DOCSLIB.ORG

Cohesin Release Is Required for Sister Chromatid Resolution, but Not for Condensin-Mediated Compaction, at the Onset of Mitosis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cohesin Release Is Required for Sister Chromatid Resolution, but Not for Condensin-Mediated Compaction, at the Onset of Mitosis Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on September 28, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Cohesin release is required for sister chromatid resolution, but not for condensin-mediated compaction, at the onset of mitosis Ana Losada, Michiko Hirano, and Tatsuya Hirano1 Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York 11724, USA The establishment of metaphase chromosomes is an essential prerequisite of sister chromatid separation in anaphase. It involves the coordinated action of cohesin and condensin, protein complexes that mediate cohesion and condensation, respectively. In metazoans, most cohesin dissociates from chromatin at prophase, coincident with association of condensin. Whether loosening of cohesion at the onset of mitosis facilitates the compaction process, resolution of the sister chromatids, or both, remains unknown. We have found that the prophase release of cohesin is completely blocked when two mitotic kinases, aurora B and polo-like kinase (Plx1), are simultaneously depleted from Xenopus egg extracts. Condensin loading onto chromatin is not affected under this condition, and rod-shaped chromosomes are produced that show an apparently normal level of compaction. However, the resolution of sister chromatids within these chromosomes is severely compromised. This is not because of inhibition of topoisomerase II activity that is also required for the resolution process. We propose that aurora B and Plx1 cooperate to destabilize the sister chromatid linkage through distinct mechanisms that may involve phosphorylation of histone H3 and cohesin, respectively. More importantly, our results strongly suggest that cohesin release at the onset of mitosis is essential for sister chromatid resolution but not for condensin-mediated compaction. [Keywords: Cohesin; condensin; sister chromatid cohesion; chromosome condensation; histone H3 phosphorylation] Received September 4, 2002; revised version accepted October 11, 2002. In eukaryotic cells, the duplication of chromosomal cycle-dependent transitions of chromosome structure DNA during S phase produces two sister DNA mol- can largely be explained by the dynamic behavior of two eculesthat are topologically intertwined. In addition, a distinct structural maintenance of chromosomes (SMC) proteinaceous linkage between the sister chromatids is protein complexes, cohesin and condensin. Cohesin established during this stage and is maintained through- plays a central role in sister chromatid cohesion, possi- out G2 phase. At the onset of mitosis, loosening of co- bly asthe main constituentof the proteinaceouslinkage hesion accompanies the compaction of each chromatid that holds sister chromatids together (for review, see Lee along itslongitudinal axis.The final product of this and Orr-Weaver 2001; Nasmyth 2001). In metazoan mechanistically complex process is the metaphase chro- cells, most cohesin complexes bound to interphase chro- mosome, in which two rod-shaped sister chromatids are matin dissociate during mitotic prophase (Losada et al. juxtaposed along their entire length. The establishment 1998, 2000; Waizenegger et al. 2000; Warren et al. 2000). of metaphase chromosome structure is an essential pre- Although it hasbeen proposedthat thisbulk releaseof requisite of the faithful segregation of sister chromatids cohesin may be required for proper chromosome conden- in anaphase. Despite its fundamental importance, very sation (e.g., Losada and Hirano 2001), no direct test for little isknown about the regulatory network that con- thishypothesishasbeenreported to date. The remaining tributesto the conversionof amorphousinterphasechro- cohesin complexes are removed from the chromosomes matin into highly organized metaphase chromosomes. via separase-mediated cleavage at the onset of anaphase, Accumulating lines of evidence suggest that the cell- leading to complete separation of the sister chromatids (Waizenegger et al. 2000; Hauf et al. 2001). On the other hand, condensin is loaded on chromosomes in prophase, 1Corresponding author. at the time when condensation is initiated and cohesin- E-MAIL [email protected]; FAX (516) 367-8815. Article and publication are at http://www.genesdev.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/ mediated linkage is destabilized (for review, see Hirano gad.249202. 2000). Condensin is essential for the maintenance of 3004 GENES & DEVELOPMENT 16:3004–3016 © 2002 by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press ISSN 0890-9369/02 $5.00; www.genesdev.org Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on September 28, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Aurora B, polo and sister chromatid resolution condensation from metaphase to anaphase and dissoci- This in vitro system allows the assembly of chromo- ates from chromosomes in telophase when decondensa- somesindependentlyof other mitotic events(e.g., tion becomesapparent in the daughter cell nuclei (Hi- spindle assembly), enabling us to investigate the specific rano and Mitchison 1994; Schmiesing et al. 2000). contribution of different kinasestothisparticular pro- One important question is how multiple protein ki- cess. We have found that aurora B and polo-like kinase nases might regulate these changes of chromosome ar- (Plx1) act in concert to dissociate cohesin from chroma- chitecture. Three mitotic kinases, cdc2, polo, and aurora tin at the onset of mitosis. Condensin is still able to bind B, are of particular interest. We have shown previously to chromatin when cohesin release is prevented by si- that phosphorylation of condensin by cdc2–cyclin B ac- multaneousdepletion of both kinasesandleadsto the tivatesitspositivesupercoilingand knotting activities formation of rod-shaped chromosomes of apparently in vitro (Kimura et al. 1998, 1999, 2001). Although this normal length. However, the assembled chromosomes observation partially explains how chromosome conden- have a profound defect in the resolution of sister chro- sation is initiated at the onset of mitosis, additional matids. mechanisms are likely to dictate the mitosis-specific as- sociation of condensin with chromatin (Kimura and Hi- rano 2000; Steen et al. 2000). Cdc2 can also phosphory- Results late one of the regulatory subunits of vertebrate cohesin Characterization of Plx1 and aurora B in Xenopus (SA/Scc3) in vitro, and thisphosphorylationreducesthe egg extracts affinity of the complex for chromatin (Losada et al. 2000). However, cdc2 activity isnot required for cohesin We have shown previously that release of cohesin from release when a pseudomitotic state is induced by addi- chromatin at the onset of mitosis is not accompanied by tion of a phosphatase inhibitor to interphase extracts cleavage of the Rad21/Scc1 subunit but instead corre- (Sumara et al. 2000). In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Cdc5/ lates with phosphorylation of the SA/Scc3 subunits in polo kinase phosphorylates the Scc1 subunit of cohesin Xenopus egg extracts(Losadaet al. 2000). In thisstudy, and thereby enhancesitscleavage by separaseat the on- we have focused on the role of two mitotic kinases, Plx1 set of anaphase (Alexandru et al. 2001). The specific role and aurora B, in cohesin behavior. If phosphorylation of of this kinase in sister chromatid separation has been cohesinindeed promotesitsrelease,one would expect revealed only recently, probably because polo plays mul- the responsible protein kinase(s) to act on chromatin. To tiple rolesthroughout mitosisanditsmutation causes test whether Plx1 and aurora B met this criterion, we pleiotropic phenotypes(Glover et al. 1998). investigated their chromatin-binding properties in the A similar level of complexity has been encountered in cell-free extracts. Sperm chromatin was first incubated the functional analysisofaurora B. Aurora B and itsbind- with an interphase extract and then a half volume of ing partner, INCENP, are referred to aschromosomal cytostatic factor (CSF)-arrested extract was added to in- passengers on the basis of their dynamic localization duce the transition to a mitotic state. Aliquots were during mitosis (for review, see Adams et al. 2001a). taken from the reaction mixture at different time points, These proteins associate with chromosomes early in mi- and chromatin fractionswere isolatedand analyzed by tosisandare detected at their centromeric regionsby immunoblotting. Consistent with our previous work metaphase. In anaphase, they redistribute to the spindle (Losada et al. 1998), cohesin was progressively loaded midzone and equatorial cortex and accumulate in the onto chromatin during interphase, and most complexes midbody during cytokinesis. Consistent with this dy- dissociated upon entry into mitosis (Fig. 1A, panel 1). namic behavior, mutation or depletion of aurora B causes Dissociation of cohesin coincided with association of defectsin multiple mitotic eventsincluding chromo- condensin with chromatin (Fig. 1A, panel 2). Although some segregation and cytokinesis. Recent studies have Plx1 and aurora B were detectable in both interphase and shown that aurora B phosphorylates the N-terminal tail mitotic chromatin (Fig. 1A, panels3,4), their kinaseac- of histone H3, implicating a direct contribution of this tivitiesappear to be regulated in a cell-cycle-dependent kinase to mitotic chromosome dynamics (Hsu et al. manner. Plx1 displayed a retarded migration during mi- 2000; Spelioteset al. 2000; Adamset al. 2001b; Giet and tosis(Fig.1A, panel 3, lanes9–13), which probably re- Glover 2001; Murnion et al. 2001). It has long been sus- flects its mitosis-specific activation by phosphorylation pected that thishistoneH3
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GENETICS and GENOMICS Ed
    GENETICS AND GENOMICS Ed. Csaba Szalai, PhD GENETICS AND GENOMICS Editor: Csaba Szalai, PhD, university professor Authors: Chapter 1: Valéria László Chapter 2, 3, 4, 6, 7: Sára Tóth Chapter 5: Erna Pap Chapter 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14: Csaba Szalai Chapter 15: András Falus and Ferenc Oberfrank Keywords: Mitosis, meiosis, mutations, cytogenetics, epigenetics, Mendelian inheritance, genetics of sex, developmental genetics, stem cell biology, oncogenetics, immunogenetics, human genomics, genomics of complex diseases, genomic methods, population genetics, evolution genetics, pharmacogenomics, nutrigenetics, gene environmental interaction, systems biology, bioethics. Summary The book contains the substance of the lectures and partly of the practices of the subject of ‘Genetics and Genomics’ held in Semmelweis University for medical, pharmacological and dental students. The book does not contain basic genetics and molecular biology, but rather topics from human genetics mainly from medical point of views. Some of the 15 chapters deal with medical genetics, but the chapters also introduce to the basic knowledge of cell division, cytogenetics, epigenetics, developmental genetics, stem cell biology, oncogenetics, immunogenetics, population genetics, evolution genetics, nutrigenetics, and to a relative new subject, the human genomics and its applications for the study of the genomic background of complex diseases, pharmacogenomics and for the investigation of the genome environmental interactions. As genomics belongs to sytems biology, a chapter introduces to basic terms of systems biology, and concentrating on diseases, some examples of the application and utilization of this scientific field are also be shown. The modern human genetics can also be associated with several ethical, social and legal issues. The last chapter of this book deals with these issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Prospects & Overviews Meiotic Versus Mitotic Recombination: Two Different
    Prospects & Overviews Meiotic versus mitotic recombination: Two different routes for double-strand Review essays break repair The different functions of meiotic versus mitotic DSB repair are reflected in different pathway usage and different outcomes Sabrina L. Andersen1) and Jeff Sekelsky1)2)Ã Studies in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have vali- Introduction dated the major features of the double-strand break repair (DSBR) model as an accurate representation of The existence of DNA recombination was revealed by the behavior of segregating traits long before DNA was identified the pathway through which meiotic crossovers (COs) are as the bearer of genetic information. At the start of the 20th produced. This success has led to this model being century, pioneering Drosophila geneticists studied the behav- invoked to explain double-strand break (DSB) repair in ior of chromosomal ‘‘factors’’ that determined traits such as other contexts. However, most non-crossover (NCO) eye color, wing shape, and bristle length. In 1910 Thomas Hunt recombinants generated during S. cerevisiae meiosis do Morgan published the observation that the linkage relation- not arise via a DSBR pathway. Furthermore, it is becom- ships of these factors were shuffled during meiosis [1]. Building on this discovery, in 1913 A. H. Sturtevant used ing increasingly clear that DSBR is a minor pathway for linkage analysis to determine the order of factors (genes) recombinational repair of DSBs that occur in mitotically- on a chromosome, thus simultaneously establishing that proliferating cells and that the synthesis-dependent genes are located at discrete physical locations along chromo- strand annealing (SDSA) model appears to describe somes as well as originating the classic tool of genetic map- mitotic DSB repair more accurately.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromatid Cohesion During Mitosis: Lessons from Meiosis
    Journal of Cell Science 112, 2607-2613 (1999) 2607 Printed in Great Britain © The Company of Biologists Limited 1999 JCS0467 COMMENTARY Chromatid cohesion during mitosis: lessons from meiosis Conly L. Rieder1,2,3 and Richard Cole1 1Wadsworth Center, New York State Dept of Health, PO Box 509, Albany, New York 12201-0509, USA 2Department of Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York, Albany, New York 12222, USA 3Marine Biology Laboratory, Woods Hole, MA 02543-1015, USA *Author for correspondence (e-mail: [email protected]) Published on WWW 21 July 1999 SUMMARY The equal distribution of chromosomes during mitosis and temporally separated under various conditions. Finally, we meiosis is dependent on the maintenance of sister demonstrate that in the absence of a centromeric tether, chromatid cohesion. In this commentary we review the arm cohesion is sufficient to maintain chromatid cohesion evidence that, during meiosis, the mechanism underlying during prometaphase of mitosis. This finding provides a the cohesion of chromatids along their arms is different straightforward explanation for why mutants in proteins from that responsible for cohesion in the centromere responsible for centromeric cohesion in Drosophila (e.g. region. We then argue that the chromatids on a mitotic ord, mei-s332) disrupt meiosis but not mitosis. chromosome are also tethered along their arms and in the centromere by different mechanisms, and that the Key words: Sister-chromatid cohesion, Mitosis, Meiosis, Anaphase functional action of these two mechanisms can be onset INTRODUCTION (related to the fission yeast Cut1P; Ciosk et al., 1998). When Pds1 is destroyed Esp1 is liberated, and this event somehow The equal distribution of chromosomes during mitosis is induces a class of ‘glue’ proteins, called cohesins (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Mitosis Vs. Meiosis
    Mitosis vs. Meiosis In order for organisms to continue growing and/or replace cells that are dead or beyond repair, cells must replicate, or make identical copies of themselves. In order to do this and maintain the proper number of chromosomes, the cells of eukaryotes must undergo mitosis to divide up their DNA. The dividing of the DNA ensures that both the “old” cell (parent cell) and the “new” cells (daughter cells) have the same genetic makeup and both will be diploid, or containing the same number of chromosomes as the parent cell. For reproduction of an organism to occur, the original parent cell will undergo Meiosis to create 4 new daughter cells with a slightly different genetic makeup in order to ensure genetic diversity when fertilization occurs. The four daughter cells will be haploid, or containing half the number of chromosomes as the parent cell. The difference between the two processes is that mitosis occurs in non-reproductive cells, or somatic cells, and meiosis occurs in the cells that participate in sexual reproduction, or germ cells. The Somatic Cell Cycle (Mitosis) The somatic cell cycle consists of 3 phases: interphase, m phase, and cytokinesis. 1. Interphase: Interphase is considered the non-dividing phase of the cell cycle. It is not a part of the actual process of mitosis, but it readies the cell for mitosis. It is made up of 3 sub-phases: • G1 Phase: In G1, the cell is growing. In most organisms, the majority of the cell’s life span is spent in G1. • S Phase: In each human somatic cell, there are 23 pairs of chromosomes; one chromosome comes from the mother and one comes from the father.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Meiosis
    Sexual Reproduction and Meiosis Chapter 11 Overview of Meiosis Meiosis is a form of cell division that leads to the production of gametes. gametes: egg cells and sperm cells -contain half the number of chromosomes of an adult body cell Adult body cells (somatic cells) are diploid, containing 2 sets of chromosomes. Gametes are haploid, containing only 1 set of chromosomes. 2 Overview of Meiosis Sexual reproduction includes the fusion of gametes (fertilization) to produce a diploid zygote. Life cycles of sexually reproducing organisms involve the alternation of haploid and diploid stages. Some life cycles include longer diploid phases, some include longer haploid phases. 3 1 4 5 6 2 7 Features of Meiosis Meiosis includes two rounds of division – meiosis I and meiosis II. During meiosis I, homologous chromosomes (homologues) become closely associated with each other. This is synapsis. Proteins between the homologues hold them in a synaptonemal complex. 8 9 3 Features of Meiosis Crossing over: genetic recombination between non-sister chromatids -physical exchange of regions of the chromatids chiasmata: sites of crossing over The homologues are separated from each other in anaphase I. 10 Features of Meiosis Meiosis involves two successive cell divisions with no replication of genetic material between them. This results in a reduction of the chromosome number from diploid to haploid. 11 12 4 The Process of Meiosis Prophase I: -chromosomes coil tighter -nuclear envelope dissolves -homologues become closely associated in synapsis -crossing over
    [Show full text]
  • Aging Mice Have Increased Chromosome Instability That Is Exacerbated by Elevated Mdm2 Expression
    Oncogene (2011) 30, 4622–4631 & 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0950-9232/11 www.nature.com/onc ORIGINAL ARTICLE Aging mice have increased chromosome instability that is exacerbated by elevated Mdm2 expression T Lushnikova1, A Bouska2, J Odvody1, WD Dupont3 and CM Eischen1 1Department of Pathology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA; 2Department of Pathology and Microbiology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA and 3Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA Aging is thought to negatively affect multiple cellular Introduction processes including the ability to maintain chromosome stability. Chromosome instability (CIN) is a common Genomic instability refers to the accumulation or property of cancer cells and may be a contributing factor acquisition of numerical and/or structural abnormali- to cellular transformation. The types of DNA aberrations ties in chromosomes. It has long been observed that that arise during aging before tumor development and that chromosome instability (CIN) is a hallmark of cancer contribute to tumorigenesis are currently unclear. Mdm2, cells and is postulated to be required for tumorigenesis a key regulator of the p53 tumor suppressor and (Lengauer et al., 1998; Negrini et al., 2010). Genomic modulator of DNA break repair, is frequently over- changes, such as chromosome breaks, translocations, expressed in malignancies and contributes to CIN. To genome rearrangements, aneuploidy and telomere short- determine the relationship between aging and CIN and the ening have been observed in aging organisms (Nisitani role of Mdm2, precancerous wild-type C57Bl/6 and et al., 1990; Tucker et al., 1999; Dolle and Vijg, 2002; littermate-matched Mdm2 transgenic mice at various Aubert and Lansdorp, 2008; Zietkiewicz et al., 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Sister Chromatids Are Often Incompletely Cohesed In
    Genetics: Published Articles Ahead of Print, published on September 12, 2005 as 10.1534/genetics.105.048363 Sister chromatids are often incompletely cohesed in meristematic and endopolyploid interphase nuclei of Arabidopsis thaliana Veit Schubert, Marco Klatte, Ales Pecinka, Armin Meister, Zuzana Jasencakova1, Ingo Schubert2 Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research (IPK), D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany 1present address: Dulbecco Telethon Institute of Genetics & Biophysics CNR, Epigenetics & Genome Reprogramming Laboratory, I-80131 Napoli, Italy 1 Running head: Sister chromatid alignment in Arabidopsis Keywords: Arabidopsis thaliana, sister chromatid cohesion, meristematic and endopolyploid nuclei, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), 2Corresponding author: Ingo Schubert, Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research (IPK), Corrensstrasse 3, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany Telephone: +49-39482-5239 Fax: +49-39482-5137 e-mail: [email protected] 2 ABSTRACT We analysed whether sister chromatids are continuously cohesed in meristematic and endopolyploid Arabidopsis interphase nuclei by studying sister chromatid alignment at various chromosomal positions. FISH with individual BACs to flow-sorted 4C root and leaf nuclei frequently yielded more than two hybridization signals indicating incomplete or lacking sister chromatid alignment. Up to 100% of 8C, 16C and 32C nuclei showed no sister chromatid alignment at defined positions. Simultaneous FISH with BACs from different chromosomal positions revealed more frequent sister chromatid alignment in terminal than in mid arm positions. Centromeric positions were mainly aligned up to a ploidy level of 16C but became separated or dispersed in 32C nuclei. DNA hypomethylation (of the whole genome) and transcriptional activity (at FWA gene position) did not impair sister chromatid alignment. Only 6.1% of 4C leaf nuclei showed sister chromatid separation of entire chromosome 1 top arm territories.
    [Show full text]
  • 000466 SIMR REPRT Fall2k3
    NEWS AND THE INSIGHT FROM THE STOWERS INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL Stowers RESEARCH REPORT FALL 2 0 0 Stowers Institute for Medical Research principal investigators who have received recent noteworthy awards and honors gather at the west end 3 of the Stowers Institute® campus. Front row, from left: Paul Trainor, Robb Krumlauf, Chunying Du. Second row, from left: Olivier Pourquié, Peter Baumann, Jennifer Gerton, Ting Xie. Ultimate solutions take time. Inside this issue . That’s particularly true with complex • Dr. Scott Hawley makes some surprising discoveries about how mistakes human diseases and birth defects during meiosis can lead to miscarriages and birth defects (Page 2). since there is still much we don’t • Dr. Olivier Pourquié sheds light on how the segments of the body begin to understand about the fundamentals grow at the right time and place in the embryo (Page 4). of life. At the Stowers Institute for • How do cells know when and where to differentiate and when their useful Medical Research, investigators healthy life is over? Dr. Chunying Du discovers a curious double negative seek to increase the understanding feedback loop in the apoptosis process that goes awry in cancer (Page 6); of the basic processes in living cells – Dr. Ting Xie investigates the importance of an environmental niche for VOLUME 6 stem cells (Page 7); and Dr. Peter Baumann studies the role of telomeres in a crucial step in the search for new aging and cancer (Page 8). medical treatments. • Scientific Director Dr. Robb Krumlauf and fellow Stowers Institute investigators inspire and are inspired by scientists and students in embryology at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts (Page 10).
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanisms and Regulation of Mitotic Recombination in Saccharomyces Cerevisiae
    YEASTBOOK GENOME ORGANIZATION AND INTEGRITY Mechanisms and Regulation of Mitotic Recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Lorraine S. Symington,* Rodney Rothstein,† and Michael Lisby‡ *Department of Microbiology and Immunology, and yDepartment of Genetics and Development, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York 10032, and ‡Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, DK-2200 Copenhagen, Denmark ABSTRACT Homology-dependent exchange of genetic information between DNA molecules has a profound impact on the maintenance of genome integrity by facilitating error-free DNA repair, replication, and chromosome segregation during cell division as well as programmed cell developmental events. This chapter will focus on homologous mitotic recombination in budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.However, there is an important link between mitotic and meiotic recombination (covered in the forthcoming chapter by Hunter et al. 2015) and many of the functions are evolutionarily conserved. Here we will discuss several models that have been proposed to explain the mechanism of mitotic recombination, the genes and proteins involved in various pathways, the genetic and physical assays used to discover and study these genes, and the roles of many of these proteins inside the cell. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 795 I. Introduction 796 II. Mechanisms of Recombination 798 A. Models for DSB-initiated homologous recombination 798 DSB repair and synthesis-dependent strand annealing models 798 Break-induced replication 798 Single-strand annealing and microhomology-mediated end joining 799 B. Proteins involved in homologous recombination 800 DNA end resection 800 Homologous pairing and strand invasion 802 Rad51 mediators 803 Single-strand annealing 803 DNA translocases 804 DNA synthesis during HR 805 Resolution of recombination intermediates 805 III.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosome Segregation: Learning Only When Chromosomes Are Correctly Bi-Oriented and Microtubules Exert to Let Go Tension Across Sister Kinetochores [6]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Dispatch R883 an mTORC1 substrate that negatively regulates inhibitors. Oncogene http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ 1Department of Cancer and Cell Biology, insulin signaling. Science 332, 1322–1326. onc.2013.92. University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 16. Chung, J., Kuo, C.J., Crabtree, G.R., and 19. She, Q.B., Halilovic, E., Ye, Q., Zhen, W., Cincinnati, OH 45267, USA. 2Institute for Blenis, J. (1992). Rapamycin-FKBP specifically Shirasawa, S., Sasazuki, T., Solit, D.B., and blocks growth-dependent activation of and Rosen, N. (2010). 4E-BP1 is a key effector of the Research in Immunology and Cancer (IRIC), signaling by the 70 kd S6 protein kinases. Cell oncogenic activation of the AKT and ERK Universite´ de Montre´ al, Montreal, 69, 1227–1236. signaling pathways that integrates their Quebec H3C 3J7, Canada. 3Department of 17. Zhang, Y., and Zheng, X.F. (2012). function in tumors. Cancer Cell 18, Pathology and Cell Biology, Faculty of mTOR-independent 4E-BP1 phosphorylation is 39–51. Medicine, Universite´ de Montre´ al, Montreal, associated with cancer resistance to mTOR 20. Shin, S., Wolgamott, L., Tcherkezian, J., kinase inhibitors. Cell Cycle 11, 594–603. Vallabhapurapu, S., Yu, Y., Roux, P.P., and Quebec, H3C 3J7, Canada. 18. Ducker, G.S., Atreya, C.E., Simko, J.P., Yoon, S.O. (2013). Glycogen synthase E-mail: [email protected], philippe. Hom, Y.K., Matli, M.R., Benes, C.H., Hann, B., kinase-3beta positively regulates protein [email protected] Nakakura, E.K., Bergsland, E.K., Donner, D.B., synthesis and cell proliferation through the et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Increased Aurora B Activity Causes Continuous Disruption Of
    Increased Aurora B activity causes continuous PNAS PLUS disruption of kinetochore–microtubule attachments and spindle instability Marta Muñoz-Barreraa,b and Fernando Monje-Casasa,c,1 aAndalusian Center for Molecular Biology and Regenerative Medicine (CABIMER), 41092 Seville, Spain; bSpanish National Research Council, 41092 Seville, Spain; and cDepartment of Genetics, University of Seville, 41092 Seville, Spain Edited* by Angelika Amon, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, and approved August 14, 2014 (received for review May 2, 2014) Aurora B kinase regulates the proper biorientation of sister chroma- of cytokinesis until all chromosomes have cleared the cleavage plane tids during mitosis. Lack of Aurora B kinase function results in the so as to avoid chromosome breakage during abscission (15–17). inability to correct erroneous kinetochore–microtubule attachments The absence of Aurora B activity leads to massive aneuploidy and gives rise to aneuploidy. Interestingly, increased Aurora B activ- problems because of the inability to resolve incorrect KT–MT ity also leads to problems with chromosome segregation, and over- attachments. Interestingly, however, not only the absence of expression of this kinase has been observed in various types of Aurora B but also its overexpression poses an important threat cancer. However, little is known about the mechanisms by which for cell viability, and increased levels of this kinase have been an increase in Aurora B kinase activity can impair mitotic progression associated with various types of cancer (18–20). In mammals, and cell viability. Here, using a yeast model, we demonstrate that elevated levels of Aurora B kinase cause defects in chromosome increased Aurora B activity as a result of the overexpression of the segregation and in the inhibition of cytokinesis (21), but little is Aurora B and inner centromere protein homologs triggers defects in known about the molecular mechanisms that underlie these phe- chromosome segregation by promoting the continuous disruption of notypes.
    [Show full text]
  • Accurate Chromosome Segregation by Probabilistic Self-Organisation Yasushi Saka1*, Claudiu V
    Saka et al. BMC Biology (2015) 13:65 DOI 10.1186/s12915-015-0172-y RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Accurate chromosome segregation by probabilistic self-organisation Yasushi Saka1*, Claudiu V. Giuraniuc1 and Hiroyuki Ohkura2* Abstract Background: For faithful chromosome segregation during cell division, correct attachments must be established between sister chromosomes and microtubules from opposite spindle poles through kinetochores (chromosome bi-orientation). Incorrect attachments of kinetochore microtubules (kMTs) lead to chromosome mis-segregation and aneuploidy, which is often associated with developmental abnormalities such as Down syndrome and diseases including cancer. The interaction between kinetochores and microtubules is highly dynamic with frequent attachments and detachments. However, it remains unclear how chromosome bi-orientation is achieved with such accuracy in such a dynamic process. Results: To gain new insight into this essential process, we have developed a simple mathematical model of kinetochore–microtubule interactions during cell division in general, i.e. both mitosis and meiosis. Firstly, the model reveals that the balance between attachment and detachment probabilities of kMTs is crucial for correct chromosome bi-orientation. With the right balance, incorrect attachments are resolved spontaneously into correct bi-oriented conformations while an imbalance leads to persistent errors. In addition, the model explains why errors are more commonly found in the first meiotic division (meiosis I) than in mitosis and how a faulty conformation can evade the spindle assembly checkpoint, which may lead to a chromosome loss. Conclusions: The proposed model, despite its simplicity, helps us understand one of the primary causes of chromosomal instability—aberrant kinetochore–microtubule interactions. The model reveals that chromosome bi-orientation is a probabilistic self-organisation, rather than a sophisticated process of error detection and correction.
    [Show full text]