Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 24, 2026.

The origins and evolution of macropinocytosis

Jason S. King, Robert R. Kay

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · 2018 · Review

doi:10.1098/rstb.2018.0158

Abstract

In macropinocytosis, cells take up micrometre-sized droplets of medium into internal vesicles. These vesicles are acidified and fused to lysosomes, their contents digested and useful compounds extracted. Indigestible contents can be exocytosed. Macropinocytosis has been known for approaching 100 years and is described in both metazoa and amoebae, but not in plants or fungi. Its evolutionary origin goes back to at least the common ancestor of the amoebozoa and opisthokonts, with apparent secondary loss from fungi. The primary function of macropinocytosis in amoebae and some cancer cells is feeding, but the conserved processing pathway for macropinosomes, which involves shrinkage and the retrieval of membrane to the cell surface, has been adapted in immune cells for antigen presentation. Macropinocytic cups are large actin-driven processes, closely related to phagocytic cups and pseudopods and appear to be organized around a conserved signalling patch of PIP3, active Ras and active Rac that directs actin polymerization to its periphery. Patches can form spontaneously and must be sustained by excitable kinetics with strong cooperation from the actin cytoskeleton. Growth-factor signalling shares core components with macropinocytosis, based around phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3-kinase), and we suggest that it evolved to take control of ancient feeding structures through a coupled growth factor receptor. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue ‘Macropinocytosis’.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 24, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Introduction

Macropinocytosis—the non-specific uptake of fluid into large cytoplasmic vesicles—is an actin-driven endocytic process that was clearly described by Warren Lewis in the 1930s. His time-lapse movies showed macrophages and tumour cells ruffling and taking in bright droplets of medium at their periphery, which they then transported centripetally (figure 1a). The vesicles became progressively stained with neutral red as they acidified and Lewis speculated that the cells were digesting their contents and so feeding. Macropinocytosis was described at about the same time or even earlier in amoebae, such as Amoeba proteus, where it could be triggered by dilute salt solutions. Much later, laboratory strains of the soil amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum were isolated that performed macropinocytosis at a high rate, allowing them to grow in liquid culture.

Today, tissue culture cells and these Dictyostelium amoebae are the main subjects for macropinocytosis research. The similarities in how they perform macropinocytosis—particularly the fundamental role of PIP3 (phosphatidylinositol (3,4,5)-trisphosphate in mammals and the functionally equivalent ether-linked inositol phospholipid in Dictyostelium)—points to a deep evolutionary origin of macropinocytosis in single-celled organisms. Our purpose in this article is to extend this comparison, and explore some of the implications.

How widespread is macropinocytosis?

In general, macropinocytosis is easily recognizable by light microscopy as the droplets of fluid taken up by cells are readily visible. It has been described in several branches of the amoebozoa. Among the social amoebae, apart from the well-studied Dictyostelium discoideum (figure 1b), Polysphondylium pallidum and Dictyostelium purpureum are also proficient, based on their growth in liquid medium. Macropinocytosis occurs in other free-living and pathogenic amoebae, including Acanthamoeba castellanii and Entamoeba histolytica. Large freshwater amoebae such as Chaos carolinense can perform a morphologically distinct form of macropinocytosis where the fluid is taken into vesicles pinched off from channels penetrating the cytoplasm.

Practically any mammalian cell in tissue culture seems capable of macropinocytosis in the right circumstances. Macrophages and dendritic cells of the immune system are particularly adept. Others include 3T3, MDCK and HeLa cell lines, where growth factors or activation of the growth factor signalling pathway generally stimulate macropinocytosis. Lewis described macropinocytosis in rat and mouse sarcomas, and recent attention has focused on Ras-activated tumour cells, such as pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma cells, which can feed by macropinocytosis, thus reverting to the habits of amoebae. Macropinocytosis in tissue culture cells takes different forms, with macropinosomes deriving from either dorsal or peripheral ruffles, which can form cups or flaps that close, or from large circular dorsal ruffles that contract and often leave macropinosomes as their residue.

Macropinocytosis has also been shown in immune cells from both worms and flies. The coelomocytes of Caenorhabditis elegans inhabit the pseudocoelom and efficiently clear it of secreted GFP protein, while endocytosis by Drosophila haemocytes is shown by uptake of fluorescent dextrans in primary cultures, where it is independent of dynamin, or when the dextran is injected into embryos. The presence of macropinocytic cells in these two organisms opens the possibility of applying powerful genetic methods to the process, as well as studying it in vivo.

We are not aware of accepted instances of macropinocytosis in plants or fungi, where in most cases the rigid cell wall would be a hindrance. In particular, it is unreported in the well-studied yeasts Saccharomyces cerevisiae, S. pombe or in the fungus Aspergillus nidulans.

The occurrence of macropinocytosis in multiple species from both the amoebozoa and animals places its evolutionary origin at least as far back as the common ancestor of these two groups (assuming common descent) and implies that it has been secondarily lost from at least some fungal lineages, such as yeasts, that diverged after this common ancestor (figure 1c).

Ras-activated PI3-kinases (class-1 PI3-kinase), Ras and probably the protein kinase Akt (which binds PIP3) are central organizers of macropinocytic cups (see below). Genes for these three proteins are present in all macropinocytic organisms examined. Strikingly, in the limited set of non-macropinocytic organisms examined, representing plants and fungi, PI3-kinase and Akt are both absent and Ras is only present in fungi. Thus, it appears that macropinocytosis first evolved in single-celled organisms for feeding, and has been maintained and adapted in animals, but lost from some other branches of the evolutionary tree. Its presence correlates with Ras, class-1 PI3-kinase and Akt.

Macropinocytosis in mammalian cells and Dictyostelium amoebae compared

Given a common evolutionary origin, comparing macropinocytosis in mammalian cells and amoebae should reveal its core, conserved components and mechanisms. Up to the point of sealing an internal vesicle, macropinocytosis is an actin-driven process, sensitive to inhibitors of the actin cytoskeleton and likely to involve a largely generic set of cytoskeletal proteins, such as the Arp2/3 complex and its activators, in both mammals and amoebae. It is the organization of these components in space and time that distinguishes a macropinocytic cup from other structures made by the actin cytoskeleton, such as pseudopods. This organization is a job for small G-proteins and phosphoinositides such as PIP3, as well as the cytoskeleton.

PIP3 and other phosphoinositides

PIP3 stands out as a key molecule in macropinocytosis in both amoebae and mammalian cells, despite chemical differences in the phospholipid tails between them. Macropinocytosis is strongly inhibited by blocking PI3-kinase activity, either with drugs or genetically. In Dictyostelium, PI3-kinase mutants take up very little fluid, but are able to make rudimentary cups and similarly in macrophages inhibitors of PI3-kinase do not stop cups from forming, but inhibit their closure.

The most striking feature of macropinocytic cups is the presence at their heart of an intense patch of PIP3. This is very clear in Dictyostelium amoebae and also seen in mammalian cells. PIP3 patches appear to fill the macropinocytic cup up to the lip and have surprisingly sharp edges. In Dictyostelium, PIP3 patches can form spontaneously or by splitting and are present throughout the life of the cup, up to the moment it closes. The situation is similar in macrophages, except that the patch only appears when linear ruffles circularize.

PI3-kinase activity is counteracted by the lipid phosphatase PTEN, which converts PIP3 back to PI(4,5)P2, and in whose absence PIP3 levels are elevated. PTEN is excluded from macropinocytic cups in Dictyostelium, but recruited to the rest of the plasma membrane. Deletion of PTEN has opposite effects in mammalian cells and Dictyostelium: in mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) and prostate cancer cells macropinocytosis is enhanced, whereas in Dictyostelium it is almost completely abolished. A key difference is that the Dictyostelium experiment used axenic mutants in which PI3-kinase activity is already elevated, giving very high PIP3 levels, which appear to disorganize the actin cytoskeleton. However, both results support the importance of PIP3 for macropinocytosis and perhaps suggest that its level must be carefully regulated.

PI(4,5)P2 levels spike in the macropinocytic cups of macrophages before PIP3; this has not been described in Dictyostelium, though fluid uptake is dependent on PI5-kinase required for PI(4,5)P2 synthesis. After closure of the cup, PIP3 is rapidly lost from the internal vesicle and replaced by PI(3,4)P2 in both Dictyostelium and macrophages.

Ras

Ras also appears to be crucial in macropinocytosis and can activate class-1 PI3-kinases through their Ras-binding domain. In the early days of Ras research, it was found that growth factors both activate Ras and cause cell ruffling and macropinocytosis. Crucially, injection of activated (oncogenic) Ras protein into fibroblasts alone was sufficient to drive ruffling, providing the first direct link between Ras and macropinocytosis. Surprisingly, however, recent work has shown that a triple Ras knock-out cell line can still carry out macropinocytosis, although it depends on PIP3 to do so. At the moment, it is unclear whether in this situation one of its close relatives has substituted for Ras, or whether PIP3 alone can sometimes be sufficient.

Dictyostelium has an expanded set of Ras genes, making genetic manipulation difficult. However, expressing activated Ras stimulates macropinocytosis in wild-type cells, while single and double knock-out mutants show that RasG, RasS and RasB are important for macropinocytosis. Strong evidence for the importance of Ras comes from increasing its activity by knocking out the RasGAP NF1 (neurofibromin). This results in a 4–10-fold increase in fluid uptake, larger and more frequent macropinosomes and confers the ability to grow in the standard liquid medium. In addition to Ras, its close relative Rap may be involved in macropinocytosis, because knock-down inhibits growth in liquid medium and knock-out of the RapGEF, GflB, reduces macropinocytosis apparently by arresting macropinocytic cups in an extended form.

Macropinocytic patches and downstream effectors

In both macrophages and Dictyostelium, PIP3 patches are coincident with patches of active Ras and Rac, thus giving a signalling region of up to several micrometres in diameter contained within the walls of the macropinocytic cup. This set of signal molecules recruits effector proteins to carry through cup formation and closure. Apart from activating PI3-kinase, Ras may directly regulate cytoskeletal proteins such as the formin, ForC. Rac is also required for macropinocytosis in both mammalian cells and Dictyostelium and through activation of actin nucleation, gives a link to the cytoskeleton.

PIP3 patches recruit PIP3-binding proteins, some of which are expected to have important roles in macropinocytosis. These include class-1 myosins, but the classic effector is the protein kinase Akt/PKB. In Dictyostelium, Akt is nearly essential for macropinocytosis, providing that a related protein kinase that is not PIP3-dependent but is partially redundant is also eliminated. In these PKB-/PKBR1-cells, PIP3 patches still form but their efficiency of fluid uptake is much reduced (Thomas Williams 2018, personal communication). In mammalian cells the situation is less clear, with inhibition of Akt having little effect on macropinocytosis in macrophages, but inhibiting it in stellate cells.

Some differences

In mammalian cells, macropinocytosis is often stimulated by growth factors, though it is constitutive in macrophages and dendritic cells, where it depends on extracellular calcium sensed through a calcium receptor. By contrast, macropinocytosis in Dictyostelium does not need receptor stimulation, occurring in isolated cells and in mutants where G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) signalling is genetically ablated by removal of the Gβ subunit of hetero-trimeric G-proteins. Nor does it depend on extracellular calcium, because it occurs in calcium-free media.

Diacyl-glycerol (DAG), produced from PIP3 by phospholipase C (PLC), accumulates in macropinocytic cups in macrophages and inhibiting PLC inhibits macropinocytosis in fibroblasts. However, a similar role for DAG in Dictyostelium has not been reported to date, and although PLC is able to feedback and promote PIP3 production, axenic growth is unaffected.

The relationship between macropinocytosis, phagocytosis and chemotaxis

As we are learning more about the mechanisms used by cells to generate macropinosomes, it is clear that there is significant overlap with other pathways that rely on the production of membrane protrusions. The similarities between macropinocytic and phagocytic cups are obvious, but local activation of the Arp2/3 complex by SCAR/WAVE also generates the pseudopodia and lamellipodia that drive migration and chemotaxis. Both cups and pseudopodia are generated by the same underlying excitability of the cytoskeleton and like macropinosomes, pseudopodia also spontaneously form de novo as well as by splitting. The differently shaped protrusions thus appear to have evolved by differential regulation of the same core machinery.

In Dictyostelium at least, the formation of the more complex cup shape appears to be an elaboration of the underlying pseudopod machinery. In a simple model, all that is required to convert a pseudopod to a cup is to superimpose a central region where the protrusion is blocked, corresponding to the PIP3 patch (figure 2). In the case of phagocytosis, this is supported by computational models, whereby adhesion to an immovable particle drives a pseudopod to wrap around it. How this would occur in the absence of any particle to form a macropinosome is less clear.

Although the enrichment of PIP3 at the leading edge of chemotaxing Dictyostelium cells was initially implicated in chemotaxis, there is increasing evidence that PIP3 instead defines the conversion from pseudopodia to macropinocytic and phagocytic cups. While inhibition of PIP3 production almost completely blocks macropinocytosis across evolution, both Dictyostelium and neutrophils can still chemotax efficiently when this is done. Furthermore, in growing cells with high levels of macropinocytosis, the PIP3-mediated conversion from pseudopodia to cups actually inhibits migration and inhibiting PI3-kinase or physically restricting macropinocytosis enhances chemotaxis of Dictyostelium to folic acid.

Nonetheless, given a strong enough stimulus, chemotaxis receptors can clearly stimulate localized PIP3 production. This may be explained by a recent report that both chemotaxis and phagocytosis are mediated by the same receptor that recognizes both diffusible folate and the bacterial surface component lipopolysaccharide. The two processes are thus inextricably linked, with the potential for erroneous signalling if saturated, although whether cyclic-AMP-mediated chemotaxis has similar crossover is not known.

Although phagocytosis and macropinocytosis are highly related and have presumably co-evolved, macropinosomes self-assemble in the absence of localized external signals and receptor activation. If macropinocytic cups are adaptations of pseudopods, the generation of a static cup interior must occur spontaneously. Interestingly, while PIP3 accumulates in macropinocytic cups in all Dictyostelium strains, only shallow gradients are seen in pseudopodia of non-axenic strains (Douwe Veltman 2017, unpublished data). It may, therefore, be that formation of a self-sustaining PIP3 patch requires a higher threshold of Ras activation than normal pseudopodia; i.e. low levels of active Ras form pseudopodia while high levels generate cups. The transition to a cup can thus be regulated at the level of GTPase regulatory proteins and stochastic variations in Ras activity.

The dynamic and excitable nature of the cytoskeleton enables it to be flexible and respond to multiple external and intrinsic cues. Although it is impossible to infer evolutionary order, it is easy to imagine how receptor activation could be imposed on macropinocytosis to evolve phagocytosis, or feedback loops allowing phagocytic cups to form spontaneously would allow cells to engulf fluid.

Processing macropinocytic vesicles

As macropinocytosis probably evolved as a feeding mechanism in single-celled organisms, its initial job was to digest captured proteins or macromolecules to support growth. This role has been maintained throughout evolution to human cancers, but whether other mammalian cells use macropinocytosis for feeding is not known, though clearly worth investigating. Metazoan cells have also adapted macropinocytosis for other purposes, primarily by changing the processing of macropinosomes once internalized. In immune cells, antigen presentation still requires proteins to be fragmented. Therefore, the early stages of macropinosome maturation are broadly conserved between cells and across evolution.

Although many details remain to be resolved, macropinosome maturation shares common elements with other endocytic pathways, such as being regulated by the activities of the Rab family of small GTPases. Classical clathrin-mediated endocytosis (CME) generates endosomes in a completely different way, and largely serves a different purpose—being more a mechanism to turn over specific membrane proteins than feeding. However, both CME and macropinocytosis-derived vesicles accumulate PI(3)P and active Rab5 immediately after internalization to define an ‘early’ compartment, before Rab5 is replaced by active Rab7 to define a ‘late’ stage of maturation and lysosomal fusion. This indicates a common evolutionary ancestry.

The different endocytic pathways thus have core conserved elements with, for example, Rab5 acting as a generic marker for newly internalized vesicles. While there must also be pathway-specific trafficking steps and a host of other Rabs help to add specificity and variation, there are currently no exclusive markers of macropinosomes, which are frequently identified simply by their size and loading with fluorescent dextran.

Macropinosome-specific problems

Although there are parallels with other endocytic pathways, macropinocytosis also poses some unique challenges for the cell. First, as the cups lack any clathrin or sorting adaptor protein coats, there is little apparent selectivity in the surface proteins internalized as macropinosomes form. Cells undergoing high levels of macropinocytosis will therefore rapidly digest their surface proteins unless they are retrieved before degradation. This is achieved via the combined activities of WASP and SCAR homologue (WASH) and Retromer sorting complex. These complexes are able to sort proteins into recycling vesicles and play multiple roles in endocytic trafficking and are among the first molecules to be recruited to both macropinosomes and phagosomes—having a burst of activity for just the first 2–3 min after internalization.

Macropinosomes are large, aqueous vesicles with a relatively low nutrient content compared to phagosomes. They also have much less membrane in comparison to their contents relative to smaller vesicles: the surface area-to-volume ratio of a 1 µm diameter macropinosome is 10-fold lower than a typical 100 nm endosome. This means that the macropinosomal lumen is relatively hard to acidify by pumps such as the Vacuolar ATPase (V-ATPase) and the concentration of lysosomal hydrolases and their substrates will be low.

These problems appear to be solved by the ability of macropinosomes to tubulate and shrink during the first stages of maturation (figure 3). This was reported in the first observations of macropinosomes and has been shown in macrophages and epithelial cells, as well as Dictyostelium. Importantly, at the same time the vesicle contents become more concentrated, indicating that macropinosomes are shrinking by loss of water and membrane, rather than splitting. This is likely driven by the increased osmotic pressure that must occur upon both tubulation and the fission of small vesicles as they will remove more surface area than volume from the vesicle. Shrinkage and concentration, therefore, appear to be universal parts of macropinosome maturation.

How this shrinkage is achieved is not clear, especially as it occurs at the same time that lysosomes are fusing with the macropinosome and adding membrane. In Dictyostelium at least, shrinkage coincides with the presence of PI(3)P on macropinosomes (figure 3b), and in mammalian cells was shown to be partly dependent on the activity of the PI5-kinase PIKfyve, which phosphorylates PI(3)P to form PI(3,5)P2. It seems logical that forming a smaller, more concentrated compartment will aid digestion. However, when shrinkage is reduced upon PIKfyve inhibition, degradation is not significantly affected, and the major defect appeared to be in nutrient extraction, as macropinocytosis could no longer be used to support growth. Although shrinkage is a general feature of macropinosome maturation, the assumption that it aids digestion may not be true in all cases.

Diversification of the endocytic pathways

The early phases of maturation are highly conserved, but the fate of macropinosomes after they have shrunk has diversified more (figure 4). Dictyostelium macropinosomes are able to fuse with one another during the early phases of their transit, but appear to be kept in isolation from other endosomes, as internalized dextrans do not accumulate in any other compartments.

In higher eukaryotes, the fate of internalized material is more complex and cell-type specific. In particular, there are clear differences in the interactions between macropinosomes and other endocytic pathways. In macrophages, macropinosomes appear to completely assimilate into the lysosomal system after shrinkage and can fuse with clathrin-derived tubular endosomes as well as both early and late macropinosomes.

By contrast, in both the human epidermal carcinoma cell line A-431 and NIH3T fibroblasts, though macropinosomes can fuse to each other, they rarely if ever interact with conventional clathrin-mediated endocytic compartments. Whether this can be generalized to all epithelial or cancer cells and how this might be achieved mechanistically is unclear, but it indicates fundamental differences in how cells process macropinosomes.

One explanation may be the differing functions of macropinocytosis. Like amoebae, cancer cells use macropinocytosis for feeding. Therefore, the only major prerequisite is to deliver lysosomal components and transport out liberated nutrients. In antigen presenting cells, however, there is an additional requirement to load the digested extracellular proteins onto the Major Histocompatability Complex II (MHC II) molecules before transport to the cell surface. As MHC II is found on a specialized late endosomal compartment, it is essential for macropinosome-derived antigens to interact with the endosomal system at some point. The molecular details of antigen presentation trafficking remain surprisingly poorly understood, but it may be that during the evolution of adaptive immunity, immune cells evolved a distinct mechanism to deliver macropinocytic products to the endocytic system absent in other cells.

Macropinosome efflux

Although digestible components will be transported out and assimilated by the cell, other molecules, such as the dextran-conjugated dyes frequently used to study macropinocytosis, must ultimately be released from cells. In amoebae and presumably other protists feeding by phagocytosis or macropinocytosis, indigestible material is continuously released by constitutive exocytosis. This is again best characterized in Dictyostelium, where 45 min after internalization, the vesicles transit to a neutral post-lysosomal state. This transition is driven by a second phase of WASH activity, which removes the V-ATPase and hydrolases. This is essential for exocytosis and post-lysosomes fuse with the plasma membrane shortly afterwards (figure 4).

There is no evidence for a comparable neutral post-lysosomal compartment in mammalian cells, and therefore macropinosome efflux happens by different mechanisms (summarized in figure 4). Consistent with a complex redistribution across multiple compartments, the release of macropinocytic components from macrophages has complex dynamics, indicating it occurs by at least two pathways with different kinetics.

In immature dendritic cells, processed antigen from macropinosomes can be both delivered to the MHC II loading compartment, or stored in a late endocytic compartment before being released into the extracellular environment to activate B cells. The details of exocytosis are unclear but it is dependent on both Rab27 and cytoplasmic Ca2+. Remarkably, large increases in cytoplasmic Ca2+ are sufficient to stimulate regurgitation of macropinosomes en masse, leaving endosomes unaffected, implying this is a specific regulated pathway. Calcium also regulates the fusion of other types of vesicles to the plasma membrane, including lysosomes and synaptic vesicles. It therefore seems likely that related mechanisms are employed to deliver the macropinosome-derived vesicles to the surface.

Perhaps surprisingly, little appears to be known about what ultimately happens to indigestible material in non-phagocytic cells. Studies are largely focused on uptake and nutrient liberation, and the prevalence of imaging-based analysis makes studies of efflux dynamics difficult. While early work using C14-sucrose as an indigestible marker in fetal lung fibroblasts indicates similarly complex efflux dynamics to that observed in macrophages and fluorescent dextrans are largely lost from A431 cells within 2 h, we could find no further mechanistic studies of what ultimately happens to indigestible macropinosome contents. However, the limited information from electron microscopy studies indicates that macropinosomes do not acquire intraluminal vesicles and mature into multivesicular bodies, suggesting an independent fate from classical endosomes. This may therefore be an interesting subject for future studies.

Perspectives and questions

Macropinocytosis has been known for approaching 100 years, yet today is much less well understood than the more recently discovered CME: searching for titles containing ‘macropinocytosis’ in the Web of Science yields 367 papers and containing ‘clathrin’ 3229 papers, as of July 2018. This is changing. The realization of the importance of macropinocytosis in the immune system, infection and drug delivery, cancer nutrition and neuro-degeneration has fuelled a complete change in outlook in recent years. As we gain knowledge, several fascinating questions about macropinocytosis come into focus.

Macropinocytic signalling patches as templates for circular ruffles

A major conceptual problem is to understand how actin can be persuaded to polymerize in a ring under the plasma membrane to form the walls of the macropinocytic cup. This requires organization of actin polymerization over distances of several micrometres, meaning that more than local interactions within the polymerization machinery are required. We suggest that this spatial organization is provided by the patch of PIP3, active Ras and active Rac around which macropinocytic cups form. In Dictyostelium, these patches recruit the SCAR/WAVE complex and WASP to their periphery, so in principle activating the Arp2/3 complex and actin polymerization in a hollow ring (figure 1d). How recruitment occurs—whether by movement of the actin effectors to the edge of the patch or unique binding properties there—is not known, nor whether a similar recruitment occurs in mammalian cells.

PIP3 patches must be sustained by unusual dynamics, since PIP3, Ras and Rac are all normally freely diffusible in the membrane. One element is likely to be restricted diffusion at the edges of patches, as described in macrophages, and another may be positive feedback loops between components of the patches. Active Ras and Rac can still form patches in Dictyostelium mutants lacking all class-1 PI3-kinases, suggesting that the autocatalytic kinetics sustaining patches do not require PIP3, although they may be augmented by it. PIP3 patches have been extensively studied under the guise of ‘basal actin waves’ and their formation can be stimulated by the chemoattractant cyclic-AMP in starving cells. High doses of cyclic-AMP induce more patches than low doses, but they are of otherwise the same size and intensity. This suggests patches form by an excitable process, which once triggered proceeds through to completion. The unusually large and intense PIP3 patches of axenic Dictyostelium cells, which can be viewed in TIRF microscopy, make an excellent system for discovering the principles of patch formation.

Closing and sealing macropinocytic cups

To close a macropinocytic cup requires a different form of spatial organization from forming it. As viewed by lattice light sheet microscopy, cups sometimes appear to close by concerted contraction of their lip, suggesting a purse string mechanism. Consistent with a contractile process, myosin-1 proteins are recruited to cups with one class forming a broad ring around the rim, and closing phagosomes in macrophages also recruit myosins and are able to exert contractile forces on engulfed particles.

The final stage of closing a macropinocytic cup is membrane fusion to seal the cup and form an intracellular vesicle. Little is known of this process at the moment. Because membrane flaps appear able to fuse back to the plasma membrane—though this needs confirming with lattice light sheet microscopy—the mechanism may involve a fusogenic protein such as that recently described in phagosome fusion in C. elegans, rather than the neck constriction involved in sealing coated pits. Once fusion has occurred it must be signalled so that the macropinosome processing can commence, and again the mechanism is unknown.

An evolutionary speculation: macropinocytosis and the origins of growth factor signalling

It is a remarkable fact that the core set of proteins organizing macropinocytic cups in Dictyostelium—Ras, NF1, Ras-activated PI3-kinase, PTEN and Akt—are the same as those mediating growth factor signalling in metazoa. All are also notable oncogenes or tumour suppressors. The corresponding growth factor receptors are missing in Dictyostelium as the genome does not encode receptor tyrosine kinases. We suggest an evolutionary hypothesis to explain this link between growth-factor signalling and macropinocytosis.

We propose that the Ras/PI3-kinase/Akt signalling module evolved in single-celled organisms before the appearance of metazoa and was used to organize their feeding structures, as it is in the amoebozoa to this day. As multicellular cooperation evolved in the branch of phagotrophic organisms leading to metazoa, specialized extracellular digestion arose and most cells were freed of digestive duties but became dependent on others for their food. It was essential to regulate access to this shared resource to prevent selfish appropriation by individual cells, and therefore the activity of the feeding structures in individual cells had to be brought under global control. This we propose was achieved by bringing them under the control of extracellular signals—the growth factors. This would involve linking Ras and PI3-kinase activation to cell surface receptors, so that feeding became conditional on an external signal. The innovation required might be as simple as bringing a critical RasGEF under the control of a receptor. This linkage of feeding structure to surface receptor has already been achieved in Dictyostelium for a different purpose, as recent work shows that the folate receptor, which is used to find bacteria, is also capable of triggering their phagocytosis.

This viewpoint also gives some rationale to the otherwise puzzling linkage of actin dynamics and growth factor signalling. As is well established, growth factor signalling stimulates actin dynamics and macropinosome formation. Amino acids taken up from the medium and transported to endolysosomes by macropinocytosis activate mTORC1 (the mechanistic Target Of Rapamycin complex 1) from there in synergy with a cytoplasmic route via Akt. Surprisingly, signalling of less than maximal intensity is sensitive to inhibitors of the actin cytoskeleton, such as the combination of jasplakinolide and blebbistatin. It is proposed that this is because macropinocytic cups are triggered by growth factors, and act as signal amplifiers thanks to their intrinsic self-organization and positive feedback loops. As signal amplification depends on their structure, which in turn depends on actin dynamics, signalling becomes sensitive to inhibitors of the actin cytoskeleton.

In summary, we see in macropinocytosis an ancient process that evolved for feeding in phagotrophic unicells, and whose original purpose has been at least partially retained in metazoa, with adaptation in immune cells to use the engulfed material for antigen presentation. The traces of its original function can still be seen in the wiring of growth factor signalling, which was added later to gain control of phagotrophic feeding structures in metazoa.

References 125

  1. 1.

    Lewis WH 1931 Pinocytosis. Bull. Johns Hopkins Hosp. 49, 17–27.

    Not in our library

  2. 2.

    Lewis WH 1937 Pinocytosis by malignant cells. Am. J. Cancer 29, 666–679. ()

    Not in our library10.1158/ajc.1937.510

  3. 3.

    Chen BC et al. 2014 Lattice light-sheet microscopy: imaging molecules to embryos at high spatiotemporal resolution. Science 346, 1257998 ()

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1257998

  4. 4.
  5. 5.

    Derelle R, Torruella G, Klimes V, Brinkmann H, Kim E, Vlcek C, Lang BF, Elias M 2015 Bacterial proteins pinpoint a single eukaryotic root. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E693–E699. ()

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1420657112

  6. 6.

    Schaeffer AA 1916 On the behavior of ameba towards fragments of glass and carbon and indigestible substances, and toward some some very soluble substances. Biol. Bull. 31, 303–328. ()

    Not in our library10.1126/science.44.1135.468

  7. 7.

    Edwards JG 1925 Formation of food-cups in amoeba induced by chemicals. Biol. Bull. 48, 236–239. ()

    Not in our library10.2307/1536568

  8. 8.

    Mast SO, Doyle WL 1934 Ingestion of fluid by amoeba. Protoplasma 20, 555–560. ()

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02674847

  9. 9.

    Chapman-Andresen C 1977 Endocytosis in freshwater amebas. Physiol. Rev. 57, 371–385. ()

    Not in our library10.1152/physrev.1977.57.3.371

  10. 10.

    Sussman R, Sussman M 1967 Cultivation of Dictyostelium discoideum in axenic culture. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 29, 53–55. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/0006-291x(67)90539-6

  11. 11.

    Watts DJ, Ashworth JM 1970 Growth of myxamoebae of the cellular slime mould Dictyostelium discoideum in axenic culture. Biochem. J. 119, 171–174. ()

    Not in our library10.1042/bj1190171

  12. 12.

    Hacker U, Albrecht R, Maniak M 1997 Fluid-phase uptake by macropinocytosis in Dictyostelium. J. Cell Sci. 110, 105–112.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.110.2.105

  13. 13.

    Swanson JA 2008 Shaping cups into phagosomes and macropinosomes. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 9, 639–649. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/nrm2447

  14. 14.

    Buckley CM, King JS 2017 Drinking problems: mechanisms of macropinosome formation and maturation. FEBS J. 284, 3778–3790. ()

    Not in our library10.1111/febs.14115

  15. 15.

    Clark J, Kay RR, Kielkowska A, Niewczas I, Fets L, Oxley D, Stephens LR, Hawkins PT 2014 Dictyostelium uses ether-linked inositol phospholipids for intracellular signalling. EMBO J. 33, 2188–2200. ()

    Not in our library10.15252/embj.201488677

  16. 16.

    Thilo L, Vogel G 1980 Kinetics of membrane internalization and recycling during pinocytosis in Dictyostelium discoideum. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 77, 1015–1019. ()

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.77.2.1015

  17. 17.

    Hohl HR, Raper KB 1963 Nutrition of cellular slime molds. II. Growth of Polysphondylium pallidum in axenic culture. J. Bacteriol. 85, 199–206.

    Not in our library10.1128/jb.85.1.199-206.1963

  18. 18.
  19. 19.

    Ostap EM, Maupin P, Doberstein SK, Baines IC, Korn ED, Pollard TD 2003 Dynamic localization of myosin-I to endocytic structures in Acanthamoeba. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 54, 29–40. ()

    Not in our library10.1002/cm.10081

  20. 20.

    Meza I, Clarke M 2004 Dynamics of endocytic traffic of Entamoeba histolytica revealed by confocal microscopy and flow cytometry. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 59, 215–226. ()

    Not in our library10.1002/cm.20038

  21. 21.
  22. 22.

    Swanson JA 1989 Phorbol esters stimulate macropinocytosis and solute flow through macrophages. J. Cell Sci. 94, 135–142.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.94.1.135

  23. 23.

    Sallusto F, Cella M, Danieli C, Lanzavecchia A 1995 Dendritic cells use macropinocytosis and the mannose receptor to concentrate macromolecules in the major histocompatibility complex class II compartment: downregulation by cytokines and bacterial products. J. Exp. Med. 182, 389–400. ()

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.182.2.389

  24. 24.

    Brunk U, Schellens J, Westermark B 1976 Influence of epidermal growth factor (EGF) on ruffling activity, pinocytosis and proliferation of cultivated human glia cells. Exp. Cell Res. 103, 295–302. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/0014-4827(76)90266-4

  25. 25.

    Haigler HT, McKanna JA, Cohen S 1979 Rapid stimulation of pinocytosis in human carcinoma cells A-431 by epidermal growth factor. J. Cell Biol. 83, 82–90. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.83.1.82

  26. 26.

    Bar-Sagi D, Feramisco JR 1986 Induction of membrane ruffling and fluid-phase pinocytosis in quiescent fibroblasts by ras proteins. Science 233, 1061–1068. ()

    Not in our library10.1126/science.3090687

  27. 27.

    Dowrick P, Kenworthy P, McCann B, Warn R 1993 Circular ruffle formation and closure lead to macropinocytosis in hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor-treated cells. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 61, 44–53.

    Not in our library

  28. 28.

    Commisso C et al. 2013 Macropinocytosis of protein is an amino acid supply route in Ras-transformed cells. Nature 497, 633–637. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/nature12138

  29. 29.

    Fares H, Greenwald I 2001 Genetic analysis of endocytosis in Caenorhabditis elegans: coelomocyte uptake defective mutants. Genetics 159, 133–145.

    Not in our library10.1093/genetics/159.1.133

  30. 30.

    Maekawa M, Terasaka S, Mochizuki Y, Kawai K, Ikeda Y, Araki N, Skolnik EY, Taguchi T, Arai H 2014 Sequential breakdown of 3-phosphorylated phosphoinositides is essential for the completion of macropinocytosis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E978–E987. ()

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1311029111

  31. 31.

    Li L, Wan T, Wan M, Liu B, Cheng R, Zhang R 2015 The effect of the size of fluorescent dextran on its endocytic pathway. Cell Biol. Int. 39, 531–539. ()

    Not in our library10.1002/cbin.10424

  32. 32.

    Guha A, Sriram V, Krishnan KS, Mayor S 2003 Shibire mutations reveal distinct dynamin-independent and -dependent endocytic pathways in primary cultures of Drosophila hemocytes. J. Cell Sci. 116, 3373–3386. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.00637

  33. 33.

    Chen L, Cheng D, Chu J, Zhang T, Dong Z, Lou H, Zhu L, Liu Y 2018 A novel method to image macropinocytosis in vivo. Front. Neurosci. 12, 324 ()

    Not in our library10.3389/fnins.2018.00324

  34. 34.

    van Dam TJ, Bos JL, Snel B 2011 Evolution of the Ras-like small GTPases and their regulators. Small GTPases 2, 4–16. ()

    Not in our library10.4161/sgtp.2.1.15113

  35. 35.

    Araki N, Johnson MT, Swanson JA 1996 A role for phosphoinositide 3-kinase in the completion of macropinocytosis and phagocytosis by macrophages. J. Cell Biol. 135, 1249–1260. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.135.5.1249

  36. 36.

    Buczynski G, Grove B, Nomura A, Kleve M, Bush J, Firtel RA, Cardelli J 1997 Inactivation of two Dictyostelium discoideum genes, DdPIK1 and DdPIK2, encoding proteins related to mammalian phosphatidylinositide 3-kinases, results in defects in endocytosis, lysosome to postlysosome transport, and actin cytoskeleton organization. J. Cell Biol. 136, 1271–1286. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.136.6.1271

  37. 37.

    Hoeller O, Bolourani P, Clark J, Stephens LR, Hawkins PT, Weiner OD, Weeks G, Kay RR 2013 Two distinct functions for PI3-kinases in macropinocytosis. J. Cell Sci. 126, 4296–4307. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.134015

  38. 38.

    Dormann D, Weijer G, Dowler S, Weijer CJ 2004 In vivo analysis of 3-phosphoinositide dynamics during Dictyostelium phagocytosis and chemotaxis. J. Cell Sci. 117, 6497–6509. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.01579

  39. 39.

    Parent CA, Blacklock BJ, Froelich WM, Murphy DB, Devreotes PN 1998 G Protein signaling events are activated at the leading edge of chemotactic cells. Cell 95, 81–91. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81784-5

  40. 40.

    Araki N, Egami Y, Watanabe Y, Hatae T 2007 Phosphoinositide metabolism during membrane ruffling and macropinosome formation in EGF-stimulated A431 cells. Exp. Cell Res. 313, 1496–1507. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.yexcr.2007.02.012

  41. 41.

    Yoshida S, Hoppe AD, Araki N, Swanson JA 2009 Sequential signaling in plasma-membrane domains during macropinosome formation in macrophages. J. Cell Sci. 122, 3250–3261. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.053207

  42. 42.

    Welliver TP, Swanson JA 2012 A growth factor signaling cascade confined to circular ruffles in macrophages. Biol. Open 1, 754–760. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/bio.20121784

  43. 43.

    Iijima M, Devreotes P 2002 Tumor suppressor PTEN mediates sensing of chemoattractant gradients. Cell 109, 599–610. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00745-6

  44. 44.

    Palm W, Araki J, King B, DeMatteo RG, Thompson CB 2017 Critical role for PI3-kinase in regulating the use of proteins as an amino acid source. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E8628–E8636. ()

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1712726114

  45. 45.

    Kim SM et al. 2018 PTEN deficiency and AMPK activation promote nutrient scavenging and anabolism in prostate cancer cells. Cancer Discov. 8, 866–883. ()

    Not in our library10.1158/2159-8290.cd-17-1215

  46. 46.

    Fets L, Nichols JM, Kay RR 2014 A PIP5 kinase essential for efficient chemotactic signaling. Curr. Biol. 24, 415–421. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2013.12.052

  47. 47.

    Williams TD, Paschke PI, Kay RR 2019 Function of small GTPases in Dictyostelium macropinocytosis Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 374, 20180150 ()

    Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2018.0150

  48. 48.

    Chubb JR, Wilkins A, Thomas GM, Insall RH 2000 The Dictyostelium RasS protein is required for macropinocytosis, phagocytosis and the control of cell movement. J. Cell Sci. 113, 709–719.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.113.4.709

  49. 49.

    Junemann A, Filic V, Winterhoff M, Nordholz B, Litschko C, Schwellenbach H, Stephan T, Weber I, Faix J 2016 A Diaphanous-related formin links Ras-signalling directly to actin assembly in macropinocytosis and phagocytosis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 464–473. ()

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1611024113

  50. 50.
  51. 51.
  52. 52.

    Kang RJ, Kae H, Ip H, Spiegelman GB, Weeks G 2002 Evidence for a role for the Dictyostelium Rap1 in cell viability and the response to osmotic stress. J. Cell Sci. 115, 3675–3682. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.00039

  53. 53.

    Inaba H, Yoda K, Adachi H 2017 The F-actin-binding RapGEF GflB is required for efficient macropinocytosis in Dictyostelium. J. Cell Sci. 130, 3158–3172. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.194126

  54. 54.

    Fujii M, Kawai K, Egami Y, Araki N 2013 Dissecting the roles of Rac1 activation and deactivation in macropinocytosis using microscopic photo-manipulation. Sci. Rep. 3, 2385 ()

    Not in our library10.1038/srep02385

  55. 55.

    Kay RR, Williams TD, Paschke P 2018 Amplification of PIP3 signalling by macropinocytic cups. Biochem. J. 475, 643–648. ()

    Not in our library10.1042/bcj20170785

  56. 56.

    Williams TD, Kay RR 2018 The physiological regulation of macropinocytosis during Dictyostelium growth and development. J. Cell Sci. 131, jcs-213736 ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.213736

  57. 57.

    Jung G, Wu XF, Hammer JA 1996 Dictyostelium mutants lacking multiple classic myosin I isoforms reveal combinations of shared and distinct functions. J. Cell Biol. 133, 305–323. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.133.2.305

  58. 58.

    Brzeska H, Koech H, Pridham KJ, Korn ED, Titus MA 2016 Selective localization of myosin-I proteins in macropinosomes and actin waves. Cytoskeleton (Hoboken) 73, 68–82. ()

    Not in our library10.1002/cm.21275

  59. 59.

    Rupper A, Lee K, Knecht D, Cardelli J 2001 Sequential activities of phosphoinositide 3-kinase, PKB/Akt, and Rab7 during macropinosome formation in Dictyostelium. Mol. Biol. Cell 12, 2813–2824. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.12.9.2813

  60. 60.

    Pacitto R, Gaeta I, Swanson JA, Yoshida S 2017 CXCL12-induced macropinocytosis modulates two distinct pathways to activate mTORC1 in macrophages. J. Leukoc. Biol. 101, 683–692. ()

    Not in our library10.1189/jlb.2a0316-141rr

  61. 61.

    Bi Y, Mukhopadhyay D, Drinane M, Ji B, Li X, Cao S, Shah VH 2014 Endocytosis of collagen by hepatic stellate cells regulates extracellular matrix dynamics. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 307, C622–C633. ()

    Not in our library10.1152/ajpcell.00086.2014

  62. 62.
  63. 63.
  64. 64.

    Kortholt A, King JS, Keizer-Gunnink I, Harwood AJ, Van Haastert PJ 2007 Phospholipase C regulation of phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate-mediated chemotaxis. Mol. Biol. Cell 18, 4772–4779. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.e07-05-0407

  65. 65.

    Drayer AL, Van der Kaay J, Mayr GW, Van Haastert PJ 1994 Role of phospholipase C in Dictyostelium: formation of inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate and normal development in cells lacking phospholipase C activity. EMBO J. 13, 1601–1609. ()

    Not in our library10.1002/j.1460-2075.1994.tb06423.x

  66. 66.
  67. 67.
  68. 68.

    Machesky LM, Insall RH 1998 Scar1 and the related Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein, WASP, regulate the actin cytoskeleton through the Arp2/3 complex. Curr. Biol. 8, 1347–1356. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/s0960-9822(98)00015-3

  69. 69.

    Andrew N, Insall RH 2007 Chemotaxis in shallow gradients is mediated independently of PtdIns 3-kinase by biased choices between random protrusions. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 193–200. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/ncb1536

  70. 70.

    Millius A, Dandekar SN, Houk AR, Weiner OD 2009 Neutrophils establish rapid and robust WAVE complex polarity in an actin-dependent fashion. Curr. Biol. 19, 253–259. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2008.12.044

  71. 71.

    Graziano BR, Weiner OD 2014 Self-organization of protrusions and polarity during eukaryotic chemotaxis. Curr. Opin Cell Biol. 30, 60–67. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ceb.2014.06.007

  72. 72.

    Pan M, Neilson MP, Grunfeld AM, Cruz P, Wen X, Insall RH, Jin T 2018 A G-protein-coupled chemoattractant receptor recognizes lipopolysaccharide for bacterial phagocytosis. PLoS Biol. 16, e2005754 ()

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pbio.2005754

  73. 73.

    Ferguson GJ et al. 2007 PI(3)Kγ has an important context-dependent role in neutrophil chemokinesis. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 86–91. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/ncb1517

  74. 74.

    Hoeller O, Kay RR 2007 Chemotaxis in the absence of PIP3 gradients. Curr. Biol. 17, 813–817. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2007.04.004

  75. 75.

    Veltman DM, Lemieux MG, Knecht DA, Insall RH 2014 PIP(3)-dependent macropinocytosis is incompatible with chemotaxis. J. Cell Biol. 204, 497–505. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.201309081

  76. 76.

    Xu X, Meier-Schellersheim M, Jiao X, Nelson LE, Jin T 2005 Quantitative imaging of single live cells reveals spatiotemporal dynamics of multistep signaling events of chemoattractant gradient sensing in Dictyostelium. Mol. Biol. Cell 16, 676–688. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.e04-07-0544

  77. 77.

    Srinivasan K, Wright GA, Hames N, Housman M, Roberts A, Aufderheide KJ, Janetopoulos C 2013 Delineating the core regulatory elements crucial for directed cell migration by examining folic-acid-mediated responses. J. Cell Sci. 126, 221–233. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.113415

  78. 78.

    Feliciano WD, Yoshida S, Straight SW, Swanson JA 2011 Coordination of the Rab5 cycle on macropinosomes. Traffic 12, 1911–1922. ()

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1600-0854.2011.01280.x

  79. 79.

    Egami Y 2016 Molecular imaging analysis of Rab GTPases in the regulation of phagocytosis and macropinocytosis. Anat. Sci. Int. 91, 35–42. ()

    Not in our library10.1007/s12565-015-0313-y

  80. 80.
  81. 81.

    Gorvel JP, Chavrier P, Zerial M, Gruenberg J 1991 rab5 controls early endosome fusion in vitro. Cell 64, 915–925. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/0092-8674(91)90316-q

  82. 82.

    Christoforidis S, Miaczynska M, Ashman K, Wilm M, Zhao LY, Yip SC, Waterfield MD, Backer JM, Zerial M 1999 Phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinases are Rab5 effectors. Nat. Cell Biol. 1, 249–252. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/12075

  83. 83.

    Mercanti V, Charette SJ, Bennett N, Ryckewaert JJ, Letourneur F, Cosson P 2006 Selective membrane exclusion in phagocytic and macropinocytic cups. J. Cell Sci. 119, 4079–4087. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.03190

  84. 84.

    Buckley CM, Gopaldass N, Bosmani C, Johnston SA, Soldati T, Insall RH, King JS 2016 WASH drives early recycling from macropinosomes and phagosomes to maintain surface phagocytic receptors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E5906–E5915. ()

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1524532113

  85. 85.

    Calvo-Garrido J, King JS, Munoz-Braceras S, Escalante R 2014 Vmp1 regulates PtdIns3P signaling during autophagosome formation in Dictyostelium discoideum. Traffic 15, 1235–1246. ()

    Not in our library10.1111/tra.12210

  86. 86.

    Krishna S, Palm W, Lee Y, Yang W, Bandyopadhyay U, Xu H, Florey O, Thompson CB, Overholtzer M 2016 PIKfyve regulates vacuole maturation and nutrient recovery following engulfment. Dev. Cell 38, 536–547. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.devcel.2016.08.001

  87. 87.

    Kerr MC, Lindsay MR, Luetterforst R, Hamilton N, Simpson F, Parton RG, Gleeson PA, Teasdale RD 2006 Visualisation of macropinosome maturation by the recruitment of sorting nexins. J. Cell Sci. 119, 3967–3980. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.03167

  88. 88.

    Clarke M, Kohler J, Heuser J, Gerisch G 2002 Endosome fusion and microtubule-based dynamics in the early endocytic pathway of Dictyostelium. Traffic 3, 791–800. ()

    Not in our library10.1034/j.1600-0854.2002.31104.x

  89. 89.

    Maniak M 2001 Fluid-phase uptake and transit in axenic Dictyostelium cells. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1525, 197–204. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/s0304-4165(01)00105-2

  90. 90.

    Neuhaus E, Almers W, Soldati T 2002 Morphology and dynamics of the endocytic pathway in Dictyostelium discoideum. Mol. Biol. Cell 13, 1390–1407. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.01-08-0392

  91. 91.

    Hamilton N, Kerr MC, Burrage K, Teasdale RD 2007 Analyzing real-time video microscopy: the dynamics and geometry of vesicles and tubules in endocytosis. Curr. Protoc. Cell Biol. 35, 4.16.1–4.16.11. ()

    Not in our library10.1002/0471143030.cb0416s35

  92. 92.

    Racoosin EL, Swanson JA 1993 Macropinosome maturation and fusion with tubular lysosomes in macrophages. J. Cell Biol. 121, 1011–1020. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.121.5.1011

  93. 93.

    Hewlett LJ, Prescott AR, Watts C 1994 The coated pit and macropinocytic pathways serve distinct endosome populations. J. Cell Biol. 124, 689–703. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.124.5.689

  94. 94.
  95. 95.

    Blum JS, Wearsch PA, Cresswell P 2013 Pathways of antigen processing. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 31, 443–473. ()

    Not in our library10.1146/annurev-immunol-032712-095910

  96. 96.

    Weisman RA, Korn ED 1967 Phagocytosis of latex beads by Acanthamoeba. I. Biochemical properties. Biochemistry 6, 485–497. ()

    Not in our library10.1021/bi00854a017

  97. 97.

    Ravdin JI, Murphy CF, Schlesinger PH 1988 The cellular regulation of vesicle exocytosis by Entamoeba histolytica. J. Protozool. 35, 159–163. ()

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1550-7408.1988.tb04096.x

  98. 98.

    Klein G, Satre M 1986 Kinetics of fluid-phase pinocytosis in Dictyostelium discoideum amoebae. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 138, 1146–1152. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/s0006-291x(86)80402-8

  99. 99.

    Watkins RA, Andrews A, Wynn C, Barisch C, King JS, Johnston SA 2018 Cryptococcus neoformans escape from Dictyostelium amoeba by both WASH-mediated constitutive exocytosis and vomocytosis. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 8, 108 ()

    Not in our library10.3389/fcimb.2018.00108

  100. 100.

    Carnell M et al. 2011 Actin polymerization driven by WASH causes V-ATPase retrieval and vesicle neutralization before exocytosis. J. Cell Biol. 193, 831–839. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.201009119

  101. 101.

    King JS, Gueho A, Hagedorn M, Gopaldass N, Leuba F, Soldati T, Insall RH 2013 WASH is required for lysosomal recycling and efficient autophagic and phagocytic digestion. Mol. Biol. Cell 24, 2714–2726. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.e13-02-0092

  102. 102.

    Clarke M, Köhler J, Arana Q, Liu T, Heuser J, Gerisch G 2002 Dynamics of the vacuolar H+-ATPase in the contractile vacuole complex and the endosomal pathway of Dictyostelium cells. J. Cell Sci. 115, 2893–2905.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.115.14.2893

  103. 103.

    Swanson JA, Yirinec BD, Silverstein SC 1985 Phorbol esters and horseradish peroxidase stimulate pinocytosis and redirect the flow of pinocytosed fluid in macrophages. J. Cell Biol. 100, 851–859. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.100.3.851

  104. 104.

    Besterman JM, Airhart JA, Woodworth RC, Low RB 1981 Exocytosis of pinocytosed fluid in cultured cells: kinetic evidence for rapid turnover and compartmentation. J. Cell Biol. 91, 716–727. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.91.3.716

  105. 105.

    Le Roux D et al. 2012 Antigen stored in dendritic cells after macropinocytosis is released unprocessed from late endosomes to target B cells. Blood 119, 95–105. ()

    Not in our library10.1182/blood-2011-02-336123

  106. 106.

    Falcone S, Cocucci E, Podini P, Kirchhausen T, Clementi E, Meldolesi J 2006 Macropinocytosis: regulated coordination of endocytic and exocytic membrane traffic events. J. Cell Sci. 119, 4758–4769. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.03238

  107. 107.

    Andrews N 2000 Regulated secretion of conventional lysosomes. Trends Cell Biol. 10, 316–321. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/s0962-8924(00)01794-3

  108. 108.

    Pang ZP, Sudhof TC 2010 Cell biology of Ca2+-triggered exocytosis. Curr. Opin Cell Biol. 22, 496–505. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ceb.2010.05.001

  109. 109.

    Rodriguez A, Webster P, Ortego J, Andrews N 1997 Lysosomes behave as Ca2+-regulated exocytic vesicles in fibroblasts and epithelial cells. J. Cell Biol. 137, 93–104. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.137.1.93

  110. 110.

    Grimmer S, van Deurs B, Sandvig K 2002 Membrane ruffling and macropinocytosis in A431 cells require cholesterol. J. Cell Sci. 115, 2953–2962.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.115.14.2953

  111. 111.

    Basagiannis D, Zografou S, Murphy C, Fotsis T, Morbidelli L, Ziche M, Bleck C, Mercer J, Christoforidis S 2016 VEGF induces signalling and angiogenesis by directing VEGFR2 internalisation through macropinocytosis. J. Cell Sci. 129, 4091–4104. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.188219

  112. 112.
  113. 113.

    Bloomfield G, Kay RR 2016 Uses and abuses of macropinocytosis. J. Cell Sci. 129, 2697–2705. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.176149

  114. 114.

    Welliver TP, Chang SL, Linderman JJ, Swanson JA 2011 Ruffles limit diffusion in the plasma membrane during macropinosome formation. J. Cell Sci. 124, 4106–4114. ()

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.091538

  115. 115.

    Golebiewska U, Kay JG, Masters T, Grinstein S, Im W, Pastor RW, Scarlata S, McLaughlin S 2011 Evidence for a fence that impedes the diffusion of phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate out of the forming phagosomes of macrophages. Mol. Biol. Cell 22, 3498–3507. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.e11-02-0114

  116. 116.

    Gerisch G 2010 Self-organizing actin waves that simulate phagocytic cup structures. PMC Biophys. 3, 7 ()

    Not in our library10.1186/1757-5036-3-7

  117. 117.

    Postma M, Roelofs J, Goedhart J, Gadella TW, Visser AJ, Van Haastert PJ 2003 Uniform cAMP stimulation of Dictyostelium cells induces localized patches of signal transduction and pseudopodia. Mol. Biol. Cell 14, 5019–5027. ()

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.e03-08-0566

  118. 118.

    Swanson JA, Johnson MT, Beningo K, Post P, Mooseker M, Araki N 1999 A contractile activity that closes phagosomes in macrophages. J. Cell Sci. 112, 307–316.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.112.3.307

  119. 119.

    Ghose P, Rashid A, Insley P, Trivedi M, Shah P, Singhal A, Lu Y, Bao Z, Shaham S 2018 EFF-1 fusogen promotes phagosome sealing during cell process clearance in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nat. Cell Biol. 20, 393–399. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/s41556-018-0068-5

  120. 120.

    Eichinger L et al. 2005 The genome of the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. Nature 435, 43–57. ()

    Not in our library10.1038/nature03481

  121. 121.

    Cavalier-Smith T 2017 Origin of animal multicellularity: precursors, causes, consequences-the choanoflagellate/sponge transition, neurogenesis and the Cambrian explosion. Phil. Trans. R Soc. B 372, 20150476 ()

    Not in our library10.1098/rstb.2015.0476

  122. 122.

    Pan M, Xu X, Chen Y, Jin T 2016 Identification of a chemoattractant G-protein-coupled receptor for folic acid that controls both chemotaxis and phagocytosis. Dev. Cell 36, 428–439. ()

    Not in our library10.1016/j.devcel.2016.01.012

  123. 123.

    Yoshida S, Pacitto R, Yao Y, Inoki K, Swanson JA 2015 Growth factor signaling to mTORC1 by amino acid-laden macropinosomes. J. Cell Biol. 211, 159–172. ()

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.201504097

  124. 124.

    Yoshida S, Pacitto R, Inoki K, Swanson J 2017 Macropinocytosis, mTORC1 and cellular growth control. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 75, 1227–1239. ()

    Not in our library10.1007/s00018-017-2710-y

  125. 125.

    Erami Z, Khalil BD, Salloum G, Yao Y, LoPiccolo J, Shymanets A, Nurnberg B, Bresnick AR, Backer JM 2017 Rac1-stimulated macropinocytosis enhances Gβγ activation of PI3Kβ. Biochem. J. 474, 3903–3914. ()

    Not in our library10.1042/bcj20170279

Cited by papers we hold 2

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.