A dynamic basal complex modulates mammalian sperm movement

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-136145/v1

Download PDF

Biological Sciences - Article

A dynamic basal complex modulates mammalian sperm movement

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-136145/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this older preprint version

Read the latest preprint version →

Reproductive success depends on efficient sperm movement driven by dynein-mediated microtubule sliding in the axoneme ^1-3. Models predict sliding at the base of the tail – the centriole – but such sliding has never been observed ^4,5. Centrioles are evolutionarily-ancient organelles with a conserved architecture ^6-8, and their rigidity is thought to restrict microtubule sliding ¹. Here, we show that, in mammalian sperm, the atypical distal centriole (DC) and its surrounding atypical pericentriolar matrix ^9,10 form a dynamic basal complex (DBC) that facilitates a cascade of internal sliding deformations, coupling tail beating with asymmetric head kinking. During asymmetric tail beating, the DC’s right side and its surroundings slide ~300 nm rostrally relative to the left side. This deformation is transmitted through the DBC to the head-tail junction; as a result, the head tilts to the left, generating a kinking motion. These findings suggest that the DBC evolved to act as a mechanotransducer, coupling sperm head and tail into a single self-coordinated system. The DBC may act as a morphological computer ¹¹, regulating tail beating from external feedback imparted to the head during sperm navigation. We anticipate our findings will enable studies of coordinated motion in sperm and cilia in many contexts.

General Cell Biology & Physiology

Reproductive Success

Microtubule Sliding

Axoneme

Internal Sliding Deformations

Tail Beating

Mechanotransducer

Coordinated Motion

The sperm cell consists of a head and a tail linked by a neck that regulates sperm movement, as predicted by the basal sliding hypothesis ^4,12. The neck contains two centrioles (proximal centriole, PC, and distal centriole, DC, see Supplemental Glossary for term definitions) (Fig. 1a)¹³. In most eukaryotes, the PC is a canonical cylindrical centriole ^9,14. However, in mammals, the DC, at the base of the flagellum, is structurally atypical ¹⁵. Since, similar to canonical centrioles, the atypical centriole functions post-fertilization, the reason for its atypical structure remains unknown ^16-18. The PC and DC are embedded in a specialized mass of atypical pericentriolar material: the segmented columns (SCs) and the capitulum. Distally, the SCs are continuous with outer dense fibers associated with the microtubule doublets of the axoneme. Rostrally, the capitulum connects to the nuclear basal plate, forming the implantation fossa in the head-tail junction (Fig. 1a). How this multi-component assembly supports sperm movement is unclear, but it is usually modeled as a rigid structure that anchors the tail firmly, like a clamp, to the head, with little compliance allowed by the SCs ^5,19. Here, we show that the atypical DC and the surrounding atypical pericentriolar material form a dynamic basal complex (DBC) that acts as a mechanotransducer, coupling tail beating to coordinate head kinking.

The centriole luminal scaffold splits into two rods in the atypical centriole, increasing its compliance

Two protein classes maintain the rigidity of canonical centrioles. First, A-C linkers connect the A-tubule of each triplet microtubule with the C-tubule of the neighboring triplet ^6,20. Second, a cylindrical luminal scaffold interconnects all triplets ²¹. This scaffold includes the proteins POC1B, CETN1, POC5, and the two microtubule-binding proteins FAM161A and WDR90; mutating these proteins destabilizes centriolar structure ^22,23.

In the spermatozoon, the DC consists of doublets instead of triplets and lacks the A-C linkers, while the doublets are splayed apart, suggesting increased DC compliance. Furthermore, the luminal scaffold proteins POC1B, CETN1, and POC5 reorganize into two rod structures found between loosely clamped microtubules ¹⁵. Here, we show that the microtubule-binding proteins FAM161A and WDR90 colocalize with the luminal and rod protein CETN1, labeling both at the DC and PC in human, rabbit, and bovine sperm (Extended Data Fig. 1a-b). Like the other luminal scaffold proteins, they appear as two distinct rods in the DC (Extended Data Fig. 1c-e) and are enriched in the DC compared to the PC in all three species (Extended Data Fig. 1f). This common localization pattern suggests that FAM161A and WDR90 are new conserved components of DC rods. These observations suggest that the proteins forming the scaffold that stabilizes typical centrioles split into two rods in atypical centrioles. This splitting could be an evolutionary innovation for reducing centriole rigidity, thus facilitating basal sliding.

DC rods vary in size across the three mammalian species studied (Extended Data Fig. 1g-i). This difference suggests that the atypical centriole that appeared early in mammalian evolution ⁹ continued to evolve in mammals, creating structural and functional diversity. The atypical centriole is largest in bovine sperm, and the theoretical foundation of basal sliding was based on bovine sperm ⁵; therefore, we performed the remainder of our studies with bovine sperm.

The DC rods and bars have opposite asymmetry

To gain insight into how DC rod proteins are situated relative to other sperm structures, we oriented straight sperm images with the PC tip on the right side and implantation fossa on the left side ²⁴ (Fig. 1a). We found that the rods are laterally asymmetric in bovine spermatozoa (Fig. 1b-e). 3D Stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (3D-STORM) imaging of FAM161A, POC1B, and POC5 showed that the left rods are consistently longer and thicker than the right rods. FAM161A and POC1B labeled much larger rods (about 50% longer, P<0.0001) than those labeled by POC5, suggesting different protein locations within the DC. To determine the relationship of the rods to the splayed microtubules, we measured tubulin staining width across the DC (Fig. 1e). We found that the width of the DC microtubule bundle is similar at the caudal end and 10% wider at the rostral end than that of the FAM161A and POC1B rods (P=0.2, and P<0.0001, respectively). FAM161A can simultaneously bind microtubules and other rod proteins ²⁵, suggesting a close rod-microtubule association at the DC lateral sides and that rods can act as scaffolds during basal sliding. This asymmetry agrees with the axoneme’s structural and functional asymmetry, where the left four axonemal microtubules work against the right three axonemal microtubules, generating a stronger left torque ^24,26. Asymmetry in the neck is also observed in other mammals, suggesting that rod-asymmetry may be a more general feature of mammalian sperm ^4,14,27-29.

To define the structural organization of the sperm neck in detail, we imaged unfixed, unstained bovine spermatozoa with cryo-electron tomography (cryo-ET) (Fig. 1f). We compared PC dimension measurements from cryo-ET and STORM and found them consistent with each other (Extended Data Fig. 2a). We observed two electron-dense bars in the center of the neck, as reported previously ^24,30,31. Our data shows that the bars are intimately associated with the DC’s central pair microtubules and are flanked by electron dense material that probably represent the rods (Fig. 1g). The bars are asymmetric and are made of 1-4 plates of varying sizes separated by electron-lucent inter-plate material, revealing an unexpected level of complexity (Fig. 1g). Unlike the rods' "V" shape, the bars are nearly parallel to each other (Extended Data Fig. 2b). The caudal edge-to-edge gap between the smallest DC rods (POC5) is much larger (43%) than the corresponding gap between the bars (Extended Data Fig. 2c). The rods and bars have opposite asymmetry: the right bar has more plates and is longer than the left (Extended Data fig. Fig. 2d). Finally, the two bars are situated closer to the DC’s right microtubules (Fig. 1f and Extended Data Fig. 2d). Altogether, these differences suggest that the central bars scaffold the central pair, while the rods scaffold the DC lateral side microtubules.

DC rods and microtubules slide coordinately during left-biased tail beating

To gain insight into a possible reason for the intricate but atypical architecture of the DC, we analyzed sperm that were snap-frozen while actively swimming. We used the rod asymmetry as a reference to describe the flagellar waveform relative to the sperm head despite the cell’s complex rolling motions ²⁷. We refer to this evaluation as centriole orientation-based sperm analysis (COSA). We classified the sperm images into four groups based on COSA, where the bigger rod is placed on the left and PC tip point to the right side of the head midline. We found that 15% had sharp left bends, 30% had mild left bends, 36% were straight, and 19% had slight right bend (Extended Data Fig. 3). Intriguingly, none of the sperm we analyzed (n=248) had a tail with sharp right bends. The observation that all sharp bends were to the left and none were to the right indicates that the sperm tail has bias towards the left side relative to the sperm head. A similar bias in the waveform was observed when staining for either FAM161A (Fig. 2a) or tubulin (Fig. 2b). The left-biased beat has structural origins in the inherent asymmetry of the neck, along with the increased rigidity imposed by the mitochondrial sheath that extends further rostrally on the right side of the neck (Fig. 1a and f) ³².

We then examined the DC substructures in chemically fixed sperm at distinct tail bending angles by 3D- STORM. In tails with sharp left bends, the right rod and microtubules are shifted rostrally relative to those on the left side (Fig. 2c-d and 2g-h). In contrast, the right rod and microtubules slide caudally relative to those on the left as the tail becomes straight or bent to the right (Fig. 2i). We also observed that the DC central microtubule protrudes rostrally, which likely represents the central pair (Fig. 2h). To examine the role of the central microtubule during movement, we measured the distance from a centerline drawn through the long axis of the PC to the left, center, and right of the DC microtubule bundle. As the tail bends from left to right, the DC's right microtubules move further away from the PC centerline, while the DC’s left microtubules move closer (Extended Data Fig. 4). In contrast, the DC's central microtubules maintain the same distance from the centerline during tail beating. Consistent with this, cryo-ET found that the central singlets are closer to the PC than are the DC's left and right microtubules and have the least change in distance from the PC centerline (Extended Data Fig. 5b). Also, the left and right bars associated with the central singlets were relatively static relative to each other during tail beating (Extended Data Fig. 5c-e). These differential movements suggest that the DC central pair and bars form a rail-like tracking system along which the rods and peripheral DC microtubules slide.

Our data provide the first direct evidence of microtubules sliding postulated by the basal sliding hypothesis ⁴ extending it to nanometer-scale shearing deformations in the neck. This hypothesis suggests that the tail's waveform is regulated by dynamic microtubules sliding at the axoneme base. We tested this hypothesis by comparing the sliding observed for DC microtubules and rods against three variables derived from the “sliding filament” hypothesis for flagella movement ^5,33: the calculated average flagellum beating amplitude (), microtubule sliding along the tail (), and the average waveform curvature (). As expected from the observed beating asymmetry, all three waveform characteristics were skewed towards negative values, the left side (Extended Data Fig. 6a-b). Basal microtubule and rod sliding show a strong correlation with the calculated averages of flagellar beating amplitude, sliding, and curvature (Fig. 2j, Extended Data Fig. 6c-d, Extended Data Fig. 7a-b). Overall, from sharp left to slightly right bent tail, the DC rod and the basal ends of the microtubules are displaced 263-328 nm relative to each other. This sliding has the calculated order of magnitude of the flagellar control model fittings: 160 nm in bovine sperm ⁵ (Extended Data Fig. 7i-k). This similarity suggests that the DC sliding movement is the predicted basal sliding; however, the sliding is more complex and includes associated structures such as the rods.

A dynamic basal complex transmits the tail’s microtubule sliding to the head

The current dogma holds that the neck is cemented to the head, as the neck structures connect the tail to the head. Some movement was observed in the neck, but it lacked correlation with tail beating ^24,34. Therefore, the sperm head is thought to passively follow tail swimming movement ^35,36. In contrast, we observed a dramatic coordinated motion of neck structures with a novel head movement, which we named “kinking” to signify a 2D head movement relative to the sperm long axis (Extended Data Fig. 8).

We found elastic deformation in the neck beyond the DC. The right SCs are displaced relative to the left SCs during sperm movement (Fig. 3a, Extended Data Fig. 9a). Also, the usually parallel segments of the SCs are bent between segments 8 and 9 in left curved sperm (Extended Data Fig. 9b). The motion in the neck causes the embedded PC to also move, and the PC angle relative to the neck midline changes ~24º during tail beating (Fig 3a and 3c, Extended Data Fig. 10a, Extended Data Video 1). The PC also changes its lateral position relative to the neck midline, moving 140-200 nm to the left (Extended Data Fig. 10b). We found high to strong correlation of PC position change with tail variables, DC sliding, and SCs sliding (Extended Data Fig. 11b-g). Therefore, the neck deformation is due to concomitant displacements of DC, PC, and SCs during sperm tail beating.

Most significantly, we found a novel coordinated deformation inducing a head-neck kink, with the angle changing ~45º, causing the head to kink to the left when the tail beats to the left (Fig. 2e-f, Extended Data Fig. 11a, Extended Data Video 2, Extended Data Fig. 12). Similar kink was depicted in the past in live and reactivated bovine sperm ^37,38. Interestingly, we found that head kinking also correlates with tail variables and neck structure (DC, SCs, and PC) deformation during tail beating (Fig. 3b, Extended Data Fig. 11b-h), suggesting that the neck kinking is in coordination with other nanometric structural deformations of the neck during tail beating. This head kink is marked by a sharp angle between the tail’s tangent angle at the neck, where both the head and tail bend to the left (Fig. 3c). The coordinated tail bending and head kinking suggests a dynamic structural modulation during swimming.

Sperm tail movement drives neck deformation and head kinking, as axonemal dyneins are the only active motor proteins during sperm swimming. Two mechanisms may translate forces from the tail: the axoneme's attachment to the DC and the tail's outer dense fiber attachment to SCs. Significantly, exploratory factor analysis of three sets of data measuring a total of 21 variables during sperm beating indicated that 3 factors explained the underlying sperm behavior: a major tail-to-head coordinated movement, no movement of DC center and width, and a mixture of the two (Extended Data Fig. 13). These data support a model in which the axoneme sliding that generates tail beating also deforms the neck, which subsequently kinks the head (Fig. 3c).

Centriole structure and function are conserved across ciliated cells, from protists to mammals. It is therefore surprising that the centriole found at the base of the flagellum is structurally atypical in mammalian sperm ^39-42. We show that the atypical DC and its specialized pericentriolar matrix form the DBC. The DBC has two functions: (i) it shapes tail beating according to the basal sliding hypothesis; and (ii) it translates the axoneme's piston-like tangential movement into a cascade of multi-component shearing deformations culminating in a coordinated head kinking motion. A potential advantage of mechanically coupling tail curvature with the head attachment angle is that the head can impact tail movement to provide mechanosensory information, thus providing a way for the sperm to better navigate the various barriers in the female reproductive tract. This coupling may also help the sperm dig its way through the external protective shields surrounding the ovum. We show that in bovine sperm, this coupling associates with asymmetrical tail beating and head kinking to the left and may help achieve forward movement via swimming via sperm rolling motion motions ²⁷. However, small changes to neck components will likely result in distinct movement patterns, creating a spectrum of sperm behaviors in other animal species. Altogether, the DC's novel properties suggest that it evolved by repurposing centriolar proteins to assemble a transmission system (the DBC) that couples the flagellar motor to the whole sperm, thereby enhancing sperm function.

1 King, S. M. & Sale, W. S. Fifty years of microtubule sliding in cilia. Molecular biology of the cell 29, 698-701, doi:10.1091/mbc.E17-07-0483 (2018).

2 Lishko, P. V. et al. The control of male fertility by spermatozoan ion channels. Annu Rev Physiol 74, 453-475, doi:10.1146/annurev-physiol-020911-153258 (2012).

3 Lin, J. & Nicastro, D. Asymmetric distribution and spatial switching of dynein activity generates ciliary motility. Science 360, doi:10.1126/science.aar1968 (2018).

4 Vernon, G. G. & Woolley, D. M. Basal sliding and the mechanics of oscillation in a mammalian sperm flagellum. Biophys J 87, 3934-3944, doi:10.1529/biophysj.104.042648 (2004).

5 Riedel‐Kruse, I. H., Hilfinger, A., Howard, J. & Jülicher, F. How molecular motors shape the flagellar beat. HFSP journal 1, 192-208 (2007).

6 Winey, M. & O'Toole, E. Centriole structure. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369, 20130457 (2014).

7 Uzbekov, R. & Prigent, C. Clockwise or anticlockwise? Turning the centriole triplets in the right direction! FEBS Lett 581, 1251-1254 (2007).

8 Loncarek, J. & Bettencourt-Dias, M. Building the right centriole for each cell type. Journal of Cell Biology 217, 823-835 (2018).

9 Avidor-Reiss, T. Rapid Evolution of Sperm Produces Diverse Centriole Structures that Reveal the Most Rudimentary Structure Needed for Function. Cells 7, 67 (2018).

10 Manandhar, G., Simerly, C. & Schatten, G. Centrosome reduction during mammalian spermiogenesis. Curr Top Dev Biol 49, 343-363 (2000).

11 Hauser, H., Ijspeert, A. J., Füchslin, R. M., Pfeifer, R. & Maass, W. Towards a theoretical foundation for morphological computation with compliant bodies. Biol Cybern 105, 355-370, doi:10.1007/s00422-012-0471-0 (2011).

12 Woolley, D. M. Flagellar oscillation: a commentary on proposed mechanisms. Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 85, 453-470, doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00110.x (2010).

13 Avidor-Reiss, T., Carr, A. & Fishman, E. L. The sperm centrioles. Mol Cell Endocrinol 518, 110987, doi:10.1016/j.mce.2020.110987 (2020).

14 Fawcett, D. W. & Phillips, D. M. The fine structure and development of the neck region of the mammalian spermatozoon. Anat Rec 165, 153-164, doi:10.1002/ar.1091650204 (1969).

15 Fishman, E. L. et al. A novel atypical sperm centriole is functional during human fertilization. Nature communications 9, 2210 (2018).

16 Cavazza, T. et al. Parental genome unification is highly erroneous in mammalian embryos. bioRxiv, 2020.2008.2027.269779, doi:10.1101/2020.08.27.269779 (2020).

17 Blachon, S., Khire, A. & Avidor-Reiss, T. The origin of the second centriole in the zygote of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 197, 199-205, doi:10.1534/genetics.113.160523 (2014).

18 Schneider, I., de Ruijter-Villani, M., Hossain, M. J., Stout, T. A. E. & Ellenberg, J. Non-rodent mammalian zygotes assemble dual spindles despite the presence of paternal centrosomes. bioRxiv, 2020.2010.2016.342154, doi:10.1101/2020.10.16.342154 (2020).

19 Gadelha, H., Gaffney, E. A. & Goriely, A. The counterbend phenomenon in flagellar axonemes and cross-linked filament bundles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110, 12180-12185, doi:10.1073/pnas.1302113110 (2013).

20 Greenan, G. A., Keszthelyi, B., Vale, R. D. & Agard, D. A. Insights into centriole geometry revealed by cryotomography of doublet and triplet centrioles. eLife 7, e36851 (2018).

21 Le Guennec, M. et al. A helical inner scaffold provides a structural basis for centriole cohesion. Sci Adv 6, eaaz4137, doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaz4137 (2020).

22 Pearson, C. G., Osborn, D. P., Giddings, T. H., Jr., Beales, P. L. & Winey, M. Basal body stability and ciliogenesis requires the conserved component Poc1. The Journal of cell biology 187, 905-920, doi:jcb.200908019 [pii]

10.1083/jcb.200908019 (2009).

23 Steib, E. et al. WDR90 is a centriolar microtubule wall protein important for centriole architecture integrity. eLife 9, e57205, doi:10.7554/eLife.57205 (2020).

24 Ounjai, P., Kim, K. D., Lishko, P. V. & Downing, K. H. Three-dimensional structure of the bovine sperm connecting piece revealed by electron cryotomography. Biology of reproduction 87, 73, doi:10.1095/biolreprod.112.101980 (2012).

25 Zach, F. et al. The retinitis pigmentosa 28 protein FAM161A is a novel ciliary protein involved in intermolecular protein interaction and microtubule association. Hum Mol Genet 21, 4573-4586, doi:10.1093/hmg/dds268 (2012).

26 Lindemann, C. B. A" geometric clutch" hypothesis to explain oscillations of the axoneme of cilia and flagella. Journal of theoretical biology 168, 175-189 (1994).

27 Gadêlha, H., Hernández-Herrera, P., Montoya, F., Darszon, A. & Corkidi, G. Human sperm uses asymmetric and anisotropic flagellar controls to regulate swimming symmetry and cell steering. Science Advances 6, eaba5168 (2020).

28 Babcock, D. F., Wandernoth, P. M. & Wennemuth, G. Episodic rolling and transient attachments create diversity in sperm swimming behavior. BMC biology 12, 67 (2014).

29 Lesich, K. A., dePinho, T. G., Dionne, B. J. & Lindemann, C. B. The effects of Ca2+ and ADP on dynein switching during the beat cycle of reactivated bull sperm models. Cytoskeleton 71, 611-627 (2014).

30 Nicander, L. & Bane, A. Fine structure of boar spermatozoa. Cell and Tissue Research 57, 390-405 (1962).

31 Leung, M. R. et al. The multi-scale architecture of mammalian sperm flagella and implications for ciliary motility. bioRxiv, 2020.2011.2018.388975, doi:10.1101/2020.11.18.388975 (2020).

32 Lindemann, C. B. & Lesich, K. A. Functional anatomy of the mammalian sperm flagellum. Cytoskeleton (Hoboken, N.J.) 73, 652-669, doi:10.1002/cm.21338 (2016).

33 Brokaw, C. J. Bend propagation by a sliding filament model for flagella. Journal of Experimental Biology 55, 289-304 (1971).

34 Woolley, D. M., Carter, D. A. & Tilly, G. N. Compliance in the neck structures of the guinea pig spermatozoon, as indicated by rapid freezing and electron microscopy. J Anat 213, 336-341, doi:10.1111/j.1469-7580.2008.00919.x (2008).

35 Ishijima, S. & Hamaguchi, Y. Relationship between direction of rolling and yawing of golden hamster and sea urchin spermatozoa. Cell Struct Funct 17, 319-323, doi:10.1247/csf.17.319 (1992).

36 Ishijima, S., Hamaguchi, M. S., Naruse, M., Ishijima, S. & Hamaguchi, Y. Rotational movement of a spermatozoon around its long axis. Journal of experimental biology 163, 15-31 (1992).

37 Lesich, K. A., Pelle, D. W. & Lindemann, C. B. Insights into the mechanism of ADP action on flagellar motility derived from studies on bull sperm. Biophysical journal 95, 472-482 (2008).

38 Kerns, K., Zigo, M., Drobnis, E. Z., Sutovsky, M. & Sutovsky, P. Zinc ion flux during mammalian sperm capacitation. Nature communications 9, 1-10 (2018).

39 Phillips, D. M. Insect sperm: their structure and morphogenesis. The Journal of cell biology 44, 243-277 (1970).

40 Fawcett, D. W. The mammalian spermatozoon. Dev Biol 44, 394-436 (1975).

41 Schatten, H., Schatten, G., Mazia, D., Balczon, R. & Simerly, C. Behavior of centrosomes during fertilization and cell division in mouse oocytes and in sea urchin eggs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 83, 105-109, doi:10.1073/pnas.83.1.105 (1986).

42 Avidor-Reiss, T., Mazur, M., Fishman, E. L. & Sindhwani, P. The Role of Sperm Centrioles in Human Reproduction – The Known and the Unknown. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 7, doi:10.3389/fcell.2019.00188 (2019).

Author's Contribution

T.A.R. and S.K. conceived and presented the idea. S.K. carried out the confocal microscopy and STORM. M.L. and T.Z.B.M. carried out the Cryo-EM microscopy. H.B.G. carried out mathematical and waveform analysis. A.R. assisted in STORM. E.L.F. assisted in confocal microscopy. B.S. carried out multiparametric analysis. All authors provided critical feedback and helped shaping the research, analysis, and writing the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Kebron Assefa, Mohamed Baker Nawras, and Katriana Turner for assistance throughout the study. We would like to thank for help from The University of Toledo Instrumentation center for access to STORM microscopy. We thank the following people for providing sperm: Dr. Bo Harstine from Select Sires Inc. for donating the bovine sperm, Dr. Jie Xu lab at University of Michigan for rabbit sperm, and Dr. Steve Pool at Fairfax Cryobank for human sperm, Dr. Heiko Henning at Utrecht University for providing bovine sperm for Cryo-ET. We thank Dr. Dror Sharon at Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center for providing different FAM161A antibodies. We thank the following people for editing and advising about the paper: Dr. Bo Harstine and Dr. Jadranka Loncarek. This work was supported by grant number R21 HD092700 from Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and a grant from Select Sires Inc. This work was funded by NWO Start-Up Grant 740.018.007 to T. Z., and M.R.L. is supported by a Clarendon Fund-Nuffield Department of Medicine Prize Studentship.

There is NO Competing Interest.

bovinecpsegmentationv2.gif
Extended Data Video 1
SvideoFinal.mp4
Extended Data Video 2
20201225donlymrtodesKhanaletalSupplementrytext.pdf
Supplementary Information
GraphicalAbstract.png
Graphical Abstract

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this older preprint version

Read the latest preprint version →

A dynamic basal complex modulates mammalian sperm movement

Archived Versions:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Main Text

The centriole luminal scaffold splits into two rods in the atypical centriole, increasing its compliance

The DC rods and bars have opposite asymmetry

DC rods and microtubules slide coordinately during left-biased tail beating

A dynamic basal complex transmits the tail’s microtubule sliding to the head

Conclusion

References

Declarations

Author's Contribution

Acknowledgements

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Archived Versions:

Version 1