4.3 Article

Why slow axonal transport is bidirectional - can axonal transport of tau protein rely only on motor-driven anterograde transport?

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2023.2197541

关键词

neuron; axon; mathematical modeling; kinesin; dynein

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Slow axonal transport (SAT) is responsible for moving proteins from the soma to the axon terminal and relies on active transport driven by molecular motors. Despite predominantly being anterograde, experiments have shown that SAT also has a retrograde component. In the case of tau protein transport, the retrograde component is necessary to explain the observed distribution along the axon.
Slow axonal transport (SAT) moves multiple proteins from the soma, where they are synthesized, to the axon terminal. Due to the great lengths of axons, SAT almost exclusively relies on active transport, which is driven by molecular motors. The puzzling feature of slow axonal transport is its bidirectionality. Although the net direction of SAT is anterograde, from the soma to the terminal, experiments show that it also contains a retrograde component. One of the proteins transported by SAT is the microtubule-associated protein tau. To better understand why the retrograde component in tau transport is needed, we used the perturbation technique to analyze how the full tau SAT model can be simplified for the specific case when retrograde motor-driven transport and diffusion-driven transport of tau are negligible and tau is driven only by anterograde (kinesin) motors. The solution of the simplified equations shows that without retrograde transport the tau concentration along the axon length stays almost uniform (decreases very slightly), which is inconsistent with the experimenal tau concentration at the outlet boundary (at the axon tip). Thus kinesin-driven transport alone is not enough to explain the empirically observed distribution of tau, and the retrograde motor-driven component in SAT is needed.

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

4.3
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