Loss of function of the Cik1/Kar3 motor complex results in chromosomes with syntelic attachment that are sensed by the tension checkpoint

The attachment of sister kinetochores by microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles establishes chromosome bipolar attachment, which generates tension on chromosomes and is essential for sister-chromatid segregation. Syntelic attachment occurs when both sister kinetochores are attached by microtubules from the same spindle pole and this attachment is unable to generate tension on chromosomes, but a reliable method to induce syntelic attachments is not available in budding yeast. The spindle checkpoint can sense the lack of tension on chromosomes as well as detached kinetochores to prevent anaphase onset. In budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, tension checkpoint proteins Aurora/Ipl1 kinase and centromere-localized Sgo1 are required to sense the absence of tension but are dispensable for the checkpoint response to detached kinetochores. We have found that the loss of function of a motor protein complex Cik1/Kar3 in budding yeast leads to syntelic attachments. Inactivation of either the spindle or tension checkpoint enables premature anaphase entry in cells with dysfunctional Cik1/Kar3, resulting in co-segregation of sister chromatids. Moreover, the abolished Kar3-kinetochore interaction in cik1 mutants suggests that the Cik1/Kar3 complex mediates chromosome movement along microtubules, which could facilitate bipolar attachment. Therefore, we can induce syntelic attachments in budding yeast by inactivating the Cik1/Kar3 complex, and this approach will be very useful to study the checkpoint response to syntelic attachments.     

Connecting up and clearing out: how kinetochore attachment silences the spindle assembly checkpoint

With the goal of creating two genetically identical daughter cells, cell division culminates in the equal segregation of sister chromatids. This phase of cell division is monitored by a cell cycle checkpoint known as the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). The SAC actively prevents chromosome segregation while one or more chromosomes, or more accurately kinetochores, remain unattached to the mitotic spindle. Such unattached kinetochores recruit SAC proteins to assemble a diffusible anaphase inhibitor. Kinetochores stop production of this inhibitor once microtubules (MTs) of the mitotic spindle are bound, but productive attachment of all kinetochores is required to satisfy the SAC, initiate anaphase, and exit from mitosis. Although mechanisms of kinetochore signaling and SAC inhibitor assembly and function have received the bulk of attention in the past two decades, recent work has focused on the principles of SAC silencing. Here, we review the mechanisms that silence SAC signaling at the kinetochore, and in particular, how attachment to spindle MTs and biorientation on the mitotic spindle may turn off inhibitor generation. Future challenges in this area are highlighted towards the goal of building a comprehensive molecular model of this process.     

Dual inhibition of Cdc20 by the spindle checkpoint

The metaphase-to-anaphase transition is triggered by the Anaphase-Promoting Complex (APC), an E3 ubiquitin ligase that targets proteins for degradation, leading to sister chromatid separation and mitotic exit. The function of APC is controlled by the spindle checkpoint that delays anaphase onset in the presence of any chromosome that has not established bipolar attachment to the mitotic spindle. In this way, the checkpoint ensures accurate chromosome segregation. The spindle checkpoint is mostly activated from kinetochores that are not attached to microtubules or not under tension that is normally generated from bipolar attachment. These kinetochores recruit several spindle checkpoint proteins to assemble an inhibitory complex composed of checkpoint proteins Mad2, Bub3, and Mad3/BubR1. This complex binds and inhibits Cdc20, an activator and substrate adaptor for APC. In addition, the checkpoint complex promotes Cdc20 degradation, thus lowering Cdc20 protein level upon checkpoint activation. This dual inhibition on Cdc20 likely ensures that the spindle checkpoint is sustained even when the cell contains only a single unattached kinetochore.     

The spindle assembly checkpoint is satisfied in the absence of interkinetochore tension during mitosis with unreplicated genomes

The accuracy of chromosome segregation is enhanced by the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). The SAC is thought to monitor two distinct events: attachment of kinetochores to microtubules and the stretch of the centromere between the sister kinetochores that arises only when the chromosome becomes properly bioriented. We examined human cells undergoing mitosis with unreplicated genomes (MUG). Kinetochores in these cells are not paired, which implies that the centromere cannot be stretched; however, cells progress through mitosis. A SAC is present during MUG as cells arrest in response to nocodazole, taxol, or monastrol treatments. Mad2 is recruited to unattached MUG kinetochores and released upon their attachment. In contrast, BubR1 remains on attached kinetochores and exhibits a level of phosphorylation consistent with the inability of MUG spindles to establish normal levels of centromere tension. Thus, kinetochore attachment to microtubules is sufficient to satisfy the SAC even in the absence of interkinetochore tension.     

The 'anaphase problem': how to disable the mitotic checkpoint when sisters split

Two closely connected mechanisms safeguard the fidelity of chromosome segregation in eukaryotic cells. The mitotic checkpoint monitors the attachment of kinetochores to microtubules and delays anaphase onset until all sister kinetochores have become attached to opposite poles. In addition, an error correction mechanism destabilizes erroneous attachments that do not lead to tension at sister kinetochores. Aurora B kinase, the catalytic subunit of the CPC (chromosomal passenger complex), acts as a sensor and effector in both pathways. In this review we focus on a poorly understood but important aspect of mitotic control: what prevents the mitotic checkpoint from springing into action when sister centromeres are split and tension is suddenly lost at anaphase onset? Recent work has shown that disjunction of sister chromatids, in principle, engages the mitotic checkpoint, and probably also the error correction mechanism, with potentially catastrophic consequences for cell division. Eukaryotic cells have solved this 'anaphase problem' by disabling the mitotic checkpoint at the metaphase-to-anaphase transition. Checkpoint inactivation is in part due to the reversal of Cdk1 (cyclin-dependent kinase 1) phosphorylation of the CPC component INCENP (inner centromere protein; Sli15 in budding yeast), which causes the relocation of the CPC from centromeres to the spindle midzone. These findings highlight principles of mitotic checkpoint control: when bipolar chromosome attachment is reached in mitosis, the checkpoint is satisfied, but still active and responsive to loss of tension. Mitotic checkpoint inactivation at anaphase onset is required to prevent checkpoint re-engagement when sister chromatids split.     

Erroneous Silencing of the Mitotic Checkpoint by Aberrant Spindle Pole-Kinetochore Coordination

To segregate chromosomes during cell division, microtubules that form the bipolar spindle attach to and pull on paired chromosome kinetochores. The spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) is activated at unattached and misattached kinetochores to prevent further mitotic progression. The SAC is silenced after all the kinetochores establish proper and stable attachment to the spindle. Robust timing of SAC silencing after the last kinetochore-spindle attachment herein dictates the fidelity of chromosome segregation. Chromosome missegregation is rare in typical somatic cell mitosis, but frequent in cancer cell mitosis and in meiosis I of mammalian oocytes. In the latter cases, SAC is normally activated in response to disruptions of kinetochore-spindle attachments, suggesting that frequent chromosome missegregation ensues from faulty SAC silencing. In-depth understanding of how SAC silencing malfunctions in these cases is yet missing, but is believed to hold promise for treatment of cancer and prevention of human miscarriage and birth defects. We previously established a spatiotemporal model that, to the best of our knowledge, explained the robustness of SAC silencing in normal mitosis for the first time. In this article, we take advantage of the whole-cell perspective of the spatiotemporal model to identify possible causes of chromosome missegregation out of the distinct features of spindle assembly exhibited by cancer cells and mammalian oocytes. The model results explain why multipolar spindle could inhibit SAC silencing and spindle pole clustering could promote it—albeit accompanied by more kinetochore attachment errors. The model also eliminates geometric factors as the cause for nonrobust SAC silencing in oocyte meiosis, and instead, suggests atypical kinetochore-spindle attachment in meiosis as a potential culprit. Overall, the model shows that abnormal spindle-pole formation and its aberrant coordination with atypical kinetochore-spindle attachments could compromise the robustness of SAC silencing. Our model highlights systems-level coupling between kinetochore-spindle attachment and spindle-pole formation in SAC silencing.     

Anaphase onset in vertebrate somatic cells is controlled by a checkpoint that monitors sister kinetochore attachment to the spindle

To test the popular but unproven assumption that the metaphase-anaphase transition in vertebrate somatic cells is subject to a checkpoint that monitors chromosome (i.e., kinetochore) attachment to the spindle, we filmed mitosis in 126 PtK1 cells. We found that the time from nuclear envelope breakdown to anaphase onset is linearly related (r2 = 0.85) to the duration the cell has unattached kinetochores, and that even a single unattached kinetochore delays anaphase onset. We also found that anaphase is initiated at a relatively constant 23-min average interval after the last kinetochore attaches, regardless of how long the cell possessed unattached kinetochores. From these results we conclude that vertebrate somatic cells possess a metaphase-anaphase checkpoint control that monitors sister kinetochore attachment to the spindle. We also found that some cells treated with 0.3-0.75 nM Taxol, after the last kinetochore attached to the spindle, entered anaphase and completed normal poleward chromosome motion (anaphase A) up to 3 h after the treatment--well beyond the 9-48-min range exhibited by untreated cells. The fact that spindle bipolarity and the metaphase alignment of kinetochores are maintained in these cells, and that the chromosomes move poleward during anaphase, suggests that the checkpoint monitors more than just the attachment of microtubules at sister kinetochores or the metaphase alignment of chromosomes. Our data are most consistent with the hypothesis that the checkpoint monitors an increase in tension between kinetochores and their associated microtubules as biorientation occurs.     

Anaphase B precedes anaphase A in the mouse egg

Segregation of chromosomes at the time of cell division is achieved by the microtubules and associated molecules of the spindle. Chromosomes attach to kinetochore microtubules (kMTs), which extend from the spindle pole region to kinetochores assembled upon centromeric DNA. In most animal cells studied, chromosome segregation occurs as a result of kMT shortening, which causes chromosomes to move toward the spindle poles (anaphase A). Anaphase A is typically followed by a spindle elongation that further separates the chromosomes (anaphase B). The experiments presented here provide the first detailed analysis of anaphase in a live vertebrate oocyte and show that chromosome segregation is initially driven by a significant spindle elongation (anaphase B), which is followed by a shortening of kMTs to fully segregate the chromosomes (anaphase A). Loss of tension across kMTs at anaphase onset produces a force imbalance, allowing the bipolar motor kinesin-5 to drive early anaphase B spindle elongation and chromosome segregation. Early anaphase B spindle elongation determines the extent of chromosome segregation and the size of the resulting cells. The vertebrate egg therefore employs a novel mode of anaphase wherein spindle elongation caused by loss of k-fiber tension is harnessed to kick-start chromosome segregation prior to anaphase A.     

KNL1/Spc105 recruits PP1 to silence the spindle assembly checkpoint

The spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) delays anaphase onset until kinetochores accomplish bioriented microtubule attachments [1]. Although several centromeric and kinetochore kinases, including Aurora B, regulate kinetochore-microtubule attachment and/or SAC activation [2-4], the molecular mechanism that translates bioriented attachment into SAC silencing remains unclear [5]. Employing a method to rapidly induce exact gene replacement in budding yeast [6], we show here that the binding of protein phosphatase 1?(PP1/Glc7) to the evolutionarily conserved RVSF motif of the kinetochore protein Spc105 (KNL1/Blinkin/CASC5) is essential for viability by silencing the SAC, while it plays an auxiliary nonessential role for physical chromosome segregation. Although Aurora B may inhibit this binding, persistent PP1-Spc105 interaction does not affect chromosome segregation and is insufficient to silence the SAC in the absence of microtubules, indicating that dynamic regulation of this?interaction is dispensable. However, the amount of PP1 targeted to kinetochores must be finely tuned, because recruitment of either no or one extra copy of PP1 to Spc105 is detrimental, illustrating the vital impact of targeting an exiguous fraction of PP1 to the kinetochore. We propose that the PP1-Spc105 interaction enables local regulation of dynamic phosphorylation and dephosphorylation at the kinetochore to couple microtubule attachment and SAC silencing.     

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.     

Cohesins determine the attachment manner of kinetochores to spindle microtubules at meiosis I in fission yeast

During mitosis, sister kinetochores attach to microtubules that extend to opposite spindle poles (bipolar attachment) and pull the chromatids apart at anaphase (equational segregation). A multisubunit complex called cohesin, including Rad21/Scc1, plays a crucial role in sister chromatid cohesion and equational segregation at mitosis. Meiosis I differs from mitosis in having a reductional pattern of chromosome segregation, in which sister kinetochores are attached to the same spindle (monopolar attachment). During meiosis, Rad21/Scc1 is largely replaced by its meiotic counterpart, Rec8. If Rec8 is inactivated in fission yeast, meiosis I is shifted from reductional to equational division. However, the reason rec8Delta cells undergo equational rather than random division has not been clarified; therefore, it has been unclear whether equational segregation is due to a loss of cohesin in general or to a loss of a specific requirement for Rec8. We report here that the equational segregation at meiosis I depends on substitutive Rad21, which relocates to the centromeres if Rec8 is absent. Moreover, we demonstrate that even if sufficient amounts of Rad21 are transferred to the centromeres at meiosis I, thereby establishing cohesion at the centromeres, rec8Delta cells never recover monopolar attachment but instead secure bipolar attachment. Thus, Rec8 and Rad21 define monopolar and bipolar attachment, respectively, at meiosis I. We conclude that cohesin is a crucial determinant of the attachment manner of kinetochores to the spindle microtubules at meiosis I in fission yeast.     

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.     

Kinetochore-microtubule interactions “in check” by Bub1, Bub3 and BubR1: The dual task of attaching and signalling

The spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) prevents anaphase onset until all chromosomes accomplish proper bipolar attachments to the mitotic spindle and come under tension, thereby ensuring the fidelity of chromosome segregation. Despite significant advances in our understanding of SAC signalling, a clear link between checkpoint signalling and the molecular mechanisms underlying chromosome attachment to microtubules has not been established so far. However, independent studies from many groups have interestingly found that the bone-a-fide Bub1, BubR1 and Bub3 SAC proteins are themselves required for proper kinetochore-microtubule (K-MT) interactions. Here, we review these findings and discuss the specific contribution of each of these proteins in the regulation of K-MT attachment, taking into consideration their interdependencies for kinetochore localization as well as their relationship with other proteins with a known role in chromosome attachment and congression.     

Mitotic chromosome biorientation in fission yeast is enhanced by dynein and a minus-end-directed, kinesin-like protein

Chromosome biorientation, the attachment of sister kinetochores to sister spindle poles, is vitally important for accurate chromosome segregation. We have studied this process by following the congression of pole-proximal kinetochores and their subsequent anaphase segregation in fission yeast cells that carry deletions in any or all of this organism's minus end-directed, microtubule-dependent motors: two related kinesin 14s (Pkl1p and Klp2p) and dynein. None of these deletions abolished biorientation, but fewer chromosomes segregated normally without Pkl1p, and to a lesser degree without dynein, than in wild-type cells. In the absence of Pkl1p, which normally localizes to the spindle and its poles, the checkpoint that monitors chromosome biorientation was defective, leading to frequent precocious anaphase. Ultrastructural analysis of mutant mitotic spindles suggests that Pkl1p contributes to error-free biorientation by promoting normal spindle pole organization, whereas dynein helps to anchor a focused bundle of spindle microtubules at the pole.     

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.     

Oocyte-specific differences in cell-cycle control create an innate susceptibility to meiotic errors

Segregation of homologs at the first meiotic division (MI) is facilitated by crossovers and by a physical constraint imposed on sister kinetochores that facilitates monopolar attachment to the MI spindle. Recombination failure or premature separation of homologs results in univalent chromosomes at MI, and univalents constrained to form monopolar attachments should be inherently unstable and trigger the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). Although univalents trigger cell-cycle arrest in the male, this is not the case in mammalian oocytes. Because the spindle assembly portion of the SAC appears to function normally, two hypotheses have been proposed to explain the lack of response to univalents: (1) reduced stringency of the oocyte SAC to aberrant chromosome behavior, and (2) the ability of univalents to satisfy the SAC by forming bipolar attachments. The present study of Mlh1 mutant mice demonstrates that metaphase alignment is not a prerequisite for anaphase onset and provides strong evidence that MI spindle stabilization and anaphase onset require stable bipolar attachment of a critical mass--but not all--of chromosomes. We postulate that subtle differences in SAC-mediated control make the human oocyte inherently error prone and contribute to the age-related increase in aneuploidy.     

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 small molecule Hesperadin reveals a role for Aurora B in correcting kinetochore-microtubule attachment and in maintaining the spindle assembly checkpoint

The proper segregation of sister chromatids in mitosis depends on bipolar attachment of all chromosomes to the mitotic spindle. We have identified the small molecule Hesperadin as an inhibitor of chromosome alignment and segregation. Our data imply that Hesperadin causes this phenotype by inhibiting the function of the mitotic kinase Aurora B. Mammalian cells treated with Hesperadin enter anaphase in the presence of numerous monooriented chromosomes, many of which may have both sister kinetochores attached to one spindle pole (syntelic attachment). Hesperadin also causes cells arrested by taxol or monastrol to enter anaphase within <1 h, whereas cells in nocodazole stay arrested for 3-5 h. Together, our data suggest that Aurora B is required to generate unattached kinetochores on monooriented chromosomes, which in turn could promote bipolar attachment as well as maintain checkpoint signaling.     

Chromosome bi-orientation on the mitotic spindle

For proper chromosome segregation, sister kinetochores must attach to microtubules extending from opposite spindle poles prior to anaphase onset. This state is called sister kinetochore bi-orientation or chromosome bi-orientation. The mechanism ensuring chromosome bi-orientation lies at the heart of chromosome segregation, but is still poorly understood. Recent evidence suggests that mal-oriented kinetochore-to-pole connections are corrected in a tension-dependent mechanism. The cohesin complex and the Ipl1/Aurora B protein kinase seem to be key regulators for this correction. In this article, I discuss how cells ensure sister kinetochore bi-orientation for all chromosomes, mainly focusing on our recent findings in budding yeast.     

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.