Over the last 25 years, extensive progress has been made in developing a range of nanotechnological applications where cytoskeletal filaments and molecular motors are key elements. This includes novel, highly miniaturized lab on a chip systems for biosensing, nanoseparation etc but also new materials and parallel computation devices for solving otherwise intractable mathematical problems. For such approaches, both actin-based and microtubule-based cytoskeletal systems have been used. However, in accordance with their different cellular functions, actin filaments and microtubules have different properties and interaction kinetics with molecular motors. Therefore, the two systems obviously exhibit different advantages and encounter different challenges when exploited for applications. Specifically, the achievable filament velocities, the capability to guide filaments along nanopatterned tracks and the capability to attach and transport cargo differ between actin- and microtubule-based systems. Our aim here is to systematically elucidate these differences to facilitate design of new devices and optimize future developments. We first review the cellular functions and the fundamental physical and biochemical properties of actin filaments and microtubules. In this context we also consider their interaction with molecular motors and other regulatory proteins that are of relevance for applications. We then relate these properties to the advantages and challenges associated with the use of each of the motor-filament systems for different tasks. Finally, fundamental properties are considered in relation to some of the most interesting future development paths e.g. in biosensing and biocomputation.

Actin is a major intracellular protein with key functions in cellular motility, signaling, and structural rearrangements. Its dynamic behavior, such as polymerization and depolymerization of actin filaments in response to intracellular and extracellular cues, is regulated by an abundance of actin binding proteins. Out of these, gelsolin is one of the most potent for filament severing. However, myosin motor activity also fragments actin filaments through motor-induced forces, suggesting that these two proteins could cooperate to regulate filament dynamics and motility. To test this idea, we used an in vitro motility assay, where actin filaments are propelled by surface-adsorbed heavy meromyosin (HMM) motor fragments. This allows studies of both motility and filament dynamics using isolated proteins. Gelsolin, at both nanomolar and micromolar Ca2+ concentration, appreciably enhanced actin filament severing caused by HMM-induced forces at 1 mM MgATP, an effect that was increased at higher HMM motor density. This finding is consistent with cooperativity between actin filament severing by myosin-induced forces and by gelsolin. We also observed reduced sliding velocity of the HMM-propelled filaments in the presence of gelsolin, providing further support of myosin-gelsolin cooperativity. Total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy–based single molecule studies corroborated that the velocity reduction was a direct effect of gelsolin binding to the filament and revealed different filament severing pattern of stationary and HMM propelled filaments. Overall, the results corroborate cooperative effects between gelsolin-induced alterations in the actin filaments and changes due to myosin motor activity leading to enhanced F-actin severing of possible physiological relevance.

Benefits of single molecule studies of biomolecules include the need for minimal amounts of material and the potential to reveal phenomena hidden in ensembles. However, results from recent single molecule studies of fluorescent ATP turnover by myosin are difficult to reconcile with ensemble studies. We found that key reasons are complexities due to dye photophysics and fluorescent contaminants. After eliminating these, through surface cleaning and use of triple state quenchers and redox agents, the distributions of ATP binding dwell times on myosin are best described by 2 to 3 exponential processes, with and without actin, and with and without the inhibitor para-aminoblebbistatin. Two processes are attributable to ATP turnover by myosin and actomyosin respectively, whereas the remaining process (rate constant 0.2-0.5 s(-1)) is consistent with non-specific ATP binding to myosin, possibly accelerating ATP transport to the active site. Finally, our study of actin-activated myosin ATP turnover without sliding between actin and myosin reveals heterogeneity in the ATP turnover kinetics consistent with models of isometric contraction.