Back

Human cell F-actin density differentially influences trogocytosis and phagocytosis by Entamoeba histolytica

Loya, F. P.; Irani, M. C.; Suleiman, R. L.; Ralston, K. S.

2026-03-17 microbiology
10.64898/2026.03.17.712427 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Entamoeba histolytica is a parasitic amoeba and the cause amoebiasis, a common but understudied human diarrheal disease. E. histolytica trophozoites ("amoebae") kill human cells through a process of cell-nibbling called trogocytosis (trogo-: nibble) that contributes to tissue damage. Amoebae can also perform phagocytosis, in which entire human cells are ingested. Based on studies in which human cells were artificially stiffened, it was suggested that amoebae perform phagocytosis on stiffer cells, and trogocytosis on less stiff cells. A handful of recent studies of macrophages that used artificial targets or artificially stiffened target cells also suggested a similar relationship between target stiffness and trogocytosis/phagocytosis efficiencies. To better evaluate the impact of target cell stiffness on amoebic ingestion, instead of using artificial targets or artificial cell stiffening, we created human cell mutants in which individual Rho-pathway genes were knocked down. Strikingly, amoebae performed quantitatively reduced levels of trogocytosis on all knockdown mutants, regardless of cytoskeletal F-actin organization. In contrast, amoebic phagocytosis efficiency was inversely correlated with human cell cortical F-actin density. Thus, human cell F-actin organization differentially influences amoebic trogocytosis and phagocytosis. This is more complex than the conclusions of studies that used artificial targets or artificially stiffened cells. Our results emphasize that the dynamic nature of the cytoskeleton in living cells impacts trogocytosis. In addition to shedding light on the burgeoning field of eukaryotic trogocytosis, this work extends knowledge of amoebic ingestion processes that contribute to disease.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Pathogens
721 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
13.8%
2
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 2%
9.7%
3
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
8.8%
4
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.1%
5
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 13%
6.1%
6
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 19%
4.7%
7
Molecular Biology of the Cell
272 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 40%
3.4%
9
Infection and Immunity
103 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.4%
10
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.6%
11
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
12
Journal of Virology
456 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
13
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.8%
15
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.6%
16
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.6%
17
Molecular Microbiology
66 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.6%
18
Journal of Cell Science
353 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
19
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 28%
1.3%
20
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
21
Journal of Biological Chemistry
641 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
22
Life Science Alliance
263 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
23
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.1%
24
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.9%
25
Cellular Microbiology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
26
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.7%
27
Journal of Cell Biology
333 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
28
microLife
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
29
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
30
Disease Models & Mechanisms
119 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%