4.2 Article

The influence of direct motor-motor interaction in models for cargo transport by a single team of motors

期刊

PHYSICAL BIOLOGY
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1478-3975/7/4/046009

关键词

-

资金

  1. CONICET, Argentina
  2. Spanish MICINN [FIS2008-01240]
  3. FEDER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We analyze theoretically the effects of excluded-volume interactions between motors on the dynamics of a cargo driven by multiple motors. The model considered shares much in common with others recently proposed in the literature, with the addition of direct interaction between motors and motor back steps. The cargo is assumed to follow a continuum Langevin dynamics, while individual motors evolve following a Monte Carlo algorithm based on experimentally accessible probabilities for discrete forward and backward jumps, and attachment and detachment rates. The links between cargo and motors are considered as nonlinear springs. By means of numerical simulations we compute the relevant quantities characterizing the dynamical properties of the system, and we compare the results to those for noninteracting motors. We find that interactions lead to quite relevant changes in the force-velocity relation for cargo, with a considerable reduction of the stall force, and also cause a notable decrease of the run length. These effects are mainly due to traffic-like phenomena in the microtubule. The consideration of several parallel tracks for motors reduces such effects. However, we find that for realistic values of the number of motors and the number of tracks, the influence of interactions on the global parameters of transport of cargo are far from being negligible. Our studies also provide an analysis of the relevance of motor back steps on the modeling, and of the influence of different assumptions for the detachment rates. In particular, we discuss these two aspects in connection with the possibility of observing processive back motion of cargo at large load forces.

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

4.2
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