Mechanisms of kinetochore‐microtubule attachment errors in mammalian oocytes

Proper kinetochore‐microtubule attachment is essential for correct chromosome segregation. Therefore, cells normally possess multiple mechanisms for the prevention of errors in kinetochore‐microtubule attachments and for selective stabilization of correct attachments. However, the oocyte, a cell that produces an egg through meiosis, exhibits a high frequency of errors in kinetochore‐microtubule attachments. These attachment errors predispose oocytes to chromosome segregation errors, resulting in aneuploidy in eggs. This review aims to provide possible explanations for the error‐prone nature of oocytes by examining key differences among other cell types in the mechanisms for the establishment of kinetochore‐microtubule attachments.     

Looping in on Ndc80 – How does a protein loop at the kinetochore control chromosome segregation?

Segregation of chromosomes during mitosis requires the interaction of dynamic microtubules with the kinetochore, a large protein structure established on the centromere region of sister chromatids. The core microtubule‐binding activity of the kinetochore resides in the KMN network, an outer kinetochore complex. As part of the KMN network, the Ndc80 complex, which is composed of Ndc80, Nuf2, Spc24, and Spc25, is able to bind directly to microtubules and has the ability to track with depolymerizing microtubules to produce chromosome movement. The Ndc80 complex binds directly to microtubules through a calponin homology domain and an unstructured tail in the N terminus of the Ndc80 protein. A recent flurry of papers has highlighted the importance of an internal loop region in Ndc80 in establishing end‐on attachment to microtubules. Here I discuss these recent findings that suggest that the Ndc80 internal loop functions as a binding site for proteins required for kinetochore‐microtubule interactions.     

Dynein participates in chromosome segregation in fission yeast

Background information. In eukaryotic cells, proper formation of the spindle is necessary for successful cell division. For faithful segregation of sister chromatids, each sister kinetochore must attach to microtubules that extend to opposite poles (chromosome bi‐orientation). At the metaphase—anaphase transition, cohesion between sister chromatids is removed, and each sister chromatid is pulled to opposite poles of the cell by microtubule‐dependent forces. Results. We have studied the role of the minus‐end‐directed motor protein dynein by analysing kinetochore dynamics in fission yeast cells deleted for the dynein heavy chain (Dhc1) or the light chain (Dlc1). In these mutants, we found an increased frequency of cells showing defects in chromosome segregation, which leads to the appearance of lagging chromosomes and an increased rate of chromosome loss. By following simultaneously kinetochore dynamics and localization of the checkpoint protein Mad2, we provide evidence that dynein function is not necessary for spindle‐assembly checkpoint inactivation. Instead, we have demonstrated that loss of dynein function alters chromosome segregation and activates the Mad2‐dependent spindle‐assembly checkpoint. Conclusions. These results show an unexpected role for dynein in the control of chromosome segregation in fission yeast, most probably operating during the process of bi‐orientation during early mitosis.     

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

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

Structural basis for assembly of the CBF3 kinetochore complex

Eukaryotic chromosomes contain a specialised region known as the centromere, which forms the platform for kinetochore assembly and microtubule attachment. The centromere is distinguished by the presence of nucleosomes containing the histone H3 variant, CENP‐A. In budding yeast, centromere establishment begins with the recognition of a specific DNA sequence by the CBF3 complex. This in turn facilitates CENP‐A^Cse4 nucleosome deposition and kinetochore assembly. Here, we describe a 3.6 Å single‐particle cryo‐EM reconstruction of the core CBF3 complex, incorporating the sequence‐specific DNA‐binding protein Cep3 together with regulatory subunits Ctf13 and Skp1. This provides the first structural data on Ctf13, defining it as an F‐box protein of the leucine‐rich‐repeat family, and demonstrates how a novel F‐box‐mediated interaction between Ctf13 and Skp1 is responsible for initial assembly of the CBF3 complex.     

The life and miracles of kinetochores

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

The ‘kinetochore maintenance loop’—The mark of regulation?

Kinetochores can form and be maintained on DNA sequences that are normally non‐centromeric. The existence of these so‐called neo‐centromeres has posed the problem as to the nature of the epigenetic mechanisms that maintain the centromere. Here we highlight results that indicate that the amount of CENP‐A at human centromeres is tightly regulated. It is also known that kinetochore assembly requires sister chromatid cohesion at mitosis. We therefore suggest that separation or stretching between the sister chromatids at metaphase reciprocally determines the amount of centromere assembly in the subsequent interphase. This reciprocal relationship forms the basis of a negative feedback loop that could precisely control the amount of CENP‐A and faithfully maintain the presence of a kinetochore over many cell divisions. We describe how the feedback loop would work, propose how it could be tested experimentally and suggest possible components of its mechanism.     

Stable kinetochore-microtubule attachment constrains centromere positioning in metaphase

With a single microtubule attachment, budding-yeast kinetochores provide an excellent system for understanding the coordinated linkage to dynamic microtubule plus ends for chromosome oscillation and positioning. Fluorescent tagging of kinetochore proteins indicates that, on average, all centromeres are clustered, distinctly separated from their sisters, and positioned equidistant from their respective spindle poles during metaphase. However, individual fluorescent chromosome markers near the centromere transiently reassociate with their sisters and oscillate from one spindle half to the other. To reconcile the apparent disparity between the average centromere position and individual centromere proximal markers, we utilized fluorescence recovery after photobleaching to measure stability of the histone-H3 variant Cse4p/CENP-A. Newly synthesized Cse4p replaces old protein during DNA replication. Once assembled, Cse4-GFP is a physically stable component of centromeres during mitosis. This allowed us to follow centromere dynamics within each spindle half. Kinetochores remain stably attached to dynamic microtubules and exhibit a low incidence of switching orientation or position between the spindle halves. Switching of sister chromatid attachment may be contemporaneous with Cse4p exchange and early kinetochore assembly during S phase; this would promote mixing of chromosome attachment to each spindle pole. Once biorientation is attained, centromeres rarely make excursions beyond their proximal half spindle.     

Control of Shugoshin function during fission-yeast meiosis

Meiosis consists of a single round of DNA replication followed by two consecutive nuclear divisions. During the first division (MI), sister kinetochores must orient toward the same pole to favor reductional segregation. Correct chromosome segregation during the second division (MII) requires the retention of centromeric cohesion until anaphase II. The spindle checkpoint protein Bub1 is essential for both processes in fission yeast . When bub1 is deleted, the Shugoshin protein Sgo1 is not recruited to centromeres, cohesin Rec8 does not persist at centromeres, and sister-chromatid cohesion is lost by the end of MI. Deletion of bub1 also affects kinetochore orientation because sister centromeres can move to opposite spindle poles in approximately 30% of MI divisions. We show here that these two functions are separable within the Bub1 protein. The N terminus of Bub1 is necessary and sufficient for Sgo1 targeting to centromeres and the protection of cohesion, whereas the C-terminal kinase domain acts together with Sgo2, the second fission-yeast Shugoshin protein, to promote sister-kinetochore co-orientation during MI. Additional analyses suggest that the protection of centromeric cohesion does not operate when sister kinetochores attach to opposite spindle poles during MI. Sgo1-mediated protection of centromere cohesion might therefore be regulated by the mode of kinetochore attachment.     

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

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

Driving chromosome segregation: lessons from the human and Drosophila centromere-kinetochore machinery

The kinetochore is a complex molecular machine that serves as the interface between sister chromatids and the mitotic spindle. The kinetochore assembles at a particular chromosomal locus, the centromere, which is essential to maintain genomic stability during cell division. The kinetochore is a macromolecular puzzle of subcomplexes assembled in a hierarchical manner and fulfils three main functions: microtubule attachment, chromosome and sister chromatid movement, and regulation of mitotic progression though the spindle assembly checkpoint. In the present paper we compare recent results on the assembly, organization and function of the kinetochore in human and Drosophila cells and conclude that, although essential functions are highly conserved, there are important differences that might help define what is a minimal chromosome segregation machinery.     

Dynein is a transient kinetochore component whose binding is regulated by microtubule attachment, not tension

Cytoplasmic dynein is the only known kinetochore protein capable of driving chromosome movement toward spindle poles. In grasshopper spermatocytes, dynein immunofluorescence staining is bright at prometaphase kinetochores and dimmer at metaphase kinetochores. We have determined that these differences in staining intensity reflect differences in amounts of dynein associated with the kinetochore. Metaphase kinetochores regain bright dynein staining if they are detached from spindle microtubules by micromanipulation and kept detached for 10 min. We show that this increase in dynein staining is not caused by the retraction or unmasking of dynein upon detachment. Thus, dynein genuinely is a transient component of spermatocyte kinetochores.We further show that microtubule attachment, not tension, regulates dynein localization at kinetochores. Dynein binding is extremely sensitive to the presence of microtubules: fewer than half the normal number of kinetochore microtubules leads to the loss of most kinetochoric dynein. As a result, the bulk of the dynein leaves the kinetochore very early in mitosis, soon after the kinetochores begin to attach to microtubules. The possible functions of this dynein fraction are therefore limited to the initial attachment and movement of chromosomes and/or to a role in the mitotic checkpoint.     

Beclin‐1 is required for chromosome congression and proper outer kinetochore assembly

The functions of Beclin‐1 in macroautophagy, tumorigenesis and cytokinesis are thought to be mediated by its association with the PI3K‐III complex. Here, we describe a new role for Beclin‐1 in mitotic chromosome congression that is independent of the PI3K‐III complex and its role in autophagy. Beclin‐1 depletion in HeLa cells leads to a significant reduction of the outer kinetochore proteins CENP‐E, CENP‐F and ZW10, and, consequently, the cells present severe problems in chromosome congression. Beclin‐1 associates with kinetochore microtubules and forms discrete foci near the kinetochores of attached chromosomes. We show that Beclin‐1 interacts directly with Zwint‐1—a component of the KMN (KNL‐1/Mis12/Ndc80) complex—which is essential for kinetochore–microtubule interactions. This suggests that Beclin‐1 acts downstream of the KMN complex to influence the recruitment of outer kinetochore proteins and promotes accurate kinetochore anchoring to the spindle during mitosis.     

Making an effective switch at the kinetochore by phosphorylation and dephosphorylation

The kinetochore, the proteinaceous structure on the mitotic centromere, functions as a mechanical latch that hooks onto microtubules to support directional movement of chromosomes. The structure also brings in a number of signaling molecules, such as kinases and phosphatases, which regulate microtubule dynamics and cell cycle progression. Erroneous microtubule attachment is destabilized by Aurora B-mediated phosphorylation of multiple microtubule-binding protein complexes at the kinetochore, such as the KMN network proteins and the Ska/Dam1 complex, while Plk-dependent phosphorylation of BubR1 stabilizes kinetochore–microtubule attachment by recruiting PP2A-B56. Spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) signaling, which is activated by unattached kinetochores and inhibits the metaphase-to-anaphase transition, depends on kinetochore recruitment of the kinase Bub1 through Mps1-mediated phosphorylation of the kinetochore protein KNL1 (also known as Blinkin in mammals, Spc105 in budding yeast, and Spc7 in fission yeast). Recruitment of protein phosphatase 1 to KNL1 is necessary to silence the SAC upon bioriented microtubule attachment. One of the key unsolved questions in the mitosis field is how a mechanical change at the kinetochore upon microtubule attachment is converted to these and other chemical signals that control microtubule attachment and the SAC. Rapid progress in the field is revealing the existence of an intricate signaling network created right on the kinetochore. Here we review the current understanding of phosphorylation-mediated regulation of kinetochore functions and discuss how this signaling network generates an accurate switch that turns on and off the signaling output in response to kinetochore–microtubule attachment.     

Vertebrate shugoshin links sister centromere cohesion and kinetochore microtubule stability in mitosis

Drosophila MEI-S332 and fungal Sgo1 genes are essential for sister centromere cohesion in meiosis I. We demonstrate that the related vertebrate Sgo localizes to kinetochores and is required to prevent premature sister centromere separation in mitosis, thus providing an explanation for the differential cohesion observed between the arms and the centromeres of mitotic sister chromatids. Sgo is degraded by the anaphase-promoting complex, allowing the separation of sister centromeres in anaphase. Intriguingly, we show that Sgo interacts strongly with microtubules in vitro and that it regulates kinetochore microtubule stability in vivo, consistent with a direct microtubule interaction. Sgo is thus critical for mitotic progression and chromosome segregation and provides an unexpected link between sister centromere cohesion and microtubule interactions at kinetochores.     

Drosophila Dalmatian combines sororin and shugoshin roles in establishment and protection of cohesion

Sister chromatid cohesion is crucial to ensure chromosome bi‐orientation and equal chromosome segregation. Cohesin removal via mitotic kinases and Wapl has to be prevented in pericentromeric regions in order to protect cohesion until metaphase, but the mechanisms of mitotic cohesion protection remain elusive in Drosophila. Here, we show that dalmatian (Dmt), an ortholog of the vertebrate cohesin‐associated protein sororin, is required for protection of mitotic cohesion in flies. Dmt is essential for cohesion establishment during interphase and is enriched on pericentromeric heterochromatin. Dmt is recruited through direct association with heterochromatin protein‐1 (HP1), and this interaction is required for cohesion. During mitosis, Dmt interdependently recruits protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A) to pericentromeric regions, and PP2A binding is required for Dmt to protect cohesion. Intriguingly, Dmt is sufficient to protect cohesion upon heterologous expression in human cells. Our findings of a hybrid system, in which Dmt exerts both sororin‐like establishment functions and shugoshin‐like heterochromatin‐based protection roles, provide clues to the evolutionary modulation of eukaryotic cohesion regulation systems.     

Kinetochore dynein generates a poleward pulling force to facilitate congression and full chromosome alignment

For proper chromosome segregation, all kinetochores must achieve bipolar microtubule （MT） attachment and subsequently align at the spindle equator before anaphase onset. The MT minus end-directed motor dynein/dynactin binds kinetoehores in prometaphase and has long been implicated in chromosome congression. Unfortunately, inactivation of dynein usually disturbs spindle organization, thus hampering evaluation of its kinetochore roles. Here we specifically eliminated kinetochore dynein/dynactin by RNAi-mediated depletion of ZW10, a protein essential for kinetochore localization of the motor. Time-lapse microscopy indicated markedly-reduced congression efficiency, though congressing chromosomes displayed similar velocities as in control cells. Moreover, cells frequently failed to achieve full chromosome alignment, despite their normal spindles. Confocal microcopy revealed that the misaligned kinetochores were monooriented or unattached and mostly lying outside the spindle, suggesting a difficulty to capture MTs from the opposite pole. Kinetoehores on monoastral spindles were dispersed farther away from the pole and exhibited only mild oscillation. Furthermore, inactivating dynein by other means generated similar phenotypes. Therefore, kinetochore dynein produces on monooriented kinetochores a poleward pulling force, which may contribute to efficient bipolar attachment by facilitating their proper microtubule captures to promote congression as well as full chromosome alignment.     

Chromosome dynamics: new light on Aurora B kinase function

Aurora B family kinases play an essential role in chromosome segregation and cytokinesis. Recent work suggests that the kinase activity is required for bipolar chromosome orientation, kinetochore assembly, spindle checkpoint and microtubule dynamics. Aurora B also has additional functions in chromosome condensation and cohesion.     

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

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

Epigenetics regulate centromere formation and kinetochore function

The eukaryote centromere was initially defined cytologically as the primary constriction on vertebrate chromosomes and functionally as a chromosomal feature with a relatively low recombination frequency. Structurally, the centromere is the foundation for sister chromatid cohesion and kinetochore formation. Together these provide the basis for interaction between chromosomes and the mitotic spindle, allowing the efficient segregation of sister chromatids during cell division. Although centromeric (CEN) DNA is highly variable between species, in all cases the functional centromere forms in a chromatin domain defined by the substitution of histone H3 with the centromere specific H3 variant centromere protein A (CENP-A), also known as CENH3. Kinetochore formation and function are dependent on a variety of regional epigenetic modifications that appear to result in a loop chromatin conformation providing exterior CENH3 domains for kinetochore construction, and interior heterochromatin domains essential for sister chromatid cohesion. In addition pericentric heterochromatin provides a structural element required for spindle assembly checkpoint function. Advances in our understanding of CENH3 biology have resulted in a model where kinetochore location is specified by the epigenetic mark left after dilution of CENH3 to daughter DNA strands during S phase. This results in a self-renewing and self-reinforcing epigenetic state favorable to reliably mark centromere location, as well as to provide the optimal chromatin configuration for kinetochore formation and function.