Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The potential role of the cytoskeleton in signaling via the T cell antigen receptor (TCR) was investigated using pharmacological agents. In Jurkat T cells, disruption of the actin-based cytoskeleton with cytochalasin D or disruption of the microtubules with colchicine did not affect TCR induction of proximal signaling events triggered by CD3 mAb. Polymerized actin and tubulin, therefore, were not required for TCR-mediated signal transduction. Nocodazole, however, was found to inhibit dramatically TCR signaling, independently of its ability to depolymerize microtubules. This effect was TCR-specific, because signaling via the human muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 in the same cells was unaffected. A mechanism for the inhibition of TCR signaling by nocodazole was suggested by in vitro assays, which revealed that the drug inhibited the kinase activity of LCK and, to a lesser extent, FYN. The kinase activity of ZAP-70 in vitro, however, was unaffected. These results, therefore, suggested that nocodazole prevented initial phosphorylation of the TCR by LCK after stimulation, and as a result, it blocked activation of downstream signaling pathways. Immunofluorescence analyses also revealed that nocodazole and the specific SRC-family kinase inhibitor PP1 delocalized ZAP-70 from its constitutive site at the cell cortex. These effects did not require the SH2 domains of ZAP-70. The localization of ZAP-70 to the cell cortex is, therefore, regulated by the activity of SRC-family kinases, independently of their ability to phosphorylate immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motifs of the TCR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huby et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: