4.4 Article

Ultrastructural properties of ciliary zonule microfibrils

期刊

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY
卷 139, 期 2, 页码 65-75

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/S1047-8477(02)00559-2

关键词

ciliary body; eye; fibrillin; microfibril; zonule

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL62295, HL53325, HL60394] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM29647] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Conventional electron microscopy and rotary shadowing techniques have provided conflicting interpretations of microfibril ultrastructure. To address this issue, we have used quick-freeze deep-etch (QFDE) microscopy to obtain 3-dimensional surface views of microfibrils that have not been fixed, dehydrated, or stained with heavy metals. By this approach, microfibrils appear as tightly packed rows of bead-like subunits that do not display the interbead filamentous links seen by other methods. At regular 50-nm intervals along the microfibril length, a larger bead is often recognized which tends to be aligned with those from adjacent microfibrils when the microfibrils are in bundles. This evidence of organized lateral associations of microfibrils is supported by the observation of small filaments that span between the adjacent microfibrils. When QFDE microscopy was used to examine microfibrils exposed to sonication, partially dissociated microfibrils with the more typical beads on a string appearance were observed. Beads are also seen alone, as monomers, often with an array of small thread-like filaments extending from the bead in a crab-like manner. Our results suggest that the beads on a string appearance of sonicated microfibrils may result from a partial loss of protein components from the interbead domains, thus leading to exposure of a filamentous substructure. It is possible, therefore, that this phenomenon might also contribute to the beads on a string appearance of microfibrils seen using other electron microscopy techniques. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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