Volume 96, Issue 1, Pages (January 2009)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Dynamics and Mechanics of Endothelial Cell Spreading Cynthia A. Reinhart-King, Micah Dembo, Daniel A. Hammer Biophysical Journal Volume 89, Issue 1,
Advertisements

Mesoscale Simulation of Blood Flow in Small Vessels Prosenjit Bagchi Biophysical Journal Volume 92, Issue 6, Pages (March 2007) DOI: /biophysj
Quantitative Characterization of the Large-Scale Association of ErbB1 and ErbB2 by Flow Cytometric Homo-FRET Measurements  Ágnes Szabó, Gábor Horváth,
Small Peptide Binding Stiffens the Ubiquitin-like Protein SUMO1
Volume 112, Issue 10, Pages (May 2017)
Masahiro Ueda, Tatsuo Shibata  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 89, Issue 4, Pages (October 2005)
Investigation of Domain Formation in Sphingomyelin/Cholesterol/POPC Mixtures by Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer and Monte Carlo Simulations  Monica.
The State Diagram for Cell Adhesion Mediated by Two Receptors
Volume 102, Issue 3, Pages (February 2012)
Specific Recognition of Macroscopic Objects by the Cell Surface: Evidence for a Receptor Density Threshold Revealed by Micrometric Particle Binding Characteristics 
Volume 88, Issue 1, Pages (January 2005)
Volume 93, Issue 2, Pages (July 2007)
Bacterial Motility Reveals Unknown Molecular Organization
Volume 104, Issue 2, Pages (January 2013)
Kinetic Analysis of High Affinity Forms of Interleukin (IL)-13 Receptors: Suppression of IL-13 Binding by IL-2 Receptor γ Chain  Vladimir A. Kuznetsov,
Volume 74, Issue 6, Pages (June 1998)
Cyclic Mechanical Reinforcement of Integrin–Ligand Interactions
Volume 104, Issue 1, Pages (January 2013)
Volume 110, Issue 11, Pages (June 2016)
Huiyan Wu, Guangyi Zhao, Hongfei Zu, James H.-C. Wang, Qing-Ming Wang 
Volume 96, Issue 1, Pages (January 2009)
He Meng, Johan Bosman, Thijn van der Heijden, John van Noort 
Volume 96, Issue 9, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 101, Issue 2, Pages (July 2011)
Optical Pushing: A Tool for Parallelized Biomolecule Manipulation
Jai A. Pathak, Rumi R. Sologuren, Rojaramani Narwal 
Rainer Kurre, Berenike Maier  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 105, Issue 3, Pages (August 2013)
Actin Cytoskeleton-Dependent Dynamics of the Human Serotonin1A Receptor Correlates with Receptor Signaling  Sourav Ganguly, Thomas J. Pucadyil, Amitabha.
Cytoskeletal Regulation Couples LFA-1 Conformational Changes to Receptor Lateral Mobility and Clustering  Christopher W. Cairo, Rossen Mirchev, David E.
Predicting the Rupture Probabilities of Molecular Bonds in Series
Kelly E. Caputo, Dooyoung Lee, Michael R. King, Daniel A. Hammer 
Michael J. Rosenbluth, Wilbur A. Lam, Daniel A. Fletcher 
IL-12 and IL-23 Affect Photocarcinogenesis Differently
Volume 100, Issue 1, Pages (January 2011)
Volume 90, Issue 2, Pages (January 2006)
Low Spring Constant Regulates P-Selectin-PSGL-1 Bond Rupture
Volume 101, Issue 3, Pages (August 2011)
Tom E. Williams, Shanmugam Nagarajan, Periasamy Selvaraj, Cheng Zhu 
Volume 101, Issue 11, Pages (December 2011)
Modeling Ca2+ Feedback on a Single Inositol 1,4,5-Trisphosphate Receptor and Its Modulation by Ca2+ Buffers  Jianwei Shuai, John E. Pearson, Ian Parker 
Volume 88, Issue 6, Pages (June 2005)
Toward experimental assessment of receptor occupancy: TGN1412 revisited  Zoe Waibler, PhD, Linda Y. Sender, Christel Kamp, PhD, Jan Müller-Berghaus, MD,
B-S Transition in Short Oligonucleotides
Quantitative Membrane Electrostatics with the Atomic Force Microscope
Jamie L. Maciaszek, Biree Andemariam, Greg Huber, George Lykotrafitis 
Interferon-γ-Mediated Growth Regulation of Melanoma Cells: Involvement of STAT1- Dependent and STAT1-Independent Signals  Anja Bosserhoff  Journal of Investigative.
Volume 84, Issue 1, Pages (January 2003)
Volume 94, Issue 1, Pages (January 2008)
Volume 101, Issue 7, Pages (October 2011)
Simultaneous Topography and Recognition Imaging Using Force Microscopy
Johannes Hampl, Yueh-hsiu Chien, Mark M Davis  Immunity 
Probabilistic Modeling of Rosette Formation
Arisa Uemura, Thuc-Nghi Nguyen, Amanda N. Steele, Soichiro Yamada 
R. Gueta, D. Barlam, R.Z. Shneck, I. Rousso  Biophysical Journal 
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 86, Issue 2, Pages (February 2004)
Change in Rigidity in the Activated Form of the Glucose/Galactose Receptor from Escherichia coli: A Phenomenon that Will Be Key to the Development of.
Volume 110, Issue 1, Pages (January 2016)
CD44 phosphorylation regulates melanoma cell and fibroblast migration on, but not attachment to, a hyaluronan substratum  David Peck, Clare M. Isacke 
Volume 100, Issue 6, Pages (March 2011)
Main Phase Transitions in Supported Lipid Single-Bilayer
Subpiconewton Dynamic Force Spectroscopy Using Magnetic Tweezers
Small Peptide Binding Stiffens the Ubiquitin-like Protein SUMO1
William J. Galush, Jeffrey A. Nye, Jay T. Groves  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 108, Issue 8, Pages (April 2015)
Gap Junction Coupling and Calcium Waves in the Pancreatic Islet
Volume 101, Issue 7, Pages (October 2011)
Volume 99, Issue 9, Pages (November 2010)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 96, Issue 1, Pages 285-293 (January 2009) LFA-1 Binding Destabilizes the JAM-A Homophilic Interaction During Leukocyte Transmigration  Ewa P. Wojcikiewicz, Rory R. Koenen, Line Fraemohs, Julia Minkiewicz, Hashem Azad, Christian Weber, Vincent T. Moy  Biophysical Journal  Volume 96, Issue 1, Pages 285-293 (January 2009) DOI: 10.1529/biophysj.108.135491 Copyright © 2009 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Solid-phase binding assays. (A) Specific binding of JAM-A·biotin to immobilized JAM-A was analyzed in the presence of increasing concentrations of unlabeled JAM-A (circle), JAM-A·D1 (square), and a Fab control (solid circle). (B) Specific binding of JAM-A·biotin to immobilized JAM-A was analyzed in the presence of increasing concentrations of unlabeled JAM-A·D2 (square) and a Fab control (solid circle). The fraction of bound ligand is given as mean ± SE of four separate experiments in each case. Biophysical Journal 2009 96, 285-293DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.108.135491) Copyright © 2009 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Single-molecule AFM measurements of the JAM-A/JAM-A and JAM-A/JAM-A·D1 interactions. (A) Single-molecule adhesion force scans of the JAM-A homophilic interaction. Adhesion was seen in the second and fifth scans. fu is the unbinding force, and ks represents the system spring. (B) Force histograms of measurements sorted according to loading rate (rf). Representative force histograms for loading rates of 2805 ± 37 pN/s and 9017 ± 102 pN/s are shown. (C) Dynamic force spectrum of the JAM-A/JAM-A (open circle) and JAMA.D1/JAM-A (black circle) interactions. Individual forces were acquired at a loading rate range of ∼2000–100,000 pN/s, sorted according to loading rate, and compiled into force histograms. Each data point in the dynamic force spectrum corresponds to the peak of each force histogram. The error for both loading rate and unbinding force is the standard error of at least three separate experiments. Biophysical Journal 2009 96, 285-293DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.108.135491) Copyright © 2009 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Adhesion of CHO transfectants to immobilized JAM-A. CHO cells transfected with JAM-A or vector control were allowed to adhere to JAM-A. Cell culture plate wells were incubated with open I-domain, wild-type (wt) I-domain, pAb anti-JAM-A, or soluble JAM-A. Cell adhesion is represented as the percentage of total added cells. Data are presented as mean ± SE of three separate experiments. Biophysical Journal 2009 96, 285-293DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.108.135491) Copyright © 2009 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 The effect of the open I-domain on the JAM-A homophilic interaction. (A) Dynamic force spectra of JAM-A/JAM-A (open circle) and JAM-A/JAM-A in the presence of the open I-domain (open square). (B) Dynamic force spectra of the JAM-A·D1/JAM-A (black circle) interaction and JAM-A/JAM-A·D1 (gray square) in the presence of the open I-domain. (C) Overlay of data from A and B: JAM-A/JAM-A (open circle) and JAM-A/JAM-A in the presence of the open I-domain (open square), and JAM-A·D1/JAM-A (black circle). In each dynamic force spectrum, the error for both loading rate and unbinding force is the standard error of at least three separate experiments. Biophysical Journal 2009 96, 285-293DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.108.135491) Copyright © 2009 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 (A) Schematic representation of the experimental setup used to conduct Jurkat AFM cell adhesion studies. The LFA-1-expressing Jurkat cell was attached to the AFM cantilever and allowed to interact with JAM-A·D2 on the sample petri dish. (B) Whole-cell AFM adhesion measurements of Jurkat cells on JAM-A·D2 without treatment, in the presence of antibodies against JAM-A·D2 or LFA-1 (TS1/22), and on BSA. The shaded area represents the work of deadhesion. (C) The average calculated work of deadhesion from AFM whole-cell adhesion measurements of Jurkat cells on JAM-A·D2 without treatment, in the presence of anti-JAM-A·D2 antibody, TS1/22 antibody (anti-LFA-1), and Jurkat cells on BSA. The error is the standard error of three separate experiments. (C) Dynamic force spectra of the LFA-1/JAM-A·D2 (diamond) and JAM-A/JAM-A (circle) unbinding forces were acquired for a loading rate range of ∼500–100,000 pN/s. The error for both loading rate and unbinding force is the standard error of at least three separate experiments. Biophysical Journal 2009 96, 285-293DOI: (10.1529/biophysj.108.135491) Copyright © 2009 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions