Search for: All records

Studies in cultured neurons have shown that neurofilaments are cargoes of axonal transport that move rapidly but intermittently along microtubule tracks. However, the extent to which axonal neurofilaments movein vivohas been controversial. Some researchers have proposed that most axonally transported neurofilaments are deposited into a persistently stationary network and that only a small proportion of axonal neurofilaments are transported in mature axons. Here we use the fluorescence photoactivation pulse-escape technique to test this hypothesis in intact peripheral nerves of adult malehThy1-paGFP-NFMmice, which express low levels of mouse neurofilament protein M tagged with photoactivatable GFP. Neurofilaments were photoactivated in short segments of large, myelinated axons, and the mobility of these fluorescently tagged polymers was determined by analyzing the kinetics of their departure. Our results show that >80% of the fluorescence departed the window within 3 h after activation, indicating a highly mobile neurofilament population. The movement was blocked by glycolytic inhibitors, confirming that it was an active transport process. Thus, we find no evidence for a substantial stationary neurofilament population. By extrapolation of the decay kinetics, we predict that 99% of the neurofilaments would have exited the activation window after 10 h. These data support a dynamic view of the neuronal cytoskeleton in which neurofilaments cycle repeatedly between moving and pausing states throughout their journey along the axon, even in mature myelinated axons. The filaments spend a large proportion of their time pausing, but on a timescale of hours, most of them move.

Neurofilaments are flexible cytoskeletal polymers that are capable of folding and unfolding between their bouts of bidirectional movement along axons. Here we present a detailed characterization of this behavior in cultured neurons using kymograph analysis with approximately 30 ms temporal resolution. We analyzed 781 filaments ranging from 0.6‐42 µm in length. We observed complex behaviors including pinch folds, hairpin folds, orientation changes (flips), and occasional severing and annealing events. On average, the filaments spent approximately 40% of their time in some sort of folded configuration. A small proportion of filaments (4%) moved while folded, but most (96%) moved in an outstretched configuration. Collectively, our observations suggest that motors may interact with neurofilaments at multiple points along their length, but preferentially at their ends. In addition, the prevalence of neurofilament folding and the tendency of neurofilaments to straighten out when they move, suggest that an important function of the movement of these polymers in axons may be to maintain them in an outstretched and longitudinally co‐aligned configuration. Thus, neurofilament movement may function as much to organize these polymers as to move them, and this could explain why they spend so much time engaged in apparently unproductive bidirectional movement.

We have used kymograph analysis combined with edge detection and an automated computational algorithm to analyze the axonal transport kinetics of neurofilament polymers in cultured neurons at 30 ms temporal resolution. We generated 301 kymographs from 136 movies and analyzed 726 filaments ranging from 0.6 to 42 µm in length, representing ∼37,000 distinct moving and pausing events. We found that the movement is even more intermittent than previously reported and that the filaments undergo frequent, often transient, reversals which suggest that they can engage simultaneously with both anterograde and retrograde motors. Average anterograde and retrograde bout velocities (0.9 and 1.2 µm s⁻¹, respectively) were faster than previously reported, with maximum sustained bout velocities of up to 6.6 and 7.8 µm s⁻¹, respectively. Average run lengths (∼1.1 µm) and run times (∼1.4 s) were in the range reported for molecular motor processivity in vitro, suggesting that the runs could represent the individual processive bouts of the neurofilament motors. Notably, we found no decrease in run velocity, run length or run time with increasing filament length, which suggests that either the drag on the moving filaments is negligible or that longer filaments recruit more motors.