Mps1 kinase promotes sister-kinetochore bi-orientation by a tension-dependent mechanism

Segregation of sister chromatids to opposite spindle poles during anaphase is dependent on the prior capture of sister kinetochores by microtubules extending from opposite spindle poles (bi-orientation). If sister kinetochores attach to microtubules from the same pole (syntelic attachment), the kinetochore-spindle pole connections must be re-oriented to be converted to proper bi-orientation. This re-orientation is facilitated by Aurora B kinase (Ipl1 in budding yeast), which eliminates kinetochore-spindle pole connections that do not generate tension. Mps1 is another evolutionarily conserved protein kinase, required for spindle-assembly checkpoint and, in some organisms, for duplication of microtubule-organizing centers. Separately from these functions, however, Mps1 has an important role in chromosome segregation. Here we show that, in budding yeast, Mps1 has a crucial role in establishing sister-kinetochore bi-orientation on the mitotic spindle. Failure in bi-orientation with inactive Mps1 is not due to a lack of kinetochore-spindle pole connections by microtubules, but due to a defect in properly orienting the connections. Mps1 promotes re-orientation of kinetochore-spindle pole connections and eliminates those that do not generate tension between sister kinetochores. We did not find evidence that Ipl1 regulates Mps1 or vice versa; therefore, they play similar, but possibly independent, roles in facilitating bi-orientation.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Budding yeast mitotic chromosomes have an intrinsic bias to biorient on the spindle

BACKGROUND: Chromosomes must biorient on the mitotic spindle, with the two sisters attached to opposite spindle poles. The spindle checkpoint detects unattached chromosomes and monitors biorientation by detecting the lack of tension between two sisters attached to the same pole. After the spindle has been depolymerized and allowed to reform, budding yeast sgo1 mutants fail to biorient their sister chromatids and die as cells divide. RESULTS: In sgo1 mutants, chromosomes attach to microtubules normally but cannot reorient if both sisters attach to the same pole. The mutants' fate depends on the position of the spindle poles when the chromosomes attach to microtubules. If the poles have separated, sister chromatids biorient, but if the poles are still close, sister chromatids often attach to the same pole, missegregate, and cause cell death. CONCLUSIONS: These observations argue that budding yeast mitotic chromosomes have an intrinsic, geometric bias to biorient on the spindle. When the poles have already separated, attaching one kinetochore to one pole predisposes its sister to attach to the opposite pole, allowing the cells to segregate the chromosomes correctly. When the poles have not separated, the second kinetochore eventually attaches to either of the two poles randomly, causing orientation errors that are corrected in the wild-type but not in sgo1 mutants. In the absence of spindle damage, sgo1 cells divide successfully, suggesting that kinetochores only make stable attachments to microtubules after the cells have entered mitosis and separated their spindle poles.     

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.     

The aurora B kinase AIR-2 regulates kinetochores during mitosis and is required for separation of homologous Chromosomes during meiosis

BACKGROUND: Mitotic chromosome segregation depends on bi-orientation and capture of sister kinetochores by microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles and the near synchronous loss of sister chromatid cohesion. During meiosis I, in contrast, sister kinetochores orient to the same pole, and homologous kinetochores are captured by microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles. Additionally, mechanisms exist that prevent complete loss of cohesion during meiosis I. These features ensure that homologs separate during meiosis I and sister chromatids remain together until meiosis II. The mechanisms responsible for orienting kinetochores in mitosis and for causing asynchronous loss of cohesion during meiosis are not well understood. RESULTS: During mitosis in C. elegans, aurora B kinase, AIR-2, is not required for sister chromatid separation, but it is required for chromosome segregation. Condensin recruitment during metaphase requires AIR-2; however, condensin functions during prometaphase, independent of AIR-2. During metaphase, AIR-2 promotes chromosome congression to the metaphase plate, perhaps by inhibiting attachment of chromatids to both spindle poles. During meiosis in AIR-2-depleted oocytes, congression of bivalents appears normal, but segregation fails. Localization of AIR-2 on meiotic bivalents suggests this kinase promotes separation of homologs by promoting the loss of cohesion distal to the single chiasma. Inactivation of the phosphatase that antagonizes AIR-2 causes premature separation of chromatids during meiosis I, in a separase-dependent reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Aurora B functions to resolve chiasmata during meiosis I and to regulate kinetochore function during mitosis. Condensin mediates chromosome condensation during prophase, and condensin-independent pathways contribute to chromosome condensation during metaphase.     

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.     

Mitosis in the cellular slime mold Polysphondylium violaceum

Myxamebas of Polysphondylium violaceum were grown in liquid medium and processed for electron microscopy. Mitosis is characterized by a persistent nuclear envelope, ring-shaped extranuclear spindle pole bodies (SPBs), a central spindle spatially separated from the chromosomal microtubules, well-differentiated kinetochores, and dispersion of the nucleoli. SPBs originate from the division, during prophase, of an electron-opaque body associated with the interphase nucleus. The nuclear nevelope becomes fenestrated in their vicinity, allowing the build-up of the intranuclear, central spindle and chromosomal microtubules as the SPBs migrate to opposite poles. At metaphase the chromosomes are in amphitelic orientation, each sister chromatid being directly connected to the corresponding SPB by a single microtubule. During ana- and telophase the central spindle elongates, the daughter chromosomes approach the SPBs, and the nucleus constricts in the equatorial region. The cytoplasm cleaves by furrowing in late telophase, which is in other respects characterized by a re- establishment of the interphase condition. Spindle elongation and poleward movement of chromosomes are discussed in relation to hypotheses of the mechanism of mitosis.     

Functional cooperation of Dam1, Ipl1, and the inner centromere protein (INCENP)-related protein Sli15 during chromosome segregation.

We have shown previously that Ipl1 and Sli15 are required for chromosome segregation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sli15 associates directly with the Ipl1 protein kinase and these two proteins colocalize to the mitotic spindle. We show here that Sli15 stimulates the in vitro, and likely in vivo, kinase activity of Ipl1, and Sli15 facilitates the association of Ipl1 with the mitotic spindle. The Ipl1-binding and -stimulating activities of Sli15 both reside within a region containing homology to the metazoan inner centromere protein (INCENP). Ipl1 and Sli15 also bind to Dam1, a microtubule-binding protein required for mitotic spindle integrity and kinetochore function. Sli15 and Dam1 are most likely physiological targets of Ipl1 since Ipl1 can phosphorylate both proteins efficiently in vitro, and the in vivo phosphorylation of both proteins is reduced in ipl1 mutants. Some dam1 mutations exacerbate the phenotype of ipl1 and sli15 mutants, thus providing evidence that Dam1 interactions with Ipl1-Sli15 are functionally important in vivo. Similar to Dam1, Ipl1 and Sli15 each bind to microtubules directly in vitro, and they are associated with yeast centromeric DNA in vivo. Given their dual association with microtubules and kinetochores, Ipl1, Sli15, and Dam1 may play crucial roles in regulating chromosome-spindle interactions or in the movement of kinetochores along microtubules.     

An Mtw1 complex promotes kinetochore biorientation that is monitored by the Ipl1/Aurora protein kinase

Chromosome segregation depends on kinetochore biorientation so that sister kinetochores attach to microtubules from opposite poles and come under tension. The budding yeast Ipl1/Aurora protein kinase allows the absence of tension to activate the spindle checkpoint. We found that checkpoint activation in the mtw1-1 kinetochore mutant requires Ipl1p, suggesting that Mtw1p promotes tension. We isolated mtw1-1 dosage suppressors and identified Dsn1, a kinetochore protein that immunoprecipitates with the Mif2/CENP-C and Cse4/CENP-A proteins, as well as the Mtw1, Nnf1, and Nsl1 kinetochore proteins. mtw1 and dsn1 mutant strains exhibit similar phenotypes, suggesting that Mtw1p and Dsn1p act together. Although mtw1 mutant cells contained unattached chromosomes, attachment was restored by impairing Ipl1p function. These results suggest that mtw1 mutant kinetochores are competent to bind microtubules but Ipl1p generates unattached chromosomes. We therefore propose that an Mtw1 complex is required for kinetochore biorientation that is monitored by the Ipl1p kinase.     

Kinetochore-microtubule interactions: steps towards bi-orientation

Eukaryotic cells segregate their chromosomes accurately to opposite poles during mitosis, which is necessary for maintenance of their genetic integrity. This process mainly relies on the forces generated by kinetochore-microtubule (KT-MT) attachment. During prometaphase, the KT initially interacts with a single MT extending from a spindle pole and then moves towards a spindle pole. Subsequently, MTs from the other spindle pole also interact with the KT. Eventually, one sister KT becomes attached to MTs from one pole while the other sister to those from the other pole (sister KT bi-orientation). If sister KTs interact with MTs with aberrant orientation, this must be corrected to attain proper bi-orientation (error correction) before the anaphase is initiated. Here, I discuss how KTs initially interact with MTs and how this interaction develops into bi-orientation; both processes are fundamentally crucial for proper chromosome segregation in the subsequent anaphase.     

Lack of tension at kinetochores activates the spindle checkpoint in budding yeast

The spindle checkpoint delays the onset of anaphase until all pairs of sister chromatids are attached to the mitotic spindle. The checkpoint could monitor the attachment of microtubules to kinetochores, the tension that results from the two sister chromatids attaching to opposite spindle poles, or both. We tested the role of tension by allowing cells to enter mitosis without a prior round of DNA replication. The unreplicated chromatids are attached to spindle microtubules but are not under tension since they lack a sister chromatid that could attach to the opposite pole. Because the spindle checkpoint is activated in these cells, we conclude that the absence of tension at the yeast kinetochore is sufficient to activate the spindle checkpoint in mitosis.     

Kinetochore orientation during meiosis is controlled by Aurora B and the monopolin complex

Kinetochores of sister chromatids attach to microtubules emanating from the same pole (coorientation) during meiosis I and microtubules emanating from opposite poles (biorientation) during meiosis II. We find that the Aurora B kinase Ipl1 regulates kinetochore-microtubule attachment during both meiotic divisions and that a complex known as the monopolin complex ensures that the protein kinase coorients sister chromatids during meiosis I. Furthermore, the defining of conditions sufficient to induce sister kinetochore coorientation during mitosis provides insight into monopolin complex function. The monopolin complex joins sister kinetochores independently of cohesins, the proteins that hold sister chromatids together. We propose that this function of the monopolin complex helps Aurora B coorient sister chromatids during meiosis I.     

The Ipl1-Aurora protein kinase activates the spindle checkpoint by creating unattached kinetochores

The spindle checkpoint ensures accurate chromosome segregation by delaying cell-cycle progression until all sister kinetochores capture microtubules from opposite poles and come under tension (for reviews, see refs 1, 2). Although the checkpoint is activated by either the lack of kinetochore-microtubule attachments or defects in the tension exerted by microtubule-generated forces, it is not clear whether these signals are linked. We investigated the connection between tension and attachment by studying the conserved budding yeast Ipl1Aurora protein kinase that is required for checkpoint activation in the absence of tension but not attachment. Here, we show that spindle-checkpoint activation in kinetochore mutants that seem to have unattached kinetochores depends on Ipl1 activity. When Ipl1 function was impaired in these kinetochore mutants, the attachments were restored and the checkpoint was turned off. These data indicate that Ipl1 activates the checkpoint in response to tension defects by creating unattached kinetochores. Moreover, although the Dam1 kinetochore complex has been implicated as a key downstream target, we found the existence of unidentified Ipl1 sites on Dam1 or additional important substrates that regulate both microtuble detachment and the checkpoint.     

Mps1 phosphorylation of Dam1 couples kinetochores to microtubule plus ends at metaphase

BACKGROUND: Duplicated chromosomes are equally segregated to daughter cells by a bipolar mitotic spindle during cell division. By metaphase, sister chromatids are coupled to microtubule (MT) plus ends from opposite poles of the bipolar spindle via kinetochores. Here we describe a phosphorylation event that promotes the coupling of kinetochores to microtubule plus ends. RESULTS: Dam1 is a kinetochore component that directly binds to microtubules. We identified DAM1-765, a dominant allele of DAM1, in a genetic screen for mutations that increase stress on the spindle pole body (SPB) in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. DAM1-765 contains the single mutation S221F. We show that S221 is one of six Dam1 serines (S13, S49, S217, S218, S221, and S232) phosphorylated by Mps1 in vitro. In cells with single mutations S221F, S218A, or S221A, kinetochores in the metaphase spindle form tight clusters that are closer to the SPBs than in a wild-type cell. Five lines of experimental evidence, including localization of spindle components by fluorescence microscopy, measurement of microtubule dynamics by fluorescence redistribution after photobleaching, and reconstructions of three-dimensional structure by electron tomography, combined with computational modeling of microtubule behavior strongly indicate that, unlike wild-type kinetochores, Dam1-765 kinetochores do not colocalize with an equal number of plus ends. Despite the uncoupling of the kinetochores from the plus ends of MTs, the DAM1-765 cells are viable, complete the cell cycle with the same kinetics as wild-type cells, and biorient their chromosomes as efficiently as wild-type cells. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that phosphorylation of Dam1 residues S218 and S221 by Mps1 is required for efficient coupling of kinetochores to MT plus ends. We find that efficient plus-end coupling is not required for (1) maintenance of chromosome biorientation, (2) maintenance of tension between sister kinetochores, or (3) chromosome segregation.     

Mitosis: aurora gives chromosomes a healthy stretch

Attachment of sister chromatids to microtubules from opposite spindle poles--bi-orientation--generates tension at the kinetochores. The Ipl1/Aurora B kinase responds to the absence of tension at mono-oriented chromosomes and promotes microtubule turnover and spindle checkpoint activation until a stable bi-oriented attachment is achieved.     

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.