Coordinated Segregation of Sister Chromatids 2419 Staining (To Visualize the SC) and FISH (To Identify the X Chromosome and the Telomeres)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Coordinated Segregation of Sister Chromatids 2419 Staining (To Visualize the SC) and FISH (To Identify the X Chromosome and the Telomeres) RESEARCH ARTICLE 2417 Coordinating the segregation of sister chromatids during the first meiotic division: evidence for sexual dimorphism Craig A. Hodges, Renée LeMaire-Adkins and Patricia A. Hunt* Department of Genetics and Center for Human Genetics, Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio 44106-4955, USA *Author for correspondence (e-mail: [email protected]) Accepted 5 April 2001 Journal of Cell Science 114, 2417-2426 © The Company of Biologists Ltd SUMMARY Errors during the first meiotic division are common in our chromosome at prophase to determine if this factor species, but virtually all occur during female meiosis. The influenced the propensity of the chromosome for self- reason why oogenesis is more error prone than synapsis. We were unable to directly correlate synaptic spermatogenesis remains unknown. Normal segregation of differences with subsequent segregation behavior. homologous chromosomes at the first meiotic division (MI) However, unexpectedly, we uncovered a sexual dimorphism requires coordinated behavior of the sister chromatids that may partially explain sex-specific differences in the of each homolog. Failure of sister kinetochores to act fidelity of meiotic chromosome segregation. Specifically, in cooperatively at MI, or precocious sister chromatid the male remnants of the synaptonemal complex remain segregation (PSCS), has been postulated to be a major associated with the centromeres until anaphase of the contributor to human nondisjunction. To investigate the second meiotic division (MII), whereas in the female, all factors that influence PSCS we utilized the XO mouse, since traces of synaptonemal complex (SC) protein components the chromatids of the single X chromosome frequently are lost from the chromosomes before the onset of the first segregate at MI, and the propensity for PSCS is influenced meiotic division. This finding suggests a sex-specific by genetic background. Our studies demonstrate that the difference in the components used to correctly segregate strain-specific differences in PSCS are due to the actions chromosomes during meiosis, and may provide a reason for of an autosomal trans-acting factor or factors. Since the high error frequency during female meiosis. components of the synaptonemal complex are thought to play a role in centromere cohesion and kinetochore Key words: Meiosis, Nondisjunction, Sister chromatid cohesion, orientation, we evaluated the behavior of the X Synaptonemal complex, XO mouse INTRODUCTION form attachments to the same rather than opposing spindle poles. The second meiotic division (MII) is similar to a mitotic Proper chromosome segregation during mitotic cell division cell division, involving the segregation of sister chromatids. requires at least two chromosome-associated protein However, because MI and MII occur without an intervening S complexes. At the centromere, functional kinetochores must be phase, successful chromosome segregation at MII requires formed on individual sister chromatids to facilitate the a mechanism whereby cohesion is released along the attachment of the chromatids to opposite spindle poles. In chromosome arms at anaphase I but maintained between sister addition, cohesion must be established between the centromeres until anaphase II. centromeres and along the arms of the sister chromatids and It is commonly assumed that the specialized meiotic maintained until anaphase to prevent their precocious cohesion requirements depend upon the unique events of separation. meiotic prophase, e.g. synapsis and recombination. The role of By comparison with mitotic cell division, the segregation recombination in the disjunction of homologous chromosomes behavior of chromosomes during meiotic cell division is at MI is well established (e.g. Carpenter, 1994; reviewed in complex, necessitating modification of both the kinetochore Hassold et al., 2000; Hawley, 1988; Koehler et al., 1996; Lamb and cohesion complexes. Our understanding of these meiotic et al., 1996). The role of synapsis remains less well modifications remains rudimentary. The first meiotic division characterized, but the inferential evidence is compelling: both (MI) involves the segregation of homologs rather than defects in homolog synapsis and the absence of a homologous sister chromatids (Fig. 1A). Thus, successful chromosome partner are associated with an increased frequency of segregation at MI requires specialized cohesion mechanisms premature separation of sister chromatids at MI in a variety of that provide physical connections between homologs (rather species (reviewed in Moore and Orr-Weaver, 1998; Wolf, than sister chromatids), and impose constraint on the 1993). Moreover studies in corn, yeast and mammals provide centromeres of sister chromatids so that their kinetochores evidence for the involvement of components of the 2418 JOURNAL OF CELL SCIENCE 114 (13) synaptonemal complex (SC), the proteinaceous structure influence the behavior of sister kinetochores at the first meiotic involved in homolog synapsis, in MI segregation. In maize, the division. We report here the results of detailed meiotic studies analysis of a variety of mutants and structural rearrangements that exclude X-chromosome specific differences and suggest provides compelling evidence for a relationship between the that segregation is influenced by the action of an autosomal gene SC and sister chromatid cohesion and suggests a direct or genes. We hypothesized that this trans-acting factor(s) would correlation between synaptic failure in the centromeric region influence the synaptic behavior of the X chromosome, and that and precocious sister chromatid segregation (PSCS) (reviewed failure to undergo self-synapsis involving the centromere of the in Maguire, 1995). In yeast, mutations in the meiosis-specific chromosome would result in the premature separation of X component of the cohesion complex, Rec8, show an increase chromatids at MI. Our observations did not fit this expectation, in PSCS at MI (Watanabe and Nurse, 1999). Finally, in but our studies provide new insight to the complexity of the mammals, two pieces of data implicate the involvement of SC synaptic process and suggest that inferences about subsequent proteins in meiotic sister chromatid cohesion. First, remnants meiotic events based on pachytene analysis may be misleading. of the lateral element persist at the centromere until anaphase More importantly, however, our efforts to correlate segregation II, as revealed by immunolocalization studies using antibodies behavior with the retention of synaptonemal complex proteins to two protein components, SCP3 and SCP2 (Dobson et al., revealed a surprising difference in centromere-associated 1994; Offenberg et al., 1998). Second, studies of the recently proteins between oogenesis and spermatogenesis. Differences identified cohesin components, SMC1 and SMC3, provide in the protein components of the meiotic chromosome cohesion evidence of interactions with SCP3 and SCP2 (Eijpe et al., complex may influence the fidelity of meiotic chromosome 2000). Thus, there is considerable indirect evidence for the segregation, thus this intriguing sexual dimorphism may involvement of SC proteins in the unique behavior of sister provide a partial explanation for the high chromosome error rate kinetochores at MI, in the maintenance of connections between during human female meiosis. homologs, and in the maintenance of cohesion between sister centromeres until anaphase II. However, the mechanistic details remain unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS These processes are not only of academic interest to students of meiotic cell division but rather have a dramatic impact on Production of XO female mice human life: the meiotic divisions in the human female are XO female mice and XX sibling controls were produced on two extraordinarily error prone. Estimates of the error frequency different inbred strain backgrounds using previously described mating range from one in twenty to one in three human oocytes, schemes involving males prone to meiotic sex chromosome depending upon the age of the woman (reviewed in Hassold et nondisjunction. Specifically, C57BL/6 females were mated to al., 1996). Despite intensive investigation, the reason for the C57BL/6 males carrying the Y* chromosome (Eicher et al., 1982) and high error rate in our species remains unknown. It is clear, C3H females were mated to C3H males carrying the X-linked Paf however, that the majority of errors occur during the first mutation (Lane and Davisson, 1990). Both crosses produce meiotic division, that the propensity for segregation errors is approximately 20% XO females. chromosome-specific, and that the fidelity of chromosome Intercrosses of the two inbred strains were made to generate F1 hybrid females that differed only in the origin of their X chromosome: segregation is influenced by the number and placement of C57BL/6 females were mated to C3H males carrying the Paf mutation recombination events along the chromosome arms (reviewed to produce XO females with a C57BL/6 X chromosome and C3H in Hassold et al., 2000). It has been postulated that PSCS is a females were mated to C57BL/6 males carrying the Y* mutation to major mechanism responsible for the age-related increase in produce XO females with a C3H X chromosome. segregation errors in our species (Angell, 1997; Angell et al., 1994; Wolstenholme and Angell, 2000), and the small amount Oocyte collection, culture and fixation of data available from direct studies of human oocytes are To assess the
Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Anaphase Bridges: Not All Natural Fibers Are Healthy
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Review Anaphase Bridges: Not All Natural Fibers Are Healthy Alice Finardi 1, Lucia F. Massari 2 and Rosella Visintin 1,* 1 Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20139 Milan, Italy; alice.fi[email protected] 2 The Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, Institute of Cell Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3BF, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-02-5748-9859; Fax: +39-02-9437-5991 Received: 14 July 2020; Accepted: 5 August 2020; Published: 7 August 2020 Abstract: At each round of cell division, the DNA must be correctly duplicated and distributed between the two daughter cells to maintain genome identity. In order to achieve proper chromosome replication and segregation, sister chromatids must be recognized as such and kept together until their separation. This process of cohesion is mainly achieved through proteinaceous linkages of cohesin complexes, which are loaded on the sister chromatids as they are generated during S phase. Cohesion between sister chromatids must be fully removed at anaphase to allow chromosome segregation. Other (non-proteinaceous) sources of cohesion between sister chromatids consist of DNA linkages or sister chromatid intertwines. DNA linkages are a natural consequence of DNA replication, but must be timely resolved before chromosome segregation to avoid the arising of DNA lesions and genome instability, a hallmark of cancer development. As complete resolution of sister chromatid intertwines only occurs during chromosome segregation, it is not clear whether DNA linkages that persist in mitosis are simply an unwanted leftover or whether they have a functional role.
    [Show full text]
  • Pds5 Regulators Segregate Cohesion and Condensation Pathways in Saccharomyces Cerevisiae
    Pds5 regulators segregate cohesion and condensation pathways in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Kevin Tong and Robert V. Skibbens1 Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015 Edited by Douglas Koshland, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved April 23, 2015 (received for review January 21, 2015) Cohesins are required both for the tethering together of sister these cohesion-related processes are so intimately entwined as to chromatids (termed cohesion) and subsequent condensation into be potentially inseparable. discrete structures—processes fundamental for faithful chromo- Cells from RBS patients typically exhibit heterochromatic re- some segregation into daughter cells. Differentiating between pulsion (regionalized condensation defects) absent in cells from cohesin roles in cohesion and condensation would provide an im- CdLS patients. The presence of aneuploidy and failed mitosis also portant advance in studying chromatin metabolism. Pds5 is a cohe- appears to differentiate, at the cellular level, otherwise highly sin-associated factor that is essential for both cohesion maintenance similar developmental abnormalities(12,20).Therefore,theidenti- and condensation. Recent studies revealed that ELG1 deletion sup- fication of pathways through which cohesion and condensation are presses the temperature sensitivity of pds5 mutant cells. However, experimentally separated would provide important tools useful in the mechanisms through which Elg1 may regulate cohesion and con- dissecting each pathway in isolation and provide a broader un- densation remain unknown. Here, we report that ELG1 deletion from derstanding of the multifaceted cohesin complex. A limited number pds5-1 mutant cells results in a significant rescue of cohesion, but not of genes (RAD61/WAPL and ELG1), when deleted, suppress condensation, defects. Based on evidence that Elg1 unloads the DNA ctf7/eco1 mutant cell growth deficiencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Repression of Harmful Meiotic Recombination in Centromeric Regions
    Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology 54 (2016) 188–197 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology j ournal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/semcdb Review Repression of harmful meiotic recombination in centromeric regions ∗ Mridula Nambiar, Gerald R. Smith Division of Basic Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, WA, United States a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: During the first division of meiosis, segregation of homologous chromosomes reduces the chromosome Received 23 November 2015 number by half. In most species, sister chromatid cohesion and reciprocal recombination (crossing-over) Accepted 27 January 2016 between homologous chromosomes are essential to provide tension to signal proper chromosome segre- Available online 3 February 2016 gation during the first meiotic division. Crossovers are not distributed uniformly throughout the genome and are repressed at and near the centromeres. Rare crossovers that occur too near or in the centromere Keywords: interfere with proper segregation and can give rise to aneuploid progeny, which can be severely defec- Meiosis tive or inviable. We review here how crossing-over occurs and how it is prevented in and around the Homologous recombination Crossing-over centromeres. Molecular mechanisms of centromeric repression are only now being elucidated. How- Centromeres ever, rapid advances in understanding crossing-over, chromosome structure, and centromere functions Chromosome segregation promise to explain how potentially deleterious crossovers are avoided in certain chromosomal regions Aneuploidy while allowing beneficial crossovers in others. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Drosophila Mei-S332 Gene Promotes Sister-Chromatid Cohesionin Meiosis Following Kinetochore Differentiation
    Copyright 0 1992 by the Genetics Society of America The Drosophila mei-S332 Gene Promotes Sister-Chromatid Cohesionin Meiosis Following Kinetochore Differentiation Anne W. Kerrebrock,* Wesley Y. Miyazaki,*9t Deborah Birnbyt”and Terry L. Orr-Weaver*9t92 *Whitehead Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, and +Department ofBiology,Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142 Manuscript received September 3, 1991 Accepted for publication December24, 1991 ABSTRACT The Drosophila meiS332 gene acts to maintain sister-chromatid cohesion before anaphase I1 of meiosis in both males and females. By isolating and analyzing seven new alleles and a deficiency uncovering the mei-S332 gene we have demonstrated that the onset of the requirement for mei-S332 is not until late anaphaseI. All of our alleles result primarilyin equational (meiosis11) nondisjunction with low amounts of reductional (meiosis I) nondisjunction. Cytological analysis revealed that sister chromatids frequently separate in late anaphaseI in these mutants. Sincethe sister chromatids remain associated until late in the first division, chromosomes segregate normallyduring meiosis I, and the genetic consequencesof premature sister-chromatid dissociationare seen as nondisjunction in meiosis 11. The late onsetof mei-S332 action demonstratedby the mutations was not a consequence of residual gene function because two strong, and possibly null, alleles give predominantly equational nondis- junction both as homozygotes and in trans to a deficiency. mei-S332 is not required until after metaphase I, when the kinetochore differentiates from a single hemispherical kinetochore jointly organized by the sister chromatids into two distinct sister kinetochores.Therefore, we propose that the mei-S322 product acts to hold the doubled kinetochore together until anaphase 11.
    [Show full text]
  • S-Phase Checkpoint Genes Safeguard High-Fidelity Sister Chromatid Cohesion□D Cheryl D
    Molecular Biology of the Cell Vol. 15, 1724–1735, April 2004 S-Phase Checkpoint Genes Safeguard High-Fidelity Sister Chromatid Cohesion□D Cheryl D. Warren,* D. Mark Eckley,* Marina S. Lee,* Joseph S. Hanna,* Adam Hughes,* Brian Peyser,* Chunfa Jie,* Rafael Irizarry,† and Forrest A. Spencer*‡ *McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine, Ross 850, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21205; and †Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205 Submitted September 2, 2003; Revised December 10, 2003; Accepted December 23, 2003 Monitoring Editor: Douglas Koshland Cohesion establishment and maintenance are carried out by proteins that modify the activity of Cohesin, an essential complex that holds sister chromatids together. Constituents of the replication fork, such as the DNA polymerase ␣-binding protein Ctf4, contribute to cohesion in ways that are poorly understood. To identify additional cohesion components, we analyzed a ctf4⌬ synthetic lethal screen performed on microarrays. We focused on a subset of ctf4⌬- interacting genes with genetic instability of their own. Our analyses revealed that 17 previously studied genes are also necessary for the maintenance of robust association of sisters in metaphase. Among these were subunits of the MRX complex, which forms a molecular structure similar to Cohesin. Further investigation indicated that the MRX complex did not contribute to metaphase cohesion independent of Cohesin, although an additional role may be contributed by XRS2. In general, results from the screen indicated a sister chromatid cohesion role for a specific subset of genes that function in DNA replication and repair. This subset is particularly enriched for genes that support the S-phase checkpoint.
    [Show full text]
  • Incomplete Y Chromosomes Promote Magnification in Male and Female Drosophila (Ribosomal Genes/Ribosomal Gene Amplification) DONALD J
    Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 84, pp. 2382-2386, April 1987 Genetics Incomplete Y chromosomes promote magnification in male and female Drosophila (ribosomal genes/ribosomal gene amplification) DONALD J. KOMMA AND SHARYN A. ENDOW* Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710 Communicated by D. Bernard Amos, December 12, 1986 ABSTRACT We have recently shown that magnification, on the Y that might encode a gene whose product initiates an increase in the number of ribosomal RNA genes (rDNA) in breaks in the rDNA or results in unequal pairing. Alterna- gametes produced by rDNA-deficient flies, can occur in female tively, the involvement of a limited region of the Y chromo- Drosophila if they have a Y chromosome. We now have tested some might imply a chromosomal pairing function analogous several X-Y translocation and recombinant chromosomes to to that of the collochores described by Cooper (8). determine which parts of the Y chromosome are necessary for The Ybb- chromosome, discovered by Schultz in 1933 (9), magnification to occur in females. Our data indicate that the has been described as being particularly effective in promot- required region is the distal part of the long arm of the Y ing magnification (1, 10, 11). In addition to promoting a high chromosome, yL. We have also used X-Y translocation chro- frequency of magnification in males carrying an Xbb chro- mosomes to study magnification of rDNA-deficient X chromo- mosome (1), it brings about the production of new bb alleles somes in males. Our data show that the region of the Y in males carrying an Xbb+ chromosome (2, 11, 12), and its chromosome from the distal end of the nucleolus organizer derivatives can bring about magnification of an Xbb chro- through the centromere is not required for magnfication in mosome in males of a bb+ phenotype (13), suggesting that it males.
    [Show full text]
  • H2A.Z Contributes to the Unique 3D Structure of the Centromere
    H2A.Z contributes to the unique 3D structure of the centromere Ian K. Greaves, Danny Rangasamy, Patricia Ridgway, and David J. Tremethick* The John Curtin School of Medical Research, Australian National University, P.O. Box 334, Canberra, The Australian Capital Territory 2601, Australia Edited by Steven Henikoff, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, and approved November 1, 2006 (received for review September 10, 2006) Mammalian centromere function depends upon a specialized chro- In this study, we investigated: (i) whether H2A.Z is a core matin organization where distinct domains of CENP-A and di- constituent of pericentric heterochromatin; (ii) the interplay methyl K4 histone H3, forming centric chromatin, are uniquely between H2A.Z and CENP-A, including whether H2A.Z is a positioned on or near the surface of the chromosome. These component of centric chromatin; (iii) the 3D spatial organization distinct domains are embedded in pericentric heterochromatin of H2A.Z chromatin at metaphase and its relationship to the (characterized by H3 methylated at K9). The mechanisms that other marks of the centromere; and (iv) whether the histone underpin this complex spatial organization are unknown. Here, we modifications that define centric and pericentric chromatin in identify the essential histone variant H2A.Z as a new structural flies, humans (3), and fission yeast (7) are conserved in mice. component of the centromere. Along linear chromatin fibers H2A.Z is distributed nonuniformly throughout heterochromatin, and cen- Results tric chromatin where regions of nucleosomes containing H2A.Z and H2A.Z Is Present in Pericentric Heterochromatin at the Inner Centro- dimethylated K4 H3 are interspersed between subdomains of mere.
    [Show full text]
  • CHROMATID SEGREGATION of TETRAPLOIDS and HEXAPLOIDS HILDA GEIRINGER Wheaton College, Mass
    CHROMATID SEGREGATION OF TETRAPLOIDS AND HEXAPLOIDS HILDA GEIRINGER Wheaton College, Mass. Received February 26, 1949. INTRODUCTION N an earlier paper (GEIRINGER1948) the author has investigated the mathe- I matical genetics of autopolyploids if one locus is considered and chromo- some segregation is assumed. A paper on the linkage theory of autopolyploids (m loci), under the same assumption, is in press (GEIRINGER1949). However, while chromosome segregation might be assumed as an approximation theory, the study of polyploids should actually be based on the consideration of chromatid segregation. In the case of one locus this theory can be worked out and is presented in this paper as far as random mating is concerned. This study, for m = 1, as well as the approximation theory for general m, may serve as a necessary preparation for a general linkage theory of polyploids under chromatid segregation. A basic paper by J. B. S. HALDANE(1930) is mainly concerned with the chromosome segregation theory of polyploids; “random chromatid segrega- tion” of tetraploids is briefly discussed too and a limit formula (our formula (24)) follows. In a paper of a more recent date R. A. FISHER(1947) deals with the linkage theory of polyploids under chromatid segregation. The paper uses important earlier investigations by the same author (1941, 1944) as well as a paper by FISHERand MATHER(1943) and papers by MATHER(1935, 1936). As in previous papers it is our aim to consider a heredity problem like the one in question as a probability problem. From certain basic probability dis- tributions which must be known other genetical distributions are derived by means of probability calculus.
    [Show full text]
  • Teacher Background Meiosis
    Teacher Background Meiosis Note: The Teacher Background Section is meant to provide information for the teacher about the topic and is tied very closely to the PowerPoint slide show. For greater understanding, the teacher may want to play the slide show as he/she reads the background section. For the students, the slide show can be used in its entirety or can be edited as necessary for a given class. What are the two types of cell division? There are two types of normal cell division – mitosis and meiosis. Both types of cell division take place in eukaryotic organisms. Mitosis is cell division which begins in the zygote (fertilized oocyte) and continues in somatic cells throughout the life of the organism. Mitosis is important for growth and repair since this type of cell division produces genetically identical diploid copies of the original cell. (See chapter 2 for more details.) What is meiosis? Meiosis is cell division that occurs in the ovaries of the female and testes of the male and involves the maturation of primordial ooctyes (eggs) and formation of sperm cells, respectively. Primordial oocytes are present in the ovary at the birth of the female and sperm cells form from spermatogonia (sperm stem cells) in the testes. (See chapter 6 for more details.) Meiosis is a two-phase cell division process that reduces the chromosome number by half (haploid) so when fertilization occurs, the normal chromosome number of the species (diploid) will be maintained. Meiosis ensures genetic diversity by randomly assorting the homologous pairs of chromosomes as oocytes mature and sperm cells are formed.
    [Show full text]