Microtubules, the primary components of the chromosome segregation machinery, are stabilized by longitudinal and lateral noncovalent bonds between the tubulin subunits. However, the thermodynamics of these bonds and the microtubule physicochemical properties are poorly understood. Here, we explore the biomechanics of microtubule polymers using multiscale computational modeling and nanoindentations in silico of a contiguous microtubule fragment. A close match between the simulated and experimental force-deformation spectra enabled us to correlate the microtubule biomechanics with dynamic structural transitions at the nanoscale. Our mechanical testing revealed that the compressed MT behaves as a system of rigid elements interconnected through a network of lateral and longitudinal elastic bonds. The initial regime of continuous elastic deformation of the microtubule is followed by the transition regime, during which the microtubule lattice undergoes discrete structural changes, which include first the reversible dissociation of lateral bonds followed by irreversible dissociation of the longitudinal bonds. We have determined the free energies of dissociation of the lateral (6.9 ± 0.4 kcal/mol) and longitudinal (14.9 ± 1.5 kcal/mol) tubulin-tubulin bonds. These values in conjunction with the large flexural rigidity of tubulin protofilaments obtained (18,000-26,000 pN·nm(2)) support the idea that the disassembling microtubule is capable of generating a large mechanical force to move chromosomes during cell division. Our computational modeling offers a comprehensive quantitative platform to link molecular tubulin characteristics with the physiological behavior of microtubules. The developed in silico nanoindentation method provides a powerful tool for the exploration of biomechanical properties of other cytoskeletal and multiprotein assemblies.
Microtubules, the primary components of the chromosome segregation machinery, are stabilized by longitudinal and lateral noncovalent bonds between the tubulin subunits. However, the thermodynamics of these bonds and the microtubule physicochemical properties are poorly understood. Here, we explore the biomechanics of microtubule polymers using multiscale computational modeling and nanoindentations in silico of a contiguous microtubule fragment. A close match between the simulated and experimental force-deformation spectra enabled us to correlate the microtubule biomechanics with dynamic structural transitions at the nanoscale. Our mechanical testing revealed that the compressed MT behaves as a system of rigid elements interconnected through a network of lateral and longitudinal elastic bonds. The initial regime of continuous elastic deformation of the microtubule is followed by the transition regime, during which the microtubule lattice undergoes discrete structural changes, which include first the reversible dissociation of lateral bonds followed by irreversible dissociation of the longitudinal bonds. We have determined the free energies of dissociation of the lateral (6.9 ± 0.4 kcal/mol) and longitudinal (14.9 ± 1.5 kcal/mol) tubulin-tubulin bonds. These values in conjunction with the large flexural rigidity of tubulin protofilaments obtained (18,000-26,000 pN·nm(2)) support the idea that the disassembling microtubule is capable of generating a large mechanical force to move chromosomes during cell division. Our computational modeling offers a comprehensive quantitative platform to link molecular tubulin characteristics with the physiological behavior of microtubules. The developed in silico nanoindentation method provides a powerful tool for the exploration of biomechanical properties of other cytoskeletal and multiprotein assemblies.
Microtubules (MTs)
are essential for health and viability of eukaryotic
cells. Stable MTs are fairly rigid,[1] which
enables them to serve as important structural and organizing elements.
MTs form long and durable linear tracks for neuronal transport, and
the mechanical properties of MTs help to define cell architecture
and polarity.[2] The dynamics of MTs, i.e.,
their ability to undergo stochastic cycles of polymerization and depolymerization,
also play a prominent role in many cellular processes.[3,4] MTs play a vital role during cell division, when they form a mitotic
spindle;[5] as a result, different MT disrupting
or stabilizing drugs are widely used as chemotherapeutic agents.[6] Importantly, the disassembling MTs have been
proposed to serve as a primary biological motor for poleward chromosome
motion during mitosis.[7,8] However, understanding the underlying
mechanisms for different MT functions is impeded by a lack of quantitative
knowledge about the thermodynamics and biomechanics of these complex
cytoskeletal structures.MTs are hollow protein cylinders that
contain lateral assemblies
of protofilaments: the linear strands of longitudinally arranged αβ-tubulin
dimers (Figure 1A).[9] A biologically relevant form of MT contains 13 protofilaments that
are arranged in a left-hand 3 start helix. Such a multi-protofilament
structure makes it difficult to establish a direct correspondence
between molecular tubulin characteristics and observed MT properties in vitro. Theoretical approaches have played an important
role in providing such a link, for example, by exploring different
mechanisms of MT dynamics and force generation.[10−13] Theoretical studies have identified
several microscopic properties that are critically important for understanding
the MT behavior. These features include the thermodynamic characteristics
of interfaces between adjacent tubulins, i.e., the energy of lateral
and longitudinal bonds, and the mechanical flexural rigidity of individual
tubulin protofilaments. To date, it has not been possible to probe
these properties via direct experimental measurements, which explains
why virtually every aspect of MT thermodynamics and mechanics is still
controversial.
Figure 1
Schematic of SOP model for nanoindentations and subunit
interactions.
(A) Atomic model of αβ-tubulin heterodimer showing the
secondary structure: helices (blue), sheets (red), and loops/turns
(gray). (B) The Cα-based representation of an MT
lattice fragment (MT8/13) with tubulin heterodimers shown in brown
(α-tubulin) and green (β-tubulin). In simulations, the
cantilever tip (gray ball) produces indentations of MT lattice (arrow
shows direction of force). (C) Schematic of MT fragment with locations
of 7 specific points for indentation: for points 1, 2, and 3 the force
is applied onto the surface of the α-tubulin, β-tubulin,
and dimer–dimer interface, respectively; for points 4 and 5
force is applied at the interfaces between two α- and two β-tubulins,
respectively; for points 6 and 7 force is applied between protofilaments
at the junction connecting four tubulin dimers, and within two dimers,
respectively. (D) Atomic structure of the lateral (α–α
and β–β) interfaces between adjacent protofilaments.
(E) Atomic structure of the longitudinal interfaces: interdimer (α–β;
left) and intradimer (β–α, right).
Schematic of SOP model for nanoindentations and subunit
interactions.
(A) Atomic model of αβ-tubulin heterodimer showing the
secondary structure: helices (blue), sheets (red), and loops/turns
(gray). (B) The Cα-based representation of an MT
lattice fragment (MT8/13) with tubulin heterodimers shown in brown
(α-tubulin) and green (β-tubulin). In simulations, the
cantilever tip (gray ball) produces indentations of MT lattice (arrow
shows direction of force). (C) Schematic of MT fragment with locations
of 7 specific points for indentation: for points 1, 2, and 3 the force
is applied onto the surface of the α-tubulin, β-tubulin,
and dimer–dimer interface, respectively; for points 4 and 5
force is applied at the interfaces between two α- and two β-tubulins,
respectively; for points 6 and 7 force is applied between protofilaments
at the junction connecting four tubulin dimers, and within two dimers,
respectively. (D) Atomic structure of the lateral (α–α
and β–β) interfaces between adjacent protofilaments.
(E) Atomic structure of the longitudinal interfaces: interdimer (α–β;
left) and intradimer (β–α, right).It is generally agreed that in the MT lattice the
longitudinal
tubulin–tubulin bonds are stronger than the lateral bonds,
because during MT disassembly the lateral tubulin bonds dissociate
prior to the longitudinal ones. This is evident from the presence
of curled “ram horns” at the ends of shortening polymers[14] and is in agreement with computer calculations
based on tubulin structure.[15] However,
the absolute values of the tubulin–tubulin bond energies are
not known. Traditional thermodynamic analyses of these bonds have
led to ambiguous results mainly because of the complexity of pathways
for tubulin assembly and disassembly.[16] Indeed, the binding rate constants for tubulin attachment to various
sites at the ragged MT tip can vary due to the differences in the
number and location of neighboring subunits.[17] Additional difficulty concerns the dissociation rate, which can
be affected by the number of lateral contacts for a given dimer, as
well as by the rigidity of MT protofilaments, which bend concomitantly
with tubulin disassembly. The energy of lateral and longitudinal bonds’
dissociations have previously been estimated using different kinetic
and mechanical MT models; the energy values vary significantly from
3 to 15 kBT for the lateral
bonds, and from 6 to 20 kBT for the longitudinal bonds.[18−23] Quantum calculations have also been employed, but the obtained estimates
are unrealistically large (up to 186 kBT for the lateral bonds and 158 kBT for the longitudinal bonds[24,25]). The shapes of the free energy profiles and even the geometry and
number of the sites for tubulin–tubulin interactions in the
MT models are debated.[18,20,22,23,26]The
flexural rigidity of MT protofilaments is also a subject of
debate. Previous theoretical estimates of this quantity vary by an
order of magnitude, from 1,500 to 28,000 pN nm2,[27,28] which correspond to energies of 3.7 to 64 kBT per dimer for full protofilament straightening.
Accurate determination of protofilament rigidity is experimentally
difficult because protofilaments are fragile transient structures.
Knowing flexural rigidity, however, is important, because it has direct
implications for mechanisms of force generation during MT depolymerization.
Indeed, MT depolymerization can generate a large force in
vitro and in vivo,[29,30] but the underlying mechanism is controversial.[27] In the power stroke based mechanism of force generation,
the bending protofilaments are thought to transmit a large force available
from tubulin–tubulin energetics, but this energy can be used
to move the associated cargo only if protofilaments are fairly rigid.[10]The various functional roles played by
MTs in eukaryotic cells
necessitate rigorous quantitative analysis of their thermodynamic
and mechanical properties. Recently, considerable progress has been
achieved in the mechanical testing of biological protein assemblies,[31] including the MT response to compressive force.[32,33] Such dynamic force measurements present a unique methodology to
deform or rupture the noncovalent bonds of the MT lattice, opening
an experimental avenue to determine the underlying microscopic characteristics.
The published experimental force–indentation spectra for the
MT reveal a complex multistep deformation mechanism.[32,33] However, a detailed structure-based interpretation of these results
has been lacking. Here, we have carried out the controlled in silico nanoindentations of the MT by combining molecular
dynamics (MD) simulations accelerated on graphics processing units
(GPUs)[34,35] of the atomic tubulin structure and the
Cα-based self-organized polymer (SOP) model[36−40] of the MT fragment, which contains 13 protofilaments, each 8 tubulin
dimers in length (Figure 1). The computational
acceleration on GPUs has enabled us to apply the experimentally relevant
force-loading rate (cantilever velocity vf= 1.0 μm/s) and to span the experimental
time scale (∼50 ms). Close agreement between experimental and
simulated force spectra has allowed us to resolve structural transitions
in the MT lattice that underpin the MT lattice biomechanics in the
experimentally inaccessible sub-nanometer scale of length. Importantly,
using our novel methodology of nanoindentation in silico we were able to directly calculate the energies of lateral and longitudinal
tubulin–tubulin contacts and to obtain an independent estimate
of the flexural rigidity of single tubulin protofilaments.
Results
SOP Model
Provides Accurate Description of the Experimental
Force–Indentation Spectra
The simulated force–indentation
spectra, i.e., the profiles of the indentation force F vs the cantilever tip displacement (indentation depth) X (the FX curves) and the profiles of F vs the virtual cantilever base (or piezo) displacement Z (the FZ curves), are presented in Figure 2A. Importantly, these curves are very similar to
the corresponding experimental spectra (see Figure 1C in ref (32)). The FZ and FX curves exhibit the single-step transitions,
characterized by a single force peak, and multistep transitions with
several force peaks. Although the force spectra show some variability
depending on the location of indentation points, each spectrum reveals
three distinct regimes (see Supporting Movie S1 in the Supporting Information): (1) the linear-like
regime of continuous elastic deformation (Z <
15–20 nm; X < 6–8 nm); (2) the transition
regime where the MT lattice undergoes discrete structural transitions
(15–20 nm < Z < 25–30 nm; 6–8
nm < X < 11–13 nm); and (3) the postcollapse
regime (Z > 25–30 nm; X >
11–13 nm) (Figure 2). We estimated the
spring constant KMT from the initial slope
of the FZ curves (linear-like regime), and extracted
the values of critical force F* (peak force in FZ curves) and the critical distance Z*,
at which the transition to the collapsed state occurs. These values
are in good quantitative agreement with their experimental counterparts
(compared in Table 1). The slightly higher
theoretical values of F* and Z*
are due to our using a faster cantilever velocity (vf = 1.0 μm/s vs vf ≈
0.2 μm/s used in refs (32, 33)). Thus, the SOP model provides a very good description of the physicochemical
properties of the MT lattice. In the simulations described above,
we imposed hard constraints at the ends of the MT fragment (see Materials and Methods) to mimic the long persistence
length of the MT polymers (microns to millimeters). However, the force
spectra were very similar when the soft (harmonic) constraints were
applied, and the relative differences between the values of F*, Z*, and X* from simulations
with soft constraints and hard constraints were within the standard
deviations (data not shown).
Figure 2
Force indentations in silico. (A) The force–deformation
(FZ) curves for 7 indentation points (Figure 1C), each depicted with different color. Results
were obtained with vf =1.0 μm/s
and Rtip = 10 nm (see Figure S1 in the Supporting Information for Rtip = 15 nm). Z is the displacement of
the virtual cantilever base (piezo in AFM). Dashed black curves represent
the FZ profiles for the tip retraction simulations,
which followed the forward indentations (solid black curve) with Z = 17, 24, and 35 nm as initial conditions. The top inset
shows the corresponding FX curves for the forward
indentation (solid curves; colors as in A) and backward tip retraction
(dashed black curves). X is the displacement of the
cantilever tip. The bottom inset shows the time profiles of the structure
overlap χ for MT lattice restructuring during tip retraction
(starting from Z = 17, 24, and 35 nm indentations).
(B) The MT structure snapshots 1, 2a, 2b, and 3 illustrating the mechanism
of MT deformation and collapse. Structure 1: continuous deformation
(Z < 15–20 nm; elastic regime). Structures
2a and 2b: disruption of lateral and longitudinal interfaces, respectively
(20–25 nm < Z < 25–30 nm; transition
regime). Structure 3: postcollapse evolution (Z >
25–30 nm). These structures correspond to the accordingly numbered
regions in FZ and FX curves in panel
A.
Table 1
Comparison of the
Mechanical Properties
of the MT Lattice Determined from Indentations in Vitro and in Silicoa
indentation
KMT, pN/nm
F*, nN
Z*,
nm
in silico (Rtip = 10 nm)
51.8 ± 2.8
0.62 ± 0.07
23.8 ± 2.2
in silico (Rtip = 15 nm)
61.4 ± 6.6
0.76 ± 0.04
26.9 ± 1.3
in vitro (Rtip = 20 nm)
74.0 ± 13.0
0.4 ± 0.1
17.2 ± 3.5
Values are means with standard
deviations: MT spring constant, KMT; critical
force, F*; and critical distance, Z* (cantilever velocity vf = 1.0 μm/s).
Experimental data in vitro are from the results of
de Pablo et al.[32] and Shaap et al.,[33] who used vf ≈
0.2 μm/s and Rtip ≈ 15–20
nm. The experimental values of KMT were
extracted from the experimental histogram (Figure 2 in ref (33)); the values of F* and Z* were taken from the experimental
force–indentation curves (Figure 1 in ref (32)). Theoretical values of KMT, F*, and Z* were obtained by averaging over 3 simulation runs for each indentation
point 1–7.
Force indentations in silico. (A) The force–deformation
(FZ) curves for 7 indentation points (Figure 1C), each depicted with different color. Results
were obtained with vf =1.0 μm/s
and Rtip = 10 nm (see Figure S1 in the Supporting Information for Rtip = 15 nm). Z is the displacement of
the virtual cantilever base (piezo in AFM). Dashed black curves represent
the FZ profiles for the tip retraction simulations,
which followed the forward indentations (solid black curve) with Z = 17, 24, and 35 nm as initial conditions. The top inset
shows the corresponding FX curves for the forward
indentation (solid curves; colors as in A) and backward tip retraction
(dashed black curves). X is the displacement of the
cantilever tip. The bottom inset shows the time profiles of the structure
overlap χ for MT lattice restructuring during tip retraction
(starting from Z = 17, 24, and 35 nm indentations).
(B) The MT structure snapshots 1, 2a, 2b, and 3 illustrating the mechanism
of MT deformation and collapse. Structure 1: continuous deformation
(Z < 15–20 nm; elastic regime). Structures
2a and 2b: disruption of lateral and longitudinal interfaces, respectively
(20–25 nm < Z < 25–30 nm; transition
regime). Structure 3: postcollapse evolution (Z >
25–30 nm). These structures correspond to the accordingly numbered
regions in FZ and FX curves in panel
A.Values are means with standard
deviations: MT spring constant, KMT; critical
force, F*; and critical distance, Z* (cantilever velocity vf = 1.0 μm/s).
Experimental data in vitro are from the results of
de Pablo et al.[32] and Shaap et al.,[33] who used vf ≈
0.2 μm/s and Rtip ≈ 15–20
nm. The experimental values of KMT were
extracted from the experimental histogram (Figure 2 in ref (33)); the values of F* and Z* were taken from the experimental
force–indentation curves (Figure 1 in ref (32)). Theoretical values of KMT, F*, and Z* were obtained by averaging over 3 simulation runs for each indentation
point 1–7.
MT Is
a Network of Rigid Elements Interconnected via Elastic
Lateral and Longitudinal Bonds
Simulations for 7 indentation
points were carried out using tips of different size. The summarized
description of all observed transitions is provided in Table S1 in
the Supporting Information. Comparison
of the FZ and FX curves for a 10
nm tip (Figure 2) vs a 15 nm tip (Figure S1
in the Supporting Information) shows that
the force spectra are similar, although the values of F*, X* (critical indentation depth), and KMT increase slightly with tip size (Table 1). Consider examples of the forward indentation
for the 10 nm tip followed by tip retraction at the surface of a protofilament
(indentation points 2 and 3; Figures 3A and 3B) and between protofilaments (indentation points
6 and 7; Figures 3C and 3D). The critical force F* and critical indentation
depth X* depend on where the compressive force is
applied: F* = 0.65–0.7 nN and X* ≈ 12 nm for compressing a protofilament (Figure 3A) are larger than F* = 0.5–0.55
nN and X* ≈ 10 nm for compressing the interface
between protofilaments (Figure 3C). We also
profiled the slope of the FX curve (dF/dX), a measure of mechanical compliance of the
MT. We found that dF/dX varies largely
with X (Figures 3B and 3D): steep increases interrupted by sudden drops
of dF/dX indicate that the MT lattice
behaves as a soft material. The heights of the peaks of dF/dX mark the limits of deformability of the MT cylinder.
The MT resists the mechanical collapse longer (strong last peak of
dF/dX) when indented on the protofilament
rather than between the protofilaments (weak last peak of dF/dX). This indicates that the lateral
interfaces between tubulins are softer (more compliant mechanically)
than between longitudinal tubulins within a protofilament. We arrive
at similar conclusions when considering the results obtained with
a 15 nm tip for indentation points 1, 3, and 5, 7 (Figure S2 in the Supporting Information). The profiles of structure
overlap χ (defined in the Supporting Information) show that the collapsed MT lattice remains ∼80–90%
similar to the uncompressed state (the insets to Figures 3B and 3D, and Figures S2B
and S2D in the Supporting Information).
This implies that stress-dependent changes are mainly localized to
the lateral and longitudinal interfaces. Hence, the network of lateral
and longitudinal bonds is the origin of elasticity for the MT lattice.
Figure 3
Force
spectra for indentation and retraction and deformation-induced
MT structure alterations. Shown are results for indentation points
2 (black) and 3 (red) in panels A and B, and for indentation points
7 (black) and 6 (red) in panels C and D obtained with vf = 1.0 μm/s and Rtip = 10 nm (see Figure S2 in the Supporting Information for results obtained with Rtip = 15
nm). (A, C) The FX curves for forward indentation
(solid black and red lines). The insets show the FZ curves. Curves for backward tip retraction (dashed red lines) were
generated using the structures obtained from forward indentation for X = 7, 11, and 21 nm (indicated on the graphs). (B, D) The
slope dF/dX for force spectra from
panels A and C. Snapshots show the side views of the MT structure
before dissociation of the lateral bonds and after dissociation of
the longitudinal bonds. The insets show the profiles of structure
overlap χ vs X.
Force
spectra for indentation and retraction and deformation-induced
MT structure alterations. Shown are results for indentation points
2 (black) and 3 (red) in panels A and B, and for indentation points
7 (black) and 6 (red) in panels C and D obtained with vf = 1.0 μm/s and Rtip = 10 nm (see Figure S2 in the Supporting Information for results obtained with Rtip = 15
nm). (A, C) The FX curves for forward indentation
(solid black and red lines). The insets show the FZ curves. Curves for backward tip retraction (dashed red lines) were
generated using the structures obtained from forward indentation for X = 7, 11, and 21 nm (indicated on the graphs). (B, D) The
slope dF/dX for force spectra from
panels A and C. Snapshots show the side views of the MT structure
before dissociation of the lateral bonds and after dissociation of
the longitudinal bonds. The insets show the profiles of structure
overlap χ vs X.
MT Deformation and Collapse Occur via Specific Multistep Mechanism
Our study demonstrates a qualitative similarity between the FX curves and profiles of dF/dX and χ for different indentation points (Figures 2 and 3 for 10 nm tip, and Figures S1
and S2 in the Supporting Information for
15 nm tip). Analysis of structures generated under different indentation
conditions has revealed that the MT transition to the collapsed state
occurs by a surprisingly conserved pathway (Supporting Movie S1 in
the Supporting Information), which we illustrate
for two examples of MT indentation (Figure 4). Initially, the MT lattice resists deformation, as seen from the
increase of dF/dX (the inset in
Figure 4), which results in small variations
in the local curvature of the MT cylinder under the tip (Figure S3A
in the Supporting Information). This is
the linear-like regime of (continuous) elastic deformation as evidenced
from the quasi-linear dependence of F on X (white region in Figure 4); this
regime persists until X ≈ 6–8 nm (structure
1 in Figure 2, Figure S1 in the Supporting Information, and Figure 4; see Figure S3A in the Supporting Information). The compressive force loads an increasingly larger portion of
the MT surface leading to the MT cylinder flattening (“buckling”).
Indentation beyond X ≈ 6–8 nm can no
longer be accommodated by the MT bending alone. At this point, the
MT system enters the transition regime (gray region in Figure 4) in which discrete structural changes occur. In
this regime, mechanical tension exceeds the strength of lateral and
longitudinal bonds, which results in their sequential rupture: the
lateral bonds dissociate first at X ≈ 6–8
nm (structure 2a, Figure 4), and the longitudinal
bonds dissociate second at X ≈ 11–13
nm (structure 2b, Figure 4). The latter event
triggers the MT lattice rapid transitioning to the collapsed state,
which results in a sharp force drop (force peak in Figure 4). This crossover from the continuous deformation
to the multistep discrete dissociation transitions was observed in
all indentation simulations (21 runs), regardless of where the compressive
force was applied. Importantly, we detected the dissociation of the
longitudinal interdimer bonds but not the intradimer bonds, consistent
with tubulin heterodimer being a major structural unit for MT disassembly.
Disruption of the lateral interfaces between the α-tubulins
occurred simultaneously with loss of lateral contacts between the β-tubulins.
Beyond X ≈ 20 nm indentation, which corresponds
to the postcollapse regime, the tip indented the lower portion of
the MT cylinder (not shown), and the resulting events were not analyzed.
Figure 4
Summary
of the MT deformation mechanics. The FX curves for
force application between protofilaments at the junction
connecting four tubulin dimers (indentation point 6, red curve) and
within the adjacent dimers (point 7, black curve) illustrate that
the sequence of transitions is overall similar. Images of the MT lattice
and tip on the main graph are shown in an MT cross-section view. White
area indicates the linear-like regime for elastic deformations, represented
by the buckled MT cylinder (structure 1, X ≈
3–4 nm). Gray area corresponds to the transition regime, characterized
by the rupture of lateral (structure 2a, X ≈
6–8 nm), then longitudinal contacts (structure 2b, X ≈ 9–11 nm). The inset shows the slope dF/dX vs X, so the peaks
correspond to the activated system states for the buckling and dissociation
transitions. Images in the inset are the same structures 1, 2a, and
2b (with no tip) viewed from the top; areas circled in orange contain
the disrupted lateral and longitudinal interfaces (see also Figure
S3 in the Supporting Information).
Summary
of the MT deformation mechanics. The FX curves for
force application between protofilaments at the junction
connecting four tubulin dimers (indentation point 6, red curve) and
within the adjacent dimers (point 7, black curve) illustrate that
the sequence of transitions is overall similar. Images of the MT lattice
and tip on the main graph are shown in an MT cross-section view. White
area indicates the linear-like regime for elastic deformations, represented
by the buckled MT cylinder (structure 1, X ≈
3–4 nm). Gray area corresponds to the transition regime, characterized
by the rupture of lateral (structure 2a, X ≈
6–8 nm), then longitudinal contacts (structure 2b, X ≈ 9–11 nm). The inset shows the slope dF/dX vs X, so the peaks
correspond to the activated system states for the buckling and dissociation
transitions. Images in the inset are the same structures 1, 2a, and
2b (with no tip) viewed from the top; areas circled in orange contain
the disrupted lateral and longitudinal interfaces (see also Figure
S3 in the Supporting Information).
Dissociation of the Lateral but Not Longitudinal Contacts Is
Reversible
We carried out simulations of the force-quenched
tip retraction with 10 nm tip (Figures 2 and 3) and 15 nm tip (Figures S1 and S2 in the Supporting Information), in which we reversed
the direction of cantilever motion thereby gradually decreasing to
zero the amplitude of compressive force (see Supporting Movie S2 in
the Supporting Information). We used the
MT structures from the simulations of forward deformation for X = 7, 11, and 21 nm indentation. These structures correspond
to the buckled MT (X ≈ 7 nm), the MT with
disrupted lateral bonds (X ≈ 11 nm), and the
MT with disrupted lateral and longitudinal bonds (X ≈ 21 nm). To monitor the progress of MT lattice remodeling,
we analyzed the structure overlap χ (the inset to Figures 2 and S1 in the Supporting Information). In full agreement with experiment (Figures 1 and 5 in ref (33)), we found that the deformation is fully reversible for small indentations
(X < 7 nm), partially reversible with small hysteresis
for larger indentations (7 nm < X < 11 nm),
and irreversible with large hysteresis for indentations larger than
critical (X* ≈ 11–13 nm). These findings
are also supported by the results from the dynamics of MT lattice
remodeling, which show that MT restructuring is 100% complete (χ
≈ 1) over 10–20 ms for X = 7 and 11
nm indentation, but is incomplete (χ ≈ 0.90–0.93)
for X = 21 nm indentation (the bottom inset in Figures 2 and S1 in the Supporting Information). This demonstrates that ruptured lateral contacts between the adjacent
protofilaments can be efficiently restored over the time scale of
a few tens of microseconds. The disruption of longitudinal bonds,
however, inflicts irreparable damage on the MT lattice.
SOP Model Predicts
Strong Interactions at the Longitudinal and
Lateral Tubulin Interfaces
Our finding that the MT lattice
structure in the collapsed state is ∼85–90% similar
to the native state (Figures 3 and S2 in the Supporting Information) strongly suggests that
the compression-induced alterations in the MT lattice are mostly localized
to the lateral and longitudinal interfaces, consistent with recent
results from other groups.[41] This property
allowed us to probe the thermodynamics of MT deformation. We analyzed
the FX curves for forced indentation and force-quenched
retraction (Supporting Movie S2 in the Supporting
Information) to determine the enthalpy change ΔH, reversible work wrev, and
free energy change ΔG for the MT transitioning
from the native state (X = 0) to the collapsed state
(X = 20 nm) (see the Supporting
Information for more detail). Next, we calculated the enthalpy
change and free energy change for disruption of the contacts at the
lateral interface (ΔHlat and ΔGlat) and longitudinal interface (ΔHlong and ΔGlong). The number of lateral/longitudinal contacts was determined using
a conservative estimate of the distance characteristic of contact
disruption (see the Supporting Information). A comparison of ΔHlat, ΔHlong, and ΔGlat, ΔGlong demonstrates that these
state functions show little variation with tip size and tip position
on the MT (Table S2 in the Supporting Information). The changes in enthalpy, free energy, and entropy for the disruption
of one lateral bond and one longitudinal bond are summarized in Table 2. Importantly, the obtained values of ΔGlat = 6.9 ± 0.4 kcal/mol and ΔGlong = 14.9 ± 1.5 kcal/mol indicate that
the intra-protofilament longitudinal tubulin–tubulin bonds
are roughly twice as strong as the lateral inter-protofilament tubulin–tubulin
bonds. This is consistent with our finding that the lateral bonds
dissociate prior to the longitudinal bonds. Interestingly, the difference
in entropy for the rupture of longitudinal bonds vs lateral bonds
is roughly 4-fold (Table 2). This large TΔS difference can be understood
from the increased flexibility of the newly created protofilament
ends. We also estimated the range for tubulin–tubulin interactions
(see Supporting Information), and found
that the longitudinal bonds are characterized by the longer interaction
range (Δylong ≈ 1.25–1.5
nm) compared to the lateral bonds (Δylat ≈ 0.85–1.1 nm). Both of these values lie within the
1.5–2 nm interaction range characteristic of protein complexes.[42,43]
Table 2
Thermodynamic Characteristics Deduced
from in Silico Indentations: Change in Enthalpy ΔH, Entropy TΔS,
and Free Energy ΔG (with Standard Deviations)
Associated with the Disruption of a Single Lateral Bond (Interface)
and Longitudinal Bonda
interface
ΔG, kcal/mol
ΔH, kcal/mol
TΔS, kcal/mol
lateral
6.9 ± 0.4
9.3 ± 0.8
2.5 ± 0.7
longitudinal
14.9 ± 1.5
25.7 ± 2.2
10.8 ± 2.5
Averaging is performed over all
indentation points (1–7, Figure 1C)
and for 10 and 15 nm tip.
Averaging is performed over all
indentation points (1–7, Figure 1C)
and for 10 and 15 nm tip.
Nanoindentation
Spectra of a Single Protofilament Suggest That
It Has Large Flexural Rigidity
We analyzed mechanical deformations
of the MT cylinder using a thin-shell approximation (see Supporting Information).[32] For the average slope of the FX curves of KMT = 51.8 ± 2.8 pN/nm (for simulations
with 10 nm tip; Table 1), the MT flexural rigidity
EI comes to (25,400 ± 1,500) × 103 pN nm2, which corresponds to the MT persistence length Lp = EI/kBT of 6.18 ± 0.36 mm. To estimate the flexural rigidity of tubulin
strands, we performed simulations of bending deformation of single
protofilaments formed by 8 (PF8/1), 16 (PF16/1), 24 (PF24/1), and
32 (PF32/1) dimers (see Supporting Movie S3 in the Supporting Information for PF16/1). In these simulations,
the protofilament ends were clamped and the bending in response to
forced indentations was examined. The simulated force–deformation
spectra, i.e., the profiles of the deformation force F vs the cantilever tip displacement (deformation) X (the FX curves), and the corresponding profiles
of the deformation energy (obtained by calculating the area under
the FX curve) vs X are presented
in Figure S5 in the Supporting Information. Using the harmonic approximation valid for small 2–3 nm
deformations we find that the values of EI for these protofilament
fragments are in the range of 18,000–26,000 pN nm2 (Figure S5 in the Supporting Information, Table 3), which corresponds to the 4.5–6.6
μm range for the persistence length (Table 3).
Table 3
Mechanical Bending Parameters Deduced
from in Silico Deformationsa
system
PF8/1
PF16/1
PF24/1
PF32/1
EI × 10–26, N m2
1.8 ± 0.1
2.3 ± 0.2
2.6 ± 0.1
2.6 ± 0.1
Lp, μm
4.5 ± 0.3
5.7 ± 0.4
6.3 ± 0.2
6.3 ± 0.3
Values are averages with standard
deviations of the flexural rigidity (EI) and persistence length (Lp) obtained from 5 bending simulation runs for
single protofilaments of 8 (PF8/1), 16 (PF16/1), 24 (PF24/1), and
32 (PF32/1) tubulin dimers.
Values are averages with standard
deviations of the flexural rigidity (EI) and persistence length (Lp) obtained from 5 bending simulation runs for
single protofilaments of 8 (PF8/1), 16 (PF16/1), 24 (PF24/1), and
32 (PF32/1) tubulin dimers.
Discussion
A Novel Approach to Multiscale Modeling of MT Polymer
Dynamic, mechanical, and force-generating properties of MTs play
important roles in many cellular processes, but little is known about
the thermodynamics of tubulin–tubulin interactions and mechanics
of individual protofilaments that form the MT lattice. Previously,
the energies of lateral and longitudinal bonds’ dissociations
were estimated with the help of molecular-mechanical models, in which
the tubulin monomer/dimer was the smallest unit.[19−21] The major drawback
of this approach is that tubulin energies are derived from the dynamic
parameters of MT assembly and disassembly, which report on the thermodynamics
of tubulin–tubulin interactions only indirectly. In contrast,
the AFM-based dynamic force measurements provide a more straightforward
experimental avenue, because in these experiments the protofilaments’
deformation and tubulin–tubulin bond rupture events are recorded
with high spatial and temporal resolution.[32,33] However, due to the complexity of the multi-protofilament MT structure,
the molecular interpretation of experimental force–indentation
spectra at the level of protein–protein bonds is not trivial,
as it requires the structure-based understanding of fine features
of the experimental spectra.We have overcome this limitation
by carrying out the dynamic force measurements in silico using the amino acid as the smallest structural unit. Our computer-based
experiments mimic the AFM based dynamic force experiments in vitro. The full control over the system we have during
the entire course of forced deformation (contact point and direction
of force application, constrained residues, indenter size) and the
structural resolution (intact versus disrupted lateral/longitudinal
interfaces) allows us to directly correlate the energy changes with
the structure alterations at the residue level. Our approach to forced
indentation in silico involves following stochastic
dynamics of mechanical deformation of a biological particle, which
is microscopically reversible when a force loading is sufficiently
slow. In this regime of compressive force application, the rate of
force increase is slower than the rate of system re-equilibration
at each point along the deformation reaction path (quasi-equilibrium).
This can be gleaned, e.g., from the comparison of FX curves for the 24 dimer long protofilament fragment PF24/1 obtained
using varying cantilever velocities (see Figure S6 in the Supporting Information). We see that as vf decreases, the FX curves
become less and less different. For example, the FX curves obtained for PF24/1 with vf =
1.0 and 0.5 μm/s look almost identical, implying similar mechanical
responses (Figure S6 in the Supporting Information). These results show that in silico indentation
experiments reported here are carried out under near-equilibrium force-loading
conditions.The dynamic force spectroscopy in silico was previously
applied by us to examine the forced unfolding of fibrin polymers[44] and to map the free energy landscape for deformation
of the Cowpea Chlorotic Mottle Virus capsid.[45] This approach is made possible by combining the atomic-level and
Cα-based coarse-grained modeling with nanomanipulation
of the MT lattice in silico.[34,35] By taking advantage of the computational acceleration on a GPU we
were able to carry out detailed exploration of MT biomechanics on
a long time scale (∼50 ms) using the experimentally relevant
conditions of force application.[32,33] With this
approach, the atomic-level details underlying the lateral and longitudinal
interactions are implicit in the SOP model of the MT cylinder. The
next-neighbor interactions that stabilize MT structure and the lattice
confinement for individual dimers are explicitly described. Within
the context of these advances, although this model can be applied
to describe processes that occur on a millisecond time scale, given
current computational limitations it cannot be applied to much slower
processes, such as the rupture of tubulin bonds and protofilament
bending during MT depolymerization.Here, we have determined
the thermodynamic and mechanical characteristics
of the MT that are difficult to access experimentally by analyzing
the force–deformation curves from in silico nanoindentation simulations. The area under the FX curve is the total work performed on the system, and the reversible
part of work can be linked to the Gibbs free energy change. Hence,
the obtained free energies for the tubulin bonds’ dissociation
are based on theoretical analyses of in silico experiments,
in which these bonds are directly manipulated. The only free parameter
of the SOP model is εh, but the values of this quantity
for each group of contacts between amino acids were calculated using
the all-atom MD simulations (Table S3 in the Supporting
Information). The SOP model based nanoindentation assays provided
the force–indentation curves which agree well with the experimental
AFM spectra.[32,33] Thus, the agreement between the
experiment and simulations was achieved without model fitting and
without adjustment of free parameters. The detailed understanding
of the mechanisms of MT deformation and structural collapse that we
have achieved offers unique insights into the mechanochemistry of
the MT lattice.
Insights into the Thermodynamics of Tubulin–Tubulin
Interactions
in the MT Lattice
First, we found that the compressed MT
behaves as a system of rigid elements interconnected through a network
of lateral and longitudinal elastic bonds. Large rigidity of tubulin
monomers agrees well with the results of prior computational modeling
study, in which tubulin monomers were found to have a stable central
core.[46] Accordingly, under small deformations
the MT cylinder responds elastically, while undergoing continuous
deformation characteristic of long wavelength modes. The importance
of slow global modes in mechanical deformation of the MT lattice has
also been revealed in a recent elastic network modeling study.[47] Beyond 3–4 nm compression, the αβ-tubulin
dimers buckle, leading to flattening of the MT cylinder. With further
compression the lateral contacts between the adjacent protofilaments
dissociate (both α–α and β–β
lateral bonds behave similarly), which is then followed by the rupture
of longitudinal interdimer but not intradimer bonds (Figure S4 in
the Supporting Information); these discrete
structure changes are characteristic of short wavelength modes. Importantly,
the sequence of microscopic events during mechanical MT compression
defined here is likely to provide a blueprint for a pathway of normal
MT disassembly. Indeed, in the course of mechanical compression tubulin
bonds dissociate in the same order as during normal MT disassembly
(lateral bonds prior to the longitudinal ones). Since the Gibbs free
energy change for any bond dissociation is a state function and, therefore,
does not depend on the exact cause of transition, our findings from
nanoindentation experiments are directly applicable to describe and
model the molecular events during MT disassembly.Second, our
work provides direct estimates of the free energies of dissociation
of the lateral and longitudinal tubulin–tubulin bonds. We show
that interfaces between tubulin subunits in the MT wall are characterized
by strong noncovalent interactions. Structural analyses revealed that
(i) the α–α and β–β lateral
interfaces are formed by a total of 19 and 21 stable residue–residue
contacts, respectively, and that (ii) the longitudinal intradimer
bonds and interdimer bonds are stabilized by 78 and 38 total contacts,
respectively. In both the lateral and longitudinal interfaces, the
most stable residue–residue contacts are hydrophobic bonds
and salt bridges (Figure S4A–D in the Supporting
Information), consistent with a recent molecular modeling study[48] (major structural determinants in tubulin monomers
involved in the intermonomer contacts’ formation are accumulated
in Table S4 in the Supporting Information). The difference between the obtained energies of the lateral and
longitudinal bonds, ΔΔG = ΔGlong – ΔGlat = 8.0 kcal/mol (∼13.3 kBT), is close to the 11 kBT estimate reported earlier.[15,19] Importantly, the large strength of the tubulin–tubulin bonds
reported here should prompt a re-evaluation of current molecular models
of MT dynamics and stability, where these characteristics play a significant
role.Third, our results reveal that the rupture of the lateral
tubulin–tubulin
bond is highly reversible. This finding provides an important clue
for understanding the molecular mechanisms of MT rescue, an abrupt
switch from MT depolymerization to polymerization. We suggest that
high reversibility of lateral bond dissociation can promote “sealing”
of the cracks between shortening protofilaments in the MT wall, thereby
inhibiting the depolymerization. Another insight from our study concerns
the geometry of contacts in the lateral tubulin interfaces. Previously,
it has been suggested that the steplike “gaps” in the
force–indentation curves obtained with AFM reflect the existence
of two additional interaction sites between the dimers in adjacent
protofilaments.[22] Our results demonstrate
that a single pair of lateral interaction sites can account for all
features of the experimental force spectrum, and the steplike gaps
appear to result from the dissociation of lateral bonds under 6–8
nm deformations (Figure 4). Interestingly,
subjecting the MT lattice to mechanical stress can lead to the formation
of small defects at the junction points connecting α- and β-tubulins;
these defects grow in size with increasing force load (Figure S3 in
the Supporting Information). Such defects
could also emerge due to the mechanical “fatigue” of
an MT lattice that repeatedly experiences large deformations, similar
to the behavior of carbon nanotubes.[49,50] However, since
the local force to cause such a crack is large (>300 pN), thermal
vibrations of the MTs are highly unlikely to lead to the MT lattice
fatigue,[33] so they cannot explain the MT
“aging” in vitro.[51] Yet, crack formation might be pertinent to the activity
of MT-severing enzymes, which are thought to exert large local forces
while pulling the tubulins out of the MT wall.[52]We found that the rupture of the longitudinal tubulin–tubulin
bond is irreversible on the time scale of a few tens of microseconds.
The corresponding irreversibility of the MT lattice restructuring
is directly related to the long time scale required for the re-formation
of all the longitudinal bonds and recovery of the MT lattice structure
upon large indentation, a feature that was also detected in the original
AFM experiments.[32,33] The authors found that it would
take ∼4 min for the MT lattice to fully self-heal (in the absence
of free tubulin in solution) following an indentation beyond 10 nm.
Hence, this finding shows that even after disruption of lateral and
longitudinal bonds the lattice is able to recover, but only on a long
time scale of a few minutes. To further explore this (ir)reversibility
aspect, we carried out simulations of force-induced forward indentation
followed by force-quenched backward tip retraction, but for the short
protofilament fragment PF8/1. The results are presented in Figure
S7 in the Supporting Information. Interestingly,
we found that, following the initial dissociation of the longitudinal
bond between the 4th and 5th dimers, when the direction of tip motion
was reversed, the bond re-formed and the protofilament unbent completely
over a 10–20 ms time scale (Figure S7 in the Supporting Information). Hence, the longitudinal bond dissociation
in short protofilament fragments (such as PF8/1) is fully reversible
on the millisecond time scale. This can be explained by lower entropic
barriers for reassociation of tubulin dimers in single protofilaments
compared to the MT lattice.
Implications for the Models of Force Generation
by the Depolymerizing
MT
The large flexural rigidity of individual protofilaments
reported here implies that tubulin protofilaments are fairly rigid.
Our estimates (18,000–26,000 pN nm2, Table 3) come close to the experimental values from several
studies (Table 1 in ref (18)) and agree with those from a recent all-atom MD simulation
study (EI = 27,740 pN nm2).[28] This large protofilament’s rigidity supports the idea that
almost the entire energy from GTP hydrolysis is stored as mechanical
tension in a straightened protofilament.[53,54] The obtained value of the persistence length for the MT cylinder Lp = 6.18 mm agrees well with the experimentally
measured value 3.45 mm (ref (1)) and with the estimates from other computation studies,[28,47,55] demonstrating the validity of
SOP modeling. Importantly, our results imply that tubulin protofilaments
are about 3 orders of magnitude more flexible than the intact MT cylinder
(of comparable length), which is in tune with some but not all previous
estimates.[27,48,56] We also obtained a similar 3 orders of magnitude difference for
the persistence length, i.e., 6.18 mm for the MT cylinder vs 4.5–6.6
μm for the tubulin protofilaments (Table 3), implying a stabilizing role played by the lateral tubulin–tubulin
bonds.Our work has important implications for the mechanism
of force generation by the disassembling MTs. The ability of shortening
MTs to transport a large cargo in vitro (up to 30
pN)[30] has been proposed to result from
different mechanisms, including the biased-diffusion and power stroke
based models.[10,27] Only the latter mechanism takes
a direct advantage of the tubulin dissociation pathway during which
the lateral tubulin bonds dissociate prior to the longitudinal ones,
causing a splaying of the protofilaments into the “ram’s
horns” structures.[14,58] This structural transition
has been proposed to exert a power stroke, capable of moving the appropriately
attached cargo.[21,57,59] Although SOP modeling does not allow one to calculate directly the
MT disassembly due to the prohibitively large computational time,
it is interesting to discuss the estimates obtained here in the framework
of the current models for MT force generation. The work to straighten
the 8–32 dimer long protofilament with the intradimer bending
angle of 0.4 rad can be estimated from the protofilament’s
rigidity, assuming that the protofilament behaves as a Hookean spring:
∼39–58 kBT. This large bending energy suggests that a significant portion of
this chemical energy can be converted into useful work.[53,54] Therefore, both the large flexural rigidity of tubulin protofilaments
and high tubulin–tubulin dissociation energies obtained here
support the proposal that the disassembling MT can serve as a strong
depolymerization motor.[10,21] We hope that future
advances in computational molecular modeling and availability of high-resolution,
nucleotide specific tubulin structures will enable a direct testing
of these conclusions. The modeling tools we have developed here can
also be applied to study other complex biological assemblies when
their detailed physicochemical characteristics cannot be resolved
using modern experimental approaches.
Materials
and Methods
Computer Model of MT Lattice
The structure of a finite-length
fragment of the MT lattice was obtained from the 13 subunit ring structure
of αβ-tubulin dimers, as in ref (60). This ring structure utilizes
atomic coordinates of the αβ-tubulin dimer (PDB code: 1JFF),[61] in which the E-site in β-tubulin contains GDP. The
finite-length fragment of GDP-tubulin MT lattice (MT8/13, Figure 1A) was constructed by replicating the ring structure
8 times using the shift distance of 85 Å to obtain an MT construct
of 8 dimers in length (MT8/13; see Figure 1B). We used the all-atom molecular dynamics simulations in implicit
water (SASA and GB models of implicit solvation) to obtain an accurate
parametrization of the SOP model, as described below (see Table S3
in the Supporting Information). The structures
of 8, 16, 24, and 32 dimer long single protofilaments (PF8/1, PF16/1,
PF24/1, and PF32/1) were extracted starting from the structure of
MT8/13.
Self-Organized Polymer (SOP) Model
We used the SOP
model of the polypeptide chain[36] to describe
each monomer (α-tubulin and β-tubulin). In the topology-based
SOP model, each amino acid is represented by a single interaction
center (Cα-atom), and the Cα–Cα covalent bond with the bond distance a = 3.8 Å (peptide bond length). The potential energy function
of the protein conformation USOP specified
in terms of the coordinates {r} = r1, r2, ..., r (N is the total number of amino acid residues) is given by USOP = UFENE + UNBATT + UNBREP. The finite extensible nonlinear elastic potential UFENE = −∑(k/2)(R02){log[1 –
(r – r0)2/R02]} with the spring constant k = 14 N/m and
the tolerance in the change of a covalent bond distance R0 = 2 Å describes the backbone chain connectivity.
The distance between residues i and i + 1 is r, and r0 is its value
in the native (PDB) structure. We used the Lennard-Jones potential UNBATT = ∑∑εh[(r0/r)12 – 2(r0/r)6]Δ to account for the noncovalent (nonbonded attractive) interactions
that stabilize the native folded state. We assumed that if the noncovalently
linked residues i and j (|i – j| > 2) are within the cutoff
distance RC = 8 Å in the native state,
then Δ = 1, and it is zero otherwise.
The value of εh quantifies the strength of the nonbonded
interactions. The non-native (nonbonded repulsive) interactions UNBREP = ∑εl(σl/r)6 + ∑∑εl(r0/r)6(1−Δ) are treated as repulsive. An additional constraint was imposed
on the bond angle formed by residues i, i+1, and i+2 by including the repulsive potential
with parameters εl = 1 kcal/mol and σl = 3.8 Å. These determine the strength and the range of the
repulsion.
Parameterization of Cα-Based
SOP Model
A more detailed description of the SOP model parametrization
is presented
in the Supporting Information. In short,
in the SOP model, the parameter εh defines the average
strength of noncovalent residue–residue contacts that stabilize
the native state. Importantly, the values of εh were
calculated directly using MD simulations of an atomic structure model
MT8/13 of the MT lattice at T = 300 K. The atomic-level
details that determine the type and number of binary contacts between
amino acids and their energies were ported to the SOP model of the
MT lattice. Three 10 ns simulation runs were performed to calculate
for each group of contacts the average nonbonded energy (Enb), given by the sum of the van der Waals energy (Lennard-Jones
potential) and the electrostatic energy (Coulomb potential), and the
average number of binary contacts between amino acids (Nnb) that stabilize the native MT structure (native contacts).
We assumed that a pair of residues formed a contact if the distance
between their Cα-atoms in the native state does not
exceed the cutoff distance RC. We used
a standard choice of the cutoff distance RC = 8 Å. All the native contacts were divided into five groups
(contact types): (1) the intramonomer contacts in the α-tubulin
monomers; (2) the intramonomer contacts in the β-tubulin monomers;
(3) the intradimer contacts that stabilize the dimer’s structure;
(4) the longitudinal interdimer contacts between any two dimers along
the MT cylinder axis; and (5) the lateral interdimer contacts between
the α-tubulin monomers and between the β-tubulin monomers
in adjacent protofilaments. To calculate the energy for nonbonded
interactions, we employed the Solvent Accessible Surface Area (SASA)[62] and Generalized Born (GB)[63] models of implicit solvation, which are based on the CHARMM19
force-field.[64] We used the output from
SASA model based simulations (coordinate and energy files) to calculate
the values of Enb and Nnb for the contact groups 1–3. Since electrostatic
interactions are important for the formation of longitudinal and lateral
tubulin–tubulin bonds, we used a more accurate GB model to
calculate Enb and Nnb for the contact groups 4 and 5. Finally, dividing Enb by the corresponding value of Nnb for each contact group, we obtained the value of εh (see Table S3 in the Supporting Information), which were used in all simulations reported here.
Dynamic Force
Measurements in Silico
Nanoindentation measurements
were performed at different points on
the MT surface using the spherical tip of radius Rtip = 10 and 15 nm (Figure 1C),
similar to the 15 nm tip used in atomic force microscopy (AFM) experiments.[32,33] In the simulations of mechanical indentation of the MT cylinder
and deformation of single protofilament fragments, the tip–MT
lattice interactions and the tip–protofilament interactions
were modeled by the repulsive potential, Utip = εtip[σtip/(r– Rtip)]6, where r is the position of the ith particle, εtip = 4.18 kJ/mol, and σtip =1.0 Å. In
the forward indentation measurement, the tip exerted the time-dependent
compressive force f(t) = f(t)n in the direction n perpendicular to the MT or protofilament surface (Figure 1B). The force magnitude f(t) = rft was
increased with the force-loading rate rf = κvf, where vf = 1.0 μm/s (for MT indentations) and vf = 0.2 μm/s (for protofilament deformations) is
the velocity of the cantilever base (piezo) represented by a virtual
particle, and κ = 0.05 N/m is the cantilever spring constant.
The force f(t) is transmitted to
the tip through the cantilever spring, and the resisting indentation
force (for MT lattice) or deformation force (for the protofilament) F is calculated using the energy output from simulations.
In the simulations of backward (tip) retraction, the direction of
tip (or piezo) motion was reversed, which resulted in a gradual decrease
of the compressive force to zero.
Simulations of Mechanical
Indentation of MT
These simulations
were performed using the SOP model of MT8/13 and Langevin simulations
accelerated on a GPU.[34,35] To account for the long persistence
length of MTs (microns to millimeters),[65] positions of the Cα-atoms for
a total of 9 residues 248, 253, 257, 262, 325, 326, 329, 348, 349
in each tubulin monomer at the plus MT end, and positions of the Cα-atoms for 9 residues 98, 176, 177, 180,
221, 224, 225, 403, 407 in each tubulin monomer at the plus MT end,
were constrained (Figure 1). We implemented
hard constraint conditions, in which the positions of all 9 constrained
residues were fixed, and soft harmonic constraints, in which we connected
these same 9 residues to a virtual wall through a harmonic spring
with the spring constant of κ = 0.1 nN/nm. A total of 42 indentation
runs were generated (using hard constraints): 3 runs per indentation
point 1–7; 21 runs for each Rtip value. We profiled the dependence of the indentation force F in dynamic force experiments on the cantilever tip displacement X (indentation depth) and Z (the piezo
displacement) for all indentation points (Figure 1C). The FX curves show higher sensitivity
to the MT deformation dynamics than FZ curves, and
so X is a better reaction coordinate. However, for
the purpose of comparing the results of experiments with simulations,
we analyzed the FZ and FX curves
(Figure 2A).
Simulations of Bending
Deformation of MT Protofilaments
These simulations were performed
using the SOP models of protofilament
fragments PF8/1, PF16/1, PF24/1, and PF32/1 and Langevin simulations
on a GPU. To constrain a protofilament, we fixed the same positions
of the Cα-atoms at the N-terminus
of the first monomer and at the C-terminus of the last monomer. The
cantilever tip was set to move in the direction perpendicular to the
protofilament axis, as shown in Figure S5 in the Supporting Information. A total of 12 indentation runs for
indentation point 3 were generated for all four protofilament fragments:
3 runs per fragment (Rtip = 10 nm). We
profiled the dependence of the deformation force F on the cantilever tip displacement X for the protofilament
fragments (Figure S5 in the Supporting Information). Flexural rigidity of the protofilament fragments was calculated
in the harmonic approximation as described in the Supporting Information. Because the harmonic approximation
is valid only in the regime of small deformations, we analyzed the
initial quadratic 2–3 nm portion of the FX curves (Figure S5 in the Supporting Information). This deformation translates to the average dimer–dimer
bending angle of 1–2°.
Free Energy Estimation
To obtain accurate estimates
of the Gibbs free energy change associated with the disruption of
single lateral interface and longitudinal interface (ΔGlat and ΔGlong), we determined the mechanical work performed on the MT (area under
the FX curve). Since it is not possible to apply
infinitely slow force loading, which would correspond to the equilibrium
conditions of mechanical force application (and reversible work),
the total work (w) in our indentation cycle contains
the reversible part wrev, which is spent
to deform the MT lattice, and to dissociate the lateral and longitudinal
bonds, as well as the irreversible part wirrev (see hysteresis in the FX curves in Figures 2 and 3; see also Figures
S1 and S2 in the Supporting Information). We calculated the reversible part of work wrev using the Crooks theorem (see the Supporting
Information).
Analyses of the Simulation Output
These analyses for
mechanical compression of MT8/13, and bending deformation of PF8/1,
PF16/1, PF24/1, and PF32/1, including the structure visualization
and determination of the thermodynamic quantities (ΔG, ΔH, and TΔS), flexural rigidity (EI), persistence length (Lp), and the range of lateral and longitudinal
bonds (Δy), are described in detail in the Supporting Information.
Authors: Artem Zhmurov; Andre E X Brown; Rustem I Litvinov; Ruxandra I Dima; John W Weisel; Valeri Barsegov Journal: Structure Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Kelly E Theisen; Artem Zhmurov; Maycee E Newberry; Valeri Barsegov; Ruxandra I Dima Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Maxim I Molodtsov; Elena A Ermakova; Emmanuil E Shnol; Ekaterina L Grishchuk; J Richard McIntosh; Fazly I Ataullakhanov Journal: Biophys J Date: 2005-02-18 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Artem Efremov; Ekaterina L Grishchuk; J Richard McIntosh; Fazly I Ataullakhanov Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-11-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Vladimir A Volkov; Anatoly V Zaytsev; Nikita Gudimchuk; Paula M Grissom; Alexander L Gintsburg; Fazly I Ataullakhanov; J Richard McIntosh; Ekaterina L Grishchuk Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-04-22 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Lili X Peng; Monica T Hsu; Massimiliano Bonomi; David A Agard; Matthew P Jacobson Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2014-02-06 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: Pavel Zakharov; Nikita Gudimchuk; Vladimir Voevodin; Alexander Tikhonravov; Fazoil I Ataullakhanov; Ekaterina L Grishchuk Journal: Biophys J Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Olga Kononova; Rustem I Litvinov; Dmitry S Blokhin; Vladimir V Klochkov; John W Weisel; Joel S Bennett; Valeri Barsegov Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Daniela Bauer; Dale R Merz; Benjamin Pelz; Kelly E Theisen; Gail Yacyshyn; Dejana Mokranjac; Ruxandra I Dima; Matthias Rief; Gabriel Žoldák Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Farkhad Maksudov; Olga Kononova; Aida Llauró; Alvaro Ortega-Esteban; Trevor Douglas; Gabriela N Condezo; Carmen San Martín; Kenneth A Marx; Gijs J L Wuite; Wouter H Roos; Pedro J de Pablo; Valeri Barsegov Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2020-12-28 Impact factor: 8.947