Dicentric chromosomes and the inactivation of the centromere

Summary The origin and behavior of human dicentric chromosomes are reviewed. Most dicentrics between two non-homologous or two homologous chromosomes (isodicentrics), which are permanent members of a chromosome complement, probably originate from segregation of an adjacent quadriradial; such configurations are the result of a chromatid translocation between two nonhomologous chromosomes, or they represent an adjacent counterpart of a mitotic chiasma. The segregation of such a quadriradial may also give rise to a cell line monosomic for the chromosome concerned (e.g., a 45,X line). Contrary to the generally held opinion, isodicentrics rarely result from an isolocal break in two chromatids followed by rejoining of sister chromatids. In this case the daughter centromeres go to opposite poles in the next anaphase, and the resulting bridge breaks at a random point. This mechanism, therefore, leads to the formation of an isodicentric chromosome only if the two centromeres are close together, or if one centromere is immediately inactivated. Observations on the origin of dicentrics in Bloom syndrome support these conclusions. One centromere is permanently inactivated in most dicentric chromosomes, and even when the dicentric breaks into two chromosomes, the centromere is not reactivated. The appearance and behavior of the acentric X chromosomes show that their centromeres are similarly inactivated and not prematurely divided. Two Bloom syndrome lymphocytes, one with an extra chromosome 2 and the other with an extra chromosome 7, each having an inactivated centromere, show that this can also happen in monocentric autosomes.     

Sequence of centromere separation: orderly separation of multicentric chromosomes in mouse L cells

Mouse L cells have many dicentric chromosomes and one with eight centromeres. All eight centromeres behave similarly until midmetaphase when most centromeres split into two units each in apparently quick succession but out-of-phase. This premature separation leaves one or perhaps two closely located centromeres intact, which separate at late metaphase-anaphase, drawing the two chromatids to opposite poles. Such dominance of one centromere over all others, though unexplained, ensures the lack of any mitotic abnormality such as bridges or fragments. These observations show that all the centromeres are retained as functional primary constrictions except for a change in functional regulation when more than one centromere are located on a chromosome.     

Observations on dicentrics in living cells

Summary In previously irradiated endosperm cells of Haemanthus katherinae studied in vitro by means of micro-cinematography, two-kinetochore chromatids and dicentric chromosomes have been observed. Breaking of such dicentric chromatids and chromosomes has been analysed. Behaviour of some of the dicentric chromosomes during anaphase deserves special attention: interlocking dicentrics cut one through another and rejoin in a few minutes. In this way from a metaphase interlocking dicentric, two sister anaphase dicentrics are formed. Interlocked dicentrics can also uncoil and not break at all. In this case no activity was observed in one kinetochore of one dicentric in later stages of anaphase (two kinetochores were active in one dicentric and only one in its sister). Analysis of chromosome movements in two-kinetochore chromatids and dicentrics is also presented.     

Inverted meiosis and its place in the evolution of sexual reproduction pathways

Inverted meiosis is observed in plants (Cyperaceae and Juncaceae) and insects (Coccoidea, Aphididae) with holocentric chromosomes, the centromeres of which occupy from 70 to 90% of the metaphase chromosome length. In the first meiotic division (meiosis I), chiasmata are formed and rodlike bivalents orient equationally, and in anaphase I, sister chromatids segregate to the poles; the diploid chromosome number is maintained. Non-sister chromatids of homologous chromosomes remain in contact during interkinesis and prophase II and segregate in anaphase II, forming haploid chromosome sets. The segregation of sister chromatids in meiosis I was demonstrated by example of three plant species that were heterozygous for chromosomal rearrangements. In these species, sister chromatids, marked with rearrangement, segregated in anaphase I. Using fluorescent antibodies, it was demonstrated that meiotic recombination enzymes Spo11 and Rad5l, typical of canonical meiosis, functioned at the meiotic prophase I of pollen mother cells of Luzula elegance and Rhynchospora pubera. Moreover, antibodies to synaptonemal complexes proteins ASY1 and ZYP1 were visualized as filamentous structures, pointing to probable formation of synaptonemal complexes. In L. elegance, chiasmata are formed by means of chromatin threads containing satellite DNA. According to the hypothesis of the author of this review, equational division of sister chromatids at meiosis I in the organisms with inverted meiosis can be explained by the absence of specific meiotic proteins (shugoshins). These proteins are able to protect cohesins of holocentric centromeres from hydrolysis by separases at meiosis I, as occurs in the organisms with monocentric chromosomes and canonical meiosis. The basic type of inverted meiosis was described in Coccoidea and Aphididae males. In their females, the variants of parthenogenesis were also observed. Until now, the methods of molecular cytogenetics were not applied for the analysis of inverted meiosis in Coccoidea and Aphididae. Evolutionary, inverted meiosis is thought to have appeared secondarily as an adaptation of the molecular mechanisms of canonical meiosis to chromosome holocentrism.     

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     

The parental origin and mechanism of formation of three dicentric X chromosomes

Summary Cytogenetic and molecular analyses of three dicentric X chromosomes were performed in an attempt to identify the parental origin and mechanism of formation of the aberant chromosomes. Results indicate that, in these three cases, the dicentric chromosomes were formed by chromatid breakage and reunion of sister chromatids at the breakpoint. In two cases the abnormal chromosomes were paternal in origin; in the third case the dicentric originated from the maternal X chromosome.     

Sequence of centromere separation: characterization of multicentric chromosomes in a rat cell line

The B₁ cell line of rat cerebral endothelium origin exhibits several dicentric and multicentric chromosomes. These chromosomes, unlike multicentrics in mouse (Vig and Zinkowski 1986) do not show premature centromere separation. All centromeres deposit kinetochore proteins and appear to be functional. Even the centromeres which fail to migrate to the poles during anaphase and make side arm bridges bind to spindle microtubules. Some multicentric chromosomes show kinetochores spaced apart with intervening stretches of euchromatin while others are located adjacent to each other thus exhibiting tandem repeats and forming a compound kinetochore (Brinkeley et al. 1984). Also, unlike mouse multicentric chromosomes in which different pericentric regions and the centromeres replicate at different times, the rat chromosomes appear to replicate all pericentric and centric regions in a given multicentric simultaneously. The present studies indicate that centromeres in rat and mouse replicate during the last part of the S-phase and in continuation with the pericentric heterochromatin.     

Differential kinetochore protein requirements for establishment versus propagation of centromere activity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Dicentric chromosomes undergo a breakage-fusion-bridge cycle as a consequence of having two centromeres on the same chromatid attach to opposite spindle poles in mitosis. Suppression of dicentric chromosome breakage reflects loss of kinetochore function at the kinetochore-microtubule or the kinetochore-DNA interface. Using a conditionally functional dicentric chromosome in vivo, we demonstrate that kinetochore mutants exhibit quantitative differences in their degree of chromosome breakage. Mutations in chl4/mcm17/ctf17 segregate dicentric chromosomes through successive cell divisions without breakage, indicating that only one of the two centromeres is functional. Centromere DNA introduced into the cell is unable to promote kinetochore assembly in the absence of CHL4. In contrast, established centromeres retain their segregation capacity for greater than 25 generations after depletion of Chl4p. The persistent mitotic stability of established centromeres reveals the presence of an epigenetic component in kinetochore segregation. Furthermore, this study identifies Chl4p in the initiation and specification of a heritable chromatin state.     

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.     

Aurora controls sister kinetochore mono-orientation and homolog bi-orientation in meiosis-I

Aurora-B kinases are important regulators of mitotic chromosome segregation, where they are required for the faithful bi-orientation of sister chromatids. In contrast to mitosis, sister chromatids have to be oriented toward the same spindle pole in meiosis-I, while homologous chromosomes are bi-oriented. We find that the fission yeast Aurora kinase Ark1 is required for the faithful bi-orientation of sister chromatids in mitosis and of homologous chromosomes in meiosis-I. Unexpectedly, Ark1 is also necessary for the faithful mono-orientation of sister chromatids in meiosis-I, even though the canonical mono-orientation pathway, which depends on Moa1 and Rec8, seems intact. Our data suggest that Ark1 prevents unified sister kinetochores during metaphase-I from merotelic attachment to both spindle poles and thus from being torn apart during anaphase-I, revealing a novel mechanism promoting monopolar attachment. Furthermore, our results provide an explanation for the previously enigmatic observation that fission yeast Shugoshin Sgo2, which assists in loading Aurora to centromeres, and its regulator Bub1 are required for the mono-orientation of sister chromatids in meiosis-I.     

Characterization of kinetochores in multicentric chromosomes

Long-term cultures of certain rat and mouse cell lines carry several dicentric and some multicentric chromosomes. Using antikinetochore antibodies obtainable from serum of scleroderma (var. CREST) patients we studied the number of kinetochores formed along the length of these chromosomes. The rat cells displayed as many kinetochores as there were centromeres. However, mouse cells showed the synthesis of only one kinetochore in dicentric and multicentric chromosomes which had been in the culture for a period of 1 year or more. When translocations were induced by bleomycin in mouse L cells, the newly formed dicentric chromosomes showed the formation of two kinetochores. It is not known when the accessory centromeres lose their capacity to assemble kinetochore proteins. Possibly, in the rat the latent kinetochores lack a specific component which renders them ineffective for microtubule binding. The reason for the formation of only one kinetochore in mouse multicentric chromosomes is not clear. It may be due to the accumulation of mutations, modification of the kinetochore protein so that it lacks the antibody binding component, or a more effective regulatory gene than in the rat.     

Mitotic instability in wheat×Thinopyrum ponticum derivatives revealed by chromosome counting, nuclear DNA content and histone H3 phosphorylation pattern

To evaluate the mitotic stability of Triticum aestivum×Thinopyrum ponticum derivatives (BC₂F₇ and BC₂F₅ doubled haploids), chromosome counting by both conventional and immunostaining techniques, and measurement of DNA content were performed. The wheat progenitor line, PF 839197, the wheat recurrent parent CEP 19 and the control Chinese Spring were also investigated. In the hybrid derivatives, chromosome number ranged from 2n=36 to 60, with a predominance of chromosome numbers higher than 2n=42, that was confirmed by determination of nuclear DNA content. Chinese Spring and PF 839197 were stable, but CEP 19 showed chromosome number variation (20%). Analyses of non-pretreated cells revealed the presence of anaphase bridges, lagging chromatids, chromosome fragments and micronuclei. Immunostaining with an antibody recognizing histone H3 phosphorylated showed dicentric chromatids forming anaphase bridges and pericentromeric phosphorylation at centric chromosome fragments but not at lagging chromatids. The possible causes of the observed mitotic instability are discussed.     

Cohesin ensures bipolar attachment of microtubules to sister centromeres and resists their precocious separation

The multisubunit protein complex cohesin is required to establish cohesion between sister chromatids during S phase and to maintain it during G2 and M phases. Cohesin is essential for mitosis, and even partial defects cause very high rates of chromosome loss. In budding yeast, cohesin associates with specific sites which are distributed along the entire length of a chromosome but are more dense in the vicinity of the centromere. Real-time imaging of individual centromeres tagged with green fluorescent protein suggests that cohesin bound to centromeres is important for bipolar attachment to microtubules. This cohesin is, however, incapable of resisting the consequent force, which leads to sister centromere splitting and chromosome stretching. Meanwhile, cohesin bound to sequences flanking the centromeres prevents sister chromatids from completely unzipping and is required to pull back together sister centromeres that have already split. Cohesin therefore has a central role in generating a dynamic tension between microtubules and sister chromatid cohesion at centromeres, which lasts until chromosome segregation is finally promoted by separin-dependent cleavage of the cohesin subunit Scc1p.     

Homologous chromosome interactions in meiosis: diversity amidst conservation

Proper chromosome segregation is crucial for preventing fertility problems, birth defects and cancer. During mitotic cell divisions, sister chromatids separate from each other to opposite poles, resulting in two daughter cells that each have a complete copy of the genome. Meiosis poses a special problem in which homologous chromosomes must first pair and then separate at the first meiotic division before sister chromatids separate at the second meiotic division. So, chromosome interactions between homologues are a unique feature of meiosis and are essential for proper chromosome segregation. Pairing and locking together of homologous chromosomes involves recombination interactions in some cases, but not in others. Although all organisms must match and lock homologous chromosomes to maintain genome integrity throughout meiosis, recent results indicate that the underlying mechanisms vary in different organisms.     

The 'anaphase problem': how to disable the mitotic checkpoint when sisters split

Two closely connected mechanisms safeguard the fidelity of chromosome segregation in eukaryotic cells. The mitotic checkpoint monitors the attachment of kinetochores to microtubules and delays anaphase onset until all sister kinetochores have become attached to opposite poles. In addition, an error correction mechanism destabilizes erroneous attachments that do not lead to tension at sister kinetochores. Aurora B kinase, the catalytic subunit of the CPC (chromosomal passenger complex), acts as a sensor and effector in both pathways. In this review we focus on a poorly understood but important aspect of mitotic control: what prevents the mitotic checkpoint from springing into action when sister centromeres are split and tension is suddenly lost at anaphase onset? Recent work has shown that disjunction of sister chromatids, in principle, engages the mitotic checkpoint, and probably also the error correction mechanism, with potentially catastrophic consequences for cell division. Eukaryotic cells have solved this 'anaphase problem' by disabling the mitotic checkpoint at the metaphase-to-anaphase transition. Checkpoint inactivation is in part due to the reversal of Cdk1 (cyclin-dependent kinase 1) phosphorylation of the CPC component INCENP (inner centromere protein; Sli15 in budding yeast), which causes the relocation of the CPC from centromeres to the spindle midzone. These findings highlight principles of mitotic checkpoint control: when bipolar chromosome attachment is reached in mitosis, the checkpoint is satisfied, but still active and responsive to loss of tension. Mitotic checkpoint inactivation at anaphase onset is required to prevent checkpoint re-engagement when sister chromatids split.     

Tethering Sister Centromeres to Each Other Suggests the Spindle Checkpoint Detects Stretch within the Kinetochore

The spindle checkpoint ensures that newly born cells receive one copy of each chromosome by preventing chromosomes from segregating until they are all correctly attached to the spindle. The checkpoint monitors tension to distinguish between correctly aligned chromosomes and those with both sisters attached to the same spindle pole. Tension arises when sister kinetochores attach to and are pulled toward opposite poles, stretching the chromatin around centromeres and elongating kinetochores. We distinguished between two hypotheses for where the checkpoint monitors tension: between the kinetochores, by detecting alterations in the distance between them, or by responding to changes in the structure of the kinetochore itself. To distinguish these models, we inhibited chromatin stretch by tethering sister chromatids together by binding a tetrameric form of the Lac repressor to arrays of the Lac operator located on either side of a centromere. Inhibiting chromatin stretch did not activate the spindle checkpoint; these cells entered anaphase at the same time as control cells that express a dimeric version of the Lac repressor, which cannot cross link chromatids, and cells whose checkpoint has been inactivated. There is no dominant checkpoint inhibition when sister kinetochores are held together: cells expressing the tetrameric Lac repressor still arrest in response to microtubule-depolymerizing drugs. Tethering chromatids together does not disrupt kinetochore function; chromosomes are successfully segregated to opposite poles of the spindle. Our results indicate that the spindle checkpoint does not monitor inter-kinetochore separation, thus supporting the hypothesis that tension is measured within the kinetochore.     

Shugoshin1 may play important roles in separation of homologous chromosomes and sister chromatids during mouse oocyte meiosis

Background

Homologous chromosomes separate in meiosis I and sister chromatids separate in meiosis II, generating haploid gametes. To address the question why sister chromatids do not separate in meiosis I, we explored the roles of Shogoshin1 (Sgo1) in chromosome separation during oocyte meiosis.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Sgo1 function was evaluated by exogenous overexpression to enhance its roles and RNAi to suppress its roles during two meioses of mouse oocytes. Immunocytochemistry and chromosome spread were used to evaluate phenotypes. The exogenous Sgo1 overexpression kept homologous chromosomes and sister chromatids not to separate in meiosis I and meiosis II, respectively, while the Sgo1 RNAi promoted premature separation of sister chromatids.

Conclusions

Our results reveal that prevention of premature separation of sister chromatids in meiosis I requires the retention of centromeric Sgo1, while normal separation of sister chromatids in meiosis II requires loss of centromeric Sgo1.     

Aberrant Transpositions of Maize Double Ds-Like Elements Usually Involve Ds Ends on Sister Chromatids

McClintock's analysis of chromosome-breaking Dissociation (Ds) elements in maize demonstrated that sister chromatids fuse at the position of Ds, forming a dicentric chromosome and an acentric fragment. In tobacco, Ds left and right ends in direct orientation (that is, half a double Ds) are sufficient to promote Activator-dependent marker gene loss. We present here a detailed analysis of germinally inherited rearrangements promoted by "half double Ds" elements and a characterization of rearrangements that involve inversion of the segment between the Ds ends and/or deletion of a segment adjacent to the Ds construct. The results support a model in which chromosome breakage promoted by these elements, and presumably by double Ds elements, involves Ds ends on sister chromatids.     

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.     

THE STRUCTURE OF THE CENTROMERIC REGION OF CHO CHROMOSOMES

CHO chromosomes, prepared for fluorescence microscopy, or for scanning electron microscopy, sometimes show a splitting of the centromere proper into two sister centromeres, with a space between them, while the sister chromatids are joined in the most proximal regions of the chromosome arms. It is suggested that this might represent the final stage of chromatid splitting before the anaphase separation of chromatids.