Cited by 222Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsCancer Treatment and Pharmacology

Tau Does Not Stabilize Axonal Microtubules but Rather Enables Them to Have Long Labile Domains

Open access
Qiang, Liang, Sun, Xiaohuan, Austin, Timothy O., Muralidharan, Hemalatha, Jean, Daphney C., Liu, Mei, Yu, Wenqian, Baas, Peter W.·2018·Current Biology

Abstract

It is widely believed that tau stabilizes microtubules in the axon [1-3] and, hence, that disease-induced loss of tau from axonal microtubules leads to their destabilization [3-5]. An individual microtubule in the axon has a stable domain and a labile domain [6-8]. We found that tau is more abundant on the labile domain, which is inconsistent with tau's proposed role as a microtubule stabilizer. When tau is experimentally depleted from cultured rat neurons, the labile microtubule mass of the axon drops considerably, the remaining labile microtubule mass becomes less labile, and the stable microtubule mass increases. MAP6 (also called stable tubule-only polypeptide), which is normally enriched on the stable domain [9], acquires a broader distribution across the microtubule when tau is depleted, providing a potential explanation for the increase in stable microtubule mass. When MAP6 is depleted, the labile microtubule mass becomes even more labile, indicating that, unlike tau, MAP6 is a genuine stabilizer of axonal microtubules. We conclude that tau is not a stabilizer of axonal microtubules but is enriched on the labile domain of the microtubule to promote its assembly while limiting the binding to it of genuine stabilizers, such as MAP6. This enables the labile domain to achieve great lengths without being stabilized. These conclusions are contrary to tau dogma.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2018.05.045

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Qiang, L., Sun, X., Austin, T. O., Muralidharan, H., Jean, D. C., Liu, M., Yu, W., & Baas, P. W.
Affiliations
  • Nantong University (CN)
  • Drexel University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Qiang, Liang
  • Baas, Peter W.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-07
Volume
28
Issue
13
Pages
2181-2189.e4
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2810622900
Cited by
222
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 8
FWCI
18.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • NIH (R01 NS28785)
  • US Department of Defense (W81XWH-17-1-0504)
  • Pennsylvania Department of Health CURE program
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31371078)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20171253)
  • Brody Family Medical Trust Fund
  • National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (1002809)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Microtubule and mitosis dynamics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Keywords
tau protein, axonal microtubules, microtubule stabilization, MAP6, microtubule assembly, tauopathy, axons
MeSH terms
Animals, Axons, Cells, Cultured, Microtubules, tau Proteins, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review