4.6 Article

Loss of Smyhc1 or Hsp90 alpha 1 Function Results in Different Effects on Myofibril Organization in Skeletal Muscles of Zebrafish Embryos

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008416

关键词

-

资金

  1. BARD, the United States-Israel Binational Agricultural Research and Development Fund [IS-3703-05]
  2. University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Myofibrillogenesis requires the correct folding and assembly of sarcomeric proteins into highly organized sarcomeres. Heat shock protein 90 alpha 1 (Hsp90 alpha 1) has been implicated as a myosin chaperone that plays a key role in myofibrillogenesis. Knockdown or mutation of hsp90 alpha 1 resulted in complete disorganization of thick and thin filaments and M-and Z-line structures. It is not clear whether the disorganization of these sarcomeric structures is due to a direct effect from loss of Hsp90 alpha 1 function or indirectly through the disorganization of myosin thick filaments. Methodology/Principal Findings: In this study, we carried out a loss-of-function analysis of myosin thick filaments via gene-specific knockdown or using a myosin ATPase inhibitor BTS (N-benzyl-p-toluene sulphonamide) in zebrafish embryos. We demonstrated that knockdown of myosin heavy chain 1 (myhc1) resulted in sarcomeric defects in the thick and thin filaments and defective alignment of Z-lines. Similarly, treating zebrafish embryos with BTS disrupted thick and thin filament organization, with little effect on the M-and Z-lines. In contrast, loss of Hsp90 alpha 1 function completely disrupted all sarcomeric structures including both thick and thin filaments as well as the M-and Z-lines. Conclusion/Significance: Together, these studies indicate that the hsp90 alpha 1 mutant phenotype is not simply due to disruption of myosin folding and assembly, suggesting that Hsp90 alpha 1 may play a role in the assembly and organization of other sarcomeric structures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据