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.     

Oscillatory movements of monooriented chromosomes and their position relative to the spindle pole result from the ejection properties of the aster and half-spindle

During mitosis a monooriented chromosome oscillates toward and away from its associated spindle pole and may be positioned many micrometers from the pole at the time of anaphase. We tested the hypothesis of Pickett-Heaps et al. (Pickett-Heaps, J. D., D. H. Tippit, and K. R. Porter, 1982, Cell, 29:729-744) that this behavior is generated by the sister kinetochores of a chromosome interacting with, and moving in opposite direction along, the same set of polar microtubules. When the sister chromatids of a monooriented chromosome split at the onset of anaphase in newt lung cells, the proximal chromatid remains stationary or moves closer to the pole, with the kinetochore leading. During this time the distal chromatid moves a variable distance radially away from the pole, with one or both chromatid arms leading. Subsequent electron microscopy of these cells revealed that the kinetochore on the distal chromatid is free of microtubules. These results suggest that the distal kinetochore is not involved in the positioning of a monooriented chromosome relative to the spindle pole or in its oscillatory movements. To test this conclusion we used laser microsurgery to create monooriented chromosomes containing one kinetochore. Correlative light and electron microscopy revealed that chromosomes containing one kinetochore continue to undergo normal oscillations. Additional observations on normal and laser-irradiated monooriented chromosomes indicated that the chromosome does not change shape, and that the kinetochore region is not deformed, during movement away from the pole. Thus movement away from the pole during an oscillation does not appear to arise from a push generated by the single pole-facing kinetochore fiber, as postulated (Bajer, A. S., 1982, J. Cell Biol., 93:33-48). When the chromatid arms of a monooriented chromosome are cut free of the kinetochore, they are immediately ejected radially outward from the spindle pole at a constant velocity of 2 micron/min. This ejection velocity is similar to that of the outward movement of an oscillating chromosome. We conclude that the oscillations of a monooriented chromosome and its position relative to the spindle pole result from an imbalance between poleward pulling forces acting at the proximal kinetochore and an ejection force acting along the chromosome, which is generated within the aster and half-spindle.     

Chromosome behavior after laser microirradiation of a single kinetochore in mitotic PtK2 cells

The role of the kinetochore in chromosome movement was studied by 532- nm wavelength laser microirradiation of mitotic PtK2 cells. When the kinetochore of a single chromatid is irradiated at mitotic prometaphase or metaphase, the whole chromosome moves towards the pole to which the unirradiated kinetochore is oriented, while the remaining chromosomes congregate on the metaphase plate. The chromatids of the irradiated chromosome remain attached to one another until anaphase, at which time they separate by a distance of 1 or 2 micrometers and remain parallel to each other, not undergoing any poleward separation. Electron microscopy shows that irradiated chromatids exhibit either no recognizable kinetochore structure or a typical inactive kinetochore in which the tri-layer structure is present but has no microtubules associated with it. Graphical analysis of the movement of the irradiated chromosome shows that the chromosome moves to the pole rapidly with a velocity of approximately 3 micrometers/min. If the chromosome is close to one pole at irradiation, and the kinetochore oriented towards that pole is irradiated, the chromosome moves across the spindle to the opposite pole. The chromosome is slowed down as it traverses the equatorial region, but the velocity in both half-spindles is approximately the same as the anaphase velocity of a single chromatid. Thus a single kinetochore moves twice the normal mass of chromatin (two chromatids) at the same velocity with which it moves a single chromatid, showing that the velocity with which a kinetochore moves is independent, within limits, of the mass associated with it.     

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.     

Functional Roles of Poleward Microtubule Flux During Mitosis

Poleward microtubule flux is a conserved process during mitosis and meiosis in metazoan cells and is defined as the translocation of spindle microtubules toward spindle poles coupled to the depolymerization of their minus-ends. In some cell types, the rate of poleward microtubule flux matches that of poleward chromatid movement during anaphase A, suggesting that it pulls chromatids poleward. However, in other cell types, the rate of poleward microtubule flux is significantly slower than chromatid movement during anaphase A, suggesting that it makes little contribution to chromatid movement. This discrepancy led to speculation that flux is maintained in these cells to fulfill other functional roles aside from contributing to anaphase A chromatid movement. These roles include contributing to chromosome alignment, regulating spindle size and microtubule turnover, and correcting errors in chromosome attachment to spindle microtubules. Here, we discuss recent data that begin to pinpoint the functional roles of poleward microtubule flux during mitosis and meiosis.     

Micromanipulation of chromosomes reveals that cohesion release during cell division is gradual and does not require tension

In mitosis, cohesion appears to be present along the entire length of the chromosome, between centromeres and along chromosome arms. By metaphase, sister chromatids appear as two adjacent but visibly distinct rods. Sister chromatids separate from one another in anaphase by releasing all chromosome cohesion. This is different from meiosis I, in which pairs of sister chromatids separate from one another, moving to each spindle pole by releasing cohesion only between sister chromatid arms. Then, in anaphase II, sister chromatids separate by releasing centromere cohesion. Our objective was to find where cohesion is present or absent on chromosomes in mitosis and meiosis and when and how it is released. We determined cohesion directly by pulling on chromosomes with two micromanipulation needles. Thus, we could distinguish for the first time between apparent doubleness as seen in the microscope and physical separability. We found that apparent doubleness can be deceiving: Visibly distinct sister chromatids often cannot be separated. We also demonstrated that cohesion is released gradually in anaphase, with chromosomes looking as if they were unzipped or pulled apart. This implied that tension from spindle forces was required, but we showed directly that no tension was necessary to pull chromatids apart.     

Polo-like kinase Cdc5 promotes chiasmata formation and cosegregation of sister centromeres at meiosis I

During meiosis, two rounds of chromosome segregation occur after a single round of DNA replication, producing haploid progeny from diploid progenitors. Three innovations in chromosome behaviour during meiosis I accomplish this unique division. First, crossovers between maternal and paternal sister chromatids (detected cytologically as chiasmata) bind replicated maternal and paternal chromosomes together. Second, sister kinetochores attach to microtubules from the same pole (mono-polar orientation), causing maternal and paternal centromere pairs (and not sister chromatids) to be separated. Third, sister chromatid cohesion near centromeres is preserved at anaphase I when cohesion along chromosome arms is destroyed. The finding that destruction of mitotic cohesion is regulated by Polo-like kinases prompted us to investigate the meiotic role of the yeast Polo-like kinase Cdc5. We show here that cells lacking Cdc5 synapse homologues and initiate recombination normally, but fail to efficiently resolve recombination intermediates as crossovers. They also fail to properly localize the Lrs4 (ref. 3) and Mam1 (ref. 4) monopolin proteins, resulting in bipolar orientation of sister kinetochores. Cdc5 is thus required both for the formation of chiasmata and for cosegregation of sister centromeres at meiosis I.     

Orientation of nonrandomly segregating sex chromosomes in spermatocytes of the flea beetle, Alagoasa bicolor L.

In males of the flea beetle, Alagoasa bicolor L., spermatocytes have two achiasmate sex chromosomes, X and Y, each of which is approximately five times larger than the ten pairs of chiasmate autosomes. At metaphase I, these univalent sex chromosomes are located on a spindle domain separated from the autosomal spindle domain by a sheath of mitochondria. A single centriole pair is located at each pole of the spindle. In prometaphase I, each sex chromosome appears to maintain an attachment to both spindle poles via kinetochore microtubules (i.e., amphitelic orientation). Before anaphase I, this orientation changes to the syntelic orientation (both sister kinetochores connected to the same pole), perhaps by the release of microtubule attachments from the more distant pole by each of the chromosomes. The syntelic orientation just prior to anaphase I leaves each sex chromosome attached to the nearest pole via kinetochore microtubules, ensuring nonrandom segregation. As the sex chromosomes reorient, the autosomes follow in a sequential manner, starting with the bivalent closest to the sex spindle domain. We report here data that shed new light on the mechanism of this exceptional meiotic chromosome behavior.     

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.     

Asynchronous entry into anaphase induced by okadaic acid: spindle microtubule organization and microtubule/kinetochore attachments

Summary We have found that a brief treatment of either PtK₂ cells or stamen hair cells ofTradescantia virginiana during metaphase with okadaic acid, a potent protein phosphatase inhibitor, results in asynchronous entry into anaphase. After this treatment, the interval for the separation of sister chromatids can be expanded from a few seconds to approximately 5 min. We have performed a series of immunolocalizations of cells with anti-tubulin antibodies and CREST serum, asking whether okadaic acid induces asynchronous entry into anaphase through changes in the organization of the spindle microtubules or through a loss in the attachment of spindle microtubules to the kinetochores. Our experiments clearly indicate that asynchronous entry into anaphase after phosphatase inhibitor treatment is not the result of either altered spindle microtubule organization or the long-term loss of microtubule attachment to kinetochores. The kinetochore fiber bundles for all of the separating chromosomes are normally of uniform length throughout anaphase, but after asynchronous entry into anaphase, different groups of kinetochore fiber bundles have distinctly different lengths. The reason for this difference in length is that once split apart, the daughter chromosomes begin their movement toward the spindle poles, with normal shortening of the kinetochore fiber bundle microtubules. Thus, okadaic acid treatment during metaphase does not affect anaphase chromosome movement once it has begun. Our results suggest that one or more protein phosphatases appear to play an important role during metaphase in the regulatory cascade that culminates in synchronous sister chromatid separation.     

Involvement of chromatid cohesiveness at the centromere and chromosome arms in meiotic chromosome segregation: A cytological approach

Kinetochores and chromatid cores of meiotic chromosomes of the grasshopper species Arcyptera fusca and Eyprepocnemis plorans were differentially silver stained to analyse the possible involvement of both structures in chromatid cohesiveness and meiotic chromosome segregation. Special attention was paid to the behaviour of these structures in the univalent sex chromosome, and in B univalents with different orientations during the first meiotic division. It was observed that while sister chromatid of univalents are associated at metaphase I, chromatid cores are individualised independently of their orientation. We think that cohesive proteins on the inner surface of sister chromatids, and not the chromatid cores, are involved in the chromatid cohesiveness that maintains associated sister chromatids of bivalents and univalents until anaphase I. At anaphase I sister chromatids of amphitelically oriented B univalents or spontaneous autosomal univalents separate but do not reach the poles because they remain connected at the centromere by a long strand which can be visualized by silver staining, that joins stretched sister kinetochores. This strand is normally observed between sister kinetochores of half-bivalents at metaphase II and early anaphase II. We suggest that certain centromere proteins that form the silver-stainable strand assure chromosome integrity until metaphase II. These cohesive centromere proteins would be released or modified during anaphase II to allow normal chromatid segregation. Failure of this process during the first meiotic division could lead to the lagging of amphitelically oriented univalents. Based on our results we propose a model of meiotic chromosome segregation. During mitosis the cohesive proteins located at the centromere and chromosome arms are released during the same cellular division. During meiosis those proteins must be sequentially inactivated, i.e. those situated on the inner surface of the chromatids must be eliminated during the first meiotic division while those located at the centromere must be released during the second meiotic division.by D.P. Bazett-Jones     

Kinetochore fibre dynamics outside the context of the spindle during anaphase

Chromosomes move polewards as kinetochore fibres shorten during anaphase. Fibre dynamics and force production have been studied extensively, but little is known about these processes in the absence of the spindle matrix. Here we show that laser-microbeam-severed kinetochore fibres in the cytoplasm of grasshopper spermatocytes maintain a constant length while turning over in a polarized manner. Tubulin incorporates at or near the kinetochore and translocates towards severed ends without shortening the fibre. Consequently, the chromosome cannot move polewards unless the severed fibre reattaches to the pole through microtubules. A potential seclusion artefact has been ruled out, as fibres severed inside spindles behave identically despite being surrounded by the spindle matrix. Our data suggest that kinetochore microtubules constantly treadmill during anaphase in insect cells. Treadmilling is an intrinsic property of microtubules in the kinetochore fibre, independent of the context and attachment of the spindle. The machinery that depolymerizes minus ends of kinetochore microtubules is functional in a non-spindle context. Attachment to the pole, however, is required to cause net kinetochore fibre shortening to generate polewards forces during anaphase.     

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.     

Mitosis with undivided chromosomes

Summary Cases of cell division with single chromatids are discussed in connection with a study on mitosis with undivided chromosomes made on living material of the endosperm of Haemanthus katharinae. Such divisions are known from certain abnormal mitoses in the microspores of a few plant species, and also from the second meiotic division, in which it is possible in numerous materials to study the behaviour of daughter univalents, and, in a few cases, also daughter chromosomes derived from chromosomes that were paired during the first division.The various cases of mitosis with single chromatids show a great variation with respect to the degree of scattering of the chromosomes over the spindle at metaphase. In a few cases there is practically no tendency to form a metaphase plate. In other cases the tendency to form such a plate is more or less pronounced, but also in these cases it is difficult for the chromosomes to form this arrangement. Some of them remain scattered over the spindle. After the metaphase a kind of anaphase usually follows in which the single chromatids, without division, move to the poles, often with other chromosomes lagging in intermediate positions.An approach of chromosomes to the poles may be caused by two different mechanisms in mitoses of this kind and only in a few cases is the information sufficient to show that active centromere movements occur during these anaphases.In many aspects of their behaviour on the spindle, single chromatids are similar to ordinary univalents of the first meiotic division. For this reason the movement mechanics of the chromosomes of the first meiotic division is briefly reviewed.The interpretation is expressed that the structure of the centromere region of a single chromatid shows some similarity to that of a univalent of the first meiotic division and that this may be the reason for their similar behaviour. The chromatid centromere would have a structural multiplicity with respect to its kinetic elements, corresponding to its subdivision in half-chromatids and also to the presence of two or three consecutive chromomeres in its longitudinal direction. As these kinetic elements are arranged close to one another on one side of the narrow cylinder of the centromere constriction, it is difficult for them to orient, towards both poles simultaneously. A single chromatid having a centromere of this kind will show orientation instability and change its orientation between the two unipolar orientations and various more or less bipolar orientations. The movements following these different orientations would cause the scattering of these single chromatids over the spindle. The orientation of ordinary mitotic metaphase chromosomes, consisting of two such chromatids, could often be the consequence of a process of co-orientation similar to that in meiotic bivalents.The anaphase movement of undivided chromosomes, which by active centromere movements are shifted in the polar directions without a separation of daughter components, is discussed with reference to a similar behaviour observed by Dietz in multivalents in Ostracods. These multivalents are stabilized in the equator during metaphase, in spite of the fact that they have two or three centromeres directed towards one pole and a single one towards the other. During anaphase their chromosomes do not separate but the whole configurations are shifted towards that pole towards which the majority of the centromeres are directed (this is followed by another type of movement which does not concern us in this connection). Undivided chromosomes that are oriented with more of their kinetic material towards one of the poles and less towards the other should by the same mechanisms as moved the multivalents be shifted in the equatorial direction during metaphase and in the polar direction during anaphase. The mechanism of these events is obscure. A change in the interpretation given by Dietz is suggested.This paper is dedicated to Professor Franz Schrader on the occasion of his seventieth birthday.     

The reduction of chromosome number in meiosis is determined by properties built into the chromosomes

In meiosis I, two chromatids move to each spindle pole. Then, in meiosis II, the two are distributed, one to each future gamete. This requires that meiosis I chromosomes attach to the spindle differently than meiosis II chromosomes and that they regulate chromosome cohesion differently. We investigated whether the information that dictates the division type of the chromosome comes from the whole cell, the spindle, or the chromosome itself. Also, we determined when chromosomes can switch from meiosis I behavior to meiosis II behavior. We used a micromanipulation needle to fuse grasshopper spermatocytes in meiosis I to spermatocytes in meiosis II, and to move chromosomes from one spindle to the other. Chromosomes placed on spindles of a different meiotic division always behaved as they would have on their native spindle; e.g., a meiosis I chromosome attached to a meiosis II spindle in its normal fashion and sister chromatids moved together to the same spindle pole. We also showed that meiosis I chromosomes become competent meiosis II chromosomes in anaphase of meiosis I, but not before. The patterns for attachment to the spindle and regulation of cohesion are built into the chromosome itself. These results suggest that regulation of chromosome cohesion may be linked to differences in the arrangement of kinetochores in the two meiotic divisions.     

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.     

Separation anxiety at the centromere

During mitosis, replicated sister-chromatids must maintain cohesion as they attach to the mitotic spindle. At anaphase, cohesion is lost simultaneously along the entire chromosome, releasing sisters from one another and allowing them to segregate to opposite poles. During meiosis, sisters separate in a two-step process. At anaphase of meiosis I, cohesion is lost along the chromosome arms but is maintained at centromeric regions. Not until meiosis II are sister chromatids able to break the connection at the centromere and separate away from one another. Recent studies suggest that the centromere exhibits dynamics that are very different compared with those of the chromatid arms during both mitosis and meiosis. This review discusses the nature of the specialized chromatid cohesion seen at the centromere.     

Division of the nucleolus and its release of CDC14 during anaphase of meiosis I depends on separase,SPO12, and SLK19

Disjunction of maternal and paternal centromeres during meiosis I requires crossing over between homologous chromatids, which creates chiasmata that hold homologs together. It also depends on a mechanism ensuring that maternal and paternal sister kinetochore pairs attach to oppositely oriented microtubules. Proteolytic cleavage of cohesin's Rec8 subunit by separase destroys cohesion between sister chromatid arms at anaphase I and thereby resolves chiasmata. The Spo12 and Slk19 proteins have been implicated in regulating meiosis I kinetochore orientation and/or in preventing cleavage of Rec8 at centromeres. We show here that the role of these proteins is instead to promote nucleolar segregation, including release of the Cdc14 phosphatase required for Cdk1 inactivation and disassembly of the anaphase I spindle. Separase is also required but surprisingly not its protease activity. It has two mechanistically different roles during meiosis I. Loss of the protease-independent function alone results in a second meiotic division occurring on anaphase I spindles in spo12delta and slk19delta mutants.     

A role for the FEAR pathway in nuclear positioning during anaphase

In budding yeast, cells lacking separase function exit mitosis with an undivided nucleus localized to the daughter cell. Here we show that the inability to separate sister chromatids per se is not sufficient to cause the daughter preference. Rather, separase affects nuclear positioning as part of the Cdc14 early anaphase release (FEAR) pathway. The role of the FEAR pathway in nuclear positioning is exerted during anaphase and is not shared by the mitotic exit network. We find that the nuclear segregation defect in FEAR mutants does not stem from nonfunctional spindle poles or the absence of cytoplasmic microtubules. Instead, the concomitant inactivation of sister chromatid separation and the FEAR pathway uncovered a mother-directed force in anaphase that was previously masked by the elongating spindle. We propose that at anaphase onset, the FEAR pathway activates cytoplasmic microtubule-associated forces that facilitate chromosome segregation to the mother cell.     

Slk19p is necessary to prevent separation of sister chromatids in meiosis I

BACKGROUND: A fundamental difference between meiotic and mitotic chromosome segregation is that in meiosis I, sister chromatids remain joined, moving as a unit to one pole of the spindle rather than separating as they do in mitosis. It has long been known that the sustained linkage of sister chromatids through meiotic anaphase I is accomplished by association of the chromatids at the centromere region. The localization of the cohesin Rec8p to the centromeres is essential for maintenance of sister chromatid cohesion through meiosis I, but the molecular basis for the regulation of Rec8p and sister kinetochores in meiosis remains a mystery. RESULTS: We show that the SLK19 gene product from Saccharomyces cerevisiae is essential for proper chromosome segregation during meiosis I. When slk19 mutants were induced to sporulate they completed events characteristic of meiotic prophase I, but at the first meiotic division they segregated their sister chromatids to opposite poles at high frequencies. The vast majority of these cells did not perform a second meiotic division and proceeded to form dyads (asci containing two spores). Slk19p was found to localize to centromere regions of chromosomes during meiotic prophase where it remained until anaphase I. In the absence of Slk19p, Rec8p was not maintained at the centromere region through anaphase I as it is in wild-type cells. Finally, we demonstrate that Slk19p appears to function downstream of the meiosis-specific protein Spo13p in control of sister chromatid behavior during meiosis I. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that Slk19p is essential at the centromere of meiotic chromosomes to prevent the premature separation of sister chromatids at meiosis I.