Kinetochore capture and bi-orientation on the mitotic spindle

Kinetochores are large protein complexes that are formed on chromosome regions known as centromeres. For high-fidelity chromosome segregation, kinetochores must be correctly captured on the mitotic spindle before anaphase onset. During prometaphase, kinetochores are initially captured by a single microtubule that extends from a spindle pole and are then transported poleward along the microtubule. Subsequently, microtubules that extend from the other spindle pole also interact with kinetochores and, eventually, each sister kinetochore attaches to microtubules that extend from opposite poles - this is known as bi-orientation. Here we discuss the molecular mechanisms of these processes, by focusing on budding yeast and drawing comparisons with other organisms.     

Chromosome bi-orientation: Euclidian euploidy

Establishment of proper attachments between chromosomes and microtubules is essential for the accurate division of the genome. Two recent studies indicate that these attachments are facilitated by the geometry of chromosomes and the bipolar arrangement of spindle microtubules.     

Concentrating on the mitotic spindle

In eukaryotes, the microtubule-based spindle drives chromosome segregation. In this issue, Schweizer et al. (2015; J. Cell Biol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201506107) find that the spindle area is demarcated by a semipermeable organelle barrier. Molecular crowding, which is microtubule independent, causes the enrichment and/or retention of crucial factors in the spindle region. Their results add an important new feature to the models of how this structure assembles and is regulated.Mitosis is marked by the assembly of the mitotic spindle, a microtubule-based structure that facilitates accurate chromosome segregation. Many biochemical reactions are coupled to spindle assembly, from tubulin polymerization itself to the mitotic checkpoint, which inhibits chromosome disjunction until all the chromosomes are properly attached and aligned (Cleveland et al., 2003). Interestingly, these reactions are virtually unaltered over a broad morphological range; large spindles and small spindles follow roughly the same biochemical rules despite quite distinct geometries (Brown et al., 2007; Wühr et al., 2008). In this issue, Schweizer et al. report that the mitotic spindle area is delineated by membrane-bound organelles, generating a “spindle envelope” with unique molecular constituents compared with the surrounding cytoplasm. Spindle envelope–based molecular crowding provides an enticing hypothetical solution to the broad problem of confining mitotic biochemistry to a specific cellular space irrespective of cell size.Schweizer et al. (2015) used FRAP and fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) to measure the mobility of specific proteins. The authors found that tubulin and the Mad2 spindle assembly checkpoint protein were enriched in the spindle area in a microtubule polymer-independent manner. Given that the mobility of these proteins outside and within the spindle area was the same, changes in local concentration were likely a result of a barrier effect. In support of this hypothesis, modeling their FCS data with a fenestrated barrier separating the spindle area from the cytoplasm reproduced the measured FCS results. To test if a barrier surrounding the spindle area was important for spindle function, the authors disrupted the envelope area by laser microsurgery and found chromosome segregation errors consistent with defects in spindle assembly and kinetochore attachment monitoring. Thus, spindle envelope–based concentration of basal components in two critical spindle reactions, spindle assembly and mitotic checkpoint signaling, could mechanistically catalyze cell division.Molecular crowding can catalyze reactions and stabilize proteins by altering the local concentration of one or more rate-limiting components and is best characterized by membrane-bound organelles. Crowding by aggregation can greatly increase biochemical reactions without the need for a contiguous membrane (Weber and Brangwynne, 2012; Brangwynne, 2013) and this phenomenon can regulate cell cycle states (Lee et al., 2013). Here, Schweizer et al. (2015) propose that by creating a membrane-bound organelle exclusion zone, a spindle envelope could cause the molecular crowding of important spindle proteins and thereby their enrichment in the spindle area.The mitotic spindle is known to scale with cell size: smaller cells have smaller spindles (Levy and Heald, 2012). Spindle size scaling is prominent during development when repeated cell division without embryonic growth results in cells that can be several orders of magnitude smaller than that of the zygote. Recently, cytoplasm volume and tubulin concentration was shown to be an important factor in spindle size scaling; however, a curious exception to the size scaling rule is that there seems to be an upper limit to spindle size, resulting in stable spindle size when a threshold cell size is reached (Wühr et al., 2008; Good et al., 2013; Hazel et al., 2013). A spindle envelope would provide mechanisms to maintain increased local tubulin concentration independent of the absolute amount available in the cell. The net effect would be that spindle size scales in very large cells to the spindle envelope size rather than cell size in a manner analogous to chromosome size scaling to nuclear size independently of cell size (Fig. 1 A). Clearly this is a more complex problem and factors such as tubulin protein production and polymerization cofactors (such as the Tog family of proteins) clearly play an important role (Slep, 2009). However, spindle envelope–based molecular crowding could provide an elegant solution to a biochemical problem.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Molecular crowding in the mitotic spindle. Schematic view of how a spindle envelope could mitigate spindle size scaling during development (A) or cell cycle control (B) in a common cytoplasm. (A) A spindle envelope (black dotted line) that excludes large membrane-bound organelles (yellow) could locally increase the concentration of spindle proteins (depicted as a red background) such as tubulin to control spindle size independent of cell size during early development. (B) Neighboring nuclei in a common cytoplasm (e.g., the syncytial mitotic gonad in C. elegans) could have differing mitotic states by restricting the diffusion of important regulatory proteins such as Mad2 (similar coloring as in A).A spindle envelope could also provide a cell biological solution to another developmental problem—independent cell cycle control of separate nuclei within a single cytoplasm (syncytia). For example, the mitotic region of the Caenorhabditis elegans germline contains germ cell precursors that divide independently of one another in a common cytoplasm. In some cases, two neighboring dividing nuclei can have different biochemistry, one arrested in metaphase because of a kinetochore microtubule attachment defect while the other is progressing into anaphase (Gerhold et al., 2015). By restricting the diffusive radius of signaling molecules like Mad2, a steep threshold of checkpoint activity can be maintained, allowing independent cell cycle control even in a common cytoplasm (Fig. 1 B).The mitotic spindle has long been known to exclude large membrane-bound organelles, even in the absence of microtubule polymer, leading to a hypothesized nontubulin-based “spindle matrix.” A spindle matrix would be an excellent candidate to underlie the spindle envelope. The molecular nature of a spindle matrix, however, has never been agreed upon with candidate mechanisms ranging from nonprotein macromolecules to actin (Pickett-Heaps et al., 1984; Chang et al., 2004). A convincing argument can be made that the Skeletor/Megator/Chromator proteins first identified in Drosophila melanogaster constitute a spindle matrix (Walker et al., 2000; Qi et al., 2004; Rath et al., 2004; Schweizer et al., 2014). These proteins are large and are found in the nucleus in interphase and as microtubule-independent fibrous structures in and around the spindle in mitosis. Depletion of these proteins results in mitotic errors; however, these may or may not be caused by a role as the spindle matrix.Schweizer et al. (2015) evaluated Megator (as a representative member of the complex) as a possible basis for generating the spindle envelope. FRAP and FCS showed that, like tubulin and Mad2, Megator is concentrated in the spindle envelope region independent of microtubules. However, Megator in the spindle region had slower diffusive properties compared with that around the cell periphery. Thus, unlike tubulin and Mad2, the mobility of Megator within the spindle was altered, indicating that Megator likely forms a high molecular weight complex with its binding partners Skeletor and Chromator in the spindle area, which may help form the spindle envelope.The sum of these results lead to a possible model whereby the Skeletor/Megator/Chromator proteins complex together and subsequently support a spindle envelope independent of microtubules. The spindle envelope excludes large membrane-bound organelles, leading to increased concentration of mitotic reaction constituents and thus ultimately catalyzing cell division. It will be exciting in the future to determine if the spindle area is indeed subject to molecular crowding in the purest of forms (solvent exclusion) and how this effect drives cell division.     

Bi-orienting chromosomes on the mitotic spindle

For the proper segregation of sister chromatids before cell division, each sister kinetochore must attach to microtubules that extend to opposite spindle poles. This process is called bipolar microtubule attachment or chromosome bi-orientation. The mechanism for chromosome bi-orientation lies at the heart of chromosome segregation, but is still poorly understood. Recent studies suggest that cells can promote bi-orientation by re-orienting kinetochore-spindle pole connections.     

Regulation of Aurora-A kinase on the mitotic spindle

The error-free segregation of duplicated chromosomes during cell division is essential for the maintenance of an intact genome. This process is brought about by a highly dynamic bipolar array of microtubules, the mitotic spindle. The formation and function of the mitotic spindle during M-phase of the cell cycle is regulated by protein phosphorylation, involving multiple protein kinases and phosphatases. Prominent among the enzymes implicated in spindle assembly is the serine/threonine-specific protein kinase Aurora-A. In several common human tumors, Aurora-A is overexpressed, and deregulation of this kinase was shown to result in mitotic defects and aneuploidy. Moreover, recent genetic evidence directly links the human Aurora-A gene to cancer susceptibility. Several of the physiological substrates of Aurora-A presumably await identification, but recent studies are beginning to shed light on the regulation of this critical mitotic kinase. Here, we review these findings with particular emphasis on the role of TPX2, a prominent spindle component implicated in a Ran-GTP-mediated spindle assembly pathway.Communicated by E.A. Nigg     

Bi-orienting chromosomes: acrobatics on the mitotic spindle

To maintain their genetic integrity, eukaryotic cells must segregate their chromosomes properly to opposite poles during mitosis. This process mainly depends on the forces generated by microtubules that attach to kinetochores. During prometaphase, kinetochores initially interact with a single microtubule that extends from a spindle pole and then move towards a spindle pole. Subsequently, microtubules that extend from the other spindle pole also interact with kinetochores and, eventually, each sister kinetochore attaches to microtubules that extend from opposite poles (sister kinetochore bi-orientation). If sister kinetochores interact with microtubules in wrong orientation, this must be corrected before the onset of anaphase. Here, I discuss the processes leading to bi-orientation and the mechanisms ensuring this pivotal state that is required for proper chromosome segregation.     

Mechanisms and molecules of the mitotic spindle

In all eukaryotes, morphogenesis of the microtubule cytoskeleton into a bipolar spindle is required for the faithful transmission of the genome to the two daughter cells during division. This process is facilitated by the intrinsic polarity and dynamic properties of microtubules and involves many proteins that modulate microtubule organization and stability. Recent work has begun to uncover the molecular mechanisms behind these dynamic events. Here we describe current models and discuss some of the complex repertoire of factors required for spindle assembly and chromosome segregation.     

Cell division: AAAtacking the mitotic spindle

Cell division requires the assembly of a microtubule-based spindle which captures and segregates sister chromatids. But how is this spindle broken down once chromosome segregation is complete? New evidence implicates a highly conserved AAA-ATPase in spindle disassembly at the end of mitosis.     

Proteome analysis of the human mitotic spindle

The accurate distribution of sister chromatids during cell division is crucial for the generation of two cells with the same complement of genetic information. A highly dynamic microtubule-based structure, the mitotic spindle, carries out the physical separation of the chromosomes to opposite poles of the cells and, moreover, determines the cell division cleavage plane. In animal cells, the spindle comprises microtubules that radiate from the microtubule organizing centers, the centrosomes, and interact with kinetochores on the chromosomes. Malfunctioning of the spindle can lead to chromosome missegregation and hence result in aneuploidy, a hallmark of most human cancers. Despite major progress in deciphering the temporal and spatial regulation of the mitotic spindle, its composition and function are not fully understood. A more complete inventory of spindle components would therefore constitute an important advance. Here we describe the purification of human mitotic spindles and their analysis by MS/MS. We identified 151 proteins previously known to associate with the spindle apparatus, centrosomes, and/or kinetochores and 644 other proteins, including 154 uncharacterized components that did not show obvious homologies to known proteins and did not contain motifs indicative of a particular localization. Of these uncharacterized proteins, 17 were tagged and localized in transfected mitotic cells, resulting in the identification of six genuine spindle components (KIAA0008, CdcA8, KIAA1187, FLJ12649, FLJ90806, and C20Orf129). This study illustrates the strength of a proteomic approach for the analysis of isolated human spindles and identifies several novel spindle components for future functional studies.     

Molecular components of the mitotic spindle.

Mitotic spindles constitute the machinery responsible for equidistribution of the genetic material into each daughter cell during cell division. They are transient and hence quite labile structures, changing their morphology even while performing their function. Biochemical, immunological and genetic analyses of mitotic cells have allowed us to identify a variety of molecules that are recruited to form the spindle at the onset of mitosis. Evaluation of the roles of these molecules in both the formation and in the dynamics of spindle microtubules should be important for understanding the molecular basis of mitosis and its regulation. We have recently identified a novel mitosis-specific microtubule-associated protein (MAP) using a monoclonal antibody probe raised against the mitotic spindles isolated from cultured mammalian cells. This 95/105 kDa antigen represents a unique component of the spindle distinct from any of the other MAPs reported so far. Antibody microinjection resulted in mitotic inhibition in a stage-specific and dose-dependent manner, indicating that the protein is an essential spindle component.     

Polarity of microtubules of the mitotic spindle

Microtubules are polar structures that grow preferentially at one end. Measurement of their rate of directional growth can be used as a polarity indicator to determine their orientation with respect to a nucleation site. The results are interpreted to signify that the microtubules originating from the centrosomes and chromosomes of the mitotic spindle are antiparallel to each other.     

Centrosome-independent mitotic spindle formation in vertebrates

BACKGROUND: In cells lacking centrosomes, the microtubule-organizing activity of the centrosome is substituted for by the combined action of chromatin and molecular motors. The question of whether a centrosome-independent pathway for spindle formation exists in vertebrate somatic cells, which always contain centrosomes, remains unanswered, however. By a combination of labeling with green fluorescent protein (GFP) and laser microsurgery we have been able to selectively destroy centrosomes in living mammalian cells as they enter mitosis. RESULTS: We have established a mammalian cell line in which the boundaries of the centrosome are defined by the constitutive expression of gamma-tubulin-GFP. This feature allows us to use laser microsurgery to selectively destroy the centrosomes in living cells. Here we show that this method can be used to reproducibly ablate the centrosome as a functional entity, and that after destruction the microtubules associated with the ablated centrosome disassemble. Depolymerization-repolymerization experiments reveal that microtubules form in acentrosomal cells randomly within the cytoplasm. When both centrosomes are destroyed during prophase these cells form a functional bipolar spindle. Surprisingly, when just one centrosome is destroyed, bipolar spindles are also formed that contain one centrosomal and one acentrosomal pole. Both the polar regions in these spindles are well focused and contain the nuclear structural protein NuMA. The acentrosomal pole lacks pericentrin, gamma-tubulin, and centrioles, however. CONCLUSIONS: These results reveal, for the first time, that somatic cells can use a centrosome-independent pathway for spindle formation that is normally masked by the presence of the centrosome. Furthermore, this mechanism is strong enough to drive bipolar spindle assembly even in the presence of a single functional centrosome.     

ATM controls proper mitotic spindle structure

The recessive ataxia-telangiectasia (A-T) syndrome is characterized by cerebellar degeneration, immunodeficiency, cancer susceptibility, premature aging, and insulin-resistant diabetes and is caused by loss of function of the ATM kinase, a member of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase–like protein kinases (PIKKs) family. ATM plays a crucial role in the DNA damage response (DDR); however, the complexity of A-T features suggests that ATM may regulate other cellular functions. Here we show that ATM affects proper bipolar mitotic spindle structure independently of DNA damage. In addition, we find that in mitosis ATM forms a complex with the poly(ADP)ribose (PAR) polymerase Tankyrase (TNKS) 1, the spindle pole protein NuMA1, and breast cancer susceptibility protein BRCA1, another crucial DDR player. Our evidence indicates that the complex is required for efficient poly(ADP)ribosylation of NuMA1. We find further that a mutant NuMA1 version, non-phosphorylatable at potential ATM-dependent phosphorylation sites, is poorly PARylated and induces loss of spindle bipolarity. Our findings may help to explain crucial A-T features and provide further mechanistic rationale for TNKS inhibition in cancer therapy.     

The regulation of mitotic spindle function

The process of mitosis includes a series of morphological changes in the cell in which the directional movements of chromosomes are the most prominent. The presence of a microtubular array, known as the spindle or mitotic apparatus, provides at least a scaffold upon which these movements take place. The precise mechanism for chromosome movement remains obscure, but new findings suggest that the kinetochore may play a key role in chromosome movement toward the spindle pole, and that sliding interactions between or among adjacent microtubules may provide the mechanochemical basis for spindle elongation. The physiological regulation of the anaphase motors and of spindle operation either before or after anaphase remains equally elusive. Elicitors that may serve as controlling elements in spindle function include shifts in cytosolic calcium activity and perhaps the activation or inactivation of protein kinases, which in turn produce changes in the state of phosphorylation of specific spindle components.