Although recent years have yielded many insights into the molecular basis for cell motility, this complex process still holds many secrets. Recent models have suggested that a major active signal to nucleate new networks of actin filaments comes from a pathway known as the WASP-Arp2/3 pathway (reviewed in Machesky and Insall 1999xMachesky, L.M. and Insall, R.H. J. Cell Biol. 1999; 146: 267–272Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (199)See all ReferencesMachesky and Insall 1999). The Ena/VASP proteins facilitate the formation of new networks through enhancement of filament elongation and filament capture (Laurent et al. 1999xLaurent, V., Loisel, T.P., Harbeck, B., Wehman, A., Groebe, L., Jockusch, B.M., Wehland, J., Gertler, F.B., and Carlier, M.F. J. Cell Biol. 1999; 144: 1245–1258Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (237)See all ReferencesLaurent et al. 1999). Now we must incorporate the idea that Ena/VASP proteins may actually slow eukaryotic cell translocation although they speed up Listeria translocation (1xBashaw, G.J., Kidd, T., Murray, D., Pawson, T., and Goodman, C.S. Cell. 2000; 101: 703–715Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMedSee all References, 2xBear, J.E., Loureiro, J.J., Libova, I., Fassler, R., Wehland, J., and Gertler, F.B. Cell. 2000; 101: 717–728Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMedSee all References). How can we reconcile these apparently contradictory findings?First, it is probably much too simplistic to assume that increased actin polymerization correlates directly with increased translocation. For example, Dictyostelium cells show a maximum of assembled actin in response to a pulse of extracellular cAMP at a point when the cells are completely rounded up prior to polarization and increased translocation. This cringe response is not a migratory state, but the cells have up to 3-fold more F-actin than resting cells (Hall et al. 1988xHall, A.L., Schlein, A., and Condeelis, J. J. Cell. Biochem. 1988; 37: 285–299Crossref | PubMedSee all ReferencesHall et al. 1988). Furthermore, many of the signaling molecules generally thought to trigger actin polymerization, such as the small GTPases Rac1 and RhoA, can trigger neurite retraction or even growth cone collapse. It is unclear whether a rise in F-actin accompanies a pause, retraction or even collapse, but this should be testable. Small local amounts of the actin polymerization blocking drug cytochalasin D can actually increase neurite extension, perhaps by allowing the microtubule cytoskeleton to penetrate the cell cortex and advance the leading edge (Lanier and Gertler 2000xLanier, L.M. and Gertler, F.B. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2000; 10: 80–87Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (161)See all ReferencesLanier and Gertler 2000). Clearly, the role of F-actin in cell translocation is complex, so simply equating F-actin amount or even turnover with rate of translocation is oversimplistic.Listeria cells appear to have a simple built-in polarity—so any increase in actin polymerization would be expected to enhance the translocation speed—but eukaryotic motile cells exhibit much more complex types of movement. Perhaps the shape and polarity of a eukaryotic cell may be a better indicator of its speed than the amount of filamentous actin or the rate of actin filament turnover. Rapidly moving fibroblasts or Dictyostelium cells most often show a very polarized phenotype—the cell is elongated with a clear uropod at the rear and a small but consistent lamellipodium at the front. Stationary cells or cells that are changing direction often show multiple pseudopodia and lamellipodia in all directions. This could be analogous to the pause and turn state of an axon during pathfinding. If the axon needs to make a decision, it may use Ena, whether downstream of the repulsive receptor Robo or other attractive/repulsive receptors, to enhance the production of actin-based filopodia and lamellipodia while it pauses and explores the environment. Furthermore, neurons could require actin assembly for both protrusion and retraction. Contractility, as induced by Rho GTPases, requires large actin-myosin networks, which are probably assembled in response to cues such as repulsion (Kozma et al. 1997xKozma, R., Sarner, S., Ahmed, S., and Lim, L. Mol. Cell Biol. 1997; 17: 1201–1211Crossref | PubMedSee all ReferencesKozma et al. 1997). Figure 3Figure 3 shows a cartoon sketch of some different shapes of motile cells in what could be termed pause and explore versus rapid polarized translocation. It is easy to imagine that the actin polymerization requirements for pause and explore might be quite high and that a cell might concentrate its efforts into only a small leading edge area when it translocates in a single direction. If this model holds any truth, we might expect to see both repulsive and attractive receptors coupling to Ena and other parameters, such as the location of activation, to be variable.Figure 3Examples of Cells Translocating Unidirectionally toward a Target versus Cells Migrating Randomly or Pausing to Sample the EnvironmentRed indicates areas of rapid actin filament assembly.View Large Image | View Hi-Res Image | Download PowerPoint SlideAnother plausible way to think of Ena/VASP proteins as translocation restrictors is that the kinds of effects that Ena/VASP have on actin filaments may be to promote a stable network that enhances adhesion and/or pauses the leading edge. Both cell–cell and cell–substratum adhesion have the effect of slowing down cell translocation and both are likely to require actin polymerization. The effects of Ena/VASP proteins at the leading edges of cells might be to promote adhesion or alternatively to modify the structure of actin networks nucleated by the Arp2/3 complex. Lanier et al. 1999xLanier, L.M., Gates, M.A., Witke, W., Menzies, A.S., Wehman, A.M., Macklis, J.D., Kwiatkowski, D., Soriano, P., and Gertler, F.B. Neuron. 1999; 22: 313–325Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMedSee all ReferencesLanier et al. 1999 found Mena at the tips of growth cone filopodia, so perhaps Ena/VASP reshape actin into parallel bundles, allowing structures such as filopodia to protrude from branched lamellipodial networks. These filopodia could then form the basis for cell–cell junctions in keratinocytes or cell–substratum exploration in neurites or fibroblasts. It would be interesting to use fluorescence microscopy to examine directly the effects of Ena/VASP proteins on dendritic networks produced by the Arp2/3 complex in vitro (Blanchoin et al. 2000xBlanchoin, L., Amann, K.J., Higgs, H.N., Marchand, J.B., Kaiser, D.A., and Pollard, T.D. Nature. 2000; 404: 1007–1011Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (356)See all ReferencesBlanchoin et al. 2000).Clearly, many questions arise as to the reconciliation of the role of Ena/VASP proteins in Listeria translocation, in vitro and in eukaryotic cells. Some of the questions will probably be answered by resolution of the differences between genetic systems, where expression levels and cellular context within a whole organism are directing the results and biochemical systems that are oversimplified at times but allow direct access to molecular mechanisms. Other questions will be of great biological interest, such as the real function of filopodia and lamellipodia in an advancing neurite, the different contexts in which actin assembly is triggered, and the fine-tuning of the cytoskeleton by numerous signaling and actin binding proteins that results in all of the complex behaviors of motile cells.*E-mail: l.m.machesky@bham.ac.uk