997
) and caps pointed ends (Mullins et al.,
1998
). This combination is sufficient to link filaments into orthogonal networks. The concentration of filament pointed ends in our
experiments, however, is in the nanomolar or subnanomolar range so the
question becomes whether a nanomolar concentration of filament-filament cross-links is sufficient to explain the large changes in viscosity we
observe in our experiments. Wachsstock et al. (1993b)
demonstrated that the stiffness of a network is related in a
complicated way to both the number and dynamics of cross-links. We can
estimate the number of possible end-side cross-links in our rheometry
experiments from the affinity of Arp2/3 for pointed ends, approximately
20 nM (Mullins and Pollard, unpublished data). With 5 nM filament ends
in a solution of 15 µM filamentous actin, 0.5 µM Arp2/3 will cap
4.8 nM of the pointed ends, and at 1.5 µM it will cap 4.9 nM. Over
the same concentration range, however, the stiffness of the filament
network increases by more than a factor of 2, suggesting that the
network formation activity cannot be completely explained by end-side
associations but is also produced by side-side cross-links. The
existence of two filament side-binding sites in addition to the pointed
end binding site is also consistent with the fact that three subunits
can be chemically cross-linked to actin filaments (Mullins et
al., 1997
).
Subcellular Localizations of Arp2/3 and
-Actinin
Arp2/3 complex cross-links actin filaments in a manner similar to
-actinin, so we wondered if the cellular functions of these proteins
overlap. One way to address this question is to determine the extent to
which the subcellular distributions of the two proteins overlap. By
immunofluorescence microscopy, we find both Arp2/3 and
-actinin
enriched in peripheral regions of cells, but the staining patterns do
not overlap completely, particularly at the leading edge (Figure 10).
The staining of Arp2/3 subunits is enriched at the leading edge of
adherent Acanthamoeba and fibrillar in character, while
-actinin staining is diffuse or undetectable at the leading edge
(Figure 6). We consistently observe that, even in cells with
-actinin staining near the leading edge, the staining does not reach
the plasma membrane while Arp3, Arp2, p40, and p35 staining always
extends to the tip of the leading edge.
The fact that Arp2/3 localizes to the tip of the leading edge suggests
that it does not passively diffuse into the region but is involved in
the initial events of leading edge formation. This pattern is
consistent with the recent observation that pseudopodia produced by
rapidly polymerizing actin filaments in the tails of motile
Listeria monocytogenes also do not contain
-actinin (Sechi et al., 1997
). One explanation for the absence of
-actinin in such actin-rich structures is that they form more
rapidly than
-actinin can diffuse into them. The cellular
concentrations of filamentous actin and
-actinin in
Acanthamoeba are approximately 100 and 5 µM (Gordon
et al., 1976
; Pollard et al., 1986
) and the Kd of
-actinin binding to actin filaments is 5 µM so
at a given time more than 95% of the cellular
-actinin is bound to
existing filaments. The dissociation rate constant of
Acanthamoeba
-actinin is 5 s
1 (Wachsstock
et al., 1993a
) while the rate of addition of actin monomers
to existing filaments in vivo can be as high 1000 s
1, so
it is possible in a cell for filament formation to outpace
-actinin
redistribution, especially in regions where actin polymerization is
driving membrane protrusion.
Role of Profilin in Arp2/3 Function
How does profilin, which interacts with both actin and Arp2,
affect the interaction of actin with Arp2/3 complex? Arp2/3 complex nucleates barbed end growth of filaments and remains tightly attached to the pointed ends of filaments. Profilin-bound actin monomers add to
the barbed end of an actin filament with the same kinetics as free
monomers so we would not expect profilin to affect the ability of actin
to bind Arp2/3 complex. Arp2/3 binds filament ends with nanomolar
affinity (Mullins et al., 1998
) and profilin with micromolar
affinity so we would also not expect profilin to significantly inhibit
binding of Arp2/3 to actin filament ends.
The affinity of profilin for its ligands varies considerably:
submicromolar for actin monomers, an order of magnitude weaker for
Arp2/3 complex, and yet another order of magnitude weaker for both
actin dimers and the ends of actin filaments. For barbed ends the
Kd is estimated at 50 µM (Cooper and Pollard, 1985
;
Kaiser et al., 1986
), and for cross-linked actin dimers it
is estimated at 70 µM (Mockrin and Korn, 1983
). Cooper and Pollard
(1985)
speculated that steric hindrance from adjacent subunits in a
filament reduces the affinity for profilin. The low affinity of
profilin for cross-linked actin dimers (Mockrin and Korn, 1983
)
indicates that a single additional monomer could produce such
hindrances. If steric constraints are indeed responsible for the low
affinity of actin filaments and dimers for profilin, then these
constraints are not as severe in the Arp2/3 complex, suggesting that
Arp2 and Arp3 are not packed exactly like actin subunits at the end of
a filament.
Given a Kd of 7 µM, is there enough free profilin in
Acanthamoeba to bind a substantial fraction of Arp2/3
complex? The concentrations of profilin (Tseng et al., 1984
)
and unpolymerized actin (Gordon et al., 1976
) are about 100 µM each and that of Arp2/3 complex is 2 µM (Kelleher et
al., 1995
). Calculations based on equilibrium binding constants
and results from cell fractionation studies (Perelroizen et
al., 1994
; Vinson, DeLaCruz, Kaiser, Higgs, and Pollard, in
preparation; Kaiser, unpublished observations) indicate that only
70-80% of cellular profilin is bound to actin. Thus, in the absence
of other competing ligands, a cellular pool of 20-30 µM profilin is
available to bind Arp2/3 complex. At these concentrations about 75% of
the available Arp2/3 complex would be saturated with profilin. So,
despite its relative weakness, the interaction may have physiological
significance. Arp2 and Arp3 bind and hydrolyze ATP, but the exchange of
nucleotide from the Arp2/3 complex is very slow (Mullins and Kelleher,
unpublished observations) so one possible function of profilin binding
is to facilitate nucleotide exchange in the complex.
Biological Implications of Filament Cross-linking Activity
At the leading edge of motile cells we expect Arp2/3 complex to
nucleate filament formation, cap the filament pointed ends (Mullins and
Pollard, unpublished data), and bind the sides of filaments (Mullins
et al., 1997
). These activities are sufficient to form
orthogonal networks of actin filaments in which the pointed ends are
attached to the sides of other filaments in T junctions of the type
observed at the leading edges of fish keratocytes (Small, et
al., 1995
; Svitkina et al., 1997). As discussed above, one side binding and one pointed end binding site are probably insufficient to produce the stiff orthogonal networks observed in our
rheometric experiments, so there may be an additional filament binding
site.
Arp2/3 complex is thus capable of promoting polymerization at the
leading edge and attaching newly formed filaments to a rigid structure,
a requirement for the "Elastic Brownian ratchet" model of
polymerization-driven motility (Mogilner and Oster, 1996). As the actin
filaments grow at their membrane-proximal ends and drive forward
motility (Tilney et al., 1981
; Wang, 1985
), the bound
complex will be translocated away from the membrane. This would explain
the uniform localization of the complex throughout the actin-rich zone
of the leading edge and all along the actin filament tails of motile
Listeria (Welch, et al., 1997a
). The partitioning
of Arp2/3 complex to the leading edge and
-actinin to other parts of
the amoeba cortex suggests that other cross-linking proteins (with
different properties) replace the complex at the lateral margins of
protrusive zones.
Our observations raise several questions for future study: Are the
nucleation and filament cross-linking activities separable? If so, are
they regulated separately in the cell? Which activity of the complex is
essential for cell polarity and motility
nucleation, filament
organization, or both? The answers to these questions will provide us
with a more complete picture of how living cells regulate motility and
shape changes.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank members of the Pollard laboratory for technical assistance, advice, and helpful discussion, particularly Pam Maupin who prepared thin sections, Don Kaiser who supplied us with monoclonal antibodies, and Mike Ostap who participated in almost every amoeba preparation. We thank Cynthia Wolberger for use of her analytical ultracentrifuge and Tom Laue for checking our math. This work was supported by NIH research grant GM-26338 to T.D.P., a fellowship to R.D.M. from the Jane Coffin Childs Fund for Cancer Research, and a Jenkins Fellowship to J.X.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
C. C. Beltzner and T. D. Pollard Pathway of Actin Filament Branch Formation by Arp2/3 Complex J. Biol. Chem., March 14, 2008; 283(11): 7135 - 7144. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Y. Huang, M. Renaud-Young, and D. Young Nak1 interacts with Hob1 and Wsp1 to regulate cell growth and polarity in Schizosaccharomyces pombe J. Cell Sci., January 1, 2005; 118(1): 199 - 210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |