Actin depolymerizing factor (ADF)/cofilin is the main protein family promoting the disassembly of actin filaments, which is essential for numerous cellular functions. ADF/cofilin proteins disassemble actin filaments through different reactions, as they bind to their sides, sever them, and promote the depolymerization of the resulting ADF/cofilin-saturated filaments. Moreover, the efficiency of ADF/cofilin is known to be very sensitive to pH. ADF/cofilin thus illustrates two challenges in actin biochemistry: separating the different regulatory actions of a single protein and characterizing them as a function of specific biochemical conditions. Here, we investigate the different reactions of ADF/cofilin on actin filaments, at four different pH values ranging from 6.6 to 7.8, using single-filament microfluidics techniques. We show that decreasing the pH decreases the effective filament severing rate by increasing the rate at which filaments become saturated by ADF/cofilin, thereby reducing the number of ADF/cofilin domain boundaries, where severing can occur. The severing rate per domain boundary, however, remains unchanged at different pH values. The ADF/cofilin-decorated filaments ("cofilactin" filaments) depolymerize from both ends. We show here that, at physiological pH (7.0-7.4), the pointed end depolymerization of cofilactin filaments is barely faster than that of bare filaments. In contrast, cofilactin barbed ends undergo an "unstoppable" depolymerization (depolymerizing for minutes despite the presence of free actin monomers and capping protein in solution), throughout our pH range. We thus show that, at physiological pH, the main contribution of ADF/cofilin to filament depolymerization is at the barbed end.
Actin depolymerizing factor (ADF)/cofilin is the main protein family promoting the disassembly of actin filaments, which is essential for numerous cellular functions. ADF/cofilin proteins disassemble actin filaments through different reactions, as they bind to their sides, sever them, and promote the depolymerization of the resulting ADF/cofilin-saturated filaments. Moreover, the efficiency of ADF/cofilin is known to be very sensitive to pH. ADF/cofilin thus illustrates two challenges in actin biochemistry: separating the different regulatory actions of a single protein and characterizing them as a function of specific biochemical conditions. Here, we investigate the different reactions of ADF/cofilin on actin filaments, at four different pH values ranging from 6.6 to 7.8, using single-filament microfluidics techniques. We show that decreasing the pH decreases the effective filament severing rate by increasing the rate at which filaments become saturated by ADF/cofilin, thereby reducing the number of ADF/cofilin domain boundaries, where severing can occur. The severing rate per domain boundary, however, remains unchanged at different pH values. The ADF/cofilin-decorated filaments ("cofilactin" filaments) depolymerize from both ends. We show here that, at physiological pH (7.0-7.4), the pointed end depolymerization of cofilactin filaments is barely faster than that of bare filaments. In contrast, cofilactin barbed ends undergo an "unstoppable" depolymerization (depolymerizing for minutes despite the presence of free actin monomers and capping protein in solution), throughout our pH range. We thus show that, at physiological pH, the main contribution of ADF/cofilin to filament depolymerization is at the barbed end.
A number of key cellular processes
rely on the proper assembly and disassembly of actin filament networks.[1] The central regulator of actin disassembly is
the ADF/cofilin protein family,[2,3] which comprises three
isoforms in mammals: cofilin-1 (cof1, found in nearly all cell types),
cofilin-2 (cof2, found primarily in muscles), and actin depolymerization
factor (ADF, found mostly in neurons and epithelial cells). We refer
to them collectively as “ADF/cofilin”.Over the
years, the combined efforts of several laboratories have
led to the following understanding of actin filament disassembly by
ADF/cofilin. Molecules of ADF/cofilin bind stoichiometrically[4,5] to the sides of actin filaments, with a strong preference for ADP-actin
subunits.[6−10] Though ADF/cofilin molecules do not contact each other,[11] they bind in a cooperative manner, leading to
the formation of ADF/cofilin domains on the filaments.[5,7,9,12,13] Compared to bare F-actin, the filament portions
decorated with ADF/cofilin (termed “cofilactin”) are
more flexible[14,15] and exhibit a shorter right-handed
helical pitch, with a different subunit conformation.[11,16−19] Thermal fluctuations are then enough to sever actin filaments at
(or near) domain boundaries.[8,9,13,20,21] Cofilactin filaments do not sever but depolymerize from both ends,[13] thereby renewing the actin monomer pool.ADF/cofilin thus disassembles actin filaments through the combination
of different actions. As such, it vividly illustrates a current challenge
in actin biochemistry: identifying and quantifying the multiple reactions
involving a single protein. This is a very difficult task for bulk
solution assays, where a large number of reactions take place simultaneously,
and single-filament techniques have played a key role in deciphering
ADF/cofilin’s actions.[9,13,20,22−24] In particular,
the microfluidics-based method that we have developed over the past
years is a powerful tool for such investigations.[25] It has recently allowed us to quantify the kinetics of
the aforementioned reactions and to discover that ADF/cofilin-saturated
filament (cofilactin) barbed ends can hardly stop depolymerizing,
even when ATP-G-actin and capping protein are present in solution.[13]In addition, ADF/cofilin is very sensitive
to pH.[4,5,26−31] In cells, the pH can be a key regulatory factor.[32] It can vary between compartments, vary between cell types,
and be specifically modulated. We can consider that a typical cytoplasmic
pH would be between 7.0 and 7.4. Recently, we have quantified the
different reactions involving ADF/cofilin at pH 7.8,[13] leaving open the question of how these reaction rates are
individually affected by pH variations. For instance, it has been
reported that ADF/cofilin is a more potent filament disassembler at
higher pH values,[4,5,26−29] but the actual impact of pH on the rate constants of individual
reactions has yet to be determined. Moreover, whether the unstoppable
barbed end depolymerization that we have recently discovered for ADF/cofilin-saturated
filaments at pH 7.8[13] remains significant
at lower, more physiological pH values is an open question.Here, we investigate how the different contributions of ADF/cofilin
(using unlabeled ADF, unlabeled cof1, and eGFP-cof1) to actin filament
disassembly depend on pH, which we varied from 6.6 to 7.8. We first
present the microfluidics methods that we have used for the observation
of individual filaments (Figure ). We measured cofilin’s ability to decorate
actin filaments by binding to their sides (Figure ) and the rate at which individual cofilin
domains severed actin filaments (Figure ). We next quantified the kinetic parameters
of filament ends, for bare and ADF/cofilin-saturated (cofilactin)
filaments (Figure ), and we specifically quantified the extent to which the barbed
ends of cofilactin filaments are in a state that can hardly stop depolymerizing
(Figure ). We finally
summarize our results (Figure ).
Figure 1
Using microfluidics to monitor individual actin filaments and the
binding of cofilin. (A) Experiments are performed in microfluidics
chambers, sketched from above. The main channel is connected through
three inlets to different protein solutions. Controlling the pressure
in each inlet allows one to rapidly change the solution in the field
of view. (B) Sketch of a typical experiment (side view). Filaments
are elongated from coverslip-anchored spectrin-actin seeds, by injecting
ATP-G-actin. Filaments are then aged by flowing in a solution of ATP-G-actin
at the critical concentration, for at least 15 min. This results in
>99% of the monomers being in the ADP state. Finally, filaments
are
exposed to ADF/cofilin. (C) Example of a field of view, imaged with
TIRFm. ADP-F-actin labeled with Alexa-488 is exposed to mCherry-cofilin-1,
which forms observable domains on the filaments.
Figure 2
Cofilin binds more slowly to filaments at higher pH values. (A)
Experimental configuration. Actin filaments are grown from spectrin-actin
seeds with a long middle segment of unlabeled ADP-actin. (B) Time-lapse
image showing an unlabeled ADP-actin filament becoming saturated by
eGFP-cof1 over time. (C and D) Mean normalized eGFP-cofilin-1 fluorescence
signal, binding to unlabeled ADP-F-actin. eGFP-cofilin-1 at concentrations
of (C) 150 and (D) 400 nM was injected in the chamber from time zero
onward. The fluorescence signal was averaged along 20–35 pixels
(3.5–6 μm) for each filament. There were (C) N = 10, 10, 18, and 20 filaments used for pH 6.6 Hepes,
pH 7.0 Hepes, pH 7.0 Tris, and pH 7.4 Tris, respectively, and (D) N = 10 filaments for each condition. (E) Number of cofilin
subunits in individual domains, increasing over time. For the sake
of clarity, the time origin has been shifted for each curve. Lines
show the linear fit. Condition: 400 nM eGFP-cofilin-1 and pH 7.0 Hepes.
(F) Growth rates of individual cofilin domains at different eGFP-cofilin-1
concentrations and pH. Values are median values; error bars show the
interquartile range. N = 10 domains, except N = 9 for pH 6.6 Hepes with 150 nM cof1 and for pH 7.8 Tris
with 400 nM cof1.
Figure 3
The severing
rate per cofilin domain is unaffected by pH. (A) Experimental
setup. Alexa-568-labeled actin filaments are polymerized from actin-spectrin
seeds and aged before being exposed to eGFP-cof1. (B) Typical kymograph.
eGFP-cof1 at a concentration of 200 nM (green) is constantly injected,
binds F-actin (red), and induces severing (lightning symbols). (C)
Fraction of cofilin domains with no severing event detected near their
edges over time. Time zero is defined for each domain as the last
frame before the domain becomes visible. The survival fraction curves
are calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method over 22–43
filaments, 78–90 cofilin domains, and 30–33 severing
events for each data set.
Figure 4
A higher pH slows polymerization and depolymerization of bare F-actin
but accelerates depolymerization of ADF/cofilin-saturated filaments
at both ends. (A–C) Polymerization from the barbed end. (A)
Sketch of the experimental configuration, where filaments were grown
from actin-spectrin seeds with G-ATP-actin and profilin. (B) Kymograph
of a typical elongating filament. (C) Polymerization rate at different
pH values. N = 20 filaments for each condition. (D
and E) Depolymerization from the barbed end. (D) Sketch of the experimental
configuration. ADP-F-actin is exposed either to buffer only or to
1–2 μM unlabeled ADF or cofilin-1 to fully saturate the
filament in <1 min. (E) Depolymerization rate for different pH
values. The right panel shows a close-up of the 0–5 sub/s range.
From left to right, N = 20, 32, 22, 32, and 31 (bare
filaments), N = 9, 14, 23, 33, and 34 (ADF-saturated),
and N = 17, 18, and 16 (cofilin-1-saturated). (F–H)
Depolymerization from the pointed end. (F) Sketch of the experimental
configuration. ADP-F-actin was bound to the surface by gelsolin. Filaments
were exposed to buffer only (supplemented with 0.4 mM CaCl2 to ensure gelsolin-actin tight binding) containing 1–2 μM
unlabeled ADF or cofilin-1 to rapidly saturate filaments. (G) Typical
kymograph of a depolymerizing filament saturated with ADF. (H) Pointed
end depolymerization rate at different pH values. N = 14, 20, 15, 20, and 20 (bare filaments). N =
20, 20, 16, 20, and 20 (ADF-saturated). N = 20, 20,
and 20 (cofilin-1-saturated). In panels C, E, and H, symbols show
median values and error bars show the interquartile range.
Figure 5
“Unstoppable”
depolymerization of cofilactin barbed
ends is observed throughout our pH range. (A–C) Synergy of
CP and ADF/cofilin in saturating filaments and initiating barbed end
depolymerization. (A) Sketch of the experimental configuration and
events. Filaments grow until they are capped with CP. ADF/cofilin
can then saturate the filaments, up to their BE, which thus uncaps
and depolymerizes. (B) Kymograph of a filament continuously exposed
to the same solution containing 0.8 μM G-ATP-actin, 1 μM
ADF, and 2 nM CP. The filament polymerizes, pauses as it is capped
by CP, and eventually depolymerizes. (C) Fraction of barbed ends that
underwent a transition from a pause to depolymerization. Time zero
corresponds to the beginning of the pause (as shown in panel B). N = 24, 32, and 32 filaments for pH 7.0 Hepes, pH 7.0 Tris,
and pH 7.4 Tris, respectively. (D–F) Cofilactin barbed ends
sustain depolymerization in the presence of ATP-G-actin. (D) Sketch
of the experimental configuration and events. Filaments are polymerized
from spectrin-actin seeds and saturated with ADF. Depolymerizing cofilactin
filaments are then constantly exposed to a solution of ATP-G-actin.
(E) Fraction of barbed ends that underwent a transition from depolymerization
to polymerization over time when exposed to 1 μM ATP-G-actin
and 0.5 μM ADF (to keep filaments saturated). N = 25, 16, 25, 24, and 31 for pH 6.6 Hepes, pH 7.0 Hepes, pH 7.0
Tris, pH 7.4 Tris, and pH 7.8 Tris, respectively. (F) Same as panel
E but with 1 μM profilin added to the solution. N = 21, 27, and 30 for pH 6.6 Hepes, pH 7.4 Tris, and pH 7.8 Tris,
respectively.
Figure 6
Summary of results. Barbed end depolymerization is an important
contribution of cofilin disassembly at physiological pH. Within the
pH range that we have explored (6.6–7.8), we have made the
following observations (from top to bottom, on this sketch). A lower
pH favors the rapid decoration of filaments by ADF/cofilin, but the
severing rate per cofilin domain does not vary with pH. As a consequence,
at a higher pH, domain boundaries persist longer (before domains merge)
and severing is more efficient. The acceleration of pointed end depolymerization
for cofilactin filaments is mostly observed at high pH values. The
“unstoppable” depolymerization of cofilactin barbed
ends is observed at all pH values and is more pronounced at lower
pH values.
Methods
Buffers and Proteins
Experiments
were performed at
room temperature in F-buffer (10 mM Hepes or Tris-HCl, 50 mM KCl,
1 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM EGTA, 0.2 mM ATP, 10 mM DTT, and 1 mM
DABCO) at different pH values: pH 6.6 (Hepes), pH 7.0 (Hepes or Tris),
pH 7.4 (Tris), and pH 7.8 (Tris). The pH of each buffer was adjusted
after all of the ingredients had been mixed.All the protocols
for protein purification can be found in ref (13). Actin was purified from
acetone powder, made from rabbit muscle. Recombinant mousecofilin-1,
eGFP-cof1 (with eGFP at the N-terminus), humanADF, humanprofilin-1,
and humangelsolin were expressed in bacteria and purified. Capping
protein was made from recombinant mouse capping proteins alpha1 and
beta2, co-expressed in bacteria. Spectrin-actin seeds were purified
from human erythrocytes.Gelsolin was biotinylated with sulfo-NHS-biotin.
Actin was fluorescently
labeled on accessible surface lysines of F-actin, using Alexa488 or
Alexa568 succinimidyl ester.
Microfluidics for the Study of Single Actin
Filaments
To distinguish the different actions of cofilin
and quantify them,
one needs to observe single events on individual actin filaments.
To do so, the microfluidics-based method that we have developed over
the past 9 years[25] is a valuable tool.
The microfluidics setup is sketched in Figure A. It allows one
to monitor a large number of actin filaments anchored by one end only,
as well as labeled cofilin, using epifluorescence or TIRF microscopy
(Figure B). The experiments
we report here are very similar to the ones we described in ref (13). Barbed end dynamics,
as well as cofilin side binding and filament severing, were monitored
on filaments grown from spectrin-actin seeds anchored to the coverslip
surface (Figure B).
Pointed end dynamics were monitored by anchoring gelsolin-capped barbed
ends to the coverslip surface, using biotinylated gelsolin and a neutravidin-decorated
surface.Using microfluidics to monitor individual actin filaments and the
binding of cofilin. (A) Experiments are performed in microfluidics
chambers, sketched from above. The main channel is connected through
three inlets to different protein solutions. Controlling the pressure
in each inlet allows one to rapidly change the solution in the field
of view. (B) Sketch of a typical experiment (side view). Filaments
are elongated from coverslip-anchored spectrin-actin seeds, by injecting
ATP-G-actin. Filaments are then aged by flowing in a solution of ATP-G-actin
at the critical concentration, for at least 15 min. This results in
>99% of the monomers being in the ADP state. Finally, filaments
are
exposed to ADF/cofilin. (C) Example of a field of view, imaged with
TIRFm. ADP-F-actin labeled with Alexa-488 is exposed to mCherry-cofilin-1,
which forms observable domains on the filaments.
Microscopy and Data Analysis
Images were acquired via
epifluorescence or TIRF microscopy (ILAS2, Roper Scientific, now Gataca
systems) on a Nikon TiE inverted microscope equipped with a 60×
oil-immersion objective, either with an Evolve EMCCD camera (Photometrics)
controlled by Metamorph or with an Orca-Flash2.8 camera (Hamamatsu)
controlled by Micromanager. Images were analyzed using ImageJ.Elongation or depolymerization rates (Figure ) were determined on individual filaments,
and median values were reported. We considered that each actin subunit
contributed 2.7 nm to the filament length. For the quantification
of severing (Figure ), uncapping (Figure C), and rescue (Figure E,F), survival fractions were determined, following a Kaplan–Meier
algorithm.[33]As an example, we detail
here the protocol for the quantification
of severing (Figure ). Filaments were polymerized from anchored spectrin-actin seeds
with Alexa-568 (14%)-actin and aged for at least 15 min to ensure
that >99% of the monomers were in an ADP state.[25] A solution of low-concentration eGFP-cofilin-1 in F-buffer
(no G-actin) was then constantly injected. Images were acquired using
epifluorescence microscopy. All domains located at least 0.5 μm
(4 pixels) from the anchored seed were analyzed. For each domain,
time zero was defined as the frame before which they appeared. Domains
could then “sever”, i.e., have a filament severing event
occur near one of their boundaries, or be “lost”, for
example when a severing event occurred at another domain located upstream
on the same filament. These events were accounted for using a Kaplan–Meier
algorithm to determine the survival fraction of unsevered domains
over time (Figure C).
Results and Discussion
Cofilin Binds Faster to Actin Filaments at
Lower pH Values
Using our microfluidics setup, we have generated
ADP-actin filaments
comprising a long unlabeled segment and have monitored the binding
of eGFP-cof1 to this segment (Figure A,B). We found
that the decoration of the filament was equally fast at pH 6.6, 7.0,
and 7.4 (Figure C)
but significantly slower at pH 7.8, where it took approximately 6
times longer to reach 50% of full saturation in the presence of 400
nM eGFP-cof1 (Figure D).Cofilin binds more slowly to filaments at higher pH values. (A)
Experimental configuration. Actin filaments are grown from spectrin-actin
seeds with a long middle segment of unlabeled ADP-actin. (B) Time-lapse
image showing an unlabeled ADP-actin filament becoming saturated by
eGFP-cof1 over time. (C and D) Mean normalized eGFP-cofilin-1 fluorescence
signal, binding to unlabeled ADP-F-actin. eGFP-cofilin-1 at concentrations
of (C) 150 and (D) 400 nM was injected in the chamber from time zero
onward. The fluorescence signal was averaged along 20–35 pixels
(3.5–6 μm) for each filament. There were (C) N = 10, 10, 18, and 20 filaments used for pH 6.6 Hepes,
pH 7.0 Hepes, pH 7.0 Tris, and pH 7.4 Tris, respectively, and (D) N = 10 filaments for each condition. (E) Number of cofilin
subunits in individual domains, increasing over time. For the sake
of clarity, the time origin has been shifted for each curve. Lines
show the linear fit. Condition: 400 nM eGFP-cofilin-1 and pH 7.0 Hepes.
(F) Growth rates of individual cofilin domains at different eGFP-cofilin-1
concentrations and pH. Values are median values; error bars show the
interquartile range. N = 10 domains, except N = 9 for pH 6.6 Hepes with 150 nM cof1 and for pH 7.8 Tris
with 400 nM cof1.We measured the growth
rate of individual eGFP-cof1 domains (Figure E) and found that
they appeared to grow symmetrically toward both filament ends, as
we already reported for pH 7.8.[13] As we
found in our observation for the overall decoration of filaments,
we found that domain growth rate was pH-independent for low pH values
and approximately 3-fold lower at pH 7.8 (Figure F). Overall, our results show that cofilin
domains nucleate and grow much faster at pH 6.6–7.4 than at
pH 7.8.
The Severing Rate per Cofilin Domain Is Unaffected by pH
We next sought to measure the severing rate per eGFP-cof1 domain
at different pH values. To do so, we exposed Alexa-568 (14%)-ADP-actin
filaments to eGFP-cof1 and monitored the severing events over time
for each cof1 domain (Figure ). As previously
reported, severing events were observed to occur at the boundaries
of cof1 domains and occurred more often at the pointed end side of
the domain. Different cofilin concentrations were used at different
pH values to observe separate, individual domains long enough (domains
grow faster and thus fuse more rapidly at lower pH values). We found
no significant differences in the severing rate per domain as a function
of pH (Figure C).The severing
rate per cofilin domain is unaffected by pH. (A) Experimental
setup. Alexa-568-labeled actin filaments are polymerized from actin-spectrin
seeds and aged before being exposed to eGFP-cof1. (B) Typical kymograph.
eGFP-cof1 at a concentration of 200 nM (green) is constantly injected,
binds F-actin (red), and induces severing (lightning symbols). (C)
Fraction of cofilin domains with no severing event detected near their
edges over time. Time zero is defined for each domain as the last
frame before the domain becomes visible. The survival fraction curves
are calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method over 22–43
filaments, 78–90 cofilin domains, and 30–33 severing
events for each data set.Therefore, our results indicate that the previously reported
enhancement
of filament severing activity by cofilin at higher pH values[34] is not due to faster severing at each potential
severing site but to a greater number of these sites, i.e., a greater
number of domain boundaries. For a given concentration range, the
rapid cofilin decoration at low pH makes domain boundaries shorter-lived,
as domains rapidly expand and merge.
Bare Actin Filaments (without
Cofilin) Are More Dynamic at Lower
pH Values
Before measuring the depolymerization rates of
ADF/cofilin-saturated filaments, we measured the barbed end elongation
rate as well as the depolymerization rate of both ends in the absence
of ADF/cofilin at different pH values (Figure ). We found that
barbed ends exhibited higher on and off-rates at low pH (Figure C,E) and that pointed
ends also had higher off-rates at low pH (Figure H). This is consistent with earlier work
on pH,[35−37] and studies performed at high pH values[25] typically report filament dynamics slower than
those from studies performed at lower pH values.[38]A higher pH slows polymerization and depolymerization of bare F-actin
but accelerates depolymerization of ADF/cofilin-saturated filaments
at both ends. (A–C) Polymerization from the barbed end. (A)
Sketch of the experimental configuration, where filaments were grown
from actin-spectrin seeds with G-ATP-actin and profilin. (B) Kymograph
of a typical elongating filament. (C) Polymerization rate at different
pH values. N = 20 filaments for each condition. (D
and E) Depolymerization from the barbed end. (D) Sketch of the experimental
configuration. ADP-F-actin is exposed either to buffer only or to
1–2 μM unlabeled ADF or cofilin-1 to fully saturate the
filament in <1 min. (E) Depolymerization rate for different pH
values. The right panel shows a close-up of the 0–5 sub/s range.
From left to right, N = 20, 32, 22, 32, and 31 (bare
filaments), N = 9, 14, 23, 33, and 34 (ADF-saturated),
and N = 17, 18, and 16 (cofilin-1-saturated). (F–H)
Depolymerization from the pointed end. (F) Sketch of the experimental
configuration. ADP-F-actin was bound to the surface by gelsolin. Filaments
were exposed to buffer only (supplemented with 0.4 mM CaCl2 to ensure gelsolin-actin tight binding) containing 1–2 μM
unlabeled ADF or cofilin-1 to rapidly saturate filaments. (G) Typical
kymograph of a depolymerizing filament saturated with ADF. (H) Pointed
end depolymerization rate at different pH values. N = 14, 20, 15, 20, and 20 (bare filaments). N =
20, 20, 16, 20, and 20 (ADF-saturated). N = 20, 20,
and 20 (cofilin-1-saturated). In panels C, E, and H, symbols show
median values and error bars show the interquartile range.
ADF/Cofilin-Saturated Filaments Depolymerize
Faster at Higher
pH Values
The pointed end depolymerization of ADF- and cof1-saturated
filaments is faster at higher pH values (Figure H). As a result, the enhancement of pointed
end depolymerization by ADF saturation, which is very significant
at pH 7.8 (a 17-fold increase, compared to that of bare filaments),
is milder at physiological pH (a 4-fold increase at pH 7.4 and a 2-fold
increase at pH 7). cof1-saturated filament pointed ends at physiological
pH (7.0–7.4) depolymerize at rates similar to those of bare
filaments. This effect likely contributes to the more efficient filament
disassembly previously reported for higher pH values[4,5,26−29] (in addition to severing, which
we have discussed above).When filaments were saturated with
cof1 or ADF, barbed ends depolymerized more slowly than those of bare
filaments, and their off-rate increased with pH (Figure E). Consequently, the difference
in barbed end depolymerization between bare and saturated filaments
was greater at lower pH values: ADF-saturated barbed ends depolymerized
6.6-fold slower than bare barbed ends at pH 7 but only 1.7-fold slower
at pH 7.8.Another totally different effect of ADF/cofilin on
barbed end dynamics
is that free ADF/cofilin molecules in solution directly target bare
ADP-actin barbed ends and increase the monomer off-rate, as we have
first reported at pH 7.8.[13] This effect
remains at lower pH (Figure S1). This effect,
which requires ADP-actin at the barbed end, is unlikely to play a
role in cells, where an ATP-actin monomer will quickly bind the barbed
end and thus protect it from the direct targeting by ADF/cofilin.[13] Moreover, this enhancement of depolymerization
by direct targeting of the barbed end disappears if the sides of the
filament are decorated with ADF/cofilin up to the barbed end. At physiological
pH (7.0–7.4), the faster decoration of the filament sides by
ADF/cofilin (Figure ) makes this direct targeting of the BE even less likely to play
a role in cells.Nonetheless, the effect of direct BE targeting
by ADF/cofilin can
be readily observed in vitro, if actin monomers are absent from solution
and the barbed end thus remains ADP-actin (Figure S1). Importantly, this effect should not be confused with the
saturation of the sides of the filaments with ADF/cofilin, which slows
barbed end depolymerization (Figure E). This was unfortunately the case in a recent study[39] in which the authors, using unlabeled ADF, wrongly
concluded that binding ADF to the sides of filaments accelerated their
depolymerization from the barbed end.
Depolymerization at the
Barbed Ends of Cofilactin Filaments
Is Even Harder To Stop at Lower pH Values
We next investigated
if the unstoppable barbed end depolymerization of ADF/cofilin-saturated
filaments, which we discovered at pH 7.8,[13] also occurred at lower pH values.We verified that, at physiological
pH (7.0–7.4), capped filaments exposed to ADF became uncapped
and started to depolymerize (Figure A–C). Because
lower pH values accelerate the formation and growth of cofilin domains
on filaments [observed for cof1 (Figure )], they also decrease the time required
for these domains to reach the barbed end and uncap it: at pH 7.0
and 7.4 (Figure C),
uncapping occurs faster than what we previously observed at pH 7.8.[13] To further quantify the unstoppable nature of
barbed end depolymerization for ADF/cofilin-saturated filaments, we
compared the time it took for 1 μM ATP-G-actin to “rescue”
ADF-saturated filament barbed ends from depolymerization. We found
that this rescue was slower at lower pH values (Figure E). We found that adding profilin in the
buffer delayed further the rescue of depolymerizing barbed ends (Figure F).“Unstoppable”
depolymerization of cofilactin barbed
ends is observed throughout our pH range. (A–C) Synergy of
CP and ADF/cofilin in saturating filaments and initiating barbed end
depolymerization. (A) Sketch of the experimental configuration and
events. Filaments grow until they are capped with CP. ADF/cofilin
can then saturate the filaments, up to their BE, which thus uncaps
and depolymerizes. (B) Kymograph of a filament continuously exposed
to the same solution containing 0.8 μM G-ATP-actin, 1 μM
ADF, and 2 nM CP. The filament polymerizes, pauses as it is capped
by CP, and eventually depolymerizes. (C) Fraction of barbed ends that
underwent a transition from a pause to depolymerization. Time zero
corresponds to the beginning of the pause (as shown in panel B). N = 24, 32, and 32 filaments for pH 7.0 Hepes, pH 7.0 Tris,
and pH 7.4 Tris, respectively. (D–F) Cofilactin barbed ends
sustain depolymerization in the presence of ATP-G-actin. (D) Sketch
of the experimental configuration and events. Filaments are polymerized
from spectrin-actin seeds and saturated with ADF. Depolymerizing cofilactin
filaments are then constantly exposed to a solution of ATP-G-actin.
(E) Fraction of barbed ends that underwent a transition from depolymerization
to polymerization over time when exposed to 1 μM ATP-G-actin
and 0.5 μM ADF (to keep filaments saturated). N = 25, 16, 25, 24, and 31 for pH 6.6 Hepes, pH 7.0 Hepes, pH 7.0
Tris, pH 7.4 Tris, and pH 7.8 Tris, respectively. (F) Same as panel
E but with 1 μM profilin added to the solution. N = 21, 27, and 30 for pH 6.6 Hepes, pH 7.4 Tris, and pH 7.8 Tris,
respectively.Our results thus show
that the “unstoppable” depolymerizing
state of cofilactin barbed ends is a feature that exists over the
whole pH range that we have explored. In fact, its contribution to
the depolymerization of cofilactin filaments appears to be greater
at physiological pH (7.0–7.4) than at pH 7.8 where it was originally
discovered[13] for the following reasons.
(1) Depolymerizing cofilactin barbed ends are more difficult to rescue
at lower pH values. (2) Capped actin filaments are more rapidly saturated
by ADF/cofilin and uncapped at lower pH values. (3) ADF-saturated
filaments depolymerize faster from their barbed ends than from their
pointed ends, which depolymerize almost as slow as the pointed ends
of bare actin filaments at lower pH values.
Conclusions
Our results further illustrate the power of single-filament microfluidics
as a tool for actin biochemistry. We could not have obtained these
results with bulk solution assays, and microfluidics offered a number
of advantages compared to standard single-filament techniques.[25,40,41] Here, it allowed us to distinguish
and to separately quantify the main reactions of ADF/cofilin on actin
filaments for different pH values: binding to the sides (Figure ) and severing (Figure ) of actin filaments
and, for filaments decorated by ADF/cofilin, the acceleration of pointed
end depolymerization (Figure ) and the unstoppable depolymerization of barbed ends (Figure ). The quantitative
variations of these reactions with pH are summarized in Figure .Summary of results. Barbed end depolymerization is an important
contribution of cofilin disassembly at physiological pH. Within the
pH range that we have explored (6.6–7.8), we have made the
following observations (from top to bottom, on this sketch). A lower
pH favors the rapid decoration of filaments by ADF/cofilin, but the
severing rate per cofilin domain does not vary with pH. As a consequence,
at a higher pH, domain boundaries persist longer (before domains merge)
and severing is more efficient. The acceleration of pointed end depolymerization
for cofilactin filaments is mostly observed at high pH values. The
“unstoppable” depolymerization of cofilactin barbed
ends is observed at all pH values and is more pronounced at lower
pH values.Overall, our results are consistent
with the notion that decreasing
the pH mostly affects the conformation of the actin filament, which
is then more favorable for binding ADF/cofilin.[42] Indeed, at lower pH values, we find that bare actin filaments
are less cohesive and depolymerize faster and that decoration by ADF/cofilin
makes them more stable because of the additional bonds it provides.
Our observation that ADF/cofilin binds more readily to actin filaments
at lower pH values is also consistent with the idea that actin filaments
are in a more “cofilin-friendly” conformation. These
changes in F-actin conformation with pH likely involve the binding
of cations to specific sites on the subunits, which modulate filament
properties[43] and whose reorganization is
coupled to cofilin binding.[44]Faster
ADF/cofilin binding at lower pH values also explains why
previous studies have reported a weaker severing activity at lower
pH values: domain boundaries, where severing can occur, rapidly vanish
as domains rapidly expand and merge. We found that the severing rate
per domain was unaffected by pH, within the range we explored. Importantly,
we found that cofilactin filament pointed ends did not depolymerize
much faster than bare filament barbed ends at physiological pH values.
In contrast, the unstoppable barbed end depolymerization of cofilin-saturated
filaments remains an important feature at all pH values and is even
stronger for lower pH values. Our results thus show that, at physiological
pH, the dominant effect differentiating cofilactin filaments from
bare filaments is the nature of their barbed ends and their “unstoppable”
depolymerization.
Authors: Alvaro H Crevenna; Nikolaus Naredi-Rainer; André Schönichen; Joachim Dzubiella; Diane L Barber; Don C Lamb; Roland Wedlich-Söldner Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2013-03-13 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Tommi Kotila; Hugo Wioland; Muniyandi Selvaraj; Konstantin Kogan; Lina Antenucci; Antoine Jégou; Juha T Huiskonen; Guillaume Romet-Lemonne; Pekka Lappalainen Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 17.694
Authors: Koen M O Galenkamp; Paulina Sosicka; Michael Jung; M Victoria Recouvreux; Yijuan Zhang; Matthew R Moldenhauer; Giovanni Brandi; Hudson H Freeze; Cosimo Commisso Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2020-03-21 Impact factor: 38.272