Sgo1 is required for co-segregation of sister chromatids during achiasmate meiosis I

The reduction of chromosome number during meiosis is achieved by two successive rounds of chromosome segregation, called meiosis I and meiosis II. While meiosis II is similar to mitosis in that sister kinetochores are bi-oriented and segregate to opposite poles, recombined homologous chromosomes segregate during the first meiotic division. Formation of chiasmata, mono-orientation of sister kinetochores and protection of centromeric cohesion are three major features of meiosis I chromosomes which ensure the reductional nature of chromosome segregation. Here we show that sister chromatids frequently segregate to opposite poles during meiosis I in fission yeast cells that lack both chiasmata and the protector of centromeric cohesion Sgo1. Our data are consistent with the notion that sister kinetochores are frequently bi-oriented in the absence of chiasmata and that Sgo1 prevents equational segregation of sister chromatids during achiasmate meiosis I.Key words: meiosis, chromosome segregation, recombination, kinetochore, Sgo1, fission yeast     

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.     

Sgo1 is required for co-segregation of sister chromatids during achiasmate meiosis I

The reduction of chromosome number during meiosis is achieved by two successive rounds of chromosome segregation, called meiosis I and meiosis II. While meiosis II is similar to mitosis in that sister kinetochores are bi-oriented and segregate to opposite poles, recombined homologous chromosomes segregate during the first meiotic division. Formation of chiasmata, mono-orientation of sister kinetochores and protection of centromeric cohesion are three major features of meiosis I chromosomes which ensure the reductional nature of chromosome segregation. Here we show that sister chromatids frequently segregate to opposite poles during meiosis I in fission yeast cells that lack both chiasmata and the protector of centromeric cohesion Sgo1. Our data are consistent with the notion that sister kinetochores are frequently bi-oriented in the absence of chiasmata and that Sgo1 prevents equational segregation of sister chromatids during achiasmate meiosis I.     

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.     

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.     

Shugoshin promotes sister kinetochore biorientation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Chromosome segregation must be executed accurately during both mitotic and meiotic cell divisions. Sgo1 plays a key role in ensuring faithful chromosome segregation in at least two ways. During meiosis this protein regulates the removal of cohesins, the proteins that hold sister chromatids together, from chromosomes. During mitosis, Sgo1 is required for sensing the absence of tension caused by sister kinetochores not being attached to microtubules emanating from opposite poles. Here we describe a differential requirement for Sgo1 in the segregation of homologous chromosomes and sister chromatids. Sgo1 plays only a minor role in segregating homologous chromosomes at meiosis I. In contrast, Sgo1 is important to bias sister kinetochores toward biorientation. We suggest that Sgo1 acts at sister kinetochores to promote their biorientation.     

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.     

Kinetochore rearrangement in meiosis II requires attachment to the spindle

The distinctive behaviors of chromosomes in mitosis and meiosis depend upon differences in kinetochore position. Kinetochore position is well established except for a critical transition between meiosis I and meiosis II. We examined kinetochore position during the transition and compared it with the position of kinetochores in mitosis. Immunofluorescence staining using the 3F3/2 antibody showed that in mitosis in grasshopper cells, as in other organisms, kinetochores are positioned on opposite sides of the two sister chromatids. In meiosis I, sister kinetochores are positioned side by side. At nuclear envelope breakdown in meiosis II, sister kinetochores are still side by side, but are separated by the time all chromosomes have fully attached in metaphase II. Micromanipulation experiments reveal that this switch from side-by-side to separated sister kinetochores requires attachment to the spindle. Moreover, it is irreversible, as chromosomes detached from a metaphase II spindle retain separate kinetochores. How this critical separation of sister kinetochores occurs in meiosis is uncertain, but clearly it is not built into the chromosome before nuclear envelope breakdown, as it is in mitosis.     

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.     

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 characterization of kinetochore protein,Ctf19 in meiosis I: an implication of differential impact of Ctf19 on the assembly of mitotic and meiotic kinetochores in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Meiosis is a specialized cell division process through which chromosome numbers are reduced by half for the generation of gametes. Kinetochore, a multiprotein complex that connects centromeres to microtubules, plays essential role in chromosome segregation. Ctf19 is the key central kinetochore protein that recruits all the other non‐essential proteins of the Ctf19 complex in budding yeast. Earlier studies have shown the role of Ctf19 complex in enrichment of cohesin around the centromeres both during mitosis and meiosis, leading to sister chromatid cohesion and meiosis II disjunction. Here we show that Ctf19 is also essential for the proper execution of the meiosis I specific unique events, such as non‐homologous centromere coupling, homologue pairing, chiasmata resolution and proper orientation of homologues and sister chromatids with respect to the spindle poles. Additionally, this investigation reveals that proper kinetochore function is required for faithful chromosome condensation in meiosis. Finally, this study suggests that absence of Ctf19 affects the integrity of meiotic kinetochore differently than that of the mitotic kinetochore. Consequently, absence of Ctf19 leads to gross chromosome missegregation during meiosis as compared with mitosis. Hence, this study reports for the first time the differential impact of a non‐essential kinetochore protein on the mitotic and meiotic kinetochore ensembles and hence chromosome segregation.     

Chromosome segregation: correcting improper attachment

Accurate chromosome segregation requires that the two sister kinetochores attach to microtubules from opposite spindle poles. New work reveals how a kinetochore can segregate properly while remaining improperly attached to two spindle poles.     

Structure of centromere chromatin: from nucleosome to chromosomal architecture

The centromere is essential for the segregation of chromosomes, as it serves as attachment site for microtubules to mediate chromosome segregation during mitosis and meiosis. In most organisms, the centromere is restricted to one chromosomal region that appears as primary constriction on the condensed chromosome and is partitioned into two chromatin domains: The centromere core is characterized by the centromere-specific histone H3 variant CENP-A (also called cenH3) and is required for specifying the centromere and for building the kinetochore complex during mitosis. This core region is generally flanked by pericentric heterochromatin, characterized by nucleosomes containing H3 methylated on lysine 9 (H3K9me) that are bound by heterochromatin proteins. During mitosis, these two domains together form a three-dimensional structure that exposes CENP-A-containing chromatin to the surface for interaction with the kinetochore and microtubules. At the same time, this structure supports the tension generated during the segregation of sister chromatids to opposite poles. In this review, we discuss recent insight into the characteristics of the centromere, from the specialized chromatin structures at the centromere core and the pericentromere to the three-dimensional organization of these regions that make up the functional centromere.     

The kinetochore proteins Pcs1 and Mde4 and heterochromatin are required to prevent merotelic orientation

BACKGROUND: Accurate chromosome segregation depends on the establishment of correct-amphitelic-kinetochore orientation. Merotelic kinetochore orientation is an error that occurs when a single kinetochore attaches to microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles, a condition that hinders segregation of the kinetochore to a spindle pole in anaphase. To avoid chromosome missegregation resulting from merotelic kinetochore orientation, cells have developed mechanisms to prevent or correct merotelic attachment. A protein called Pcs1 has been implicated in preventing merotelic attachment in mitosis and meiosis II in the fission yeast S. pombe. RESULTS: We report that Pcs1 forms a complex with a protein called Mde4. Both Pcs1 and Mde4 localize to the central core of centromeres. Deletion of mde4(+), like that of pcs1(+), causes the appearance of lagging chromosomes during the anaphases of mitotic and meiosis II cells. We provide evidence that the kinetochores of lagging chromosomes in both pcs1 and mde4 mutant cells are merotelically attached. In addition, we find that lagging chromosomes in cells with defective centromeric heterochromatin also display features consistent with merotelic attachment. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that the Pcs1/Mde4 complex is the fission yeast counterpart of the budding yeast monopolin subcomplex Csm1/Lrs4, which promotes the segregation of sister kinetochores to the same pole during meiosis I. We propose that the Pcs1/Mde4 complex acts in the central kinetochore domain to clamp microtubule binding sites together, the centromeric heterochromatin coating the flanking domains provides rigidity, and both systems contribute to the prevention of merotelic attachment.     

Chromatids segregate without centrosomes during Caenorhabditis elegans mitosis in a Ran- and CLASP-dependent manner

During mitosis, chromosomes are connected to a microtubule-based spindle. Current models propose that displacement of the spindle poles and/or the activity of kinetochore microtubules generate mechanical forces that segregate sister chromatids. Using laser destruction of the centrosomes during Caenorhabditis elegans mitosis, we show that neither of these mechanisms is necessary to achieve proper chromatid segregation. Our results strongly suggest that an outward force generated by the spindle midzone, independently of centrosomes, is sufficient to segregate chromosomes in mitotic cells. Using mutant and RNAi analysis, we show that the microtubule-bundling protein SPD-1/MAP-65 and BMK-1/kinesin-5 act as a brake opposing the force generated by the spindle midzone. Conversely, we identify a novel role for two microtubule-growth and nucleation agents, Ran and CLASP, in the establishment of the centrosome-independent force during anaphase. Their involvement raises the interesting possibility that microtubule polymerization of midzone microtubules is continuously required to sustain chromosome segregation during mitosis.     

A simple,mechanistic model for directional instability during mitotic chromosome movements

During mitosis, chromosomes become attached to microtubules that emanate from the two spindle poles. Thereafter, a chromosome moves along these microtubule "tracks" as it executes a series of movements that bring it to the spindle equator. After the onset of anaphase, the sister chromatids separate and move to opposite spindle poles. These movements are often characterized by "directional instability" (a series of runs with approximately constant speed, punctuated by sudden reversals in the direction of movement). To understand mitosis, it is critical to describe the physical mechanisms that underlie the coordination of the forces that drive directional instability. We propose a simple mechanistic model that describes the origin of the forces that move chromosomes and the coordination of these forces to produce directional instability. The model demonstrates that forces, speeds, and direction of motion associated with prometaphase through anaphase chromosome movements can be predicted from the molecular kinetics of interactions between dynamic microtubules and arrays of microtubule binding sites that are linked to the chromosome by compliant elements.     

Bipolar spindle attachments affect redistributions of ZW10, a Drosophila centromere/kinetochore component required for accurate chromosome segregation

Previous efforts have shown that mutations in the Drosophila ZW10 gene cause massive chromosome missegregation during mitotic divisions in several tissues. Here we demonstrate that mutations in ZW10 also disrupt chromosome behavior in male meiosis I and meiosis II, indicating that ZW10 function is common to both equational and reductional divisions. Divisions are apparently normal before anaphase onset, but ZW10 mutants exhibit lagging chromosomes and irregular chromosome segregation at anaphase. Chromosome missegregation during meiosis I of these mutants is not caused by precocious separation of sister chromatids, but rather the nondisjunction of homologs. ZW10 is first visible during prometaphase, where it localizes to the kinetochores of the bivalent chromosomes (during meiosis I) or to the sister kinetochores of dyads (during meiosis II). During metaphase of both divisions, ZW10 appears to move from the kinetochores and to spread toward the poles along what appear to be kinetochore microtubules. Redistributions of ZW10 at metaphase require bipolar attachments of individual chromosomes or paired bivalents to the spindle. At the onset of anaphase I or anaphase II, ZW10 rapidly relocalizes to the kinetochore regions of the separating chromosomes. In other mutant backgrounds in which chromosomes lag during anaphase, the presence or absence of ZW10 at a particular kinetochore predicts whether or not the chromosome moves appropriately to the spindle poles. We propose that ZW10 acts as part of, or immediately downstream of, a tension-sensing mechanism that regulates chromosome separation or movement at anaphase onset.     

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.     

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 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.