Chromosome Instability: RB Moonlights in Mitosis

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Chromosome Instability: RB Moonlights in Mitosis RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS CHROMOSOME INSTABILITY cohesion, which leads to chromosome segregation errors and CIN. So, is this role of RB1 important for RB moonlights in mitosis its function as a tumour suppressor? Coschi et al. used Rb1ΔL/ΔL mice that Loss of the retinoblastoma (RB) Manning and colleagues used express a mutant RB1 that cannot bind tumour suppressor pathway com- RNA interference to down- condensin II complexes to test this. monly occurs in tumours and is asso- regulate RB1 expression in TERT- The authors showed that the increased ciated with chromosome instability immortalized RPE1 cells (which are lagging chromosomes and centro- (CIN). The RB pathway is famous for diploid epithelial cells) and found that meric fusions observed in MEFs from its role in mediating G1/S cell cycle the loss of RB1 induces aneuploidy these mice were not the result of loss checkpoint control, but can this role and chromosome missegregation. of G1/S cell cycle checkpoint control. alone account for its tumour suppres- Knock down of RB1 did not affect Live imaging of these MEFs revealed sive function? proliferation but increased the mitotic the same mitotic defects, which they Evidence suggests that loss of index by twofold. In particular, the showed caused aneuploidy from either the RB pathway affects mitosis, so authors found a high proportion of an abrupt termination of the delay Van Harn and colleagues arrested cells in prometaphase, indicating that at metaphase (probably caused by mouse embryonic fibroblasts in loss of RB1 delayed mitotic progres- chromosome breakage) or a failure to which the three Rb family members sion. On further analysis, the authors complete mitosis (which generated were ablated (TKO-MEFs) in G2 by observed increased inter-centromeric binucleated cells). Condensin II sub- serum starvation. This induced the distance between sister chromatids, units were also improperly loaded cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor defects in chromosome congression, onto chromatin. The expression of the p21, produced double-strand DNA sister kinetochore orientation and RB1 mutant reduced the latency of breaks and activated the homologous alignment on the metaphase plate. tumour initiation in Rb1ΔL/ΔL;Trp53–/– recombination repair pathway. The authors proposed that these and Rb1ΔL/ΔL;Trp53+/– mice. Moreover, Inhibiting DNA damage response mitotic defects might originate from the tumours were more aggressive, (DDR) kinases accelerated cell cycle a defect in the centromere structure, there was a higher incidence of metas- re-entry and progression into mitosis which is regulated by the cohesin tases and a higher proportion of mice after release from serum starvation and condensin complexes. They with multiple tumours. By comparing and downregulated p21 expression. found that chromatin association of thymic lymphoma cells from Rb1ΔL/ΔL; These data indicate that serum- RAD21 — a subunit of the cohesin Trp53–/– and Trp53–/– mice the authors starved RB pathway-deficient cells complex — was reduced in mitotic found that whole and segmental accumulate DNA damage during cells lacking RB1, suggesting that its chromosome gains and losses were progression through the preceding loss impairs the loading or mainte- increased in the lymphoma cells that S phase and thereby activate DDR nance of the cohesin complex at the expressed mutant RB1, suggesting that pathways. Moreover, metaphase centromere. the accompanying CIN could account spreads of TKO-MEFs showed RBF1, the Drosophila melanogaster for the reduced tumour latency. defects in centromeric sister chro- RB homologue, interacts with the Together, these data suggest that matid cohesion and more chromatid condensin II subunit CAP-D3. the CIN resulting from the inability breaks than in controls, suggesting Adding to these findings, Manning of RB1 to maintain sister chromatid damage persists in mitosis. Consistent and colleagues showed that RBF1 also cohesion promotes tumorigenesis with this, the authors showed that promotes cohesin complex loading and that this is an important function serum-starved TKO-MEFs that onto DNA in D. melanogaster. In addi- of RB1 as a tumour suppressor. re-entered the cell cycle after serum tion they found that CAP-D3 loading Gemma K. Alderton addition had increased copy number on chromatin was decreased in RB1- alterations. Sister chromatid cohesion deficient RPE1 cells and that knock ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPERS van Harn, T. et al. Loss of RB proteins causes genomic instability in is initiated during S phase by the down of CAP-D3 caused similar the absence of mitogenic signalling. Genes Dev. 24, cohesin complex, and although mitotic defects in RPE1 cells to those 1377–1388 (2010) | Manning, A. L. et al. Loss of pRB the authors did not find evidence of RB1 knockdown. Interestingly, con- causes centromere dysfunction and chromsome instability. Genes Dev. 24, 1364–1376 (2010) | of improper loading of the cohesin densin II complexes are enriched at the Coschi, C. H. et al. Mitotic chromosome complex they suggested that this centromeres of mitotic chromosomes, condensation mediated by the retinoblastoma process might be defective when the suggesting that RB1 loss causes defec- protein is tumor suppressive. Genes Dev. 24, 1351–1363 (2010) RB pathway is inactivated. tive centromeric condensation and NATURE REVIEWS | CANCER VOLUME 10 | AUGUST 2010 © 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
Recommended publications
  • Meiotic Cohesin and Variants Associated with Human Reproductive Aging and Disease
    fcell-09-710033 July 27, 2021 Time: 16:27 # 1 REVIEW published: 02 August 2021 doi: 10.3389/fcell.2021.710033 Meiotic Cohesin and Variants Associated With Human Reproductive Aging and Disease Rachel Beverley1, Meredith L. Snook1 and Miguel Angel Brieño-Enríquez2* 1 Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States, 2 Magee-Womens Research Institute, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States Successful human reproduction relies on the well-orchestrated development of competent gametes through the process of meiosis. The loading of cohesin, a multi- protein complex, is a key event in the initiation of mammalian meiosis. Establishment of sister chromatid cohesion via cohesin rings is essential for ensuring homologous recombination-mediated DNA repair and future proper chromosome segregation. Cohesin proteins loaded during female fetal life are not replenished over time, and therefore are a potential etiology of age-related aneuploidy in oocytes resulting in Edited by: decreased fecundity and increased infertility and miscarriage rates with advancing Karen Schindler, Rutgers, The State University maternal age. Herein, we provide a brief overview of meiotic cohesin and summarize of New Jersey, United States the human genetic studies which have identified genetic variants of cohesin proteins and Reviewed by: the associated reproductive phenotypes
    [Show full text]
  • Distinct Functions of Human Cohesin-SA1 and Cohesin-SA2 in Double-Strand Break Repair
    Distinct Functions of Human Cohesin-SA1 and Cohesin-SA2 in Double-Strand Break Repair Xiangduo Kong,a Alexander R. Ball, Jr.,a Hoang Xuan Pham,a Weihua Zeng,a* Hsiao-Yuan Chen,a John A. Schmiesing,a Jong-Soo Kim,a* Michael Berns,b,c Kyoko Yokomoria Department of Biological Chemistry, School of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, California, USAa; Beckman Laser Instituteb and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Samueli School of Engineering,c University of California, Irvine, California, USA Cohesin is an essential multiprotein complex that mediates sister chromatid cohesion critical for proper segregation of chromo- somes during cell division. Cohesin is also involved in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair. In mammalian cells, cohesin is involved in both DSB repair and the damage checkpoint response, although the relationship between these two functions is un- clear. Two cohesins differing by one subunit (SA1 or SA2) are present in somatic cells, but their functional specificities with re- gard to DNA repair remain enigmatic. We found that cohesin-SA2 is the main complex corecruited with the cohesin-loading factor NIPBL to DNA damage sites in an S/G2-phase-specific manner. Replacing the diverged C-terminal region of SA1 with the corresponding region of SA2 confers this activity on SA1. Depletion of SA2 but not SA1 decreased sister chromatid homologous recombination repair and affected repair pathway choice, indicating that DNA repair activity is specifically associated with cohe- sin recruited to damage sites. In contrast, both cohesin complexes function in the intra-S checkpoint, indicating that cell cycle- specific damage site accumulation is not a prerequisite for cohesin’s intra-S checkpoint function.
    [Show full text]
  • Cohesin Architecture and Clustering in Vivo Siheng Xiang, Douglas Koshland*
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Cohesin architecture and clustering in vivo Siheng Xiang, Douglas Koshland* Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States Abstract Cohesin helps mediate sister chromatid cohesion, chromosome condensation, DNA repair, and transcription regulation. We exploited proximity-dependent labeling to define the in vivo interactions of cohesin domains with DNA or with other cohesin domains that lie within the same or in different cohesin complexes. Our results suggest that both cohesin’s head and hinge domains are proximal to DNA, and cohesin structure is dynamic with differential folding of its coiled coil regions to generate butterfly confirmations. This method also reveals that cohesins form ordered clusters on and off DNA. The levels of cohesin clusters and their distribution on chromosomes are cell cycle-regulated. Cohesin clustering is likely necessary for cohesion maintenance because clustering and maintenance uniquely require the same subset of cohesin domains and the auxiliary cohesin factor Pds5p. These conclusions provide important new mechanistic and biological insights into the architecture of the cohesin complex, cohesin–cohesin interactions, and cohesin’s tethering and loop-extruding activities. Introduction Chromosome segregation, DNA damage repair, and the regulation of gene expression require the tethering or folding of chromosomes (Uhlmann, 2016; Onn et al., 2008). Remarkably, these differ- ent types of chromosome organizations are all mediated by a conserved family of protein complexes *For correspondence: [email protected] called structural maintenance of chromosomes (SMC) (Onn et al., 2008; Nolivos and Sherratt, 2014; Hirano, 2016; Hassler et al., 2018). SMC complexes tether and fold chromosomes by two Competing interests: The activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Shaping of the 3D Genome by the Atpase Machine Cohesin Yoori Kim1 and Hongtao Yu1,2
    Kim and Yu Experimental & Molecular Medicine (2020) 52:1891–1897 https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-020-00526-2 Experimental & Molecular Medicine REVIEW ARTICLE Open Access Shaping of the 3D genome by the ATPase machine cohesin Yoori Kim1 and Hongtao Yu1,2 Abstract The spatial organization of the genome is critical for fundamental biological processes, including transcription, genome replication, and segregation. Chromatin is compacted and organized with defined patterns and proper dynamics during the cell cycle. Aided by direct visualization and indirect genome reconstruction tools, recent discoveries have advanced our understanding of how interphase chromatin is dynamically folded at the molecular level. Here, we review the current understanding of interphase genome organization with a focus on the major regulator of genome structure, the cohesin complex. We further discuss how cohesin harnesses the energy of ATP hydrolysis to shape the genome by extruding chromatin loops. Introduction dynamic and preferentially form at certain genomic loci to The diploid human genome contains 46 chromosomes regulate gene expression and other DNA transactions. In and 6 billion nucleotides of DNA that, when fully exten- this article, we review our current understanding of the ded, span a length of over 2 m. The genomic DNA has to local and global landscapes of interphase chromatin and fi 1234567890():,; 1234567890():,; 1234567890():,; 1234567890():,; be folded and con ned in the nucleus, which has a discuss how cohesin structures chromatin. dimension of ~10 μm. The compaction of genomic DNA also needs to be dynamic and orderly to allow myriad Local folding of interphase chromatin biochemical reactions that occur on the DNA template, Until recently, the dominant hypothesis for genome including DNA replication and repair, homologous packaging was the hierarchical folding model.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emerging Role of Cohesin in the DNA Damage Response
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Review The Emerging Role of Cohesin in the DNA Damage Response Ireneusz Litwin * , Ewa Pilarczyk and Robert Wysocki Institute of Experimental Biology, University of Wroclaw, 50-328 Wroclaw, Poland; [email protected] (E.P.); [email protected] (R.W.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-71-375-4126 Received: 29 October 2018; Accepted: 21 November 2018; Published: 28 November 2018 Abstract: Faithful transmission of genetic material is crucial for all organisms since changes in genetic information may result in genomic instability that causes developmental disorders and cancers. Thus, understanding the mechanisms that preserve genome integrity is of fundamental importance. Cohesin is a multiprotein complex whose canonical function is to hold sister chromatids together from S-phase until the onset of anaphase to ensure the equal division of chromosomes. However, recent research points to a crucial function of cohesin in the DNA damage response (DDR). In this review, we summarize recent advances in the understanding of cohesin function in DNA damage signaling and repair. First, we focus on cohesin architecture and molecular mechanisms that govern sister chromatid cohesion. Next, we briefly characterize the main DDR pathways. Finally, we describe mechanisms that determine cohesin accumulation at DNA damage sites and discuss possible roles of cohesin in DDR. Keywords: cohesin; cohesin loader; DNA double-strand breaks; replication stress; DNA damage tolerance 1. Introduction Genomes of all living organisms are continuously challenged by endogenous and exogenous insults that threaten genome stability. It has been estimated that human cells suffer more than 70,000 DNA lesions per day, most of which are single-strand DNA breaks (SSBs) [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Esco1 and Esco2 Regulate Distinct Cohesin Functions During Cell Cycle Progression
    Esco1 and Esco2 regulate distinct cohesin functions during cell cycle progression Reem M. Alomera,1, Eulália M. L. da Silvab,1, Jingrong Chenb, Katarzyna M. Piekarzb, Katherine McDonaldb, Courtney G. Sansamb, Christopher L. Sansama,b, and Susannah Rankina,b,2 aDepartment of Cell Biology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104; and bProgram in Cell Cycle and Cancer Biology, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 Edited by Douglas Koshland, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved July 31, 2017 (received for review May 19, 2017) Sister chromatids are tethered together by the cohesin complex from Finally, chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments in somatic the time they are made until their separation at anaphase. The ability cells indicate that Esco1 and Esco2 have distinct chromosomal of cohesin to tether sister chromatids together depends on acetyla- addresses. Colocalization of Esco1 with the insulator protein tion of its Smc3 subunit by members of the Eco1 family of cohesin CTCF and cohesin at the base of chromosome loops suggests that acetyltransferases. Vertebrates express two orthologs of Eco1, called Esco1 promotes normal chromosome structure (14, 15). Consistent Esco1 and Esco2, both of which are capable of modifying Smc3, but with this, depletion of Esco1 in somatic cells results in dysregulated their relative contributions to sister chromatid cohesion are unknown. transcriptional profiles (15). In contrast, Esco2 is localized to dis- We therefore set out to determine the precise contributions of Esco1 tinctly different sites, perhaps due to association with the CoREST and Esco2 to cohesion in vertebrate cells. Here we show that cohesion repressive complex (15, 16).
    [Show full text]
  • Cohesin Organizes Chromatin Loops at DNA Replication Factories
    Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on September 24, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Cohesin organizes chromatin loops at DNA replication factories Emmanuelle Guillou,1,6,7 Arkaitz Ibarra,1,6 Vincent Coulon,2 Juan Casado-Vela,3,8 Daniel Rico,4 Ignacio Casal,3,9 Etienne Schwob,2 Ana Losada,5,11 and Juan Me´ndez1,10 1DNA Replication Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), E-28029 Madrid, Spain; 2Institut de Ge´ne´tique Mole´culaire de Montpellier, CNRS-Universite´ Montpellier 1 et 2, 34293 Montpellier, Cedex 5, France; 3Protein Technology Unit, Biotechnology Programme, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), E-28029 Madrid, Spain; 4Structural Computational Biology Group, Structural Biology and Biocomputing Programme, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), E-28029 Madrid, Spain; 5Chromosome Dynamics Group, Molecular Oncology Programme, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), E-28029 Madrid, Spain Genomic DNA is packed in chromatin fibers organized in higher-order structures within the interphase nucleus. One level of organization involves the formation of chromatin loops that may provide a favorable environment to processes such as DNA replication, transcription, and repair. However, little is known about the mechanistic basis of this structuration. Here we demonstrate that cohesin participates in the spatial organization of DNA replication factories in human cells. Cohesin is enriched at replication origins and interacts with prereplication complex proteins. Down-regulation of cohesin slows down S-phase progression by limiting the number of active origins and increasing the length of chromatin loops that correspond with replicon units. These results give a new dimension to the role of cohesin in the architectural organization of interphase chromatin, by showing its participation in DNA replication.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosome Segregation in Budding Yeast: Sister Chromatid Cohesion and Related Mechanisms
    YEASTBOOK Chromosome Segregation in Budding Yeast: Sister Chromatid Cohesion and Related Mechanisms Adele L. Marston The Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JR, United Kingdom ABSTRACT Studies on budding yeast have exposed the highly conserved mechanisms by which duplicated chromosomes are evenly distributed to daughter cells at the metaphase–anaphase transition. The establishment of proteinaceous bridges between sister chromatids, a function provided by a ring-shaped complex known as cohesin, is central to accurate segregation. It is the destruction of this cohesin that triggers the segregation of chromosomes following their proper attachment to microtubules. Since it is irreversible, this process must be tightly controlled and driven to completion. Furthermore, during meiosis, modifications must be put in place to allow the segregation of maternal and paternal chromosomes in the first division for gamete formation. Here, I review the pioneering work from budding yeast that has led to a molecular understanding of the establishment and destruction of cohesion. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 31 Introduction 32 Building Mitotic Chromosomes 32 Structure and function of the cohesin complex 32 Discovery of cohesion: 32 The cohesin ring: 33 How does cohesin hold chromosomes together?: 34 Loading cohesin onto chromosomes 34 The pattern of cohesin localization on chromosomes: 35 The cohesin loading reaction: 36 Replication–coupled establishment of cohesion 37 Eco1-directed cohesion
    [Show full text]
  • Redundant and Specific Roles of Cohesin STAG Subunits in Chromatin Looping and Transcriptional Control
    Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 6, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Redundant and specific roles of cohesin STAG subunits in chromatin looping and transcriptional control Valentina Casa1#, Macarena Moronta Gines1#, Eduardo Gade Gusmao2,3#, Johan A. Slotman4, Anne Zirkel2, Natasa Josipovic2,3, Edwin Oole5, Wilfred F.J. van IJcken5, Adriaan B. Houtsmuller4, Argyris Papantonis2,3,* and Kerstin S. Wendt1,* 1Department of Cell Biology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 2Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, 50931 Cologne, Germany 3Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center, Georg-August University of Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany 4Optical Imaging Centre, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 5Center for Biomics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands *Corresponding authors #Authors contributed equally Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 6, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Abstract Cohesin is a ring-shaped multiprotein complex that is crucial for 3D genome organization and transcriptional regulation during differentiation and development. It also confers sister chromatid cohesion and facilitates DNA damage repair. Besides its core subunits SMC3, SMC1A and RAD21, cohesin in somatic cells contains one of two orthologous STAG subunits, STAG1 or STAG2. How these variable subunits affect the function of the cohesin complex is still unclear. STAG1- and STAG2- cohesin were initially proposed to organize cohesion at telomeres and centromeres, respectively. Here, we uncover redundant and specific roles of STAG1 and STAG2 in gene regulation and chromatin looping using HCT116 cells with an auxin-inducible degron (AID) tag fused to either STAG1 or STAG2. Following rapid depletion of either subunit, we perform high-resolution Hi-C, gene expression and sequential ChIP studies to show that STAG1 and STAG2 do not co-occupy individual binding sites and have distinct ways by which they affect looping and gene expression.
    [Show full text]
  • Nucleolar Organizer Regions: Genomic 'Dark Matter' Requiring Illumination
    Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on October 1, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press REVIEW Nucleolar organizer regions: genomic ‘dark matter’ requiring illumination Brian McStay Centre for Chromosome Biology, School of Natural Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland Nucleoli form around tandem arrays of a ribosomal gene The relationship between nucleolar organizer regions repeat, termed nucleolar organizer regions (NORs). Dur- (NORs) and nucleoli was first established in the 1930s ing metaphase, active NORs adopt a characteristic under- (Heitz 1931; McClintock 1934), but, for decades, the con- condensed morphology. Recent evidence indicates that tent of the former and the role of the latter remained mys- the HMG-box-containing DNA-binding protein UBF (up- terious. The era of molecular and cellular biology revealed stream binding factor) is directly responsible for this mor- that NORs contain tandem arrays of ribosomal gene phology and provides a mitotic bookmark to ensure rapid (rDNA) repeats and that nucleoli are the sites of ribosome nucleolar formation beginning in telophase in human biogenesis. Biochemistry has revealed the inner workings cells. This is likely to be a widely employed strategy, as of the nucleolus and the complexity of ribosome biogene- UBF is present throughout metazoans. In higher eukary- sis (for review, see Pederson 2010). However, the genomic otes, NORs are typically located within regions of chro- architecture of NORs and the chromosomal context in mosomes that form perinucleolar heterochromatin which they lie remains undetermined for most eukary- during interphase. Typically, the genomic architecture otes. The resulting void has placed limitations on our un- of NORs and the chromosomal regions within which derstanding of the fundamental mechanisms by which they lie is very poorly described, yet recent evidence NORs orchestrate formation of the largest structure in points to a role for context in their function.
    [Show full text]
  • Functional Coupling Between DNA Replication and Sister Chromatid Cohesion Establishment
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review Functional Coupling between DNA Replication and Sister Chromatid Cohesion Establishment Ana Boavida 1 , Diana Santos 1 , Mohammad Mahtab 1,2 and Francesca M. Pisani 1,* 1 Istituto di Biochimica e Biologia Cellulare, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Via P. Castellino 111, 80131 Naples, Italy; [email protected] (A.B.); [email protected] (D.S.); [email protected] (M.M.) 2 Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Ambientali Biologiche e Farmaceutiche, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Via Vivaldi 43, 81100 Caserta, Italy * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-0816132292 Abstract: Several lines of evidence suggest the existence in the eukaryotic cells of a tight, yet largely unexplored, connection between DNA replication and sister chromatid cohesion. Tethering of newly duplicated chromatids is mediated by cohesin, an evolutionarily conserved hetero-tetrameric protein complex that has a ring-like structure and is believed to encircle DNA. Cohesin is loaded onto chromatin in telophase/G1 and converted into a cohesive state during the subsequent S phase, a process known as cohesion establishment. Many studies have revealed that down-regulation of a number of DNA replication factors gives rise to chromosomal cohesion defects, suggesting that they play critical roles in cohesion establishment. Conversely, loss of cohesin subunits (and/or regulators) has been found to alter DNA replication fork dynamics. A critical step of the cohesion establishment process consists in cohesin acetylation, a modification accomplished by dedicated acetyltransferases that operate at the replication forks. Defects in cohesion establishment give rise to chromosome mis-segregation and aneuploidy, phenotypes frequently observed in pre-cancerous and cancerous Citation: Boavida, A.; Santos, D.; Mahtab, M.; Pisani, F.M.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cohesin Complex in Mammalian Meiosis
    Received: 5 September 2018 | Revised: 29 October 2018 | Accepted: 29 October 2018 DOI: 10.1111/gtc.12652 REVIEW ARTICLE Genes to Cells The cohesin complex in mammalian meiosis Kei‐ichiro Ishiguro Institute of Molecular Embryology and Genetics, Kumamoto University, Abstract Kumamoto, Japan Cohesin is an evolutionary conserved multi‐protein complex that plays a pivotal role in chromosome dynamics. It plays a role both in sister chromatid cohesion and in es- Correspondence Kei‐ichiro Ishiguro, Institute of Molecular tablishing higher order chromosome architecture, in somatic and germ cells. Notably, Embryology and Genetics, Kumamoto the cohesin complex in meiosis differs from that in mitosis. In mammalian meiosis, University, Kumamoto, Japan. distinct types of cohesin complexes are produced by altering the combination of meio- Email: [email protected] sis‐specific subunits. The meiosis‐specific subunits endow the cohesin complex with Funding information Yamada Science Foundation; KAKENHI, specific functions for numerous meiosis‐associated chromosomal events, such as Grant/Award Number: #16H01257, chromosome axis formation, homologue association, meiotic recombination and cen- #16H01221, #17H03634 and #18K19304 tromeric cohesion for sister kinetochore geometry. This review mainly focuses on the Communicated by: Eisuke Nishida cohesin complex in mammalian meiosis, pointing out the differences in its roles from those in mitosis. Further, common and divergent aspects of the meiosis‐specific co- hesin complex between mammals and other
    [Show full text]