Back

DNA tensiometer reveals catch-bond detachment kinetics of kinesin-1, -2 and -3

Noell, C. R.; Ma, T.-C.; Jiang, R.; McKinley, S. A.; Hancock, W. O.

2024-12-05 biophysics
10.1101/2024.12.03.626575 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Bidirectional cargo transport by kinesin and dynein is essential for cell viability and defects are linked to neurodegenerative diseases. Computational modeling suggests that the load-dependent off-rate is the strongest determinant of which motor wins a kinesin-dynein tug-of-war, and optical tweezer experiments find family-dependent differences in the sensitivity of detachment to load, with kinesin-3 > kinesin-2 > kinesin-1. However, in reconstituted kinesin-dynein pairs vitro, all three kinesin families compete nearly equally well against dynein. Modeling and experiments have confirmed that vertical forces inherent to the large trapping beads enhance kinesin-1 dissociation rates. In vivo, vertical forces are expected to range from negligible to dominant, depending on cargo and microtubule geometries. To investigate the detachment and reattachment kinetics of kinesin-1, 2 and 3 motors against loads oriented parallel to the microtubule, we created a DNA tensiometer comprising a DNA entropic spring attached to the microtubule on one end and a motor on the other. Kinesin dissociation rates at stall were slower than detachment rates during unloaded runs, and the complex reattachment kinetics were consistent with a weakly-bound slip state preceding detachment. Kinesin-3 behaviors under load suggested that long KIF1A run lengths result from the concatenation of multiple short runs connected by diffusive episodes. Stochastic simulations were able to recapitulate the load-dependent detachment and reattachment kinetics for all three motors and provide direct comparison of key transition rates between families. These results provide insight into how kinesin-1, -2 and -3 families transport cargo in complex cellular geometries and compete against dynein during bidirectional transport.

Published in eLife (predicted rank #1) · training set

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.