Cell division and the microtubular cytoskeleton]

Kinetochore microtubules result from an interaction between astral microtubules and the kinetochore of the chromosomes after breakdown of the nuclear envelope at the end of prophase. In this process, the end of a microtubule projecting from one of the polar regions contacts the primary constriction of a chromosome. The latter then undergoes rapid poleward movement. Concerning the mechanism of anaphase chromosome movement, the motive force for the chromosome-to-pole movement appears to be generated at the kinetochore or in the region very close to it. It has not been determined whether chromosomes propel themselves along stationary kinetochore microtubules by a motor at the kinetochore, or they are pulled poleward by a traction fiber consisting of kinetochore microtubules and associated motors. As chromosomes move poleward coordinate disassembly of kinetochore microtubules might occur from their kinetochore ends. In diatom and yeast spindles, elongation of the spindle in anaphase (anaphase B) may be explained by microtubule assembly at polar microtubule ends in the spindle mid-zone and sliding of the antiparallel microtubules from the opposite poles. The sliding force appears to be generated through an ATP-dependent microtubule motor. In isolated sea urchin spindles, the microtubule assembly at the equator alone might provide the force for spindle elongation, although, in addition, involvement of microtubule sliding by a GTP-requiring mechanochemical enzyme cannot be excluded. Discussions were made on possible participation in anaphase chromosome movement of such microtubule motors as dynein, kinesin, dynamin and the claret segregation protein.     

Chromosome motors on the move. From motion to spindle checkpoint activity

Spindle assembly and chromosome segregation require the concerted activities of a variety of microtubule-dependent motors. This review focuses on our current knowledge of the roles played by the chromosome-associated motors during mitosis. While some appear to function conventionally in moving chromosomes along microtubules others seem to act in different ways. For example, by docking microtubules to chromosome arms, chromatin-associated motors prevent chromosome loss and participate in spindle formation and stability. Kinetochore motors participate in the formation of stable kinetochore fibers or in the control of microtubule dynamics and are involved in spindle checkpoint activity. Chromosome-associated motors thus appear to be key molecules that function in complementary ways to ensure the accuracy of chromosome segregation.     

Building a spindle of the correct length in human cells requires the interaction between TPX2 and Aurora A

To assemble mitotic spindles, cells nucleate microtubules from a variety of sources including chromosomes and centrosomes. We know little about how the regulation of microtubule nucleation contributes to spindle bipolarity and spindle size. The Aurora A kinase activator TPX2 is required for microtubule nucleation from chromosomes as well as for spindle bipolarity. We use bacterial artificial chromosome-based recombineering to introduce point mutants that block the interaction between TPX2 and Aurora A into human cells. TPX2 mutants have very short spindles but, surprisingly, are still bipolar and segregate chromosomes. Examination of microtubule nucleation during spindle assembly shows that microtubules fail to nucleate from chromosomes. Thus, chromosome nucleation is not essential for bipolarity during human cell mitosis when centrosomes are present. Rather, chromosome nucleation is involved in spindle pole separation and setting spindle length. A second Aurora A-independent function of TPX2 is required to bipolarize spindles.     

Microtubule motors in spindle and chromosome motility.

Many of the kinesin microtubule motor proteins discovered during the past 8-9 years have roles in spindle assembly and function or chromosome movement during meiosis or mitosis. The discovery of kinesin motor proteins with a clear involvement in spindle and chromosome motility, together with recent evidence that cytoplasmic dynein plays a role in chromosome distribution, has attracted great interest. The identification of microtubule motors that function in chromosome distribution represents a major advance in understanding the forces that underlie chromosome and spindle movements during cell division.     

Motile kinetochores and polar ejection forces dictate chromosome position on the vertebrate mitotic spindle

We argue that hypotheses for how chromosomes achieve a metaphase alignment, that are based solely on a tug-of-war between poleward pulling forces produced along the length of opposing kinetochore fibers, are no longer tenable for vertebrates. Instead, kinetochores move themselves and their attached chromosomes, poleward and away from the pole, on the ends of relatively stationary but shortening/elongating kinetochore fiber microtubules. Kinetochores are also "smart" in that they switch between persistent constant-velocity phases of poleward and away from the pole motion, both autonomously and in response to information within the spindle. Several molecular mechanisms may contribute to this directional instability including kinetochore-associated microtubule motors and kinetochore microtubule dynamic instability. The control of kinetochore directional instability, to allow for congression and anaphase, is likely mediated by a vectorial mechanism whose magnitude and orientation depend on the density and orientation or growth of polar microtubules. Polar microtubule arrays have been shown to resist chromosome poleward motion and to push chromosomes away from the pole. These "polar ejection forces" appear to play a key role in regulating kinetochore directional instability, and hence, positions achieved by chromosomes on the spindle.     

Mechanisms of kinesin‐7 CENP‐E in kinetochore–microtubule capture and chromosome alignment during cell division

Chromosome congression is essential for faithful chromosome segregation and genomic stability in cell division. Centromere‐associated protein E (CENP‐E), a plus‐end‐directed kinesin motor, is required for congression of pole‐proximal chromosomes in metaphase. CENP‐E accumulates at the outer plate of kinetochores and mediates the kinetochore‐microtubule capture. CENP‐E also transports the chromosomes along spindle microtubules towards the equatorial plate. CENP‐E interacts with Bub1‐related kinase, Aurora B and core kinetochore components during kinetochore–microtubule attachment. In this review, we introduce the structures and mechanochemistry of kinesin‐7 CENP‐E. We highlight the complicated interactions between CENP‐E and partner proteins during chromosome congression. We summarise the detailed roles and mechanisms of CENP‐E in mitosis and meiosis, including the kinetochore–microtubule capture, chromosome congression/alignment in metaphase and the regulation of spindle assembly checkpoint. We also shed a light on the roles of CENP‐E in tumourigenesis and CENP‐E's specific inhibitors.     

A Force Balance Model of Early Spindle Pole Separation in Drosophila Embryos

The formation and function of the mitotic spindle depends upon force generation by multiple molecular motors and by the dynamics of microtubules, but how these force-generating mechanisms relate to one another is unclear. To address this issue we have modeled the separation of spindle poles as a function of time during the early stages of spindle morphogenesis in Drosophila embryos. We propose that the outward forces that drive the separation of the spindle poles depend upon forces exerted by cortical dynein and by microtubule polymerization, and that these forces are antagonized by a C-terminal kinesin, Ncd, which generates an inward force on the poles. We computed the sum of the forces generated by dynein, microtubule polymerization, and Ncd, as a function of the extent of spindle pole separation and solved an equation relating the rate of pole separation to the net force. As a result, we obtained graphs of the time course of spindle pole separation during interphase and prophase that display a reasonable fit to the experimental data for wild-type and motor-inhibited embryos. Among the novel contributions of the model are an explanation of pole separation after simultaneous loss of Ncd and dynein function, and the prediction of a large value for the effective centrosomal drag that is needed to fit the experimental data. The results demonstrate the utility of force balance models for explaining certain mitotic movements because they explain semiquantitatively how the force generators drive a rapid initial burst of pole separation when the net force is great, how pole separation slows down as the force decreases, and how a stable separation of the spindle poles characteristic of the prophase steady state is achieved when the force reaches zero.     

Chromokinesin Xklp1 contributes to the regulation of microtubule density and organization during spindle assembly

Xklp1 is a chromosome-associated kinesin required for Xenopus early embryonic cell division. Function blocking experiments in Xenopus egg extracts suggested that it is required for spindle assembly. We have reinvestigated Xklp1 function(s) by monitoring spindle assembly and microtubule behavior under a range of Xklp1 concentrations in egg extracts. We found that in the absence of Xklp1, bipolar spindles form with a reduced efficiency and display abnormalities associated with an increased microtubule mass. Likewise, centrosomal asters assembled in Xklp1-depleted extract show an increased microtubule mass. Conversely, addition of recombinant Xklp1 to the extract reduces the microtubule mass associated with spindles and asters. Our data suggest that Xklp1 affects microtubule polymerization during M-phase. We propose that these attributes, combined with Xklp1 plus-end directed motility, contribute to the assembly of a functional bipolar spindle.     

Elevated polar ejection forces stabilize kinetochore–microtubule attachments

Chromosome biorientation promotes congression and generates tension that stabilizes kinetochore–microtubule (kt-MT) interactions. Forces produced by molecular motors also contribute to chromosome alignment, but their impact on kt-MT attachment stability is unclear. A critical force that acts on chromosomes is the kinesin-10–dependent polar ejection force (PEF). PEFs are proposed to facilitate congression by pushing chromosomes away from spindle poles, although knowledge of the molecular mechanisms underpinning PEF generation is incomplete. Here, we describe a live-cell PEF assay in which tension was applied to chromosomes by manipulating levels of the chromokinesin NOD (no distributive disjunction; Drosophila melanogaster kinesin-10). NOD stabilized syntelic kt-MT attachments in a dose- and motor-dependent manner by overwhelming the ability of Aurora B to mediate error correction. NOD-coated chromatin stretched away from the pole via lateral and end-on interactions with microtubules, and NOD chimeras with either plus end–directed motility or tip-tracking activity produced PEFs. Thus, kt-MT attachment stability is modulated by PEFs, which can be generated by distinct force-producing interactions between chromosomes and dynamic spindle microtubules.     

Human chromokinesins promote chromosome congression and spindle microtubule dynamics during mitosis

Chromokinesins are microtubule plus end-directed motor proteins that bind to chromosome arms. In Xenopus egg cell-free extracts, Xkid and Xklp1 are essential for bipolar spindle formation but the functions of the human homologues, hKID (KIF22) and KIF4A, are poorly understood. By using RNAi-mediated protein knockdown in human cells, we find that only co-depletion delayed progression through mitosis in a Mad2-dependent manner. Depletion of hKID caused abnormal chromosome arm orientation, delayed chromosome congression, and sensitized cells to nocodazole. Knockdown of KIF4A increased the number and length of microtubules, altered kinetochore oscillations, and decreased kinetochore microtubule flux. These changes were associated with failures in establishing a tight metaphase plate and an increase in anaphase lagging chromosomes. Co-depletion of both chromokinesins aggravated chromosome attachment failures, which led to mitotic arrest. Thus, hKID and KIF4A contribute independently to the rapid and correct attachment of chromosomes by controlling the positioning of chromosome arms and the dynamics of microtubules, respectively.     

Dynein prevents erroneous kinetochore-microtubule attachments in mitosis

Equal distribution of the genetic material during cell division relies on efficient congression of chromosomes to the metaphase plate. Prior to their alignment, the Dynein motor recruited to kinetochores transports a fraction of laterally-attached chromosomes along microtubules toward the spindle poles. By doing that, Dynein not only contributes to chromosome movements, but also prevents premature stabilization of end-on kinetochore-microtubule attachments. This is achieved by 2 parallel mechanisms: 1) Dynein-mediated poleward movement of chromosomes counteracts opposite polar-ejection forces (PEFs) on chromosome arms by the microtubule plus-end-directed motors chromokinesins. Otherwise, they could stabilize erroneous syntelic kinetochore-microtubule attachments and lead to the random ejection of chromosomes away from the spindle poles; and 2) By transporting chromosomes to the spindle poles, Dynein brings the former to the zone of highest Aurora A kinase activity, further destabilizing kinetochore-microtubule attachments. Thus, Dynein plays an important role in keeping chromosome segregation error-free by preventing premature stabilization of kinetochore-microtubule attachments near the spindle poles.     

Modulated microtubule dynamics enable Hklp2/Kif15 to assemble bipolar spindles

Activity of the sliding motor Eg5 and coordinated microtubule dynamics are both essential for mitotic spindle pole separation. It is still a matter of controversy if changes in microtubule dynamics can compensate inhibition of Eg5 activity and re-enable bipolarization. Using a consistent live cell-imaging approach, we show that perturbation of microtubule dynamics can compensate inhibition of Eg5 through a spindle formation process reminiscent of meiosis: In Eg5-inhibited mammalian somatic cells, alteration of microtubule dynamics through depletion of TOGp or low doses of nocodazole induces the formation of multiple acentrosomal spindle poles which pass through an intermediate multipolar state followed by bipolarization. Pole separation depends on Hklp2/Kif15, an otherwise dispensable plus end-directed spindle motor and results in spindles with two centrosomal poles. Once bipolar, spindles do not rely on altered microtubule dynamics to maintain their bipolarity anymore and are functional in chromosome segregation. We conclude that altered microtubule dynamics enable Hklp2/Kif15 to replace Eg5 in pole separation through a mechanism involving the formation of acentrosomal poles. Our observations suggest that combination chemotherapy regimens involving microtubule-targeting drugs and Eg5 inhibitors might be less effective than expected.     

Force by minus-end motors Dhc1 and Klp2 collapses the S. pombe spindle after laser ablation

A microtubule-based machine called the mitotic spindle segregates chromosomes when eukaryotic cells divide. In the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe, which undergoes closed mitosis, the spindle forms a single bundle of microtubules inside the nucleus. During elongation, the spindle extends via antiparallel microtubule sliding by molecular motors. These extensile forces from the spindle are thought to resist compressive forces from the nucleus. We probe the mechanism and maintenance of this force balance via laser ablation of spindles at various stages of mitosis. We find that spindle pole bodies collapse toward each other after ablation, but spindle geometry is often rescued, allowing spindles to resume elongation. Although this basic behavior has been previously observed, many questions remain about the phenomenon's dynamics, mechanics, and molecular requirements. In this work, we find that previously hypothesized viscoelastic relaxation of the nucleus cannot explain spindle shortening in response to laser ablation. Instead, spindle collapse requires microtubule dynamics and is powered by the minus-end-directed motor proteins dynein Dhc1 and kinesin-14 Klp2, but it does not require the minus-end-directed kinesin Pkl1.     

Localization of the Kinesin-like Protein Xklp2 to Spindle Poles Requires a Leucine Zipper,a Microtubule-associated Protein,and Dynein

Xklp2 is a plus end–directed Xenopus kinesin-like protein localized at spindle poles and required for centrosome separation during spindle assembly in Xenopus egg extracts. A glutathione-S-transferase fusion protein containing the COOH-terminal domain of Xklp2 (GST-Xklp2-Tail) was previously found to localize to spindle poles (Boleti, H., E. Karsenti, and I. Vernos. 1996. Cell. 84:49–59). Now, we have examined the mechanism of localization of GST-Xklp2-Tail. Immunofluorescence and electron microscopy showed that Xklp2 and GST-Xklp2-Tail localize specifically to the minus ends of spindle pole and aster microtubules in mitotic, but not in interphase, Xenopus egg extracts. We found that dimerization and a COOH-terminal leucine zipper are required for this localization: a single point mutation in the leucine zipper prevented targeting. The mechanism of localization is complex and two additional factors in mitotic egg extracts are required for the targeting of GST-Xklp2-Tail to microtubule minus ends: (a) a novel 100-kD microtubule-associated protein that we named TPX2 (Targeting protein for Xklp2) that mediates the binding of GST-Xklp2-Tail to microtubules and (b) the dynein–dynactin complex that is required for the accumulation of GST-Xklp2-Tail at microtubule minus ends. We propose two molecular mechanisms that could account for the localization of Xklp2 to microtubule minus ends.     

Dynamic microtubules are essential for efficient chromosome capture and biorientation in S. cerevisiae

Attachment of chromosomes to the mitotic spindle has been proposed to require dynamic microtubules that randomly search three-dimensional space and become stabilized upon capture by kinetochores. In this study, we test this model by examining chromosome capture in Saccharomyces cerevisiae mutants with attenuated microtubule dynamics. Although viable, these cells are slow to progress through mitosis. Preanaphase cells contain a high proportion of chromosomes that are attached to only one spindle pole and missegregate in the absence of the spindle assembly checkpoint. Measurement of the rates of chromosome capture and biorientation demonstrate that both are severely decreased in the mutants. These results provide direct evidence that dynamic microtubules are critical for efficient chromosome capture and biorientation and support the hypothesis that microtubule search and capture plays a central role in assembly of the mitotic spindle.     

Dynamic positioning of mitotic spindles in yeast: role of microtubule motors and cortical determinants

In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, movement of the mitotic spindle to a predetermined cleavage plane at the bud neck is essential for partitioning chromosomes into the mother and daughter cells. Astral microtubule dynamics are critical to the mechanism that ensures nuclear migration to the bud neck. The nucleus moves in the opposite direction of astral microtubule growth in the mother cell, apparently being "pushed" by microtubule contacts at the cortex. In contrast, microtubules growing toward the neck and within the bud promote nuclear movement in the same direction of microtubule growth, thus "pulling" the nucleus toward the bud neck. Failure of "pulling" is evident in cells lacking Bud6p, Bni1p, Kar9p, or the kinesin homolog, Kip3p. As a consequence, there is a loss of asymmetry in spindle pole body segregation into the bud. The cytoplasmic motor protein, dynein, is not required for nuclear movement to the neck; rather, it has been postulated to contribute to spindle elongation through the neck. In the absence of KAR9, dynein-dependent spindle oscillations are evident before anaphase onset, as are postanaphase dynein-dependent pulling forces that exceed the velocity of wild-type spindle elongation threefold. In addition, dynein-mediated forces on astral microtubules are sufficient to segregate a 2N chromosome set through the neck in the absence of spindle elongation, but cytoplasmic kinesins are not. These observations support a model in which spindle polarity determinants (BUD6, BNI1, KAR9) and cytoplasmic kinesin (KIP3) provide directional cues for spindle orientation to the bud while restraining the spindle to the neck. Cytoplasmic dynein is attenuated by these spindle polarity determinants and kinesin until anaphase onset, when dynein directs spindle elongation to distal points in the mother and bud.     

Kinetochores are transported poleward along a single astral microtubule during chromosome attachment to the spindle in newt lung cells

During mitosis in cultured newt pneumocytes, one or more chromosomes may become positioned well removed (greater than 50 microns) from the polar regions during early prometaphase. As a result, these chromosomes are delayed for up to 5 h in forming an attachment to the spindle. The spatial separation of these chromosomes from the polar microtubule-nucleating centers provides a unique opportunity to study the initial stages of kinetochore fiber formation in living cells. Time-lapse Nomarski-differential interference contrast videomicroscopic observations reveal that late-attaching chromosomes always move, upon attachment, into a single polar region (usually the one closest to the chromosome). During this attachment, the kinetochore region of the chromosome undergoes a variable number of transient poleward tugs that are followed, shortly thereafter, by rapid movement of the chromosome towards the pole. Anti-tubulin immunofluorescence and serial section EM reveal that the kinetochores and kinetochore regions of nonattached chromosomes lack associated microtubules. By contrast, these methods reveal that the attachment and subsequent poleward movement of a chromosome correlates with the association of a single long microtubule with one of the kinetochores of the chromosome. This microtubule traverses the entire distance between the spindle pole and the kinetochore and often extends well past the kinetochore. From these results, we conclude that the initial attachment of a chromosome to the newt pneumocyte spindle results from an interaction between a single polar-nucleated microtubule and one of the kinetochores on the chromosome. Once this association is established, the kinetochore is rapidly transported poleward along the surface of the microtubule by a mechanism that is not dependent on microtubule depolymerization. Our results further demonstrate that the motors for prometaphase chromosome movement must be either on the surface of the kinetochore (i.e., within the corona but not the plate), distributed along the surface of the kinetochore microtubules, or both.     

Arabidopsis thaliana protein,ATK1, is a minus-end directed kinesin that exhibits non-processive movement

The microtubule cytoskeleton forms the scaffolding of the meiotic spindle. Kinesins, which bind to microtubules and generate force via ATP hydrolysis, are also thought to play a critical role in spindle assembly, maintenance, and function. The A. thaliana protein, ATK1 (formerly known as KATA), is a member of the kinesin family based on sequence similarity and is implicated in spindle assembly and/or maintenance. Thus, we want to determine if ATK1 behaves as a kinesin in vitro, and if so, determine the directionality of the motor activity and processivity character (the relationship between molecular "steps" and microtubule association). The results show that ATK1 supports microtubule movement in an ATP-dependent manner and has a minus-end directed polarity. Furthermore, ATK1 exhibits non-processive movement along the microtubule and likely requires at least four ATK1 motors bound to the microtubule to support movement. Based on these results and previous data, we conclude that ATK1 is a non-processive, minus-end directed kinesin that likely plays a role in generating forces in the spindle during meiosis.     

Mitotic spindle form and function

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae mitotic spindle in budding yeast is exemplified by its simplicity and elegance. Microtubules are nucleated from a crystalline array of proteins organized in the nuclear envelope, known as the spindle pole body in yeast (analogous to the centrosome in larger eukaryotes). The spindle has two classes of nuclear microtubules: kinetochore microtubules and interpolar microtubules. One kinetochore microtubule attaches to a single centromere on each chromosome, while approximately four interpolar microtubules emanate from each pole and interdigitate with interpolar microtubules from the opposite spindle to provide stability to the bipolar spindle. On the cytoplasmic face, two to three microtubules extend from the spindle pole toward the cell cortex. Processes requiring microtubule function are limited to spindles in mitosis and to spindle orientation and nuclear positioning in the cytoplasm. Microtubule function is regulated in large part via products of the 6 kinesin gene family and the 1 cytoplasmic dynein gene. A single bipolar kinesin (Cin8, class Kin-5), together with a depolymerase (Kip3, class Kin-8) or minus-end-directed kinesin (Kar3, class Kin-14), can support spindle function and cell viability. The remarkable feature of yeast cells is that they can survive with microtubules and genes for just two motor proteins, thus providing an unparalleled system to dissect microtubule and motor function within the spindle machine.     

The impact of chromosomes and centrosomes on spindle assembly as observed in living cells

We analyzed the role that chromosomes, kinetochores, and centrosomes play in spindle assembly in living grasshopper spermatocytes by reconstructing spindles lacking certain components. We used video- enhanced, polarization microscopy to distinguish the effect of each component on spindle microtubule dynamics and we discovered that both chromosomes and centrosomes make potent and very different contributions to the organization of the spindle. Remarkably, the position of a single chromosome can markedly affect the distribution of microtubules within a spindle or even alter the fate of spindle assembly. In an experimentally constructed spindle having only one chromosome, moving the chromosome to one of the two poles induces a dramatic assembly of microtubules at the nearer pole and a concomitant disassembly at the farther pole. So long as a spindle carries a single chromosome it will persist normally. A spindle will also persist even when all chromosomes are detached and then removed from the cell. If, however, a single chromosome remains in the cell but is detached from the spindle and kept in the cytoplasm, the spindle disassembles. One might expect the effect of chromosomes on spindle assembly to relate to a property of a specific site on each chromosome, perhaps the kinetochore. We have ruled out that possibility by showing that it is the size of chromosomes rather than the number of kinetochores that matters. Although chromosomes affect spindle assembly, they cannot organize a spindle in the absence of centrosomes. In contrast, centrosomes can organize a functional bipolar spindle in the absence of chromosomes. If both centrosomes and chromosomes are removed from the cell, the spindle quickly disappears.