4.7 Article

TRIOBP-5 sculpts stereocilia rootlets and stiffens supporting cells enabling hearing

期刊

JCI INSIGHT
卷 4, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/jci.insight.128561

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) Intramural Research Programs [DC000039-20, DC000080, ZICDC000081, 1ZIADC00003322]
  2. Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Mental Health/NIH [ZIAMH002946]
  3. NIDCD/NIH [R01DC014658]
  4. JSPS KAKENHI grant [26293369, 17H04345, JP16H06280]
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS [ZIADC000039, ZICDC000080, ZICDC000081, ZIADC000048] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26293369, 17H04345] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TRIOBP remodels the cytoskeleton by forming unusually dense F-actin bundles and is implicated in human cancer, schizophrenia, and deafness. Mutations ablating human and mouse TRIOBP-4 and TRIOBP-5 isoforms are associated with profound deafness, as inner ear mechanosensory hair cells degenerate after stereocilia rootlets fail to develop. However, the mechanisms regulating formation of stereocilia rootlets by each TRIOBP isoform remain unknown. Using 3 new Triobp mouse models, we report that TRIOBP-5 is essential for thickening bundles of F-actin in rootlets, establishing their mature dimensions and for stiffening supporting cells of the auditory sensory epithelium. The coiled-coil domains of this isoform are required for reinforcement and maintenance of stereocilia rootlets. A loss of TRIOBP-5 in mouse results in dysmorphic rootlets that are abnormally thin in the cuticular plate but have increased widths and lengths within stereocilia cores, and causes progressive deafness recapitulating the human phenotype. Our study extends the current understanding of TRIOBP isoform-specific functions necessary for life-long hearing, with implications for insight into other TRIOBPopathies.

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

4.7
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