Hazen P. Babcock, Chen Chen, Xiaowei Zhuang  Biophysical Journal 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 89, Issue 2, Pages (August 2005)
Advertisements

Volume 78, Issue 2, Pages (February 2000)
Volume 90, Issue 10, Pages (May 2006)
Volume 91, Issue 8, Pages (October 2006)
Masahiro Ueda, Tatsuo Shibata  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 88, Issue 1, Pages (January 2005)
Rapid Assembly of a Multimeric Membrane Protein Pore
Volume 90, Issue 10, Pages (May 2006)
Volume 85, Issue 3, Pages (September 2003)
Measuring Limits of Telomere Movement on Nuclear Envelope
Volume 93, Issue 9, Pages (November 2007)
FPL Modification of CaV1
Influence of Chain Length and Unsaturation on Sphingomyelin Bilayers
Nonperturbative Chemical Imaging of Organelle Transport in Living Cells with Coherent Anti-Stokes Raman Scattering Microscopy  Xiaolin Nan, Eric O. Potma,
Lara Scharrel, Rui Ma, René Schneider, Frank Jülicher, Stefan Diez 
Fluorescence Correlation Spectroscopy Close to a Fluctuating Membrane
One-Dimensional Brownian Motion of Charged Nanoparticles along Microtubules: A Model System for Weak Binding Interactions  Itsushi Minoura, Eisaku Katayama,
Joseph M. Johnson, William J. Betz  Biophysical Journal 
Arne Gennerich, Detlev Schild  Biophysical Journal 
Apparent Subdiffusion Inherent to Single Particle Tracking
Self-Organization of Myosin II in Reconstituted Actomyosin Bundles
Volume 91, Issue 10, Pages (November 2006)
Volume 99, Issue 5, Pages (September 2010)
Volume 95, Issue 8, Pages (October 2008)
Single Vesicle Assaying of SNARE-Synaptotagmin-Driven Fusion Reveals Fast and Slow Modes of Both Docking and Fusion and Intrasample Heterogeneity  Sune.
Quantitative Analysis and Modeling Probe Polarity Establishment in C
Jefferson D. Knight, Joseph J. Falke  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 90, Issue 3, Pages (February 2006)
Abir M. Kabbani, Christopher V. Kelly  Biophysical Journal 
Giant Unilamellar Vesicles Formed by Hybrid Films of Agarose and Lipids Display Altered Mechanical Properties  Rafael B. Lira, Rumiana Dimova, Karin A.
Volume 88, Issue 1, Pages (January 2005)
Kinesin Moving through the Spotlight: Single-Motor Fluorescence Microscopy with Submillisecond Time Resolution  Sander Verbrugge, Lukas C. Kapitein, Erwin.
Volume 111, Issue 7, Pages (October 2016)
Large-Scale Quantitative Analysis of Sources of Variation in the Actin Polymerization- Based Movement of Listeria monocytogenes  Frederick S. Soo, Julie.
V.M. Burlakov, R. Taylor, J. Koerner, N. Emptage  Biophysical Journal 
Pulsed Interleaved Excitation
Volume 111, Issue 12, Pages (December 2016)
Samuel T. Hess, Watt W. Webb  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 89, Issue 2, Pages (August 2005)
Rapid Assembly of a Multimeric Membrane Protein Pore
Teuta Pilizota, Joshua W. Shaevitz  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 84, Issue 1, Pages (January 2003)
Use of Helper Enzymes for ADP Removal in Infrared Spectroscopic Experiments: Application to Ca2+-ATPase  Man Liu, Eeva-Liisa Karjalainen, Andreas Barth 
Volume 90, Issue 6, Pages (March 2006)
Volume 99, Issue 8, Pages (October 2010)
Andrew D. Rouillard, Jeffrey W. Holmes  Biophysical Journal 
Richa Dave, Daniel S. Terry, James B. Munro, Scott C. Blanchard 
Fernando D. Marengo, Jonathan R. Monck  Biophysical Journal 
Satomi Matsuoka, Tatsuo Shibata, Masahiro Ueda  Biophysical Journal 
Microscopic Analysis of Bacterial Motility at High Pressure
Cyclic AMP Diffusion Coefficient in Frog Olfactory Cilia
Lipid Asymmetry in DLPC/DSPC-Supported Lipid Bilayers: A Combined AFM and Fluorescence Microscopy Study  Wan-Chen Lin, Craig D. Blanchette, Timothy V.
Felix Kohler, Alexander Rohrbach  Biophysical Journal 
Effects of Receptor Interaction in Bacterial Chemotaxis
Long-Range Nonanomalous Diffusion of Quantum Dot-Labeled Aquaporin-1 Water Channels in the Cell Plasma Membrane  Jonathan M. Crane, A.S. Verkman  Biophysical.
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages (January 2010)
Interaction of Oxazole Yellow Dyes with DNA Studied with Hybrid Optical Tweezers and Fluorescence Microscopy  C.U. Murade, V. Subramaniam, C. Otto, Martin.
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages (April 2015)
Christina Ketchum, Heather Miller, Wenxia Song, Arpita Upadhyaya 
Volume 113, Issue 10, Pages (November 2017)
Volume 100, Issue 6, Pages (March 2011)
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages (January 2007)
Volume 113, Issue 11, Pages (December 2017)
Jun’ichi Wakayama, Takumi Tamura, Naoto Yagi, Hiroyuki Iwamoto 
Kevin McHale, Andrew J. Berglund, Hideo Mabuchi  Biophysical Journal 
Probing the Endocytic Pathway in Live Cells Using Dual-Color Fluorescence Cross- Correlation Analysis  Kirsten Bacia, Irina V. Majoul, Petra Schwille 
Label-Free Imaging of Lipid-Droplet Intracellular Motion in Early Drosophila Embryos Using Femtosecond-Stimulated Raman Loss Microscopy  Wei Dou, Delong.
William J. Galush, Jeffrey A. Nye, Jay T. Groves  Biophysical Journal 
Quantitative Analysis and Modeling Probe Polarity Establishment in C
George D. Dickinson, Ian Parker  Biophysical Journal 
Presentation transcript:

Using Single-Particle Tracking to Study Nuclear Trafficking of Viral Genes  Hazen P. Babcock, Chen Chen, Xiaowei Zhuang  Biophysical Journal  Volume 87, Issue 4, Pages 2749-2758 (October 2004) DOI: 10.1529/biophysj.104.042234 Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Nuclear import of dye-labeled vRNP. (A) A DIC image of an injected cell. (B) A fluorescence image of the same cell, taken 30min after vRNP injection, showing nuclear import of the labeled vRNPs. Scale bars: 10μm. (C) Nuclear import kinetics of labeled and unlabeled vRNPs. The amount of vRNPs in the cytoplasm and nucleus were quantified using Cy3 fluorescence and antinucleoprotein immunofluorescence for the labeled and unlabeled vRNPs, respectively. Fin and Fout indicate, respectively, the average fluorescence intensities inside and outside the nucleus after subtraction of a background term determined from areas outside the injected cells. The t=0 point indicates the time of injection. The value of Fin/(Fin+Fout) at t=0 was determined by coinjecting WGA (5mg/ml) with labeled vRNP to block import. This value is not zero because vRNPs that are outside but directly above or below the nucleus contribute to Fin. Biophysical Journal 2004 87, 2749-2758DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.104.042234) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Tracking the movement of single vRNPs. (A) A DIC image of part of a cell with the trajectories of two example vRNP particles overlaid as black lines. Scale bar: 10μm. (B) The measured mean-square displacement (〈Δr2〉) versus time (Δt) for four example vRNPs in the cytoplasm of a cell. Lines are the best fit to 〈Δr2〉=4DΔt, with D being the diffusion coefficient. (C) 〈Δr2〉 versus Δt for four example vRNPs in the nucleus of a cell. The vRNP trajectories were determined 15min after injection; this allowed the majority of the vRNPs to import into the nucleus. (D) The average mean-square displacement for all the vRNP in the cytoplasm (□) or in the nucleus (○). The cytoplasm data include 108 vRNP trajectories from six different cells, and the nucleus data include 37 vRNP trajectories from six different cells. The average trajectory was 113 frames long in the cytoplasm and 54 frames long in the nucleus. Biophysical Journal 2004 87, 2749-2758DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.104.042234) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Analysis of the motion of single vRNPs. (A) The velocity autocorrelation of all the trajectories of vRNP in the cell cytoplasm (108 total). The autocorrelation was calculated using the formula〈v(t)v(t+τ)〉=1(t1+..+tn)×∑k=1n∑t=0tk(vk(t)vk(t+τ)),where n is the number of trajectories, tk(k=1, 2,…, n) are the maximal time in each trajectory minus τ, with t and τ both in the unit of frames. (B) The velocity autocorrelation of all trajectories in the cell nucleus (37 total). (C) The shaded columns indicate a histogram of the measured diffusion coefficients of individual vRNP particles in the cytoplasm normalized so that the total area under the curve is 1. The diffusion coefficient, D, was determined using the relation 〈Δr2〉=4DΔt for each individual vRNP trajectory. The number of trajectories used is 108. The solid line with circles is a simulated distribution of diffusion coefficients calculated from 1000 simulated vRNP trajectories. The simulated trajectories were generated using the average diffusion coefficient determined from experiments. The length of the simulated trajectories was randomly chosen from a range that mimics the experimental trajectory lengths (see Material and Methods). (D) The experimental and simulated distribution of diffusion coefficients for vRNPs in the nucleus. The total number of experimental and simulated trajectories is 37 and 1000, respectively. Biophysical Journal 2004 87, 2749-2758DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.104.042234) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 The interaction of the vRNP with the nuclear envelope. (A) A fluorescence image of a cell taken 2min after injection of labeled vRNP. The ring at the nuclear envelope indicates association of vRNPs with the nuclear envelope. (B) A fluorescence image of a cell that was coinjected with labeled vRNP and anti-NPC (RL1). (C) A fluorescence image of a cell that was coinjected with labeled vRNP and WGA. (D) Same as A but with a lower concentration of labeled vRNP to allow the detection of individual vRNP particles. The gray line indicates the location of the nuclear envelope, determined using DIC microscopy. The image was convolved with a Gaussian filter to reduce noise. Scale bars: 10μm. Biophysical Journal 2004 87, 2749-2758DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.104.042234) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Integrated time histograms of the duration of binding events of individual vRNPs to the nuclear envelope. (A) The number of vRNP binding events with disassociation times shorter than the time indicated on the horizontal axis. The binding times were determined from movies taken at 10 fps (0.1-s time resolution) on 13 cells. The solid line is the best-fit single exponential decay with a time constant τ=2.2s and the shaded line is the best-fit double exponential decay with two time constants τ1=1.1s and τ2=5.8s. The second time constant is probably shorter than the actual dissociation time constant due to the finite observation window (20s). (B) Integrated time histograms of the binding events of vRNPs to the nuclear envelope determined from movies taken at 1 fps (1-s time resolution) on six cells. The solid line is the best-fit single exponential decay (τ=24s), and the shaded line is the best-fit double exponential decay (τ1=10.4s and τ2=113s). Again the second time constant is probably not accurately determined due to the finite observation window (200s). (C) Integrated time histograms of the binding events determined from movies taken at 0.2 fps (5-s time resolution) on eight cells. The solid line is the best-fit single exponential decay (τ=89s). These three experiments combined suggest the presence of three dissociation time constants, 1s, 10s, and 89s. Biophysical Journal 2004 87, 2749-2758DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.104.042234) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 vRNP transport and vRNP-NPC interaction during the late stage of infection. (A) A fluorescence image of a cell taken 10min after injection with labeled vRNPs. The cell was infected with influenza viruses 6h before injection. No fluorescent ring is observed at the nuclear envelope in contrast to Fig. 3 A. (B) The velocity autocorrelation of all the vRNP trajectories in the cytoplasm of preinfected cells (163 trajectories and 17 cells). (C) The distribution of diffusion coefficients, D, in the cytoplasm of infected cells (gray) compared to that of uninfected cells (white). Biophysical Journal 2004 87, 2749-2758DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.104.042234) Copyright © 2004 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions