Persistence length measurements from stochastic single-microtubule trajectories

Nano Letters

Volumn 7, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 3138-3144

  Van Den Heuvel, M G L ^a   Bolhuis, S ^a   Dekker, C ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGLE MEASUREMENT; RANDOM PROCESSES; STIFFNESS; TRAJECTORIES; VELOCITY CONTROL;

SHORT SUBMICROMETER MICROTUBULE ENDS; STOCHASTIC SINGLE-MICROTUBULE TRAJECTORIES; STOCHASTIC TRAJECTORIES;

MEASUREMENT THEORY;

MOLECULAR MOTOR;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL MODEL; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELASTICITY; MECHANICAL STRESS; MICROTUBULE; MOTION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ELASTICITY; MICROTUBULES; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR MOTOR PROTEINS; MOTION; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES; STRESS, MECHANICAL;

EID: 36248981590     PISSN: 15306984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/nl071696y     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Schliwa, M.; Woehlke, G. Nature 2003, 422, 759.
2. Vale, R. D. Cell 2003, 112, 467.
3. van den Heuvel, M. G. L.; Dekker, C. Science 2007, 317, 333.
4. Kron, S. J.; Spudich, J. A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1986, 83, 6272.
5. Howard, J.; Hudspeth, A. J.; Vale, R. D. Nature 1989, 342, 154.
6. Kis, A.; Kasas, S.; Babic, B.; Kulik, A. J.; Benoit, W.; Briggs, G. A. D.; Schonenberger, C.; Catsicas, S.; Forro, L. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002, 89, 248101.
7. Pampaloni, F.; Lattanzi, G.; Jonas, A.; Surrey, T.; Frey, E.; Florin, E. L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 10248.
8. Duke, T.; Holy, T. E.; Leibler, S. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1995, 74, 330.
9. -2, which is also approximately the value of σ*, justifying the use of these relations. Finally, the critical kinesin surface density, below which buckling of the microtubule tip is expected to occur, is about 4 orders of magnitude lower than σ*.
10. Benetatos, P.; Frey, E. Phys. Rev. E 2003, 67, 051108.
11. Qian, H.; Sheetz, M. P.; Elson, E. L. Biophys. J. 1991, 60, 910.
12. Saxton, M. J. Biophys. J. 1997, 72, 1744.
13. Nitta, T.; Tanahashi, A.; Hirano, M.; Hess, H. Lab Chip 2006, 6, 881.
14. We simulated 1137 microtubule trajectories with a velocity that is Gaussian distributed with 0.78 ± 0.07 μm (mean ± STD). The distribution of simulated trajectory lengths was made similar to the experimental data by randomly picking a predetermind length for each simulated trajectory from an exponential distribution that resembled the experimental data. For the microtubule tip length, we assumed that it was exponentially distributed with mean 0.26 μm, although the length distribution of the tip is of no relevance to the evolution of the trajectory angle (eq 1). For the persistence length we took p =195 μm. The coordinates of the microtubule after each step of random length were calculated based on its initial position, it momentarily tip length and tip orientation that were randomly picked from an exponential and Gaussian distribution, respectively. Afterwards, the positions of the leading tip were collected with 1 s intervals. We confirmed that adding a random variance onto the tip coordinates, representing the effects of pixel noise and errors in the tracing routine, did not affect the results.
15. Gittes, F.; Mickey, B.; Nettleton, J.; Howard, J. J. Cell Biol. 1993, 120, 923.
16. Janson, M. E.; Dogterom, M. Biophys. J. 2004, 87, 2723.
17. Nitta, T.; Hess, H. Nano Lett. 2005, 5, 1337.
18. Clemmens, J.; Hess, H.; Howard, J.; Vogel, V. Langmuir 2003, 19, 1738.