Representatives of Apicomplexa perform various kinds of movements that are linked to the different stages of their life cycle. Ancestral apicomplexan lineages, including gregarines, represent organisms suitable for research into the evolution and diversification of motility within the group. The vermiform trophozoites and gamonts of the archigregarine Selenidium pygospionis perform a very active type of bending motility. Experimental assays and subsequent light, electron, and confocal microscopic analyses demonstrated the fundamental role of the cytoskeletal proteins actin and tubulin in S. pygospionis motility and allowed us to compare the mechanism of its movement to the gliding machinery (the so-called glideosome concept) described in apicomplexan zoites. Actin-modifying drugs caused a reduction in the movement speed (cytochalasin D) or stopped the motility of archigregarines completely (jasplakinolide). Microtubule-disrupting drugs (oryzalin and colchicine) had an even more noticeable effect on archigregarine motility. The fading and disappearance of microtubules were documented in ultrathin sections, along with the formation of α-tubulin clusters visible after the immunofluorescent labelling of drug-treated archigregarines. The obtained data indicate that subpellicular microtubules most likely constitute the main motor structure involved in S. pygospionis bending motility, while actin has rather a supportive function.

Department of Botany and Zoology Faculty of Science Masaryk University Kotlářská 2 611 37 Brno Czech Republic

Department of Invertebrate Zoology Faculty of Biology Lomonosov Moscow State University Leninskiye Gory 1 12 Moscow Russian Federation 119234

Department of Invertebrate Zoology Faculty of Biology Saint Petersburg State University Universitetskaya emb 7 9 St Petersburg Russian Federation 199034

Institute of Scientific Instruments The Czech Academy of Sciences Královopolská 147 612 64 Brno Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Mol Biol Cell. 1999 Nov;10(11):3539-47 PubMed

J Cell Sci. 2002 Mar 1;115(Pt 5):1017-25 PubMed

Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2002 Mar;66(1):21-38; table of contents PubMed

Mol Microbiol. 2002 Aug;45(3):597-604 PubMed

Mol Biol Cell. 2003 Feb;14(2):396-406 PubMed

Trends Parasitol. 2004 Jan;20(1):13-6 PubMed

J Parasitol. 2003 Dec;89(6):1191-205 PubMed

Cell Motil Cytoskeleton. 2004 Jun;58(2):83-95 PubMed

Trends Cell Biol. 2004 Oct;14(10):528-32 PubMed

Trends Parasitol. 2004 Dec;20(12):567-74 PubMed

J Mol Biol. 2005 May 27;349(1):113-25 PubMed

Eur J Protistol. 2007 Jan;43(1):17-25 PubMed

Trends Parasitol. 2008 Feb;24(2):60-7 PubMed

J Parasitol. 2008 Feb;94(1):158-68 PubMed

Cell Host Microbe. 2009 Dec 17;6(6):551-62 PubMed

J Biol Chem. 2010 Nov 19;285(47):36577-85 PubMed

Front Zool. 2013 Sep 22;10(1):57 PubMed

PLoS One. 2014 Mar 14;9(3):e91819 PubMed

Protist. 2014 Aug;165(4):493-511 PubMed

Protist. 2016 Aug;167(4):339-368 PubMed

J Cell Biol. 2016 Aug 29;214(5):507-15 PubMed

BMC Biol. 2017 Jan 18;15(1):1 PubMed

PLoS One. 2017 Jun 22;12(6):e0179709 PubMed

Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 22;7(1):12137 PubMed

PLoS One. 2017 Nov 3;12(11):e0187430 PubMed

Protist. 2018 Nov;169(5):697-726 PubMed

Eur J Protistol. 2018 Oct;66:97-114 PubMed

Protist. 2018 Dec;169(6):826-852 PubMed

J Cell Biol. 1987 Oct;105(4):1473-8 PubMed

Cell Tissue Res. 1974 Apr 30;148(3):331-45 PubMed

J Exp Biol. 1980 Aug;87:149-61 PubMed

J Eukaryot Microbiol. 1993 May-Jun;40(3):345-54 PubMed

Cell. 1996 Mar 22;84(6):933-9 PubMed

J Protein Chem. 1996 May;15(4):377-88 PubMed

Exp Parasitol. 1996 Dec;84(3):355-70 PubMed

J Cell Sci. 1997 Jan;110 ( Pt 1):35-42 PubMed

Cell Motil Cytoskeleton. 1997;37(3):253-62 PubMed

Int J Parasitol. 1998 Jul;28(7):1007-13 PubMed

Nutrient Acquisition and Attachment Strategies in Basal Lineages: A Tough Nut to Crack in the Evolutionary Puzzle of Apicomplexa