4.8 Article

A distinct pool of phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate in caveolae revealed by a nanoscale labeling technique

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0900216106

Keywords

cell membrane; electron microscopy; phosphoinositide; microdomain; angiotensin II

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of the Japanese government

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Multiple functionally independent pools of phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate [PI(4,5)P-2] have been postulated to occur in the cell membrane, but the existing techniques lack sufficient resolution to unequivocally confirm their presence. To analyze the distribution of PI(4,5)P-2 at the nanoscale, we developed an electron microscopic technique that probes the freeze-fractured membrane preparation by the pleckstrin homology domain of phospholipase C-delta 1. This method does not require chemical fixation or expression of artificial probes, it is applicable to any cell in vivo and in vitro, and it can define the PI(4,5)P-2 distribution quantitatively. By using this method, we found that PI(4,5)P-2 is highly concentrated at the rim of caveolae both in cultured fibroblasts and mouse smooth muscle cells in vivo. PI(4,5)P-2 was also enriched in the coated pit, but only a low level of clustering was observed in the flat undifferentiated membrane. When cells were treated with angiotensin II, the PI(4,5)P-2 level in the undifferentiated membrane decreased to 37.9% within 10 sec and then returned to the initial level. Notably, the PI(4,5)P-2 level in caveolae showed a slower but more drastic change and decreased to 20.6% at 40 sec, whereas the PI(4,5)P-2 level in the coated pit was relatively constant and decreased only to 70.2% at 10 sec. These results show the presence of distinct PI(4,5)P-2 pools in the cell membrane and suggest a unique role for caveolae in phosphoinositide signaling.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available