The role of the chromocenter in nonrandom meiotic segregation of nonhomologous chromosomes in Drosophila melanogaster females

The evidence supporting universal significance of physical links between pericentromeric regions of homologous chromosomes for their bipolar orientation during the first meiotic division is discussed. The pericentromeric chiasmata between homologs or (in the absence of the latter) chromocentric links between nonhomologs, which are preserved until prometaphase, compensate for the disturbed binding between homologous pericentromeric regions in both structural or locus mutants. When the links between nonhomologs are involved, interchromosomal effects on chromosome disjunction and nonhomologous pairing were revealed by the genetic methods. An explanation suggested for genetic events observed during Drosophila meiosis conforms with the original, cytogenetically proved model of the orderly two-ring chromocenter formation and reorganization.     

Role of the Chromocenter in Nonrandom Meiotic Segregation of Nonhomologous Chromosomes inDrosophila melanogasterFemales

The evidence supporting universal significance of physical links between pericentromeric regions of homologous chromosomes for their bipolar orientation during the first meiotic division is discussed. The pericentromeric chiasmata between homologs or (in the absence of the latter) chromocentric links between nonhomologs, which are preserved until prometaphase, compensate for the disturbed binding between homologous pericentromeric regions in both structural or locus mutants. When the links between nonhomologs are involved, interchromosomal effects on chromosome disjunction and nonhomologous pairing were revealed by the genetic methods. An explanation suggested for genetic events observed during Drosophilameiosis conforms with the original, cytogenetically proved model of the orderly two-ring chromocenter formation and reorganization.     

Puzzling chromosome behavior in triploid females of Drosophila melanogaster

Based on a particular formation of the chromocenter and trivalents in triploid Drosophila females, as well as on asynapsis in pericentromeric regions (which is a result of trivalent competition), an explanation for the increased frequency of crossing over and nonrandom segregation of the X chromosomes and autosomes in the first meiotic division is suggested. It is proposed that a delay in pairing of the pericentromeric heterochromatic chromosome regions combined into a single chromocenter leads to the following: (1) formation of the heteroduplex structures (X structures) takes more time and, consequently, their number and the frequency of crossing over in the paired chromosome regions increases; (2) in nonhomologous chromosomes, the chromocentral connections, which normally degrade in prometaphase, are retained to fulfill a function of coorientation during the first meiotic division.     

Puzzling Chromosome Behavior in Triploid Females of Drosophila melanogaster

Based on a particular formation of the chromocenter and trivalents in triploid Drosophila females, as well as on asynapsis in pericentromeric regions (which is a result of trivalent competition), an explanation for the increased frequency of crossing over and nonrandom segregation of the X chromosomes and autosomes in the first meiotic division is suggested. It is proposed that a delay in pairing of the pericentromeric heterochromatic chromosome regions combined into a single chromocenter leads to the following: (1) formation of the heteroduplex structures (X structures) takes more time and, consequently, their number and the frequency of crossing over in the paired chromosome regions increases; (2) in nonhomologous chromosomes, the chromocentral connections, which normally degrade in prometaphase, are retained to fulfill a function of coorientation during the first meiotic division.     

Features of the chromocenter structure in Drosophila melanogaster larva cells, mutant for genes C(3)G and NOD

Homolog pairing, chromosome morphology, and chromosome disjunction in the first meiotic division were studied in the oocytes of c(3)G/c(3)G female Drosophila melanogaster at developmental stages 3-4 and 14. It was found that homologs were completely or partly paired in some cells (about 20% in either case). The lengths of chromosomes in +/+, +/c(3)G, and c(3)G/c(3)G cells were at a ratio of 1.0:1.6:2.2. The chromocenters of homozygous cells had an abnormal structure. There was no meiotic block in metaphase 1, and chromosomes only segregated equally in about 80% of anaphases of the first meiotic division. The data obtained correspond to the abnormal variants of the formation of the chromocenter in c(3)G/c(3)G females that could be predicted based on the two-ring structure of the chromocenter. The mechanism of the effect of the homo- and heterozygosity for the hypomorphic mutation c(3)G on the formation of the synaptonemal complex (SC) and crossing over frequency was suggested. In nod/nod homozygous females, asynapsis of pericentromeric regions of homologs was observed in the chromocenter. It was assumed that NOD kinezin is necessary at the last stages of pairing of the pericentromeric regions of homologs and formation of the coordinating bonds between them.     

Effect of the pairing gene Ph1 and premeiotic colchicine treatment on intra- and interchromosome pairing of isochromosomes in common wheat.

The analysis of the pattern of isochromosome pairing allows one to distinguish factors affecting presynaptic alignment of homologous chromosomes from those affecting synapsis and crossing-over. Because the two homologous arms in an isochromosome are invariably associated by a common centromere, the suppression of pairing between these arms (intrachromosome pairing) would indicate that synaptic or postsynaptic events were impaired. In contrast, the suppression of pairing between an isochromosome and its homologous chromosome (interchromosome pairing), without affecting intrachromosome pairing, would suggest that homologous presynaptic alignment was impaired. We used such an isochromosome system to determine which of the processes associated with chromosome pairing was affected by the Ph1 gene of common wheat-the main gene that restricts pairing to homologues. Ph1 reduced the frequency of interchromosome pairing without affecting intrachromosome pairing. In contrast, intrachromosome pairing was strongly reduced in the absence of the synaptic gene Syn-B1. Premeiotic colchicine treatment, which drastically decreased pairing of conventional chromosomes, reduced interchromosome but not intrachromosome pairing. The results support the hypothesis that premeiotic alignment is a necessary stage for the regularity of meiotic pairing and that Ph1 relaxes this alignment. We suggest that Ph1 acts on premeiotic alignment of homologues and homeologues as a means of ensuring diploid-like meiotic behavior in polyploid wheat.     

The importance of genetic recombination for fidelity of chromosome pairing in meiosis

In budding yeast, absence of the Hop2 protein leads to extensive synaptonemal complex (SC) formation between nonhomologous chromosomes, suggesting a crucial role for Hop2 in the proper alignment of homologous chromosomes during meiotic prophase. Genetic analysis indicates that Hop2 acts in the same pathway as the Rad51 and Dmc1 proteins, two homologs of E. coli RecA. Thus, the hop2 mutant phenotype demonstrates the importance of the recombination machinery in promoting accurate chromosome pairing. We propose that the Dmc1/Rad51 recombinases require Hop2 to distinguish homologous from nonhomologous sequences during the homology search process. Thus, when Hop2 is absent, interactions between nonhomologous sequences become inappropriately stabilized and can initiate SC formation. Overexpression of RAD51 largely suppresses the meiotic defects of the dmc1 and hop2 mutants. We conclude that Rad51 is capable of carrying out a homology search independently, whereas Dmc1 requires additional factors such as Hop2.     

Bivalent individualization during chromosome territory formation in Drosophila spermatocytes by controlled condensin II protein activity and additional force generators

Reduction of genome ploidy from diploid to haploid necessitates stable pairing of homologous chromosomes into bivalents before the start of the first meiotic division. Importantly, this chromosome pairing must avoid interlocking of non-homologous chromosomes. In spermatocytes of Drosophila melanogaster, where homolog pairing does not involve synaptonemal complex formation and crossovers, associations between non-homologous chromosomes are broken up by chromosome territory formation in early spermatocytes. Extensive non-homologous associations arise from the coalescence of the large blocks of pericentromeric heterochromatin into a chromocenter and from centromere clustering. Nevertheless, during territory formation, bivalents are moved apart into spatially separate subnuclear regions. The condensin II subunits, Cap-D3 and Cap-H2, have been implicated, but the remarkable separation of bivalents during interphase might require more than just condensin II. For further characterization of this process, we have applied time-lapse imaging using fluorescent markers of centromeres, telomeres and DNA satellites in pericentromeric heterochromatin. We describe the dynamics of the disruption of centromere clusters and the chromocenter in normal spermatocytes. Mutations in Cap-D3 and Cap-H2 abolish chromocenter disruption, resulting in excessive chromosome missegregation during M I. Chromocenter persistence in the mutants is not mediated by the special system, which conjoins homologs in compensation for the absence of crossovers in Drosophila spermatocytes. However, overexpression of Cap-H2 precluded conjunction between autosomal homologs, resulting in random segregation of univalents. Interestingly, Cap-D3 and Cap-H2 mutant spermatocytes displayed conspicuous stretching of the chromocenter, as well as occasional chromocenter disruption, suggesting that territory formation might involve forces unrelated to condensin II. While the molecular basis of these forces remains to be clarified, they are not destroyed by inhibitors of F actin and microtubules. Our results indicate that condensin II activity promotes chromosome territory formation in co-operation with additional force generators and that careful co-ordination with alternative homolog conjunction is crucial.     

The dynamics of homologous chromosome pairing during male Drosophila meiosis

BACKGROUND: Meiotic pairing is essential for the proper orientation of chromosomes at the metaphase plate and their subsequent disjunction during anaphase I. In male Drosophila melanogaster, meiosis occurs in the absence of recombination or a recognizable synaptonemal complex (SC). Due to limitations in available cytological techniques, the early stages of homologous chromosome pairing in male Drosophila have not been observed, and the mechanisms involved are poorly understood.RESULTS: Chromosome tagging with GFP-Lac repressor protein allowed us to track, for the first time, the behavior of meiotic chromosomes at high resolution, live, at all stages of male Drosophila meiosis. Homologous chromosomes pair throughout the euchromatic regions in spermatogonia and during the early phases of spermatocyte development. Extensive separation of homologs and sister chromatids along the chromosome arms occurs in mid-G2, several hours before the first meiotic division, and before the G2/M transition. Centromeres, on the other hand, show complex association patterns, with specific homolog pairing taking place in mid-G2. These changes in chromosome pairing parallel changes in large-scale chromosome organization.CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that widespread interactions along the euchromatin are required for the initiation, but not the maintenance, of meiotic pairing of autosomes in male Drosophila. We propose that heterochromatic associations, or chromatid entanglement, may be responsible for the maintenance of homolog association during late G2. Our data also suggest that the formation of chromosome territories in the spermatocyte nucleus may play an active role in ensuring the specificity of meiotic pairing in late prophase by disrupting interactions between nonhomologous chromosomes.     

Chromosome pairing in the oögonial cells of Drosophila melanogaster

Pairing between two nonhomologous chromosomes, one a free X-duplication and the other a free fourth chromosome, has been observed cytologically with high frequencies in the oögonial cells of Drosophila melanogaster. The frequencies of nonhomologous pairing ranged from 27 to 47% and showed a positive correlation with the similarity in size between the two participating nonhomologues. Partial homology increased pairing frequency between nonhomologues in the oögonial cell, in contrast to the behavior of the same nonhomologues at distributive pairing in the oöcyte, where pairing is strictly size-dependent. Pairing between homologues in the same oögonial cells occurred at a frequency of only 71% and was higher for the autosomes (73%) than for the sex chromosomes (66%). An increased frequency of homologous pairing was found for older gonial cysts (4-cell, 72.0% ; 8-cell, 76.1%) as compared with younger cysts (1-cell, 59.1% ; 2-cell, 53.1%).Research sponsored by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission under contract with the Union Carbide Corporation.     

Molecular Mechanisms of Homologous Chromosome Pairing and Segregation in Plants

In most eukaryotic species, three basic steps of pairing, recombination and synapsis occur during prophase of meiosis I. Homologous chromosomal pairing and recombination are essential for accurate segregation of chromosomes. In contrast to the well-studied processes such as recombination and synapsis, many aspects of chromosome pairing are still obscure. Recent progress in several species indicates that the telomere bouquet formation can facilitate homologous chromosome pairing by bringing chromosome ends into close proximity, but the sole presence of telomere clustering is not sufficient for recognizing homologous pairs. On the other hand, accurate segregation of the genetic material from parent to offspring during meiosis is dependent on the segregation of homologs in the reductional meiotic division （MI） with sister kinetochores exhibiting mono-orientation from the same pole, and the segregation of sister chromatids during the equational meiotic division （MII） with kinetochores showing bi-orientation from the two poles. The underlying mechanism of orientation and segregation is still unclear. Here we focus on recent studies in plants and other species that provide insight into how chromosomes find their partners and mechanisms mediating chromosomal segregation.     

From the phenomenon of nondisjunction to the problem of chromosome co-orientation (75th anniversary of Bridges' article]

The concepts of the mechanism of chromosome nondisjunction in Drosophila are described in a historical retrospective. Evidences are given for the appropriateness of the term co-orientation in the traditional sense used by geneticists treating nondisjunction. There are 6 variants of co-operation in Drosophila meiosis depending upon the number and particular chromosomes involved in co-orientation. The classical chromosome nondisjunction is a variant of co-orientation in the bivalent composed of two homologous chromosomes. By comparing the different variants of pairing (pairing in bi- and multivalents) resulting in co-orientation, the elementary events preceding co-orientation may be identified. The author reviews his recent data concerning the similarities of the co-orientation of two homologs and the co-orientation of two nonhomologs in Drosophila meiosis. The concept of the role of pairing in the precentromeric heterochromatic region during chromosome co-orientation is considered, and the hypothesis of delayed pairing in this region during meiotic prophase is put forward. Based on the suggested hypothesis clarified are (i) the relationship of pairing, crossing over, and disjunction of homologous chromosomes (ii) the relationship of crossing over and co-orientation of nonhomologous chromosomes, and (iii) the time when the contact resulting in nonhomolog co-orientation takes place.     

Dispersive forces and resisting spot welds by alternative homolog conjunction govern chromosome shape in Drosophila spermatocytes during prophase I

The bivalent chromosomes that are generated during prophase of meiosis I comprise a pair of homologous chromosomes. Homolog pairing during prophase I must include mechanisms that avoid or eliminate entanglements between non-homologous chromosomes. In Drosophila spermatocytes, non-homologous associations are disrupted by chromosome territory formation, while linkages between homologous chromosomes are maintained by special conjunction proteins. These proteins function as alternative for crossovers that link homologs during canonical meiosis but are absent during the achiasmate Drosophila male meiosis. How and where within bivalents the alternative homolog conjunction proteins function is still poorly understood. To clarify the rules that govern territory formation and alternative homolog conjunction, we have analyzed spermatocytes with chromosomal aberrations. We examined territory formation after acute chromosome cleavage by Cas9, targeted to the dodeca satellite adjacent to the centromere of chromosome 3 specifically in spermatocytes. Moreover, we studied territory organization, as well as the eventual orientation of chromosomes during meiosis I, in spermatocytes with stable structural aberrations, including heterozygous reciprocal autosomal translocations. Our observations indicate that alternative homolog conjunction is applied in a spatially confined manner. Comparable to crossovers, only a single conjunction spot per chromosome arm appears to be applied usually. These conjunction spots resist separation by the dispersing forces that drive apart homologous pericentromeric heterochromatin and embedded centromeres within territories, as well as the distinct chromosomal entities into peripheral, maximally separated territories within the spermatocyte nucleus.     

Functional analysis of maize RAD51 in meiosis and double-strand break repair

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Rad51p plays a central role in homologous recombination and the repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs). Double mutants of the two Zea mays L. (maize) rad51 homologs are viable and develop well under normal conditions, but are male sterile and have substantially reduced seed set. Light microscopic analyses of male meiosis in these plants reveal reduced homologous pairing, synapsis of nonhomologous chromosomes, reduced bivalents at diakinesis, numerous chromosome breaks at anaphase I, and that >33% of quartets carry cells that either lack an organized nucleolus or have two nucleoli. This indicates that RAD51 is required for efficient chromosome pairing and its absence results in nonhomologous pairing and synapsis. These phenotypes differ from those of an Arabidopsis rad51 mutant that exhibits completely disrupted chromosome pairing and synapsis during meiosis. Unexpectedly, surviving female gametes produced by maize rad51 double mutants are euploid and exhibit near-normal rates of meiotic crossovers. The finding that maize rad51 double mutant embryos are extremely susceptible to radiation-induced DSBs demonstrates a conserved role for RAD51 in the repair of mitotic DSBs in plants, vertebrates, and yeast.     

Distributive Disjunction of Authentic Chromosomes in Saccharomyces Cerevisiae

Distributive disjunction is defined as the first division meiotic segregation of either nonhomologous chromosomes that lack homologs or homologous chromosomes that have not recombined. To determine if chromosomes from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae were capable of distributive disjunction, we constructed a strain that was monosomic for both chromosome I and chromosome III and analyzed the meiotic segregation of the two monosomic chromosomes. In addition, we bisected chromosome I into two functional chromosome fragments, constructed strains that were monosomic for both chromosome fragments and examined meiotic segregation of the chromosome fragments in the monosomic strains. The two nonhomologous chromosomes or chromosome fragments appeared to segregate from each other in approximately 90% of the asci analyzed, indicating that yeast chromosomes were capable of distributive disjunction. We also examined the ability of a small nonhomologous centromere containing plasmid to participate in distributive disjunction with the two nonhomologous monosomic chromosomes. The plasmid appeared to efficiently participate with the two full length chromosomes suggesting that distributive disjunction in yeast is not dependent on chromosome size. Thus, distributive disjunction in S. cerevisiae appears to be different from Drosophila melanogaster where a different sized chromosome is excluded from distributive disjunction when two similar size nonhomologous chromosomes are present.     

Terminal regions of wheat chromosomes select their pairing partners in meiosis

Many plant species, including important crops like wheat, are polyploids that carry more than two sets of genetically related chromosomes capable of meiotic pairing. To safeguard a diploid-like behavior at meiosis, many polyploids evolved genetic loci that suppress incorrect pairing and recombination of homeologues. The Ph1 locus in wheat was proposed to ensure homologous pairing by controlling the specificity of centromere associations that precede chromosome pairing. Using wheat chromosomes that carry rye centromeres, we show that the centromere associations in early meiosis are not based on homology and that the Ph1 locus has no effect on such associations. Although centromeres indeed undergo a switch from nonhomologous to homologous associations in meiosis, this process is driven by the terminally initiated synapsis. The centromere has no effect on metaphase I chiasmate chromosome associations: homologs with identical or different centromeres, in the presence and absence of Ph1, pair the same. A FISH analysis of the behavior of centromeres and distal chromomeres in telocentric and bi-armed chromosomes demonstrates that it is not the centromeric, but rather the subtelomeric, regions that are involved in the correct partner recognition and selection.     

Two Types of Sites Required for Meiotic Chromosome Pairing in Caenorhabditis Elegans

Previous studies have shown that isolated portions of Caenorhabditis elegans chromosomes are not equally capable of meiotic exchange. These results led to the proposal that a homolog recognition region (HRR), defined as the region containing those sequences enabling homologous chromosomes to pair and recombine, is localized near one end of each chromosome. Using translocations and duplications we have localized the chromosome I HRR to the right end. Whereas the other half of chromosome I did not confer any ability for homologs to pair and recombine, deficiencies in this region dominantly suppressed recombination to the middle of the chromosome. These deletions may have disrupted pairing mechanisms that are secondary to and require an HRR. Thus, the processes of pairing and recombination appear to utilize at least two chromosomal elements, the HRR and other pairing sites. For example, terminal sequences from other chromosomes increase the ability of free duplications to recombine with their normal homologs, suggesting that telomere-associated sequences, homologous or nonhomologous, play a role in facilitating meiotic exchange. Recombination can also initiate at internal sites separated from the HRR by chromosome rearrangement, such as deletions of the unc-54 region of chromosome I. When crossing over was suppressed in a region of chromosome I, compensatory increases were observed in other regions. Thus, the presence of the HRR enabled recombination to occur but did not determine the distribution of the crossover events. It seems most likely that there are multiple initiation sites for recombination once homolog recognition has been achieved.     

Components of the RNAi machinery that mediate long-distance chromosomal associations are dispensable for meiotic and early somatic homolog pairing in Drosophila melanogaster

Homolog pairing is indispensable for the proper segregation of chromosomes in meiosis but the mechanism by which homologs uniquely pair with each other is poorly understood. In Drosophila, somatic chromosomes also undergo full homolog pairing by an unknown mechanism. It has been recently demonstrated that both insulator function and somatic long-distance interactions between Polycomb response elements (PREs) are stabilized by the RNAi machinery in Drosophila. This suggests the possibility that long-distance pairing interactions between homologs, either during meiosis or in the soma, may be stabilized by a similar mechanism. To test this hypothesis, we have characterized meiotic and early somatic chromosome pairing of homologous chromosomes in flies that are mutant for various components of the RNAi machinery. Despite the identification of a novel role for the piRNA machinery in meiotic progression and synaptonemal complex (SC) assembly, we have found that the components of the RNAi machinery that mediate long-distance chromosomal interactions are dispensable for homologous chromosome pairing. Thus, there appears to be at least two mechanisms that bring homologous sequences together within the nucleus: those that act between dispersed homologous sequences and those that act to align and pair homologous chromosomes.     

Meiotic Nondisjunction and Recombination of Chromosome III and Homologous Fragments in Saccharomyces Cerevisiae

A yeast strain, in which nondisjunction of chromosome III at the first-meiotic division could be assayed, was constructed. Using chromosome fragmentation plasmids, chromosomal fragments (CFs) were derived in isogenic strains from six sites along chromosome III and one site on chromosome VII. Whereas the presence of the CFs derived from chromosome III increased considerably the meiosis I nondisjunction of that chromosome, the CF derived from chromosome VII had no effect on chromosome III segregation. The effects of the chromosome III-derived fragments were not linearly related to fragment length. Two regions, one of 12 kb in size located at the left end of the chromosome, and the other of 5 kb, located at the center of the right arm, were found to have profound effects on chromosome III nondisjunction. Most disomics arising from meioses in strains containing chromosome III CFs did not contain the CF; thus it appears that the two chromosome III homologs had segregated away from the CF. Among the disomics, recombination between the homologous chromosomes III was lower than expected from the genetic distance, while recombination between one of the chromosomes III and the fragment was frequent. We suggest that there are sites along the chromosome that are more involved than others in the pairing of homologous chromosomes and that the pairing between fragment and homologs involves recombination among these latter elements.     

Genetic evidence that nonhomologous disjunction and meiotic drive are properties of wild-type Drosophila melanogaster male meiosis

We have followed sex and second chromosome disjunction, and the effects of these chromosomes on sperm function, in four genotypes: wild-type males, males deficient for the Y-linked crystal locus, males with an X chromosome heterochromatic deficiency that deletes all X-Y pairing sites, and males with both deficiencies. Both mutant situations provoke chromosome misbehavior, but the disjunctional defects are quite different. Deficiency of the X heterochromatin, consonant with the lack of pairing sites, mostly disrupts X-Y disjunction with a decidedly second-level effect on major autosome behavior. Deleting crystal, consonant with the cytological picture of postpairing chromatin-condensation problems, disrupts sex and autosome disjunction equally. Even when the mutant-induced nondisjunction has very different mechanics, however, and even more importantly, even in the wild type, there is strong, and similar, meiotic drive. The presence of meiotic drive when disjunction is disrupted by distinctly different mechanisms supports the notion that drive is a normal cellular response to meiotic problems rather than a direct effect of particular mutants. Most surprisingly, in both wild-type and crystal-deficient males the Y chromosome moves to the opposite pole from a pair of nondisjoined second chromosomes nearly 100% of the time. This nonhomologous interaction is, however, absent when the X heterochromatin is deleted. The nonhomologous disjunction of the sex and second chromosomes may be the genetic consequence of the chromosomal compartmentalization seen by deconvolution microscopy, and the absence of Y-2 disjunction when the X heterochromatin is deleted suggests that XY pairing itself, or a previously unrecognized heterochromatic function, is prerequisite to this macrostructural organization of the chromosomes.