Microinjection of mitotic cells with the 3F3/2 anti-phosphoepitope antibody delays the onset of anaphase

The transition from metaphase to anaphase is regulated by a checkpoint system that prevents chromosome segregation in anaphase until all the chromosomes have aligned at the metaphase plate. We provide evidence indicating that a kinetochore phosphoepitope plays a role in this checkpoint pathway. The 3F3/2 monoclonal antibody recognizes a kinetochore phosphoepitope in mammalian cells that is expressed on chromosomes before their congression to the metaphase plate. Once chromosomes are aligned, expression is lost and cells enter anaphase shortly thereafter. When microinjected into prophase cells, the 3F3/2 antibody caused a concentration-dependent delay in the onset of anaphase. Injected antibody inhibited the normal dephosphorylation of the 3F3/2 phosphoepitope at kinetochores. Microinjection of the antibody eliminated the asymmetric expression of the phosphoepitope normally seen on sister kinetochores of chromosomes during their movement to the metaphase plate. Chromosome movement to the metaphase plate appeared unaffected in cells injected with the antibody suggesting that asymmetric expression of the phosphoepitope on sister kinetochores is not required for chromosome congression to the metaphase plate. In antibody-injected cells, the epitope remained expressed at kinetochores throughout the prolonged metaphase, but had disappeared by the onset of anaphase. When normal cells in metaphase, lacking the epitope at kinetochores, were treated with agents that perturb microtubules, the 3F3/2 phosphoepitope quickly reappeared at kinetochores. Immunoelectron microscopy revealed that the 3F3/2 epitope is concentrated in the middle electronlucent layer of the trilaminar kinetochore structure. We propose that the 3F3/2 kinetochore phosphoepitope is involved in detecting stable kinetochore-microtubule attachment or is a signaling component of the checkpoint pathway regulating the metaphase to anaphase transition.     

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.     

Condensin Regulates the Stiffness of Vertebrate Centromeres

When chromosomes are aligned and bioriented at metaphase, the elastic stretch of centromeric chromatin opposes pulling forces exerted on sister kinetochores by the mitotic spindle. Here we show that condensin ATPase activity is an important regulator of centromere stiffness and function. Condensin depletion decreases the stiffness of centromeric chromatin by 50% when pulling forces are applied to kinetochores. However, condensin is dispensable for the normal level of compaction (rest length) of centromeres, which probably depends on other factors that control higher-order chromatin folding. Kinetochores also do not require condensin for their structure or motility. Loss of stiffness caused by condensin-depletion produces abnormal uncoordinated sister kinetochore movements, leads to an increase in Mad2(+) kinetochores near the metaphase plate and delays anaphase onset.     

Differential expression of a phosphoepitope at the kinetochores of moving chromosomes

A phosphorylated epitope is differentially expressed at the kinetochores of chromosomes in mitotic cells and may be involved in regulating chromosome movement and cell cycle progression. During prophase and early prometaphase, the phosphoepitope is expressed equally among all the kinetochores. In mid-prometaphase, some chromosomes show strong labeling on both kinetochores; others exhibit weak or no labeling; while in other chromosomes, one kinetochore is intensely labeled while its sister kinetochore is unlabeled. Chromosomes moving toward the metaphase plate express the phosphoepitope strongly on the leading kinetochore but weakly on the trailing kinetochore. This is the first demonstration of a biochemical difference between the two kinetochores of a single chromosome. During metaphase and anaphase, the kinetochores are unlabeled. At metaphase, a single misaligned chromosome can inhibit further progression into anaphase. Misaligned chromosomes express the phosphoepitope strongly on both kinetochores, even when all the other chromosomes of a cell are assembled at the metaphase plate and lack expression. This phosphoepitope may be involved in regulating chromosome movement to the metaphase plate during prometaphase and may be part of a cell cycle checkpoint by which the onset of anaphase is inhibited until complete metaphase alignment is achieved.     

Tension-dependent regulation of microtubule dynamics at kinetochores can explain metaphase congression in yeast

During metaphase in budding yeast mitosis, sister kinetochores are tethered to opposite poles and separated, stretching their intervening chromatin, by singly attached kinetochore microtubules (kMTs). Kinetochore movements are coupled to single microtubule plus-end polymerization/depolymerization at kinetochore attachment sites. Here, we use computer modeling to test possible mechanisms controlling chromosome alignment during yeast metaphase by simulating experiments that determine the 1) mean positions of kinetochore Cse4-GFP, 2) extent of oscillation of kinetochores during metaphase as measured by fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) of kinetochore Cse4-GFP, 3) dynamics of kMTs as measured by FRAP of GFP-tubulin, and 4) mean positions of unreplicated chromosome kinetochores that lack pulling forces from a sister kinetochore. We rule out a number of possible models and find the best fit between theory and experiment when it is assumed that kinetochores sense both a spatial gradient that suppresses kMT catastrophe near the poles and attachment site tension that promotes kMT rescue at higher amounts of chromatin stretch.     

Kiss and break up—a safe passage to anaphase in mitosis and meiosis

Eukaryotic chromosomes have many challenges to overcome between DNA replication and sister chromatid segregation. If these challenges are not met, cell death or unregulated cell division (cancer) may result. During prophase, chromosomes condense, the nuclear membrane breaks down and cohesins are removed from chromosome arms. In prometaphase, initial spindle attachments are made by sister kinetochores followed by correction of erroneous attachments, centromere oscillation between spindle poles and congression towards the cell's equator. In metaphase, all chromosomes attain stable bipolar spindle attachments and align at the metaphase plate, ready for the metaphase–anaphase transition when all ties between sister chromatids are broken. This review concentrates on recent developments that have revealed the intricacies of these processes. We now know more about how the mechanisms of cohesin removal differ between prophase and the metaphase–anaphase transition, the processes for detection and correction of improper spindle-kinetochore attachments and the concept that tension between sister kinetochores is the driving factor for satisfying the spindle checkpoint. We are also beginning to gain some understanding of the mechanisms behind the co-segregation of sister chromatids at the first meiotic division. Review related to the 15th International Chromosome Conference (ICC XV), held in September 2004, Brunel University, London, UK     

Metaphase arrest with centromere separation in polo mutants of Drosophila

The Drosophila gene polo encodes a conserved protein kinase known to be required to organize spindle poles and for cytokinesis. Here we report two strongly hypomorphic mutations of polo that arrest cells of the larval brain at a point in metaphase when the majority of sister kinetochores have separated by between 20-50% of the total spindle length in intact cells. In contrast, analysis of sister chromatid separation in squashed preparations of cells indicates that some 83% of sisters remain attached. This suggests the separation seen in intact cells requires the tension produced by a functional spindle. The point of arrest corresponds to the spindle integrity checkpoint; Bub1 protein and the 3F3/2 epitope are present on the separated kinetochores and the arrest is suppressed by a bub1 mutation. The mutant mitotic spindles are anastral and have assembled upon centrosomes that are associated with Centrosomin and the abnormal spindle protein (Asp), but neither with gamma-tubulin nor CP190. We discuss roles for Polo kinase in recruiting centrosomal proteins and in regulating progression through the metaphase-anaphase checkpoint.     

Dynamical Scenarios for Chromosome Bi-orientation

Chromosome bi-orientation at the metaphase spindle is essential for precise segregation of the genetic material. The process is error-prone, and error-correction mechanisms exist to switch misaligned chromosomes to the correct, bi-oriented configuration. Here, we analyze several possible dynamical scenarios to explore how cells might achieve correct bi-orientation in an efficient and robust manner. We first illustrate that tension-mediated feedback between the sister kinetochores can give rise to a bistable switch, which allows robust distinction between a loose attachment with low tension and a strong attachment with high tension. However, this mechanism has difficulties in explaining how bi-orientation is initiated starting from unattached kinetochores. We propose four possible mechanisms to overcome this problem (exploiting molecular noise; allowing an efficient attachment of kinetochores already in the absence of tension; a trial-and-error oscillation; and a stochastic bistable switch), and assess their impact on the bi-orientation process. Based on our results and supported by experimental data, we put forward a trial-and-error oscillation and a stochastic bistable switch as two elegant mechanisms with the potential to promote bi-orientation both efficiently and robustly.     

Dynamical Scenarios for Chromosome Bi-orientation

Chromosome bi-orientation at the metaphase spindle is essential for precise segregation of the genetic material. The process is error-prone, and error-correction mechanisms exist to switch misaligned chromosomes to the correct, bi-oriented configuration. Here, we analyze several possible dynamical scenarios to explore how cells might achieve correct bi-orientation in an efficient and robust manner. We first illustrate that tension-mediated feedback between the sister kinetochores can give rise to a bistable switch, which allows robust distinction between a loose attachment with low tension and a strong attachment with high tension. However, this mechanism has difficulties in explaining how bi-orientation is initiated starting from unattached kinetochores. We propose four possible mechanisms to overcome this problem (exploiting molecular noise; allowing an efficient attachment of kinetochores already in the absence of tension; a trial-and-error oscillation; and a stochastic bistable switch), and assess their impact on the bi-orientation process. Based on our results and supported by experimental data, we put forward a trial-and-error oscillation and a stochastic bistable switch as two elegant mechanisms with the potential to promote bi-orientation both efficiently and robustly.     

Confocal analysis of chromosome behavior in wheat x maize zygotes.

Herein, we profile the first embryonic mitosis in a hybrid of wheat and maize by using a whole-mount genomic in situ hybridization method and immunofluorescence staining with a tubulin-specific antibody. We have successfully captured the dynamics of each set of parental chromosomes in the first zygotic division of the hybrid embryo 24-28 h after crossing. During the first zygotic metaphase, although both sets of parental chromosomes congressed into the equatorial plate of the zygote, the maize chromosomes tended to lag in comparison with the wheat chromosomes. During anaphase, each parental chromosome separated into its sister chromosomes; however, some of the maize chromosomes lagged around the metaphase plate as segregants. The maize sister chromosomes that did move toward the pole showed delayed and asymmetric movement as compared with the wheat ones. Immunological staining of tubulin revealed a bipolar spindle structure in the first zygotic metaphase. The kinetochores of the maize chromosomes that lagged around the metaphase plate did not attach to the spindle microtubules. These results suggest that factors on the kinetochores of maize chromosomes that are required to control chromosome movement are deficient in the zygotic cell cycle.     

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.     

A perikinetochoric ring defined by MCAK and Aurora-B as a novel centromere domain

Mitotic Centromere-Associated Kinesin (MCAK) is a member of the kinesin-13 subfamily of kinesin-related proteins. In mitosis, this microtubule-depolymerising kinesin seems to be implicated in chromosome segregation and in the correction of improper kinetochore-microtubule interactions, and its activity is regulated by the Aurora-B kinase. However, there are no published data on its behaviour and function during mammalian meiosis. We have analysed by immunofluorescence in squashed mouse spermatocytes, the distribution and possible function of MCAK, together with Aurora-B, during both meiotic divisions. Our results demonstrate that MCAK and Aurora-B colocalise at the inner domain of metaphase I centromeres. Thus, MCAK shows a “cone”-like three-dimensional distribution beneath and surrounding the closely associated sister kinetochores. During the second meiotic division, MCAK and Aurora-B also colocalise at the inner centromere domain as a band that joins sister kinetochores, but only during prometaphase II in unattached chromosomes. During chromosome congression to the metaphase II plate, MCAK relocalises and appears as a ring below each sister kinetochore. Aurora-B also relocalises to appear as a ring surrounding and beneath kinetochores but during late metaphase II. Our results demonstrate that the redistribution of MCAK at prometaphase II/metaphase II centromeres depends on tension across the centromere and/or on the interaction of microtubules with kinetochores. We propose that the perikinetochoric rings of MCAK and Aurora-B define a novel transient centromere domain at least in mouse chromosomes during meiosis. We discuss the possible functions of MCAK at the inner centromere domain and at the perikinetochoric ring during both meiotic divisions.     

Dynamic bonds and polar ejection force distribution explain kinetochore oscillations in PtK1 cells

Duplicated mitotic chromosomes aligned at the metaphase plate maintain dynamic attachments to spindle microtubules via their kinetochores, and multiple motor and nonmotor proteins cooperate to regulate their behavior. Depending on the system, sister chromatids may display either of two distinct behaviors, namely (1) the presence or (2) the absence of oscillations about the metaphase plate. Significantly, in PtK1 cells, in which chromosome behavior appears to be dependent on the position along the metaphase plate, both types of behavior are observed within the same spindle, but how and why these distinct behaviors are manifested is unclear. Here, we developed a new quantitative model to describe metaphase chromosome dynamics via kinetochore–microtubule interactions mediated by nonmotor viscoelastic linkages. Our model reproduces all the key features of metaphase sister kinetochore dynamics in PtK1 cells and suggests that differences in the distribution of polar ejection forces at the periphery and in the middle of PtK1 cell spindles underlie the observed dichotomy of chromosome behavior.     

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

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

Centromeric association and non-random distribution of centromeres in human tumour cells

Summary Centromere arrangement in interphase and metaphase cells of two human tumour cell lines was analysed using anti-kinetochore antibodies as immunofluorescent probes. In GLC1 interphase nuclei, kinetochores were non-randomly positioned around the nucleolus and close to the nuclear membrane. During S and early G2 phase, necklace-like strands of kinetochores were formed in the centre of the nucleus. The duplication of sister kinetochores during the G2 phase was not synchronized. At late G2 phase, a relatively random topological distribution of centromeres was observed with short linear arrays of sister kinetochores. Carefully spread metaphase plates of MDA-MB231 cells generally exhibited a linear alignment of centromeres and large centromeric clusters. In completely pulverized MDA-MB231 cells, centromeres showed a strong tendency to associate with each other.     

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.     

Colchicine promotes a change in chromosome structure without loss of sister chromatid cohesion in prometaphase I-arrested bivalents

In somatic cells colchicine promotes the arrest of cell division at prometaphase, and chromosomes show a sequential loss of sister chromatid arm and centromere cohesion. In this study we used colchicine to analyse possible changes in chromosome structure and sister chromatid cohesion in prometaphase I-arrested bivalents of the katydid Pycnogaster cucullata. After silver staining we observed that in colchicine-arrested prometaphase I bivalents, and in contrast to what was found in control bivalents, sister kinetochores appeared individualised and sister chromatid axes were completely separated all along their length. However, this change in chromosome structure occurred without loss of sister chromatid arm cohesion. We also employed the MPM-2 monoclonal antibody against mitotic phosphoproteins on control and colchicine-treated spermatocytes. In control metaphase I bivalents this antibody labelled the tightly associated sister kinetochores and the interchromatid domain. By contrast, in colchicine-treated prometaphase I bivalents individualised sister kinetochores appeared labelled, but the interchromatid domain did not show labelling. These results support the notion that MPM-2 phosphoproteins, probably DNA topoisomerase IIalpha, located in the interchromatid domain act as "chromosomal staples" associating sister chromatid axes in metaphase I bivalents. The disappearance of these chromosomal staples would induce a change in chromosome structure, as reflected by the separation of sister kinetochores and sister axes, but without a concomitant loss of sister chromatid cohesion.     

Suppression of microtubule dynamics by benomyl decreases tension across kinetochore pairs and induces apoptosis in cancer cells

We found that benomyl, a benzimidazole fungicide, strongly suppressed the reassembly of cold-depolymerized spindle microtubules in HeLa cells. Benomyl perturbed microtubule-kinetochore attachment and chromosome alignment at the metaphase plate. Benomyl also significantly decreased the distance between the sister kinetochore pairs in metaphase cells and increased the level of the checkpoint protein BubR1 at the kinetochore region, indicating that benomyl caused loss of tension across the kinetochores. In addition, benomyl decreased the intercentrosomal distance in mitotic HeLa cells and blocked the cells at mitosis. Further, we analyzed the effects of benomyl on the signal transduction pathways in relation to mitotic block, bcl2 phosphorylation and induction of apoptosis. The results suggest that benomyl causes loss of tension across the kinetochores, blocks the cell cycle progression at mitosis and subsequently, induces apoptosis through the bcl2-bax pathway in a manner qualitatively similar to the powerful microtubule targeted anticancer drugs like the vinca alkaloids and paclitaxel. Considering the very high toxicity of the potent anticancer drugs and the low toxicity of benomyl in humans, we suggest that benomyl could be useful as an adjuvant in combination with the powerful anticancer drugs in cancer therapy.     

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.     

Holocentric plant meiosis: first sisters,then homologues

Meiosis is a crucial process of sexual reproduction by forming haploid gametes from diploid precursor cells. It involves 2 subsequent divisions (meiosis I and meiosis II) after one initial round of DNA replication. Homologous monocentric chromosomes are separated during the first and sister chromatids during the second meiotic division. The faithful segregation of monocentric chromosomes is realized by mono-orientation of fused sister kinetochores at metaphase I and by bi-orientation of sister kinetochores at metaphase II. Conventionally this depends on a 2-step loss of cohesion, along chromosome arms during meiosis I and at sister centromeres during meiosis II.