Microtubule organization in vitro

Current Opinion in Cell Biology

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 23-29

  Dogterom, Marileen ^a   Surrey, Thomas ^b  

^a FOM INSTITUTE AMOLF   (Netherlands)

^b THE FRANCIS CRICK INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL ASSAY; CELL TRANSPORT; CENTROSOME; CHROMOSOME; CROSS LINKING; FLUORESCENCE MICROSCOPY; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; INTERPHASE; MICROTUBULE; NONHUMAN; POLYMERIZATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; XENOPUS;

EID: 84873717899     PISSN: 09550674     EISSN: 18790410     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceb.2012.12.002     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Desai A., Mitchison T.J. Microtubule polymerization dynamics. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 1997, 13:83-117.
2. Dogterom M., Kerssemakers J.W., Romet-Lemonne G., Janson M.E. Force generation by dynamic microtubules. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2005, 17:67-74.
3. Heald R., Tournebize R., Blank T., Sandaltzopoulos R., Becker P., Hyman A., Karsenti E. Self-organization of microtubules into bipolar spindles around artificial chromosomes in Xenopus egg extracts. Nature 1996, 382:420-425.
4. Ambrose J.C., Li W., Marcus A., Ma H., Cyr R. A minus-end-directed kinesin with plus-end tracking protein activity is involved in spindle morphogenesis. Mol Biol Cell 2005, 16:1584-1592.
5. Kitajima T.S., Ohsugi M., Ellenberg J. Complete kinetochore tracking reveals error-prone homologous chromosome biorientation in mammalian oocytes. Cell 2011, 146:568-581.
6. Glotzer M. The 3Ms of central spindle assembly: microtubules, motors and MAPs. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2009, 10:9-20.
7. Miyamoto D.T., Perlman Z.E., Burbank K.S., Groen A.C., Mitchison T.J. The kinesin Eg5 drives poleward microtubule flux in Xenopus laevis egg extract spindles. J Cell Biol 2004, 167:813-818.
8. Janson M.E., Loughlin R., Loiodice I., Fu C., Brunner D., Nedelec F.J., Tran P.T. Crosslinkers and motors organize dynamic microtubules to form stable bipolar arrays in fission yeast. Cell 2007, 128:357-368.
9. Mitchison T., Kirschner M. Dynamic instability of microtubule growth. Nature 1984, 312:237-242.
10. Roll-Mecak A., McNally F.J. Microtubule-severing enzymes. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2010, 22:96-103.
11. Howard J., Hyman A.A. Microtubule polymerases and depolymerases. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2007, 19:31-35.
12. Gennerich A., Vale R.D. Walking the walk: how kinesin and dynein coordinate their steps. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2009, 21:59-67.
13. Holy T.E., Dogterom M., Yurke B., Leibler S. Assembly and positioning of microtubule asters in microfabricated chambers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997, 94:6228-6231.
14. Nedelec F., Surrey T., Karsenti E. Self-organisation and forces in the microtubule cytoskeleton. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2003, 15:118-124.
15. Mitchison T., Kirschner M. Microtubule assembly nucleated by isolated centrosomes. Nature 1984, 312:232-237.
16. Nedelec F.J., Surrey T., Maggs A.C., Leibler S. Self-organization of microtubules and motors. Nature 1997, 389:305-308.
17. Surrey T., Nedelec F., Leibler S., Karsenti E. Physical properties determining self-organization of motors and microtubules. Science 2001, 292:1167-1171.
18. Fink G., Hajdo L., Skowronek K.J., Reuther C., Kasprzak A.A., Diez S. The mitotic kinesin-14 Ncd drives directional microtubule-microtubule sliding. Nat Cell Biol 2009, 11:717-723.
19. Karabay A., Walker R.A. Identification of microtubule binding sites in the Ncd tail domain. Biochemistry 1999, 38:1838-1849.
20. Hentrich C., Surrey T. Microtubule organization by the antagonistic mitotic motors kinesin-5 and kinesin-14. J Cell Biol 2010, 189:465-480.
21. Merdes A., Ramyar K., Vechio J.D., Cleveland D.W. A complex of NuMA and cytoplasmic dynein is essential for mitotic spindle assembly. Cell 1996, 87:447-458.
22. Kashina A.S., Baskin R.J., Cole D.G., Wedaman K.P., Saxton W.M., Scholey J.M. A bipolar kinesin. Nature 1996, 379:270-272.
23. Kapitein L.C., Peterman E.J., Kwok B.H., Kim J.H., Kapoor T.M., Schmidt C.F. The bipolar mitotic kinesin Eg5 moves on both microtubules that it crosslinks. Nature 2005, 435:114-118.
24. Cahu J., Surrey T. Motile microtubule crosslinkers require distinct dynamic properties for correct functioning during spindle organization in Xenopus egg extract. J Cell Sci 2009, 122:1295-1300.
25. Bieling P., Telley I.A., Surrey T. A minimal midzone protein module controls formation and length of antiparallel microtubule overlaps. Cell 2010, 142:420-432.
26. Subramanian R., Wilson-Kubalek E.M., Arthur C.P., Bick M.J., Campbell E.A., Darst S.A., Milligan R.A., Kapoor T.M. Insights into antiparallel microtubule crosslinking by PRC1, a conserved nonmotor microtubule binding protein. Cell 2010, 142:433-443.
27. Tulin A., McClerklin S., Huang Y., Dixit R. Single-molecule analysis of the microtubule cross-linking protein MAP65-1 reveals a molecular mechanism for contact-angle-dependent microtubule bundling. Biophys J 2012, 102:802-809.
28. Gaillard J., Neumann E., Van Damme D., Stoppin-Mellet V., Ebel C., Barbier E., Geelen D., Vantard M. Two microtubule-associated proteins of Arabidopsis MAP65s promote antiparallel microtubule bundling. Mol Biol Cell 2008, 19:4534-4544.
29. Roostalu J., Schiebel E., Khmelinskii A. Cell cycle control of spindle elongation. Cell Cycle 2010, 9:1084-1090.
30. Bringmann H., Skiniotis G., Spilker A., Kandels-Lewis S., Vernos I., Surrey T. A kinesin-like motor inhibits microtubule dynamic instability. Science 2004, 303:1519-1522.
31. Zhu C., Jiang W. Cell cycle-dependent translocation of PRC1 on the spindle by Kif4 is essential for midzone formation and cytokinesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005, 102:343-348.
32. Kurasawa Y., Earnshaw W.C., Mochizuki Y., Dohmae N., Todokoro K. Essential roles of KIF4 and its binding partner PRC1 in organized central spindle midzone formation. EMBO J 2004, 23:3237-3248.
33. Braun M., Lansky Z., Fink G., Ruhnow F., Diez S., Janson M.E. Adaptive braking by Ase1 prevents overlapping microtubules from sliding completely apart. Nat Cell Biol 2011, 13:1259-1264.
34. Faivre-Moskalenko C., Dogterom M. Dynamics of microtubule asters in microfabricated chambers: the role of catastrophes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002, 99:16788-16793.
35. Laan L., Pavin N., Husson J., Romet-Lemonne G., Duijn Mv, Preciado-Lopez M., Vale R.D., Jülicher F., Reck-Peterson S.L., Dogterom M. Cortical dynein controls microtubule dynamics to generate pulling forces that position microtubule asters. Cell 2012, 148:502-514.
36. Laan L., Roth S., Dogterom M. End-on microtubule-dynein interactions and pulling-based positioning of microtubule organizing centers. Cell Cycle 2012, 11:1-8.
37. Pavin N., Laan L., Ma R., Dogterom M., Julicher F. Positioning of microtubule organizing centers by cortical pushing and pulling forces. New J Phys 2012, 14:105025.
38. Kapoor T.M., Mitchison T.J. Eg5 is static in bipolar spindles relative to tubulin: evidence for a static spindle matrix. J Cell Biol 2001, 154:1125-1133.
39. Vogel S.K., Pavin N., Maghelli N., Julicher F., Tolic-Norrelykke I.M. Self-organization of dynein motors generates meiotic nuclear oscillations. PLoS Biol 2009, 7:918-928.
40. Minc N., Burgess D., Chang F. Influence of cell geometry on division-plane positioning. Cell 2011, 144:414-426.
41. Fygenson D.K., Marko J.F., Libchaber A. Mechanics of microtubule-based membrane extension. Phys Rev Lett 1997, 79:4497-4500.
42. Kaneko T., Itoh T.J., Hotani H. Morphological transformation of liposomes caused by assembly of encapsulated tubulin and determination of shape by microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs). J Mol Biol 1998, 284:1671-1681.
43. Emsellem V., Cardoso O., Tabeling P. Vesicle deformation by microtubules: a phase diagram. Phys Rev E 1998, 58:4807-4810.
44. Pinot M., Chesnel F., Kubiak J.Z., Arnal I., Nedelec F.J., Gueroui Z. Effects of confinement on the self-organization of microtubules and motors. Curr Biol 2009, 19:954-960.
45. Teh S.Y., Khnouf R., Fan H., Lee A.P. Stable, biocompatible lipid vesicle generation by solvent extraction-based droplet microfluidics. Biomicrofluidics 2011, 5.
46. Loughlin R., Heald R., Nedelec F. A computational model predicts Xenopus meiotic spindle organization. J Cell Biol 2010, 191:1239-1249.
47. Burbank K.S., Mitchison T.J., Fisher D.S. Slide-and-cluster models for spindle assembly. Curr Biol 2007, 17:1373-1383.
48. Wollman R., Civelekoglu-Scholey G., Scholey J.M., Mogilner A. Reverse engineering of force integration during mitosis in the Drosophila embryo. Mol Syst Biol 2008, 4:195.
49. Brugues J., Nuzzo V., Mazur E., Needleman D.J. Nucleation and transport organize microtubules in metaphase spindles. Cell 2012, 149:554-564.
50. Mullins R.D., Hansen S.D. In vitro studies of actin filament and network dynamics. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2013, 25:6-13.
51. Sedwick C. Ted Salmon: kinetochores at the core of it all. J Cell Biol 2010, 191:896-897.
52. Laan L., Dogterom M. In vitro assays to study force generation at dynamic microtubule ends. Methods Cell Biol 2010, 95:617-639.