4.8 Article

Direct chemical evidence for sphingolipid domains in the plasma membranes of fibroblasts

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1216585110

关键词

SIMS; stable isotope

资金

  1. US Department of Energy [DE-FG02-07ER46471]
  2. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  3. National Institutes of Health [T32 GM070421]
  4. Laboratory Directed Research and Development funding
  5. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  6. National Institutes of Health
  7. National Science Foundation [CHE-1058809]
  8. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  9. Division Of Chemistry [1058809] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sphingolipids play important roles in plasma membrane structure and cell signaling. However, their lateral distribution in the plasma membrane is poorly understood. Here we quantitatively analyzed the sphingolipid organization on the entire dorsal surface of intact cells by mapping the distribution of N-15-enriched ions from metabolically labeled N-15-sphingolipids in the plasma membrane, using high-resolution imaging mass spectrometry. Many types of control experiments (internal, positive, negative, and fixation temperature), along with parallel experiments involving the imaging of fluorescent sphingolipids-both in living cells and during fixation of living cells-exclude potential artifacts. Micrometer-scale sphingolipid patches consisting of numerous N-15-sphingolipid microdomains with mean diameters of similar to 200 nm are always present in the plasma membrane. Depletion of 30% of the cellular cholesterol did not eliminate the sphingolipid domains, but did reduce their abundance and long-range organization in the plasma membrane. In contrast, disruption of the cytoskeleton eliminated the sphingolipid domains. These results indicate that these sphingolipid assemblages are not lipid rafts and are instead a distinctly different type of sphingolipid-enriched plasma membrane domain that depends upon cortical actin.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据