4.7 Review

The Ringleaders: Understanding the Apicomplexan Basal Complex Through Comparison to Established Contractile Ring Systems

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.656976

关键词

cytokinesis; contractile ring; basal complex; Apicomplexans; actomyosin; division; schizogony; endodyogeny

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 AI145941]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The actomyosin contractile ring is a conserved feature in eukaryotic cytokinesis, but the structure and force generation mechanism of the basal complex in Apicomplexans, which lack myosin II homolog, remain poorly understood. By comparing with well-studied cytokinetic mechanisms in other organisms, new research directions and possible answers are suggested to explore the diversity and divergence of Apicomplexans.
The actomyosin contractile ring is a key feature of eukaryotic cytokinesis, conserved across many eukaryotic kingdoms. Recent research into the cell biology of the divergent eukaryotic clade Apicomplexa has revealed a contractile ring structure required for asexual division in the medically relevant genera Toxoplasma and Plasmodium; however, the structure of the contractile ring, known as the basal complex in these parasites, remains poorly characterized and in the absence of a myosin II homolog, it is unclear how the force required of a cytokinetic contractile ring is generated. Here, we review the literature on the basal complex in Apicomplexans, summarizing what is known about its formation and function, and attempt to provide possible answers to this question and suggest new avenues of study by comparing the Apicomplexan basal complex to well-studied, established cytokinetic contractile rings and their mechanisms in organisms such as S. cerevisiae and D. melanogaster. We also compare the basal complex to structures formed during mitochondrial and plastid division and cytokinetic mechanisms of organisms beyond the Opisthokonts, considering Apicomplexan diversity and divergence.

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

4.7
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