3.8 Article

Evidence for axonemal distortion during the flagellar beat of Chlamydomonas

期刊

CELL MOTILITY AND THE CYTOSKELETON
卷 64, 期 8, 页码 580-589

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/cm.20205

关键词

cilia; dynein; central pair; radial spokes; Geometric Clutch; t-force

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM044228, GM 44228, R01 GM044228-15] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to understand the working mechanism that governs the flagellar beat it is essential to know if the axoneme undergoes distortion during the course of the beat cycle. The rapid fixation method employed by Mitchell was able to preserve the waveform of Chlamydomonas flagella much as it appears during normal flagellar beating [Mitchell, Cell Motil Cytoskeleton 2003;56:120-129]. This conservation of the waveform suggests that the stress responsible for the production of bending is also trapped by the fixation procedure. Longitudinal sections of these well-preserved flagella were used to document variations in the relative axonemal diameter. Sections aligned to the plane of bending, showing both the central pair microtubules and outer doublets, were examined for this purpose. Micrographs were selected that continuously showed both the outer doublets and the central pair from a straight region to a curved region of the flagellum. Axoneme diameters measured from these select micrographs showed an increase in relative diameter that averaged 39 nm greater at the crest of the bent region. This constituted a 24% increase in the axoneme diameter in the bends. The transverse stress acting across the axoneme during bending was calculated from the Geometric Clutch computer model for a simulated Chlamydomonas-like flagellar beat. If we assume that this is representative of the transverse stress acting in a real flagellum, then the Young's modulus of the intact axoneme is similar to 0.02 MPa. The possibility that the distortion of the axoneme during the beat could play a significant role in regulating dynein function is discussed.

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