4.6 Article

Cell Entry of Arginine-rich Peptides Is Independent of Endocytosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 284, Issue 6, Pages 3370-3378

Publisher

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M805550200

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  2. Volkswagen Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Arginine-rich peptides are a subclass of cell-penetrating peptides that are taken up by living cells and can be detected freely diffusing inside the cytoplasm and nucleoplasm. This phenomenon has been attributed to either an endocytic mode of uptake and a subsequent release from vesicles or to direct membrane penetration (transduction). To distinguish between both possibilities, we have blocked endocytic pathways suggested to be involved in uptake of cell-penetrating peptides. We have then monitored by confocal microscopy the uptake and distribution of the cell-penetrating transactivator of transcription (TAT) peptide into living mammalian cells over time. To prevent side effects of chemical inhibitors, we used genetically engineered cells as well as different temperature. We found that a knock-down of clathrin-mediated endocytosis and a knock-out of caveolin-mediated endocytosis did not affect the ability of TAT to enter cells. In addition, the TAT peptide showed the same intracellular distribution throughout the cytoplasm and nucleus as in control cells. Even incubation of cells at 4 degrees C did not abrogate TAT uptake nor change its intracellular distribution. We therefore conclude that this distribution results from TAT peptide that directly penetrated (transduced) the plasma membrane. The formation of nonselective pores is unlikely, because simultaneously added fluorophores were not taken up together with the TAT peptide. In summary, although the frequency and kinetics of TAT transduction varied between cell types, it was independent of endocytosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available