4.8 Article

Myosin-dependent endoplasmic reticulum motility and F-actin organization in plant cells

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0911482107

Keywords

myosin XI; actin filament; cytoplasmic streaming; velocity distribution map; Arabidopsis thaliana

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan [16085203, 17107002]
  2. Global Center of Excellence Program Formation [20770032, 21200065]
  3. National Institutes of Health American Recovery and Reinvestment [GM087658]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21570049, 21200065] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Plants exhibit an ultimate case of the intracellular motility involving rapid organelle trafficking and continuous streaming of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Although it was long assumed that the ER dynamics is actomyosin-driven, the responsible myosins were not identified, and the ER streaming was not characterized quantitatively. Here we developed software to generate a detailed velocity-distribution map for the GFP-labeled ER. This map revealed that the ER in the most peripheral plane was relatively static, whereas the ER in the inner plane was rapidly streaming with the velocities of up to similar to 3.5 mu m/sec. Similar patterns were observed when the cytosolic GFP was used to evaluate the cytoplasmic streaming. Using gene knockouts, we demonstrate that the ER dynamics is driven primarily by the ER-associated myosin XI-K, a member of a plant-specific myosin class XI. Furthermore, we show that the myosin XI deficiency affects organization of the ER network and orientation of the actin filament bundles. Collectively, our findings suggest a model whereby dynamic three-way interactions between ER, F-actin, and myosins determine the architecture and movement patterns of the ER strands, and cause cytosol hauling traditionally defined as cytoplasmic streaming.

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