A method for quantitative interpretation of fluorescence detection of poly(ethylene glycol)-mediated 1-palmitoyl-2-[[[2-[4-(phenyl-trans-1,3,5-hexatrienyl) phenyl]ethyl]oxyl]carbonyl]3-sn-phosphatidylcholine (DPHpPC) transfer and fusion between phospholipid vesicles in the dehydrated state

Fluorescence lifetimes of diphenylhexatriene-containing probes reflect local probe concentrations: Application to the measurement of membrane fusion

An important process in the life of a cell is fusion between cellular membranes. This is the process by which two cellular compartments surrounded by different membranes join to become a single compartment surrounded by a single membrane, without significant loss of compartment contents. To demonstrate fusion, the cell biophysicist must demonstrate all three critical aspects of the process: (1) mixing of membrane components, (2) mixing of compartment contents; and (3) retention of compartment contents. Most commonly, accomplishing this involves the use of fluorescence probes. The general theme to the methods described involves some form of concentration-dependent quenching. An unique method developed in our laboratory utilizes the concentration dependence of the fluorescence lifetime of a phosphatidylcholine containing carboxyethyl diphenylhexatriene at position 2 and palmitic acid at position 1 of glycerol (DPHpPC). The fluorescence lifetime of this molecule and that of its parent fluorophore diphenylhexatriene (DPH) shorten dramatically as their two-dimensional concentrations in a membrane increase. This "lifetime quenching" can be described by dimer formation that reduces the symmetry of the DPH excited state. This phenomenon allows one to use the fluorescence lifetime to gain insight into the local concentration of probe in microscopic regions of a membrane. One application of this is in distinguishing lipid transfer between the outer leaflets of two contacting membrane bilayers from fusion between these membranes that leads to mixing of lipids in both the inner and outer leaflets of the membrane bilayers. This allows a single measurement to demonstrate fusion between membrane pairs.

Analysis of membrane fusion as a two-state sequential process: evaluation of the stalk model

We propose a model that accounts for the time courses of PEG-induced fusion of membrane vesicles of varying lipid compositions and sizes. The model assumes that fusion proceeds from an initial, aggregated vesicle state ((A) membrane contact) through two sequential intermediate states (I(1) and I(2)) and then on to a fusion pore state (FP). Using this model, we interpreted data on the fusion of seven different vesicle systems. We found that the initial aggregated state involved no lipid or content mixing but did produce leakage. The final state (FP) was not leaky. Lipid mixing normally dominated the first intermediate state (I(1)), but content mixing signal was also observed in this state for most systems. The second intermediate state (I(2)) exhibited both lipid and content mixing signals and leakage, and was sometimes the only leaky state. In some systems, the first and second intermediates were indistinguishable and converted directly to the FP state. Having also tested a parallel, two-intermediate model subject to different assumptions about the nature of the intermediates, we conclude that a sequential, two-intermediate model is the simplest model sufficient to describe PEG-mediated fusion in all vesicle systems studied. We conclude as well that a fusion intermediate "state" should not be thought of as a fixed structure (e.g., "stalk" or "transmembrane contact") of uniform properties. Rather, a fusion "state" describes an ensemble of similar structures that can have different mechanical properties. Thus, a "state" can have varying probabilities of having a given functional property such as content mixing, lipid mixing, or leakage. Our data show that the content mixing signal may occur through two processes, one correlated and one not correlated with leakage. Finally, we consider the implications of our results in terms of the "modified stalk" hypothesis for the mechanism of lipid pore formation. We conclude that our results not only support this hypothesis but also provide a means of analyzing fusion time courses so as to test it and gauge the mechanism of action of fusion proteins in the context of the lipidic hypothesis of fusion.

Neuronal SNAREs do not trigger fusion between synthetic membranes but do promote PEG-mediated membrane fusion

At low surface concentrations that permit formation of impermeable membranes, neuronal soluble N-ethyl maleimide sensitive factor attachment protein receptor (SNARE) proteins form a stable, parallel, trans complex when vesicles are brought into contact by a low concentration of poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG). Surprisingly, formation of a stable SNARE complex does not trigger fusion under these conditions. However, neuronal SNAREs do promote fusion at low protein/lipid ratios when triggered by higher concentrations of PEG. Promotion of PEG-triggered fusion required phosphatidylserine and depended only on the surface concentration of SNAREs and not on the formation of a trans SNARE complex. These results were obtained at protein surface concentrations reported for synaptobrevin in synaptic vesicles and with an optimally fusogenic lipid composition. At a much higher protein/lipid ratio, vesicles joined by SNARE complex slowly mixed lipids at 37 degrees C in the absence of PEG, in agreement with earlier reports. However, vesicles containing syntaxin at a high protein/lipid ratio (>or=1:250) lost membrane integrity. We conclude that the neuronal SNARE complex promotes fusion by joining membranes and that the individual proteins syntaxin and synaptobrevin disrupt membranes so as to favor formation of a stalk complex and to promote conversion of the stalk to a fusion pore. These effects are similar to the effects of viral fusion peptides and transmembrane domains, but they are not sufficient by themselves to produce fusion in our in vitro system at surface concentrations documented to occur in synaptic vesicles. Thus, it is likely that proteins or factors other than the SNARE complex must trigger fusion in vivo.

Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG)-mediated fusion between pure lipid bilayers: a mechanism in common with viral fusion and secretory vesicle release?

Membrane fusion is fundamental to the life of eukaryotic cells. Cellular trafficking and compartmentalization, import of food stuffs and export of waste, inter-cellular communication, sexual reproduction, and cell division are all dependent on this basic process. Yet, little is known about the molecular mechanism(s) by which fusion occurs. It is known that fusing membranes must somehow be docked and brought into close contact. Specific proteins, many of which have been identified within the past decade, accomplish this. An electrical connection or 'fusion pore' is established between compartments surrounded by the fusing membranes. Three primary views of the mechanism of pore formation during secretory and viral fusion have been proposed within the past decade. In one view, a protein ring forms an initial transient connection that expands slowly by recruiting lipid so as to form a lipidic junction. In another view, the initial fusion pore consists of a protein-lipid complex that transforms slowly until the fusion proteins dissociate from the complex to form an irreversible lipidic pore. In a third view, the initial pore is a transient lipid pore that fluctuates between open and closed states before either expanding irreversibly or closing. Recent work has helped define the mechanism by which poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) mediates fusion of highly curved model membranes composed only of synthetic phospholipids. PEG is a highly hydrated polymer that can bring vesicle membranes to near molecular contact by making water between them thermodynamically unfavourable. Disrupted packing in the contacting monolayers of these vesicle membranes is necessary to induce fusion. The time course and sequence of molecular events of the ensuing fusion process have also been defined. This sequence of events involves the formation of an initial, transient intermediate in which outer leaflet lipids have mixed and small transient pores join fusing compartments ('stalk'). The transient intermediate transforms in 1-3 min to a fusion-committed, second intermediate ('septum') that then 'pops' to form the fusion pore. Inner leaflet mixing, which is shown to be distinct from outer leaflet mixing, accompanies contents mixing that marks formation of the fusion pore. Both the sequence of events and the activation energies of these events correspond well to those observed in viral membrane fusion and secretory granule fusion. These results strongly support the contention that both viral and secretory fusion events occur by lipid molecule rearrangements that can be studied and defined through the use of PEG-mediated vesicle fusion as a model system. A possible mechanism by which fusion proteins might mediate this lipidic process is described.

Secretory and viral fusion may share mechanistic events with fusion between curved lipid bilayers

Activation energies for the individual steps of secretory and viral fusion are reported to be large [Oberhauser, A. F., Monck, J. R. & Fernandez, J. M. (1992) Biophys. J. 61, 800-809; Clague, M. J., Schoch, C., Zech, L. & Blumenthal, R. (1990) Biochemistry 29, 1303-1308]. Understanding the cause for these large activation energies is crucial to defining the mechanisms of these two types of biological membrane fusion. We showed recently that the fusion of protein-free model lipid bilayers mimics the sequence of steps observed during secretory and viral fusion, suggesting that these processes may involve common lipid, rather than protein, rearrangements. To test for this possibility, we determined the activation energies for the three steps that we were able to distinguish as contributing to the fusion of protein-free model lipid bilayers. Activation energies for lipid rearrangements associated with formation of the reversible first intermediate, with conversion of this to a semi-stable second intermediate, and with irreversible fusion pore formation were 37 kcal/mol, 27 kcal/mol, and 22 kcal/mol, respectively. The first and last of these were comparable to the activation energies observed for membrane lipid exchange (42 kcal/mol) during viral fusion and for the rate of fusion pore opening during secretory granule release (23 kcal/mol). This striking similarity suggests strongly that the basic molecular processes involved in secretory and viral fusion involve a set of lipid molecule rearrangements that also are involved in model membrane fusion.

Polymer-induced membrane fusion: potential mechanism and relation to cell fusion events

Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) is used widely to mediate cell-cell fusion in the production of somatic cell hybrids and in the fusion injection of macromolecules into cultured cells from erythrocytes or liposomes. However, little is known about the mechanisms by which PEG induces fusion of cell membranes, making its use much more an art than a science. This article considers possible molecular events involved in biomembrane fusion and summarizes what we have learned about these in recent years from studies of fusion of well-defined model membranes. In addition, it recounts observations made over the past several years about the process of PEG-mediated fusion of model membranes. These observations have defined the process to an extent sufficient to allow us to propose a model for the molecular events involved in the process. It is suggested that dehydration leads to asymmetry in the lipid packing pressure in the two leaflets of the membrane bilayer leading to formation of a single bilayer septum at a point of close apposition of two membranes. The single bilayer septum then decays during formation of the initial fusion pore. Agents that enhance or alleviate the dehydration-induced asymmetric packing stress will favor or inhibit fusion. Although the proposed picture is consistent with much accumulated data, it is not yet proven; experiments must now be devised to test its details. Finally, the proposed model is discussed in terms of potential implications for the mechanisms available to a cell in controlling more complex in vivo cell fusion processes such as endocytosis, exocytosis, protein sorting/transport, and viral budding/infection.