1999
DOI: 10.1021/bi9829175
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Motility of Dimeric Ncd on a Metal-Chelating Surfactant:  Evidence That Ncd Is Not Processive

Abstract: The surface immobilization methods that allowed single-molecule motility experiments with native kinesin have not worked with the ncd motor protein and other kinesin-related motors. To solve this problem, a surfactant (Pluronic F108) was chemically modified with the metal-chelating group nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) to allow surface immobilization of histidine-tagged microtubule motors. The chelating surfactant provided a convenient and effective method for immobilization and subsequent motility experiments wit… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

12
43
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
12
43
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The rate of MT movement calculated by dividing the width of the bleached zone by the time of the linear increase of the fluorescence in the bleached zone was 0.105 Ϯ 0.001 m/s. The numbers obtained by two independent experimental approaches were consistent with each other and with the velocity of Ncd-based MT movement in vitro determined using a MT gliding assay (0.06 -0.16 m/s (McDonald et al, 1990;Walker et al, 1990;deCastro et al, 1999;Tao et al, 2006). These results strongly suggest that MT movement seen in GFP-Ncd-overexpressing cells is indeed generated by the motor activity of Ncd.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The rate of MT movement calculated by dividing the width of the bleached zone by the time of the linear increase of the fluorescence in the bleached zone was 0.105 Ϯ 0.001 m/s. The numbers obtained by two independent experimental approaches were consistent with each other and with the velocity of Ncd-based MT movement in vitro determined using a MT gliding assay (0.06 -0.16 m/s (McDonald et al, 1990;Walker et al, 1990;deCastro et al, 1999;Tao et al, 2006). These results strongly suggest that MT movement seen in GFP-Ncd-overexpressing cells is indeed generated by the motor activity of Ncd.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Such movement has never been observed in control cells (data not shown). Because MT movement continued in the presence of Taxol, we conclude that MT movement cannot be explained by forces Walker et al, 1990;deCastro et al, 1999;Tao et al, 2006). These results strongly suggest that MT A. Oladipo et al…”
supporting
confidence: 50%
“…The extended model fits the non-Michaelis-Menten shape of the velocity curve even better, suggesting that friction might be contributing to the effect. Unlike the present experiments a previous report by deCastro et al (55) shows MT velocities that follow Michaelis-Menten dependence. We do not have an explanation for this discrepancy, although a different fraction of inactive motors could play a role.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 85%
“…The ATPase Pathway-Scheme 1 shows our model for the Mt⅐Ncd ATPase based on the equilibrium binding studies (33), the pre-steady-state kinetics (14,15,34), the motility (13,17,24), and structural results for Ncd (16 -21, 39, 40). The cycle begins at the star (૽) intermediate, and the experimentally determined rate constants are designated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, Ncd translocates to the minus-end of microtubules, while kinesin moves to the plus-end (2,4,11). Additionally, kinesin is a highly processive motor, taking several steps per encounter with the microtubule, while Ncd has been shown to be nonprocessive, both mechanically and chemically (12)(13)(14)(15). Ncd and kinesin also differ in their motility and ATPase rates; Ncd is a much slower motor.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%