Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF, 373K) PPT slides of all figures Alert me when this article is cited Citation Map Services Email this article Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new content in the JCB Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McNew, J. A. Articles by Rothman, J. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McNew, J. A. Articles by Rothman, J. E. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

© The Rockefeller University Press, 0021-9525/2000//105 $5.00
The Journal of Cell Biology, Volume 150, Number 1, , 2000 105-118

Close Is Not Enough

James A. McNew^a, Thomas Weber^a, Francesco Parlati^a, Robert J. Johnston^a, Thomas J. Melia^a, Thomas H. Söllner^a, and James E. Rothman^a

^a Cellular Biochemistry and Biophysics Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10021

Is membrane fusion an essentially passive or an active process? It could be that fusion proteins simply need to pin two bilayers together long enough, and the bilayers could do the rest spontaneously. Or, it could be that the fusion proteins play an active role after pinning two bilayers, exerting force in the bilayer in one or another way to direct the fusion process. To distinguish these alternatives, we replaced one or both of the peptidic membrane anchors of exocytic vesicle (v)- and target membrane (t)-SNAREs (soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive fusion protein [NSF] attachment protein [SNAP] receptor) with covalently attached lipids. Replacing either anchor with a phospholipid prevented fusion of liposomes by the isolated SNAREs, but still allowed assembly of trans-SNARE complexes docking vesicles. This result implies an active mechanism; if fusion occurred passively, simply holding the bilayers together long enough would have been sufficient. Studies using polyisoprenoid anchors ranging from 15–55 carbons and multiple phospholipid-containing anchors reveal distinct requirements for anchors of v- and t-SNAREs to function: v-SNAREs require anchors capable of spanning both leaflets, whereas t-SNAREs do not, so long as the anchor is sufficiently hydrophobic. These data, together with previous results showing fusion is inhibited as the length of the linker connecting the helical bundle-containing rod of the SNARE complex to the anchors is increased (McNew, J.A., T. Weber, D.M. Engelman, T.H. Sollner, and J.E. Rothman, 1999. Mol. Cell. 4:415–421), suggests a model in which one activity of the SNARE complex promoting fusion is to exert force on the anchors by pulling on the linkers. This motion would lead to the simultaneous inward movement of lipids from both bilayers, and in the case of the v-SNARE, from both leaflets.

Key Words: lipid mixing • isoprene • liposome • lipid anchor • vesicular transport

© 2000 The Rockefeller University Press

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Reddit

Technorati

Twitter

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Doms, R. W., Moore, J. P. (2000). HIV-1 Membrane Fusion: Targets of Opportunity. JCB 151: f9-f14 [Full Text]  

Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents