Quantitative Microtubule Fractionation Technique to Separate Stable Microtubules, Labile Microtubules, and Free Tubulin in Mouse Tissues

Ayaka Hagita-Tatsumoto; Tomohiro Miyasaka

doi:10.3791/63358

JoVE Journal > Biochemistry

생화학

Quantitative Microtubule Fractionation Technique to Separate Stable Microtubules, Labile Microtubules, and Free Tubulin in Mouse Tissues

Published: November 17, 2023

doi:

10.3791/63358

Ayaka Hagita-Tatsumoto^1,2, Tomohiro Miyasaka^1,2,3

¹Department of Neuropathology, Faculty of Life and Medical Sciences,Doshisha University, ²Center for Research in Neurodegenerative Diseases,Doshisha University, ³Laboratory of Physiology and Anatomy, School of Pharmacy,Nihon University

Summary

Microtubules, which are tubulin polymers, play a crucial role as a cytoskeleton component in eukaryotic cells and are known for their dynamic instability. This study developed a method for fractionating microtubules to separate them into stable microtubules, labile microtubules, and free tubulin to evaluate the stability of microtubules in various mouse tissues.

Abstract

Microtubules, composed of α/β-tubulin dimers, are a crucial component of the cytoskeleton in eukaryotic cells. These tube-like polymers exhibit dynamic instability as tubulin heterodimer subunits undergo repetitive polymerization and depolymerization. Precise control of microtubule stability and dynamics, achieved through tubulin post-translational modifications and microtubule-associated proteins, is essential for various cellular functions. Dysfunctions in microtubules are strongly implicated in pathogenesis, including neurodegenerative disorders. Ongoing research focuses on microtubule-targeting therapeutic agents that modulate stability, offering potential treatment options for these diseases and cancers. Consequently, understanding the dynamic state of microtubules is crucial for assessing disease progression and therapeutic effects.

Traditionally, microtubule dynamics have been assessed in vitro or in cultured cells through rough fractionation or immunoassay, using antibodies targeting post-translational modifications of tubulin. However, accurately analyzing tubulin status in tissues using such procedures poses challenges. In this study, we developed a simple and innovative microtubule fractionation method to separate stable microtubules, labile microtubules, and free tubulin in mouse tissues.

The procedure involved homogenizing dissected mouse tissues in a microtubule-stabilizing buffer at a 19:1 volume ratio. The homogenates were then fractionated through a two-step ultracentrifugation process following initial slow centrifugation (2,400 × g) to remove debris. The first ultracentrifugation step (100,000 × g) precipitated stable microtubules, while the resulting supernatant was subjected to a second ultracentrifugation step (500,000 × g) to fractionate labile microtubules and soluble tubulin dimers. This method determined the proportions of tubulin constituting stable or labile microtubules in the mouse brain. Additionally, distinct tissue variations in microtubule stability were observed that correlated with the proliferative capacity of constituent cells. These findings highlight the significant potential of this novel method for analyzing microtubule stability in physiological and pathological conditions.

Introduction

Microtubules (MTs) are elongated tubular structures comprising protofilaments consisting of α/β-tubulin heterodimer subunits. They play essential roles in various cellular processes such as cell division, motility, shape maintenance, and intracellular transport, making them integral components of the eukaryotic cytoskeleton¹. The minus-end of MTs, where the α-tubulin subunit is exposed, is relatively stable, whereas the plus-end, where the β-tubulin subunit is exposed, undergoes dynamic depolymerization and polymerization². This continuous cycle of tubulin dimer addition and dissociation at the plus-end, referred to as dynamic instability, results in a repetitive process of rescue and catastrophe³. MTs exhibit focal domains with localized variations in dynamic instability, including stable and labile domains⁴.

Precise control of the dynamic instability of MTs is crucial for numerous cellular functions, particularly in neurons characterized by intricate morphologies. The adaptability and durability of MTs play a vital role in the development and proper functioning of nerve cells⁵^,⁶^,⁷. The dynamic instability of MTs has been found to be associated with various post-translational modifications (PTMs) of tubulin, such as acetylation, phosphorylation, palmitoylation, detyrosination, delta 2, polyglutamine oxidation, and polyglycylation. Additionally, the binding of microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs) serves as a regulatory mechanism⁸. PTMs, excluding acetylation, predominantly occur in the tubulin carboxy-terminal region situated on the external surface of MTs. These modifications create diverse surface conditions on MTs, influencing their interaction with MAPs and ultimately governing MT stability⁹. The presence of a carboxy-terminal tyrosine residue in α-tubulin is indicative of dynamic MTs, which are rapidly replaced by the free tubulin pool. Conversely, detyrosination of the carboxy terminus and acetylation of Lys40 signify stable MTs with reduced dynamic instability⁹^,¹⁰.

The PTMs of tubulin have been extensively employed in experiments to assess the dynamics and stability of MTs⁵^,⁷^,¹¹^,¹²^,¹³^,¹⁴^,¹⁵. For instance, in cell culture studies, tubulins can be segregated into two pools: the free tubulin pool and the MT pool. This is achieved by releasing free tubulin through cell permeabilization before fixing the remaining MTs¹⁵^,¹⁶^,¹⁷^,¹⁸^,¹⁹. Biochemical methods involve the use of chemical MT stabilizers that safeguard MTs from catastrophe, enabling the separation of MTs and free tubulin through centrifugation²⁰^,²¹^,²². However, these procedures do not differentiate between stable and less stable (labile) MTs, thereby rendering it impossible to quantify MTs or soluble tubulin in tissues like the brain. Consequently, evaluating MT stability in organisms under physiological and pathological conditions has proven to be challenging. To address this experimental limitation, we have developed a novel technique for precisely separating MTs and free tubulin in mouse tissue²³.

This unique MT fractionation method involves tissue homogenization under conditions that maintain tubulin status in tissues and two-step centrifugation to separate stable MTs, labile MTs, and free tubulin. This simple procedure can be applied to broad studies, including basic research on MTs and MAPs in living organisms, physiological and pathological analyses of health and diseases associated with MT stability, and developing drugs and other therapeutics that target MTs.

Protocol

1. MT fractionation method

NOTE: All experiments performed in this study were approved by the Animal Ethics Committee of Doshisha University. C57BL/6J mice of either sex, 3-4 months of age, were used here. In this protocol, dissected tissues, e.g., brain, liver, or thymus, were immediately homogenized in ice-cold microtubule stabilizing buffer (MSB), which contained Taxol (MT stabilizer) at a concentration that prevented not only depolymerization but also repolymerization of MT. The homogenate was separated into three fractions by a two-step ultracentrifugation process (Figure 1). All steps in this protocol were completed without interruption in a cool-temperature environment, and the tissues and fractions were not frozen until they were dissolved in sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-sample buffer.

Preparation of MSB and microtubes
1. To prepare MSB, mix the following reagents: 0.1 M 2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid (MES), pH 6.8 (neutralized by KOH), 10% glycerol, 0.1 mM DTT, 1 mM MgSO₄, 1 mM EGTA, 0.5% Triton X-100, phosphatase inhibitors (1 mM NaF, 1 mM β-glycerophosphate, 1 mM Na₃VO₄, 0.5 µM okadaic acid), 1x protease inhibitor cocktail, and protease inhibitors (0.1 mM PMSF, 0.1 mM DIFP, 1 µg/mL pepstatin, 1 µg/mL antipain, 10 µg/mL aprotinin, 10 µg/mL leupeptin, 50 µg/mL TLCK) (see Table of Materials) and denote as MSB(-).
2. Just before tissue dissection, add 10 µM Taxol and 2 mM GTP (see Table of Materials) to MSB(-). This buffer is denoted as MSB(+). Prepare the buffer on the day of use and keep it on ice.
3. Prepare the microtubes for sampling. Empty 2.0 mL microtube for homogenate storage; empty 1.5 mL microtube for supernatant1 (S1) lysate, precipitate2 (P2) sample, and precipitate3 (P3) sample storage; 1.5 mL microtube with 1 mL of ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for dissected tissue storage; 1.5 mL microtube with 200 µL of 2x SDS-sample buffer (0.16 M Tris pH 6.8; 20% glycerol; 2% 2-mercaptoethanol; 4% SDS) for S1 sample and supernatant3 (S3) sample storage; and centrifugation microtube for TLA55 and TLA120.2 centrifuge rotors (see Table of Materials). Label all tubes and place them on ice.
Mouse tissue homogenization
1. Prepare a chilled table for tissue dissection. First, fill a box with crushed ice and place two Petri dishes on ice, one with the inner side up and the other with the outer side. Fill ice-cold PBS in one dish for transient wash and storage of dissected tissues. Lay filter paper moistened with PBS on another dish turned over.
2. To sacrifice a mouse, perform cervical dislocation under deep anesthesia with a mixed anesthetic of butorphanol, midazolam, and medetomidine. Then, immediately dissect the tissues, e.g., brain, liver, or thymus, and wash them with ice-cold PBS in a Petri dish.
  NOTE: Any type of soft tissue can be analyzed by this method. However, the size of the tissue is limited by the recommended volume range of the homogenizer used. For example, if a 2 mL volume of homogenizer is used, 50-100 mg of tissue is recommended.
3. After weighing the 1.5 mL microtubes filled with PBS for dissected tissue storage, cut out and store tissues inside the microtubes, and reweigh each microtube. Each tissue's wet weight can be calculated by subtracting the weight of the tube before and after the tissue is added.
4. Immediately homogenize the tissue in ice-cold MSB(+) with a chilled homogenizer (see Table of Materials). The volume of MSB(+) was 19 times (µL) the tissue wet weight (mg). Perform homogenization with 20 strokes until the tissue pieces disappear.
  NOTE: For example, 1,900 µL of MSB(+) is used for 100 mg of tissue. Since the volume of MSB(+) to be added must be adjusted for each wet weight of the tissue pieces analyzed, it is necessary to weigh each tissue piece accurately.
Centrifugation of the mouse tissue homogenates
1. Move the whole homogenate to a 2 mL microtube with a Pasteur pipette and centrifuge at 2,400 × g for 3 min at 2 °C to remove the debris via precipitation.
2. Transfer the whole supernatant (S1 fraction) to a new 1.5 mL microtube and vortex. Then, aliquot 200 µL of S1 fraction into a centrifugation microtube and centrifuge at 100,000 × g using a TLA-55 rotor for 20 min at 2 °C to obtain the relatively large molecular weight proteins as a precipitate (P2 fraction).
  NOTE: The volume of the sample subjected to the ultracentrifugation steps affects the radius of centrifugation and the precipitation efficiency of the molecules. Keep the sample volume at 200 µL or less after this step to prevent inaccurate fractionation.
3. Further centrifuge all resultant supernatant (S2 fraction) at 500,000 × g using a TLA-120.2 rotor for 60 min at 2 °C to separate the insoluble protein complexes in the precipitate (P3 fraction) from soluble proteins in the supernatant (S3 fraction).
4. Add 400 µL of 1x SDS-sample buffer (0.08 M Tris pH 6.8; 10% glycerol; 1% 2-mercaptoethanol; 2% SDS) to the P2 and P3 fraction tubes and briefly sonicated to dissolve the precipitate. Transfer these fraction samples to an empty 1.5 mL microtube.
5. Dissolve the total S3 fraction in 200 µL of 2x SDS-sample buffer.
6. Mix the remaining S1 fractions with an equal volume of 2x SDS sample buffer for use as a standard curve for Western blotting.
7. Boil all these samples at 100 °C for 3 min. After the samples have cooled to room temperature, store the samples at -20 °C.
Quantification of proteins in each fraction
1. Quantify proteins in the P2, P3, and S3 fractions by Western blotting. First, use 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) to separate proteins from properly diluted the P2, P3, and S3 fractions, and serially diluted S1 sample from any individual as a standard curve. Then, electroblot the samples onto polyvinylidene fluoride membranes (see Table of Materials).
  NOTE: The dilution ratio of each fraction depends on the concentration of an objective protein and the reactivity of the antibody. (e.g., α-tubulin, TUBB3, β-tub, and tyrosinated tubulin in brain tissue: S3 = 1/400, P3 = 1/2,000, P2 = 1/2,000, S1 = 1/50,000, 1/20,000, 1/10,000, 1/5,000, 1/2,000; acetylated tubulin in brain tissue: S3 = 1/200, P3 = 1/400, P2 = 1/8,000, S1 = 1/100,000, 1/40,000, 1/20,000, 1/10,000, 1/4,000; α-tubulin in liver: S3 = 1/20, P3 = 1/100, P2 = 1/20, S1 = 1/50,000, 1/20,000, 1/10,000, 1/5,000, 1/2,000; α-tubulin in thymus: S3 = 1/100, P3 = 1/400, P2 = 1/20, S1 = 1/50,000, 1/20,000, 1/10,000, 1/5,000, 1/2,000 dilution of tissue concentration).
2. Block the membrane with 5% skimmed milk in Tris-buffered saline (50 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.6; 152 mM NaCl) with 0.1% Tween 20 (TBS-T) for over 30 min.
3. Immerse the membrane in TBS-T containing primary antibody (see Table of Materials) for over 2 h. After that, wash the membrane with TBS-T for 3 min (3 times).
4. Label primary antibody using HRP-conjugated secondary antibodies (see Table of Materials) in TBS-T for over 1 h. After that, wash the membrane with TBS-T for 3 min (3 times).
5. Develop the membranes with Enhanced Chemiluminescence reagent. Then, analyze the bands of interest with a luminescent image analyzer (see Table of Materials).
6. Quantify the protein band intensities using image analysis software (see Table of Materials) and create a standard curve by plotting the dilution units of the diluted S1 samples used for the standard curve along the X-axis and the band intensities along the Y-axis.
7. Read the protein concentration (unit) corresponding to the diluted fraction samples. Multiply the concentration read with the sample dilution factor to obtain a protein unit in each fraction. Divide the measured unit of each fraction by the total protein unit (P2 + P3 + S3) to obtain a percentage.

2. Evaluation of the properties of tubulin in each fraction

NOTE: This biochemical method provides three groups of tubulin complexes defined by sedimentation properties. Here, the status of tubulin complexes obtained in these fractions was identified based on the size of the complex and tubulin-PTMs. Complete all steps in this protocol without interruption in a cool-temperature environment but do not freeze the fraction samples until they are dissolved in the SDS-sample buffer.

Filter trap assay
1. Filter the S2 and S3 fractions (500 µL each) using a 300 kDa ultrafiltration spin column (see Table of Materials). Perform 14,000 × g centrifugation at 2 °C until the whole supernatant is filtered, eluted proteins are collected into receiver tubes, and trapped proteins remain on the filter of reservoir tubes.
2. Translate the whole filtrates (approximately 500 µL) in receiver tubes into new 1.5 mL microtubes and dissolve them in 500 µL of 2x SDS-sample buffer.
3. Solubilize the residues on the filter of reservoir tubes in 1,000 µL of 1x SDS-sample buffer by pipetting and transferring the samples to a new 1.5 mL microtube.
4. Boil the samples at 100 °C for 3 min. After the samples have cooled to room temperature, store the samples at -20 °C.
5. Analyze the amounts of tubulin by Western blotting with DM1A (anti-α-tubulin antibody, see Table of Materials).
Size-exclusion chromatography
1. Prepare the carrier buffer (0.1 M MES, pH 6.8; 10% glycerol; 1 mM MgSO₄; 1 mM EGTA; 0.1 mM DTT) supplemented with 1/10 concentration of protease and phosphatase inhibitors as described in step 1.1.1. Then, filter the solution and store it in a cold environment.
2. Prepare a gel filtration chromatography column equipped with a preparative liquid chromatography system in a chromatography chamber (see Table of Materials) at 4 °C.
3. Before injecting samples onto the column, flow 180 mL of the carrier buffer to wash the column. The flow rate is 1 mL/min for 3 h.
4. Inject commercially available purified porcine tubulin (see Table of Materials) as a control or the S3 fraction from mouse brains (500 µL each) onto the column.
5. Elute at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min with carrier buffer. Collect the 1.5 mL fractions for 120 min. Monitor eluted proteins by absorbance at 280 nm. Keep the maximum pressure under 0.3 MPa.
6. After vortexing the collected fractions, mix 50 µL of them with 50 µL of 2x SDS-sample buffer in a 1.5 mL microtube. Boil all samples at 100 °C for 3 min. After the samples have cooled to room temperature, store the samples at -20 °C.
7. Analyze the amounts of tubulin by Western blotting with DM1A, anti-α-tubulin antibody and KMX-1, anti-β-tubulin antibody (see Table of Materials).

Representative Results

Quantification of tubulin in the P2, P3, and S3 fractions from mouse brain by the MT fractionation method
Tubulin in mouse tissue was separated into the P2, P3, and S3 fractions by the MT fractionation method and quantified by Western blotting (Figure 1A). The precipitate of MTs that remained in the P2 fraction by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 × g for 20 min accounted for 34.86% ± 1.68% of total tubulin in a mouse brain. The supernatant (S2) was further centrifuged at 500,000 × g for 60 min. A precipitate (P3 fraction) and a supernatant (S3 fraction) were obtained, which accounted for 56.13% ± 2.12% or 9.01% ± 0.68% of total tubulin in the mouse brains, respectively (Figure 1B).

The cerebral cortex used in this study contains neuronal and nonneuronal cells, such as glia. To selectively assess MT stability in the neurons of mouse brains, we quantified TUBB3, a tubulin subtype exclusively expressed in neurons in the central and peripheral nervous system, by Western blotting with Tuj1 (anti-TUBB3 antibody). The percentage of TUBB3 in the P2, P3, or S3 fraction was 32.65% ± 2.20%, 59.31% ± 2.61%, or 8.04% ± 0.74%, respectively. They were not significantly different from those of α-tubulin (Figure 1B). These results suggested that neurons and glial cells exhibit similar MT stability or that neurons contain much higher amounts of tubulin than that of glial cells in vivo.

Characteristics of tubulin recovered in each fraction
Here, the mouse tissue homogenate was separated into three fractions by two-step ultracentrifugation with different gravitational accelerations; therefore, the sedimentation coefficients among proteins or their complexes in each fraction differed. Although tubulin precipitated at 100,000 × g ultracentrifugation was considered conventional MT, how the newly obtained tubulin of the P3 fraction here differs from that of tubulin in the P2 and S3 fractions should be clarified.

To characterize S3 tubulin, the S2 (P3 + S3) or S3 fraction was subjected to ultrafiltration and size exclusion chromatography. The tubulin complexes in the S3 fraction could pass through a 300 kDa ultrafiltration spin column completely, while almost all tubulin in the S2 fraction was trapped on the filter (Figure 2A). Furthermore, the molecular weight of tubulin complexes in the S3 fraction was measured by size exclusion chromatography. S3 tubulin eluted at one peak corresponding to 100 kDa, which is similar to that of commercially available purified tubulin dimers (Figure 2B,C). In addition, the proportions of α- and β-tubulin recovered in each fraction by the MT fractionation method were equal (Figure 2D). Actually, it has been shown that α- and β-tubulin can slightly exist as monomers in living cells²⁴. However, judging from the estimated kD value (nM order) reported, and the concentration of tubulin recovered in the S3 fraction (~11 µM), most (> 98%) tubulin is thought to exist as α/β-dimers. Therefore, tubulin in the S3 fraction is primarily a soluble α/β-tubulin dimer.

The tubulin polymers were separated into two fractions, P2 and P3, based on their post-translational modifications (PTMs). To differentiate between these fractions, Western blotting was performed using specific antibodies. The anti-acetylated α-tubulin antibody, which serves as a marker for stable MTs, demonstrated that the P2 fraction was significantly enriched with 97.40% ± 0.52% of acetylated α-tubulin (Figure 2E), while the total α-tubulin was recovered in the P3 and S3 fractions (Figure 1B). Conversely, the anti-tyrosinated α-tubulin antibody, indicative of labile MTs, revealed that 75.43% ± 2.69% of tyrosinated α-tubulin was present in the P3 fraction (Figure 2F). These findings confirm that the P2 fraction primarily contains tubulin within stable MTs, whereas the P3 fraction consists of tubulin within labile MTs.

Assessment of MT stability under freezing and nocodazole treatment
The effect of freezing and nocodazole treatment on the stability of mouse intracerebral MTs was analyzed to determine whether transient changes in the stability of MTs could be discerned by the MT fractionation method. MTs generally disassemble at low temperatures, but some MTs remain stable in the cold. After weighing the brains, they were frozen in liquid nitrogen and placed at -80 °C for 30 min. The transient frozen brain and raw brain as control were homogenized and fractionated into the P2, P3, and S3 fractions. Then, the proportion of tubulin contained in the three fractions was quantified by Western blotting. Once the brain was frozen before homogenization, α-tubulin in the P2 fraction decreased, and that in the P3 fraction increased in comparison to that in the raw brain (Figure 3A). Blots with 6-11B1 (acetylated α-tubulin) or 1A2 (tyrosinated α-tubulin) also revealed that brain freezing decreased the acetylation level (Figure 3B) and increased the tyrosination level (Figure 3C) of α-tubulin in the P2 fraction.

Nocodazole is a microtubule-targeting agent (MTA) that prevents MT polymerization by binding to β-tubulin and promotes MT depolymerization. Mouse brains were homogenized in Taxol-free MSB(+) with or without 10 µM nocodazole and placed at 4 °C for 20 min. The nontreated or nocodazole-treated homogenate was added to 10 µM Taxol, re-homogenized, and fractionated into the P2, P3, and S3 fractions. Then, the proportion of tubulin contained in the three fractions was quantified by Western blotting. Blots with DM1A (α-tubulin) showed that α-tubulin in the P2 fraction decreased and that in the P3 fraction tended to increase with nocodazole treatment (Figure 3D). These results indicate that P2 tubulin was destabilized in response to low temperature or nocodazole and that the P2 fraction contained robust MTs that resisted the experimental conditions. In contrast to freezing, nocodazole did not affect tubulin PTMs (Figure 3E,F). Based on the results and the above data, the depolymerization of MTs that cannot be detected by PTM analysis can be evaluated by this method.

Comparison of the ratio of stable MTs, labile MTs, and free tubulin in tissues
The stability of MTs varies among different tissues, depending on the proliferative capacity of the cells within those tissues. Notably, stable MTs are more abundant in the nervous system, which primarily consists of nonproliferative neurons, compared to other tissues⁴. To assess the ability of the developed MT fractionation method to discern differences in MT stability across various tissues, the livers and thymi of mice were fractionated, and the recovered tubulin in each fraction was quantified. The results revealed that, in comparison to other tissues, the brain exhibited a significantly higher level of P2 tubulins, while P3 tubulins were notably enriched in tissues containing proliferative cells (Figure 4). Additionally, Western blotting using 6-11B1 and 1A2 antibodies confirmed the presence of higher MT stability in the nervous system. The distinct distribution patterns of tubulin PTMs clearly indicated that the P2 tubulin specifically found in the nervous system originated from stable MTs (Figure 4). These findings further support the notion that the P2 and P3 fractions correspond to stable and labile MTs, respectively.

Figure 1: Quantification of tubulin in mouse tissue using the MT fractionation method. (A) Summary of the MT fractionation method for tissues. Stable MTs (P2 fraction), labile MTs (P3 fraction), and free tubulin (S3 fraction) in tissues can be separated by 2-step ultracentrifugation under conditions that suppress MT polymerization and depolymerization during preparation. (B) MTs in the mouse cortex were precipitated by conventional 100,000 × g ultracentrifugation followed by 500,000 × g ultracentrifugation. Then, tubulins separated into the P2, P3, and S3 fractions were quantified by Western blotting with DM1A (α-tubulin) and anti-Tuj1 (TUBB3). The proportion of proteins in each fraction (P2, P3, or S3) to the total fraction (P2 + P3 + S3) was calculated as described in the Protocol section (means ± SDs, n = 4). This figure has been modified from Hagita et al.²³. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: The MT fractionation method enables the separation of stable MTs, labile MTs, and free tubulin in the mouse cerebral cortex. (A) The S2 or S3 fractions (input) were analyzed by the filter trap assay using a 300 kDa ultrafiltration spin column. Tubulins obtained by filtration (receiver) and trapping (reservoir) were quantified by Western blotting with DM1A (α-tubulin). (B) Purified porcine tubulins were subjected to the MT fractionation method and were found to be mostly collected in the S3 fraction. (C) Molecular size of tubulin in the S3 fraction. The S3 fraction was separated by size exclusion chromatography using a gel filtration chromatography column. Proteins in each fraction were quantified by Western blotting with DM1A (α-tubulin) and KMX-1 (β-tubulin). The theoretical molecular weight is shown at the top of the panels. (D) The proportions of α-tubulin and β-tubulin in each fraction were equal. Tubulins separated into the P2, P3, and S3 fractions were quantified by Western blotting with KMX-1 (β-tubulin). Quantification of the proportion of α-tubulin and β-tubulin in each fraction relative to the sum of the total fraction (means ± SDs, n = 4). Statistical analyses were performed by Student's t-test. (E,F) The modifications of α-tubulin in the P2, P3, and S3 fractions were verified by Western blotting with 6-11B1 (acetylated α-tubulin: E) and 1A2 (tyrosinated α-tubulin: F). Quantification of the proportion of tyrosinated or acetylated α-tubulin in each fraction relative to the total fraction (means ± SDs, n = 4). (A–C) have been modified from Hagita et al.²³. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Assessment of MT depolymerization induced by freezing or MTA. (A–C) The stability of MT after 30 min of freezing at -80 °C was evaluated. The proportions of tubulin contained in the three fractions of the raw and frozen brain were quantified by Western blotting with DM1A (α-tubulin: A), 1A2 (tyrosinated α-tubulin: B), and 6-11B1 (acetylated α-tubulin: C). (D–F) The effect of nocodazole on MT stability was evaluated. The proportions of tubulin contained in the three fractions of nocodazole untreated or treated brains were quantified by Western blotting with DM1A (α-tubulin: D), 1A2 (tyrosinated α-tubulin: E), and 6-11B1 (acetylated α-tubulin: F). Representative relative levels of tyrosination (B,E) or acetylation (C,F) were normalized to the amount of total α-tubulin (A,D) (means ± SDs, n = 4). Statistical analyses were performed by Student's t-test. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Proportions of stable MTs, labile MTs, and free tubulin in the brain, liver, and thymus in mouse. The brains, livers, and thymi of mice were dissected and subjected to the MT fractionation method. Proteins separated into each fraction were quantified by Western blotting with DM1A (α-tubulin), 6-11B1 (acetylated α-tubulin), and 1A2 (tyrosinated α-tubulin). The proportion of proteins in each fraction (P2, P3, or S3) to the total fraction (P2 + P3 + S3) was calculated as described in the Protocol section (means ± SDs, n = 4). Statistical analyses were performed by one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post hoc test. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Discussion

The most significant task when investigating the status of tubulin in tissue from living organisms is preventing accidental MT polymerization or depolymerization during preparation. The stability of MTs in samples is affected by factors such as the concentration of Taxol in MSB, the proportion of tissue amount to buffer, and temperature during the process from tissue removal to homogenization and centrifugation. Therefore, the conditions were optimized in each step of the protocol for analyzing mouse tissue with a 20-fold volume of homogenate. A higher concentration of Taxol can induce MT polymerization in vitro, even under chilled conditions²⁵. When analyzing tissues with significantly different tubulin concentrations or making substantial protocol modifications, each operator should optimize the steps according to the specific objectives of their experiments.

In the conducted study, a new population of MTs, referred to as P3, was obtained from the conventional "soluble fraction" using ultracentrifugation at 500,000 × g²⁰. Theoretical calculations based on factors such as the K-factor of the rotor, centrifugal force, and duration of centrifugation suggest that the tubulins present in the S3 fraction most likely represent 6S tubulin dimers. Conversely, tubulin in the P3 fraction may correspond to MTs that are shorter in length compared to those found in the P2 fraction. This observation aligns with the result showing that freezing tissues prior to homogenization, which leads to the partial collapse of MTs²⁶, resulted in a significant increase in tubulin within the P3 fraction and a concurrent decrease in the P2 fraction (Figure 3A). Furthermore, the analysis of tubulin PTMs and the binding properties of various MAPs indicate that the P2 or P3 fraction contains stable or labile MTs, respectively. For instance, certain MAPs specific to stable MTs, primarily found in neurons, were exclusively present in the P2 fraction²³. Consequently, it is plausible to suggest that the P3 fraction comprises MTs that are more dynamic and labile in comparison to those in the P2 fraction.

According to the theory underlying the method, inappropriate experimental conditions involved in MT stabilization or centrifugation can result in poor fractionation. For instance, a low concentration of Taxol leads to a slight decrease in P2 tubulin, while excess Taxol increases P2 tubulin due to MT formation during preparation²³. Similarly, heating tissues and samples inappropriately can cause MTs to hyperpolymerize and tau to degrade or fragment²³. Moreover, centrifugal conditions are critical for separating the P3 and S3 fractions, and a slight decrease in gravitational acceleration significantly reduces the recovery of the P3 fraction. Therefore, it is recommended to strictly follow the protocol steps if any abnormal fractionations are observed.

This simple fractionation method can be broadly applied to analyze the proportions of tubulins among stable MTs, labile MTs, and free dimers in tissues. This method offers several advantages, as it can detect subtle changes in tubulin status that may not be apparent through the quantification of tubulin PTMs. Analyzing MT stability is important for understanding the physiological significance of MTs, particularly in large and complex neuronal cells, and for investigating disorders associated with MT dysregulation. Mutations or dysfunctions in tubulin or MAP genes, for example, are linked to neurodevelopmental disorders and neurodegenerative diseases²⁷^,²⁸. In Alzheimer's disease, MTs are known to be reduced, possibly due to the functional loss of tau protein in affected neurons¹⁵^,²⁹^,³⁰^,³¹^,³²^,³³. MTAs that modulate MT stability and inhibit cell division have been proposed as potential therapies for neurological disorders¹³^,³⁴. Utilizing this unique MT fractionation method to analyze the stability and behavior of MTs and MAPs in disease model animals can significantly contribute to elucidating the pathogenesis of tau-related dementia and identifying new therapeutic targets.

Disclosures

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by JST the establishment of university fellowships toward the creation of science technology innovation (A.HT.; JPMJFS2145), JST SPRING (A.HT.; JPMJSP2129), Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (A.HT.; 23KJ2078), a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research(B) JSPS KAKENHI (22H02946 for TM), a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas titled "Brain Protein Aging and Dementia Control" from MEXT (TM; 26117004), and by Uehara Research Fellowship from the Uehara Memorial Foundation (TM; 202020027). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Materials

1.5 ML TUBE CASE OF 500	Beckman Coulter	357448
1A2	Sigma-Aldrich	T9028	1:5,000 dilution
2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid (MES)	Nacalai Tesque	02442-44
300 kDa ultrafiltration spin column	Aproscience	PT-1013
6-11B1	Sigma-Aldrich	T7451	1:5,000 dilution
AKTA prime plus	Cytiva
anti-mouse IgG	Jackson ImmunoResearch	115-035-146	1:5,000 dilution
antipain	Peptide Institute Inc.	4062
aprotinin	Nacalai Tesque	03346-84
Chemi-Lumi One L	Nacalai Tesque	07880-54
Corning bottle-top vacuum filter system	Corning	430758	0.22µm 33.2cm² Nitrocellulose membrane
DIFP	Sigma-Aldrich	55-91-4
DIGITAL HOMOGENIZER		AS ONE	HOM
DM1A	Sigma-Aldrich	T9026	1:5,000 dilution
DTT	Nacalai Tesque	14128-46
EGTA	Nacalai Tesque	37346-05
FluoroTrans W 3.3 Meter Roll	Pall Corporation	BSP0161
glycerol	Nacalai Tesque	17018-25
GTP		Nacalai Tesque	17450-61
HIGH SPEED REFRIGERATIOED MICRO CENTRIFUGE Kitman		TOMY
HiLoad 16/600 Superdex 200 pg column	Cytiva	28-9893-35
Image Gauge Software	FUJIFILUM Wako Pure Chemical Corporation
ImmunoStar LD	FUJIFILUM Wako Pure Chemical Corporation	292-69903
KMX-1	Millipore	MAB3408	1:5,000 dilution
LAS-4000 luminescent image analyzer	FUJIFILUM Wako Pure Chemical Corporation
leupeptin	Peptide Institute Inc.	43449-62
MgSO₄	Nacalai Tesque	21003-75
Na₃VO₄	Nacalai Tesque	32013-92
NaF	Nacalai Tesque	31420-82
okadaic acid	LC Laboratories	O-2220
OPTIMA MAX-XP	Beckman Coulter	393315
pepstatin	Nacalai Tesque	26436-52
PMSF	Nacalai Tesque	27327-81
Polycarbonate Centrifuge Tubes for TLA120.2	Beckman Coulter	343778
Protease inhibitor cocktail (cOmplete, EDTA-free)		Roche	5056489001
Purified tubulin	Cytoskeleton	T240
QSONICA Q55	QSonica	Q55
Taxol		LC Laboratories	P-9600
TLA-120.2 rotor	Beckman Coulter	357656
TLA-55 rotor	Beckman Coulter	366725
TLCK	Nacalai Tesque	34219-94
Triton X-100	Nacalai Tesque	12967-45
β-glycerophosphate	Sigma-Aldrich	G9422

References

Janke, C., Magiera, M. M. The tubulin code and its role in controlling microtubule properties and functions. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 21 (6), 307-326 (2020).
Conde, C., Caceres, A. Microtubule assembly, organization and dynamics in axons and dendrites. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 10 (5), 319-332 (2009).
Mitchison, T., Kirschner, M. Dynamic instability of microtubule growth. Nature. 312 (5991), 237-242 (1984).
Baas, P. W., Rao, A. N., Matamoros, A. J., Leo, L. Stability properties of neuronal microtubules. Cytoskeleton (Hoboken). 73 (9), 442-460 (2016).
Challacombe, J. F., Snow, D. M., Letourneau, P. C. Dynamic microtubule ends are required for growth cone turning to avoid an inhibitory guidance cue. Journal of Neuroscience. 17 (9), 3085-3095 (1997).
Kapitein, L. C., Hoogenraad, C. C. Building the neuronal microtubule cytoskeleton. Neuron. 87 (3), 492-506 (2015).
Leo, L., et al. Vertebrate fidgetin restrains axonal growth by severing labile domains of microtubules. Cell Reports. 12 (11), 1723-1730 (2015).
Janke, C. The tubulin code: molecular components, readout mechanisms, and functions. Journal of Cell Biology. 206 (4), 461-472 (2014).
Wloga, D., Joachimiak, E., Fabczak, H. Tubulin post-translational modifications and microtubule dynamics. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 18 (10), 2207 (2017).
Baas, P. W., Black, M. M. Individual microtubules in the axon consist of domains that differ in both composition and stability. Journal of Cell Biology. 111 (2), 495-509 (1990).
Cartelli, D., et al. Microtubule alterations occur early in experimental parkinsonism and the microtubule stabilizer epothilone D is neuroprotective. Scientific Reports. 3, 1837 (2013).
Zhang, B., et al. Microtubule-binding drugs offset tau sequestration by stabilizing microtubules and reversing fast axonal transport deficits in a tauopathy model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 102 (1), 227-231 (2005).
Zhang, F., et al. Post-translational modifications of alpha-tubulin in Alzheimer disease. Translational Neurodegeneration. 4, 9 (2015).
Miyasaka, T., et al. Curcumin improves tau-induced neuronal dysfunction of nematodes. Neurobiology of Aging. 39, 69-81 (2016).
Fujiwara, H., et al. Inhibition of microtubule assembly competent tubulin synthesis leads to accumulation of phosphorylated tau in neuronal cell bodies. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 521 (3), 779-785 (2020).
Vielkind, U., Swierenga, S. H. A simple fixation procedure for immunofluorescent detection of different cytoskeletal components within the same cell. Histochemistry. 91 (1), 81-88 (1989).
Kanai, Y., et al. Expression of multiple tau isoforms and microtubule bundle formation in fibroblasts transfected with a single tau cDNA. Journal of Cell Biology. 109 (3), 1173-1184 (1989).
Brown, A., Li, Y., Slaughter, T., Black, M. M. Composite microtubules of the axon: quantitative analysis of tyrosinated and acetylated tubulin along individual axonal microtubules. Journal of Cell Science. 104 (2), 339-352 (1993).
Black, M. M., Slaughter, T., Moshiach, S., Obrocka, M., Fischer, I. Tau is enriched on dynamic microtubules in the distal region of growing axons. Journal of Neuroscience. 16 (11), 3601-3619 (1996).
Caron, J. M., Jones, A. L., Kirschner, M. W. Autoregulation of tubulin synthesis in hepatocytes and fibroblasts. Journal of Cell Biology. 101 (5), 1763-1772 (1985).
Merrick, S. E., Trojanowski, J. Q., Lee, V. M. Selective destruction of stable microtubules and axons by inhibitors of protein serine/threonine phosphatases in cultured human neurons. Journal of Neuroscience. 17 (15), 5726-5737 (1997).
Miyasaka, T., Sato, S., Tatebayashi, Y., Takashima, A. Microtubule destruction induces tau liberation and its subsequent phosphorylation. FEBS Letters. 584 (14), 3227-3232 (2010).
Hagita, A., et al. Quantitative fractionation of tissue microtubules with distinct biochemical properties reflecting their stability and lability. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 560, 186-191 (2021).
Montecinos-Franjola, F., Chaturvedi, S. K., Schuck, P., Sackett, D. L. All tubulins are not alike: Heterodimer dissociation differs among different biological sources. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 294 (26), 10315-10324 (2019).
Vallee, R. B. A taxol-dependent procedure for the isolation of microtubules and microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs). Journal of Cell Biology. 92 (2), 435-442 (1982).
Bartolo, M. E., Carter, J. V. Effect of microtubule stabilization on the freezing tolerance of mesophyll cells of spinach. Plant Physiology. 97 (1), 182-187 (1991).
Strang, K. H., Golde, T. E., Giasson, B. I. MAPT mutations, tauopathy, and mechanisms of neurodegeneration. Laboratory Investigation. 99 (7), 912-928 (2019).
Fourel, G., Boscheron, C. Tubulin mutations in neurodevelopmental disorders as a tool to decipher microtubule function. FEBS Letters. 594 (21), 3409-3438 (2020).
Terry, R. D., Gonatas, N. K., Weiss, M. Ultrastructural studies in Alzheimer’s presenile dementia. The American Journal of Pathology. 44 (2), 269-297 (1964).
Yoshida, H., Ihara, Y. Tau in paired helical filaments is functionally distinct from fetal tau: assembly incompetence of paired helical filament-tau. Journal of Neurochemistry. 61 (3), 1183-1186 (1993).
Cash, A. D., et al. Microtubule reduction in Alzheimer’s disease and aging is independent of tau filament formation. The American Journal of Pathology. 162 (5), 1623-1627 (2003).
Hempen, B., Brion, J. P. Reduction of acetylated alpha-tubulin immunoreactivity in neurofibrillary tangle-bearing neurons in Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. 55 (9), 964-972 (1996).
Miyasaka, T., et al. Imbalanced expression of tau and tubulin induces neuronal dysfunction in C. elegans models of tauopathy. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 12, 415 (2018).
Boiarska, Z., Passarella, D. Microtubule-targeting agents and neurodegeneration. Drug Discovery Today. 26 (2), 604-615 (2021).

Play Video

PDF

DOI

DOWNLOAD MATERIALS LIST

Cite This Article

Hagita-Tatsumoto, A., Miyasaka, T. Quantitative Microtubule Fractionation Technique to Separate Stable Microtubules, Labile Microtubules, and Free Tubulin in Mouse Tissues. J. Vis. Exp. (201), e63358, doi:10.3791/63358 (2023).