Skip to main content
PMC home page
The Journal of Cell Biology logoLink to The Journal of Cell Biology
. 1990 Jul 1;111(1):1–8. doi: 10.1083/jcb.111.1.1

The permeability of the nuclear envelope in dividing and nondividing cell cultures

PMCID: PMC2116163  PMID: 2365731

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine whether the permeability characteristics of the nuclear envelope vary during different phases of cellular activity. Both passive diffusion and signal-mediated transport across the envelope were analyzed during the HeLa cell cycle, and also in dividing, confluent (growth-arrested), and differentiated 3T3-L1 cultures. Colloidal gold stabilized with BSA was used to study diffusion, whereas transport was investigated using gold particles coated with nucleoplasmin, a karyophilic Xenopus oocyte protein. The gold tracers were microinjected into the cytoplasm, and subsequently localized within the cells by electron microscopy. The rates of diffusion in HeLa cells were greatest during the first and fifth hours after the onset of anaphase. These results correlate directly with the known rates of pore formation, suggesting that pores are more permeable during or just after reformation. Signal-mediated transport in HeLa cells occurs through channels that are located within the pore complexes and have functional diameters up to 230-250 A. Unlike diffusion, no significant differences in transport were observed during different phases of the cell cycle. A comparison of dividing and confluent 3T3-L1 cultures revealed highly significant differences in the transport of nucleoplasmin-gold across the envelope. The nuclei of dividing cells not only incorporated larger particles (230 A versus 190 A in diameter, including the protein coat), but the relative uptake of the tracer was about seven times greater than that in growth-arrested cells. Differentiation of confluent cells to adipocytes was accompanied by an increase in the maximum diameter of the transport channel to approximately 230 A.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.6 MB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Akey C. W., Goldfarb D. S. Protein import through the nuclear pore complex is a multistep process. J Cell Biol. 1989 Sep;109(3):971–982. doi: 10.1083/jcb.109.3.971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Akey C. W. Interactions and structure of the nuclear pore complex revealed by cryo-electron microscopy. J Cell Biol. 1989 Sep;109(3):955–970. doi: 10.1083/jcb.109.3.955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Benavente R., Dabauvalle M. C., Scheer U., Chaly N. Functional role of newly formed pore complexes in postmitotic nuclear reorganization. Chromosoma. 1989 Oct;98(4):233–241. doi: 10.1007/BF00327308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dworetzky S. I., Lanford R. E., Feldherr C. M. The effects of variations in the number and sequence of targeting signals on nuclear uptake. J Cell Biol. 1988 Oct;107(4):1279–1287. doi: 10.1083/jcb.107.4.1279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. FELDHERR C. M. THE EFFECT OF THE ELECTRON-OPAQUE PORE MATERIAL ON EXCHANGES THROUGH THE NUCLEAR ANNULI. J Cell Biol. 1965 Apr;25:43–53. doi: 10.1083/jcb.25.1.43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Feldherr C. M., Kallenbach E., Schultz N. Movement of a karyophilic protein through the nuclear pores of oocytes. J Cell Biol. 1984 Dec;99(6):2216–2222. doi: 10.1083/jcb.99.6.2216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Feldherr C. M. Nucleocytoplasmic exchanges during cell division. J Cell Biol. 1966 Oct;31(1):199–203. doi: 10.1083/jcb.31.1.199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Feldherr C. M. Nucleocytoplasmic exchanges during early interphase. J Cell Biol. 1968 Oct;39(1):49–54. doi: 10.1083/jcb.39.1.49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Frost S. C., Lane M. D. Evidence for the involvement of vicinal sulfhydryl groups in insulin-activated hexose transport by 3T3-L1 adipocytes. J Biol Chem. 1985 Mar 10;260(5):2646–2652. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Graessmann A., Graessmann M., Mueller C. Microinjection of early SV40 DNA fragments and T antigen. Methods Enzymol. 1980;65(1):816–825. doi: 10.1016/s0076-6879(80)65076-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ingber D. E., Madri J. A., Folkman J. Endothelial growth factors and extracellular matrix regulate DNA synthesis through modulation of cell and nuclear expansion. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol. 1987 May;23(5):387–394. doi: 10.1007/BF02620997. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Jiang L. W., Schindler M. Nuclear transport in 3T3 fibroblasts: effects of growth factors, transformation, and cell shape. J Cell Biol. 1988 Jan;106(1):13–19. doi: 10.1083/jcb.106.1.13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kingsley R. E., Cole N. L. Preparation of cultured mammalian cells for transmission and scanning electron microscopy using Aclar film. J Electron Microsc Tech. 1988 Sep;10(1):77–85. doi: 10.1002/jemt.1060100110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. LEVINE E. M., BECKER Y., BOONE C. W., EAGLE H. CONTACT INHIBITION, MACROMOLECULAR SYNTHESIS, AND POLYRIBOSOMES IN CULTURED HUMAN DIPLOID FIBROBLASTS. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1965 Feb;53:350–356. doi: 10.1073/pnas.53.2.350. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lanford R. E., White R. G., Dunham R. G., Kanda P. Effect of basic and nonbasic amino acid substitutions on transport induced by simian virus 40 T-antigen synthetic peptide nuclear transport signals. Mol Cell Biol. 1988 Jul;8(7):2722–2729. doi: 10.1128/mcb.8.7.2722. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Maul G. G., Maul H. M., Scogna J. E., Lieberman M. W., Stein G. S., Hsu B. Y., Borun T. W. Time sequence of nuclear pore formation in phytohemagglutinin-stimulated lymphocytes and in HeLa cells during the cell cycle. J Cell Biol. 1972 Nov;55(2):433–447. doi: 10.1083/jcb.55.2.433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Maul G. G. The nuclear and the cytoplasmic pore complex: structure, dynamics, distribution, and evolution. Int Rev Cytol Suppl. 1977;(6):75–186. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Newmeyer D. D., Forbes D. J. Nuclear import can be separated into distinct steps in vitro: nuclear pore binding and translocation. Cell. 1988 Mar 11;52(5):641–653. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(88)90402-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Paine P. L., Moore L. C., Horowitz S. B. Nuclear envelope permeability. Nature. 1975 Mar 13;254(5496):109–114. doi: 10.1038/254109a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Peters R. Fluorescence microphotolysis to measure nucleocytoplasmic transport and intracellular mobility. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1986 Dec 22;864(3-4):305–359. doi: 10.1016/0304-4157(86)90003-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. ROBBINS E., GONATAS N. K. THE ULTRASTRUCTURE OF A MAMMALIAN CELL DURING THE MITOTIC CYCLE. J Cell Biol. 1964 Jun;21:429–463. doi: 10.1083/jcb.21.3.429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Roberts B. L., Richardson W. D., Smith A. E. The effect of protein context on nuclear location signal function. Cell. 1987 Jul 31;50(3):465–475. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(87)90500-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Spurr A. R. A low-viscosity epoxy resin embedding medium for electron microscopy. J Ultrastruct Res. 1969 Jan;26(1):31–43. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5320(69)90033-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Swanson J. A., McNeil P. L. Nuclear reassembly excludes large macromolecules. Science. 1987 Oct 23;238(4826):548–550. doi: 10.1126/science.2443981. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of Cell Biology are provided here courtesy of The Rockefeller University Press

RESOURCES