3.8 Article

Interplay of self-organization of microtubule asters and crosslinking protein condensates

期刊

PNAS NEXUS
卷 2, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad231

关键词

liquid-liquid phase separation; microtubule asters; aging; self-organization; MAP65-1

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The cytoskeleton is a major focus in understanding cellular organization. Protein condensation, another organizational strategy within cells, has been found to play a role in microtubule organization. This study shows that microtubule crosslinking proteins can form phase separated condensates and control the organization of microtubules.
The cytoskeleton is a major focus of physical studies to understand organization inside cells given its primary role in cell motility, cell division, and cell mechanics. Recently, protein condensation has been shown to be another major intracellular organizational strategy. Here, we report that the microtubule crosslinking proteins, MAP65-1 and PRC1, can form phase separated condensates at physiological salt and temperature without additional crowding agents in vitro. The size of the droplets depends on the concentration of protein. MAP65 condensates are liquid at first and can gelate over time. We show that these condensates can nucleate and grow microtubule bundles that form asters, regardless of the viscoelasticity of the condensate. The droplet size directly controls the number of projections in the microtubule asters, demonstrating that the MAP65 concentration can control the organization of microtubules. When gel-like droplets nucleate and grow asters from a shell of tubulin at the surface, the microtubules are able to refluidize the MAP65 condensate, returning the MAP65 molecules to solution. This work implies that there is an interplay between condensate formation from microtubule-associated proteins, microtubule organization, and condensate dissolution that could be important for the dynamics of intracellular organization.

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

3.8
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