The life and miracles of kinetochores

Kinetochores are large protein assemblies built on chromosomal loci named centromeres. The main functions of kinetochores can be grouped under four modules. The first module, in the inner kinetochore, contributes a sturdy interface with centromeric chromatin. The second module, the outer kinetochore, contributes a microtubule‐binding interface. The third module, the spindle assembly checkpoint, is a feedback control mechanism that monitors the state of kinetochore–microtubule attachment to control the progression of the cell cycle. The fourth module discerns correct from improper attachments, preventing the stabilization of the latter and allowing the selective stabilization of the former. In this review, we discuss how the molecular organization of the four modules allows a dynamic integration of kinetochore–microtubule attachment with the prevention of chromosome segregation errors and cell‐cycle progression.     

Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and attachment stability are regulated by Hec1

Mitotic cells face the challenging tasks of linking kinetochores to growing and shortening microtubules and actively regulating these dynamic attachments to produce accurate chromosome segregation. We report here that Ndc80/Hec1 functions in regulating kinetochore microtubule plus-end dynamics and attachment stability. Microinjection of an antibody to the N terminus of Hec1 suppresses both microtubule detachment and microtubule plus-end polymerization and depolymerization at kinetochores of PtK1 cells. Centromeres become hyperstretched, kinetochore fibers shorten from spindle poles, kinetochore microtubule attachment errors increase, and chromosomes severely mis-segregate. The N terminus of Hec1 is phosphorylated by Aurora B kinase in vitro, and cells expressing N-terminal nonphosphorylatable mutants of Hec1 exhibit an increase in merotelic attachments, hyperstretching of centromeres, and errors in chromosome segregation. These findings reveal a key role for the Hec1 N terminus in controlling dynamic behavior of kinetochore microtubules.     

Three wise centromere functions: see no error,hear no break,speak no delay

The main function of the centromere is to promote kinetochore assembly for spindle microtubule attachment. Two additional functions of the centromere, however, are becoming increasingly clear: facilitation of robust sister‐chromatid cohesion at pericentromeres and advancement of replication of centromeric regions. The combination of these three centromere functions ensures correct chromosome segregation during mitosis. Here, we review the mechanisms of the kinetochore–microtubule interaction, focusing on sister‐kinetochore bi‐orientation (or chromosome bi‐orientation). We also discuss the biological importance of robust pericentromeric cohesion and early centromere replication, as well as the mechanisms orchestrating these two functions at the microtubule attachment site.     

Kinetochore microtubule establishment is defective in oocytes from aged mice

Errors in chromosome segregation in mammalian oocytes increase in number with advancing maternal age, and are a major cause of pregnancy loss. Why chromosome segregation errors are more common in oocytes from older females remains poorly understood. In mitosis, accurate chromosome segregation is enabled by attachment of kinetochores to microtubules from appropriate spindle poles, and erroneous attachments increase the likelihood of mis-segregation. Whether attachment errors are responsible for age-related oocyte aneuploidy is unknown. Here we report that oocytes from naturally aged mice exhibit substantially increased chromosome misalignment, and fewer kinetochore pairs that make stable end-on attachments to the appropriate spindle poles compared with younger oocytes. The profile of mis-attachments exhibited is consistent with the types of chromosome segregation error observed in aged oocytes. Loss of chromosome cohesion, which is a feature of oocytes from older females, causes altered kinetochore geometry in meiosis-I. However, this has only a minor impact upon MT attachment, indicating that cohesion loss is not the primary cause of aneuploidy in meiosis-I. In meiosis-II, on the other hand, age-related cohesion loss plays a direct role in errors, since prematurely individualized sister chromatids misalign and misattach to spindle MTs. Thus, whereas cohesion loss leading to precocious sister chromatid separation is a direct cause of errors in meiosis-II, cohesion loss plays a more minor role in the etiology of aneuploidy in meiosis-I. Our data introduce altered MT-kinetochore interactions as a lesion that explains aneuploidy in meiosis-I in older females.     

Molecular architecture of a kinetochore-microtubule attachment site

Kinetochore attachment to spindle microtubule plus-ends is necessary for accurate chromosome segregation during cell division in all eukaryotes. The centromeric DNA of each chromosome is linked to microtubule plus-ends by eight structural-protein complexes. Knowing the copy number of each of these complexes at one kinetochore-microtubule attachment site is necessary to understand the molecular architecture of the complex, and to elucidate the mechanisms underlying kinetochore function. We have counted, with molecular accuracy, the number of structural protein complexes in a single kinetochore-microtubule attachment using quantitative fluorescence microscopy of GFP-tagged kinetochore proteins in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We find that relative to the two Cse4p molecules in the centromeric histone, the copy number ranges from one or two for inner kinetochore proteins such as Mif2p, to 16 for the DAM-DASH complex at the kinetochore-microtubule interface. These counts allow us to visualize the overall arrangement of a kinetochore-microtubule attachment. As most of the budding yeast kinetochore proteins have homologues in higher eukaryotes, including humans, this molecular arrangement is likely to be replicated in more complex kinetochores that have multiple microtubule attachments.     

Reconstituting the kinetochore–microtubule interface: what, why, and how

The kinetochore is the proteinaceous complex that governs the movement of duplicated chromosomes by interacting with spindle microtubules during mitosis and meiosis. Faithful chromosome segregation requires that kinetochores form robust load-bearing attachments to the tips of dynamic spindle microtubules, correct microtubule attachment errors, and delay the onset of anaphase until all chromosomes have made proper attachments. To understand how this macromolecular machine operates to segregate duplicated chromosomes with exquisite accuracy, it is critical to reconstitute and study kinetochore–microtubule interactions in vitro using defined components. Here, we review the current status of reconstitution as well as recent progress in understanding the microtubule-binding functions of kinetochores in vivo.     

Merotelic kinetochores in mammalian tissue cells

Merotelic kinetochore attachment is a major source of aneuploidy in mammalian tissue cells in culture. Mammalian kinetochores typically have binding sites for about 20-25 kinetochore microtubules. In prometaphase, kinetochores become merotelic if they attach to microtubules from opposite poles rather than to just one pole as normally occurs. Merotelic attachments support chromosome bi-orientation and alignment near the metaphase plate and they are not detected by the mitotic spindle checkpoint. At anaphase onset, sister chromatids separate, but a chromatid with a merotelic kinetochore may not be segregated correctly, and may lag near the spindle equator because of pulling forces toward opposite poles, or move in the direction of the wrong pole. Correction mechanisms are important for preventing segregation errors. There are probably more than 100 times as many PtK1 tissue cells with merotelic kinetochores in early mitosis, and about 16 times as many entering anaphase as the 1% of cells with lagging chromosomes seen in late anaphase. The role of spindle mechanics and potential functions of the Ndc80/Nuf2 protein complex at the kinetochore/microtubule interface is discussed for two correction mechanisms: one that functions before anaphase to reduce the number of kinetochore microtubules to the wrong pole, and one that functions after anaphase onset to move merotelic kinetochores based on the ratio of kinetochore microtubules to the correct versus incorrect pole.     

The Composition,Functions, and Regulation of the Budding Yeast Kinetochore

The propagation of all organisms depends on the accurate and orderly segregation of chromosomes in mitosis and meiosis. Budding yeast has long served as an outstanding model organism to identify the components and underlying mechanisms that regulate chromosome segregation. This review focuses on the kinetochore, the macromolecular protein complex that assembles on centromeric chromatin and maintains persistent load-bearing attachments to the dynamic tips of spindle microtubules. The kinetochore also serves as a regulatory hub for the spindle checkpoint, ensuring that cell cycle progression is coupled to the achievement of proper microtubule–kinetochore attachments. Progress in understanding the composition and overall architecture of the kinetochore, as well as its properties in making and regulating microtubule attachments and the spindle checkpoint, is discussed.     

CLASP1, astrin and Kif2b form a molecular switch that regulates kinetochore‐microtubule dynamics to promote mitotic progression and fidelity

Accurate chromosome segregation during mitosis requires precise coordination of various processes, such as chromosome alignment, maturation of proper kinetochore–microtubule (kMT) attachments, correction of erroneous attachments, and silencing of the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). How these fundamental aspects of mitosis are coordinately and temporally regulated is poorly understood. In this study, we show that the temporal regulation of kMT attachments by CLASP1, astrin and Kif2b is central to mitotic progression and chromosome segregation fidelity. In early mitosis, a Kif2b–CLASP1 complex is recruited to kinetochores to promote chromosome movement, kMT turnover, correction of attachment errors, and maintenance of SAC signalling. However, during metaphase, this complex is replaced by an astrin–CLASP1 complex, which promotes kMT stability, chromosome alignment, and silencing of the SAC. We show that these two complexes are differentially recruited to kinetochores and are mutually exclusive. We also show that other kinetochore proteins, such as Kif18a, affect kMT attachments and chromosome movement through these proteins. Thus, CLASP1–astrin–Kif2b complex act as a central switch at kinetochores that defines mitotic progression and promotes fidelity by temporally regulating kMT attachments.     

Mechanisms of kinesin‐7 CENP‐E in kinetochore–microtubule capture and chromosome alignment during cell division

Chromosome congression is essential for faithful chromosome segregation and genomic stability in cell division. Centromere‐associated protein E (CENP‐E), a plus‐end‐directed kinesin motor, is required for congression of pole‐proximal chromosomes in metaphase. CENP‐E accumulates at the outer plate of kinetochores and mediates the kinetochore‐microtubule capture. CENP‐E also transports the chromosomes along spindle microtubules towards the equatorial plate. CENP‐E interacts with Bub1‐related kinase, Aurora B and core kinetochore components during kinetochore–microtubule attachment. In this review, we introduce the structures and mechanochemistry of kinesin‐7 CENP‐E. We highlight the complicated interactions between CENP‐E and partner proteins during chromosome congression. We summarise the detailed roles and mechanisms of CENP‐E in mitosis and meiosis, including the kinetochore–microtubule capture, chromosome congression/alignment in metaphase and the regulation of spindle assembly checkpoint. We also shed a light on the roles of CENP‐E in tumourigenesis and CENP‐E's specific inhibitors.     

Anaphase spindle mechanics prevent mis-segregation of merotelically oriented chromosomes

Merotelic kinetochore orientation is a kinetochore misattachment in which a single kinetochore is attached to microtubules from both spindle poles instead of just one. It can be favored in specific circumstances, is not detected by the mitotic checkpoint, and induces lagging chromosomes in anaphase. In mammalian cells, it occurs at high frequency in early mitosis, but few anaphase cells show lagging chromosomes. We developed live-cell imaging methods to determine whether and how the mitotic spindle prevents merotelic kinetochores from producing lagging chromosomes. We found that merotelic kinetochores entering anaphase never lost attachment to the spindle poles; they remained attached to both microtubule bundles, but this did not prevent them from segregating correctly. The two microtubule bundles usually showed different fluorescence intensities, the brighter bundle connecting the merotelic kinetochore to the correct pole. During anaphase, the dimmer bundle lengthened much more than the brighter bundle as spindle elongation occurred. This resulted in correct segregation of the merotelically oriented chromosome. We propose a model based on the ratios of microtubules to the correct versus incorrect pole for how anaphase spindle dynamics and microtubule polymerization at kinetochores prevent potential segregation errors deriving from merotelic kinetochore orientation.     

Merotelic kinetochore attachment: causes and effects

Accurate chromosome segregation depends on the proper attachment of sister kinetochores to microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles. Merotelic kinetochore orientation is an error in which a single kinetochore is attached to microtubules emanating from both spindle poles. Despite correction mechanisms, merotelically attached kinetochores can persist until anaphase, causing chromatids to lag on the mitotic spindle and hindering their timely segregation. Recent studies showing that merotelic kinetochore attachment represents a major mechanism of aneuploidy in mitotic cells and is the primary mechanism of chromosomal instability in cancer cells have underlined the importance of studying merotely. Here, we highlight recent progress in our understanding of how cells prevent and correct merotelic kinetochore attachments.     

KLP-7 acts through the Ndc80 complex to limit pole number in C. elegans oocyte meiotic spindle assembly

During oocyte meiotic cell division in many animals, bipolar spindles assemble in the absence of centrosomes, but the mechanisms that restrict pole assembly to a bipolar state are unknown. We show that KLP-7, the single mitotic centromere–associated kinesin (MCAK)/kinesin-13 in Caenorhabditis elegans, is required for bipolar oocyte meiotic spindle assembly. In klp-7(−) mutants, extra microtubules accumulated, extra functional spindle poles assembled, and chromosomes frequently segregated as three distinct masses during meiosis I anaphase. Moreover, reducing KLP-7 function in monopolar klp-18(−) mutants often restored spindle bipolarity and chromosome segregation. MCAKs act at kinetochores to correct improper kinetochore–microtubule (k–MT) attachments, and depletion of the Ndc-80 kinetochore complex, which binds microtubules to mediate kinetochore attachment, restored bipolarity in klp-7(−) mutant oocytes. We propose a model in which KLP-7/MCAK regulates k–MT attachment and spindle tension to promote the coalescence of early spindle pole foci that produces a bipolar structure during the acentrosomal process of oocyte meiotic spindle assembly.     

Mps1 at kinetochores is essential for female mouse meiosis I

In female meiosis, chromosome missegregations lead to the generation of aneuploid oocytes and can cause the development of trisomies or infertility. Because mammalian female meiosis I is error prone, the full functionality of control mechanisms, such as the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC), has been put into question. The SAC monitors the correct orientation, microtubule occupancy and tension on proteinaceous structures named kinetochores. Although it has been shown previously that the SAC exists in meiosis I, where attachments are monopolar, the role of microtubule occupancy for silencing the SAC and the importance of certain essential SAC components, such as the kinase Mps1, are unknown in mammalian oocytes. Using a conditional loss-of-function approach, we address the role of Mps1 in meiotic progression and checkpoint control in meiosis I. Our data demonstrate that kinetochore localization of Mps1 is required for the proper timing of prometaphase and is essential for SAC control, chromosome alignment and aurora C localization in meiosis I. The absence of Mps1 from kinetochores severely impairs chromosome segregation in oocyte meiosis I and, therefore, fertility in mice. In addition, we settle a long-standing question in showing that kinetochore-microtubule attachments are present in prometaphase I at a time when most of the SAC protein Mad2 disappears from kinetochores.     

Phosphorylation of human Sgo1 by NEK2A is essential for chromosome congression in mitosis

Chromosome segregation in mitosis is orchestrated by the interaction of the kinetochore with spindle microtubules. Ourrecent study shows that NEK2A interacts with MAD1 at the kinetochore and possibly functions as a novel integrator ofspindle checkpoint signaling. However, it is unclear how NEK2 A regulates kinetochore-microtubule attachment in mitosis.Here we show that NEK2A phosphorylates human Sgol and such phosphorylation is essential for faithful chromosomecongression in mitosis. NEK2A binds directly to HsSgol in vitro and co-distributes with HsSgol to the kinetochore ofmitotic cells. Our in vitro phosphorylation experiment demonstrated that HsSgol is a substrate of NEK2A and the phos-phorylation sites were mapped to Ser~(14) and Ser~(507) as judged by the incorporation of ~(32)P. Although such phosphorylation isnot required for assembly of HsSgol to the kinetochore, expression of non-phosphorylatable mutant HsSgol perturbedchromosome congression and resulted in a dramatic increase in microtubule attachment errors, including syntelic andmonotelic attachments. These findings reveal a key role for the NEK2A-mediated phosphorylation of HsSgol in orches-trating dynamic kinetochore-microtubule interaction. We propose that NEK2 A-mediated phosphorylation of human Sgolprovides a link between centromeric cohesion and spindle microtubule attachment at the kinetochores.     

Molecular architecture of the kinetochore-microtubule attachment site is conserved between point and regional centromeres

Point and regional centromeres specify a unique site on each chromosome for kinetochore assembly. The point centromere in budding yeast is a unique 150-bp DNA sequence, which supports a kinetochore with only one microtubule attachment. In contrast, regional centromeres are complex in architecture, can be up to 5 Mb in length, and typically support many kinetochore-microtubule attachments. We used quantitative fluorescence microscopy to count the number of core structural kinetochore protein complexes at the regional centromeres in fission yeast and Candida albicans. We find that the number of CENP-A nucleosomes at these centromeres reflects the number of kinetochore-microtubule attachments instead of their length. The numbers of kinetochore protein complexes per microtubule attachment are nearly identical to the numbers in a budding yeast kinetochore. These findings reveal that kinetochores with multiple microtubule attachments are mainly built by repeating a conserved structural subunit that is equivalent to a single microtubule attachment site.     

Correcting improper chromosome-spindle attachments during cell division

For accurate segregation of chromosomes during cell division, microtubule fibres must attach sister kinetochores to opposite poles of the mitotic spindle (bi-orientation). Aurora kinases are linked to oncogenesis and have been implicated in the regulation of chromosome-microtubule attachments. Although loss of Aurora kinase activity causes an accumulation of mal-orientated chromosomes in dividing cells, it is not known how the active kinase corrects improper chromosome attachments. The use of reversible small-molecule inhibitors allows activation of protein function in living vertebrate cells with temporal control. Here we show that by removal of small-molecule inhibitors, controlled activation of Aurora kinase during mitosis can correct chromosome attachment errors by selective disassembly of kinetochore-microtubule fibres, rather than by alternative mechanisms involving initial release of microtubules from either kinetochores or spindle poles. Observation of chromosomes and microtubule dynamics with real-time high-resolution microscopy showed that mal-orientated, but not bi-orientated, chromosomes move to the spindle pole as both kinetochore-microtubule fibres shorten, followed by alignment at the metaphase plate. Our results provide direct evidence for a mechanism required for the maintenance of genome integrity during cell division.     

A stochastic model of kinetochore-microtubule attachment accurately describes fission yeast chromosome segregation

In fission yeast, erroneous attachments of spindle microtubules to kinetochores are frequent in early mitosis. Most are corrected before anaphase onset by a mechanism involving the protein kinase Aurora B, which destabilizes kinetochore microtubules (ktMTs) in the absence of tension between sister chromatids. In this paper, we describe a minimal mathematical model of fission yeast chromosome segregation based on the stochastic attachment and detachment of ktMTs. The model accurately reproduces the timing of correct chromosome biorientation and segregation seen in fission yeast. Prevention of attachment defects requires both appropriate kinetochore orientation and an Aurora B-like activity. The model also reproduces abnormal chromosome segregation behavior (caused by, for example, inhibition of Aurora B). It predicts that, in metaphase, merotelic attachment is prevented by a kinetochore orientation effect and corrected by an Aurora B-like activity, whereas in anaphase, it is corrected through unbalanced forces applied to the kinetochore. These unbalanced forces are sufficient to prevent aneuploidy.     

Prevention and correction mechanisms behind anaphase synchrony: implications for the genesis of aneuploidy

The perpetuation of the species' genomic identity strongly depends on the accurate maintenance of chromosome number through countless cell generations. The synchronous entry and progression of all chromosomes through anaphase is fundamental for the quality of mitosis and is guaranteed by error prevention and correction mechanisms that ultimately certify the bipolar attachment of chromosomes to the mitotic spindle, the uniform distribution of forces amongst different chromosomes, and the simultaneity of sister-chromatid separation. The existence of a kinetochore-attachment checkpoint (KAC; also known as spindle-assembly checkpoint) ensures a delay in anaphase onset if any kinetochore remains unattached or devoid of a proper complement of microtubules. The stochastic nature of microtubule-kinetochore interactions predisposes the mitotic process to mistakes, but different molecular players cooperate by detecting and releasing incorrect attachments and thus delaying checkpoint satisfaction. Conversely, correct microtubule-kinetochore interactions become selectively stabilized. Once anaphase onset is triggered, the segregation velocities achieved by each chromosome should be similar, so that none of the chromosomes is lagged behind. This reflects the uniformity of forces acting on the different chromosomes and relies on a conspicuous mitotic spindle property known as microtubule poleward flux. Importantly, not all incorrect attachments are detected and resolved prior to anaphase leading to asynchronous chromosome segregation, but several mechanisms are in place to prevent aneuploidy. One of these mechanisms relies on anaphase spindle forces and another, known as the NoCut checkpoint, delays cell cleavage during cytokinesis until chromosomes can free the spindle mid-region. In this review we discuss how these different mechanisms act in concert to ensure the fidelity of the mitotic process.     

Basic mechanism for biorientation of mitotic chromosomes is provided by the kinetochore geometry and indiscriminate turnover of kinetochore microtubules

Accuracy of chromosome segregation relies on the ill-understood ability of mitotic kinetochores to biorient, whereupon each sister kinetochore forms microtubule (MT) attachments to only one spindle pole. Because initial MT attachments result from chance encounters with the kinetochores, biorientation must rely on specific mechanisms to avoid and resolve improper attachments. Here we use mathematical modeling to critically analyze the error-correction potential of a simplified biorientation mechanism, which involves the back-to-back arrangement of sister kinetochores and the marked instability of kinetochore–MT attachments. We show that a typical mammalian kinetochore operates in a near-optimal regime, in which the back-to-back kinetochore geometry and the indiscriminate kinetochore–MT turnover provide strong error-correction activity. In human cells, this mechanism alone can potentially enable normal segregation of 45 out of 46 chromosomes during one mitotic division, corresponding to a mis-segregation rate in the range of 10⁻¹–10⁻² per chromosome. This theoretical upper limit for chromosome segregation accuracy predicted with the basic mechanism is close to the mis-segregation rate in some cancer cells; however, it cannot explain the relatively low chromosome loss in diploid human cells, consistent with their reliance on additional mechanisms.