Do Plant Cells Secrete Exosomes Derived from Multivesicular Bodies?

Multivesicular bodies (MVBs) are spherical endosomal organelles containing small vesicles formed by inward budding of the limiting membrane into the endosomal lumen. In mammalian red cells and cells of immune system, MVBs fuse with the plasma membrane in an exocytic manner, leading to release their contents including internal vesicles into the extracellular space. These released vesicles are termed exosomes. Transmission electron microscopy studies have shown that paramural vesicles situated between the plasma membrane and the cell wall occur in various cell wall-associated processes and are similar to exosomes both in location and in morphology. Our recent studies have revealed that MVBs and paramural vesicles proliferate when cell wall appositions are rapidly deposited beneath fungal penetration attempts or during plugging of plasmodesmata between hypersensitive cells and their intact neighboring cells. This indicates a potential secretion of exosome-like vesicles into the extracellular space by fusion of MVBs with the plasma membrane. This MVB-mediated secretion pathway was proposed on the basis of pioneer studies of MVBs and paramural vesicles in plants some forty years ago. Here, we recall the attention to the occurrence of MVB-mediated secretion of exosomes in plants.Key Words: cell wall, endocytosis, endosome, exocytosis, exosome, multivesicular body, paramural bodyMultivesicular bodies (MVBs) are spherical endosomal organelles containing a number of small vesicles formed by inward budding of the limiting membrane into the endosomal lumen.¹ MVBs contain endocytosed cargoes and deliver them into lysosomal/vacuolar compartments for degradation. They also incorporate newly synthesized proteins destined for lysosomal/vacuolar compartments.² In mammalian cells of hematopoietic origin, endosomal MVBs function in removal of endocytosed surface proteins in an exocytic manner. They are redirected to the plasma membrane, where they release their contents including internal vesicles into the extracellular space by membrane fusion. The released vesicles are termed exosomes.³ During reticulocyte maturation to erythrocyte, a group of surface proteins, such as the transferrin receptor, become obsolete and are discarded via MVB-mediated secretion.³ Time-course transmission electron microscopy (TEM) first revealed that colloidal gold-transferrin was internalized into MVBs via receptor-mediated endocytosis and then transferrin together with its receptor were delivered into the extracellular space via the fusion of MVBs with the plasma membrane of reticulocytes.⁴ Some other cell types of hematopoietic origin, such as activated platelets, cytotoxic T cells and antigen-presenting cells, also secrete exosomes. Exosomes thus may play a role in various physiological processes other than discarding obsolete proteins.³Our recent TEM studies provided ultrastructural evidence on the enhanced vesicle trafficking in barley leaf cells attacked by the biotrophic powdery mildew fungus. Multivesicular compartments including MVBs, intravacuolar MVBs, and paramural bodies turned out to proliferate in intact host cells during formation of cell wall appositions (papilla response), in the hypersensitive response, and during accommodation of haustoria.^5,6 MVBs proliferated in the cytoplasm of haustorium-containing epidermal cells during compatible interactions and near sites of cell wall-associated oxidative microburst either during the papilla response or during the hypersensitive response. Because MVBs in plant cells have been demonstrated to be endosomal compartments,^7–9 they may participate in internalization of nutrients from the apoplast of intact haustorium-containing epidermal cells and sequestration of damaged membranes and deleterious materials originating from the oxidative microburst.^5,6 The presence of intravacuolar MVBs with double limiting membranes (Fig. 1A) indicates an engulfment of MVBs by the tonoplast and a vacuole-mediated autophagy of MVBs.^5,6 MVBs, as prevacuolar compartments in plant cells,⁹ thus probably deliver their contents into the central vacuole via both the fusion with the tonoplast and the engulfment by the tonoplast (Fig. 2A and B). On the other hand, paramural bodies, in which small vesicles are situated between the cell wall and the plasma membrane, were associated with cell wall appositions deposited beneath fungal penetration attempts (Fig. 1B) or around hypersensitive cells including sites of plugged plasmodesmata (Fig. 1C and D).^5,6 Because paramural vesicles are similar to exosomes both in location and in morphology, we speculated that MVBs fuse with the plasma membrane in an exocytic manner to form paramural bodies.^5,6 Endocytosed cell surface materials in endosomal MVBs may be reused and delivered together with newly synthesized materials in Golgi apparatus-derived vesicles to cell wall appositions, which are deposited rapidly to prevent fungal penetration (Fig. 2A) or to contain hypersensitive cell death (Fig. 2B). MVBs thus may be driven along two distinct pathways to deliver their contents into either central vacuole or extracellular space.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Multivesicular compartments in intact cells in barley leaves attacked by the barley powdery mildew fungus. (A) An intravacuolar multivesicular body (MVB) with double limiting membranes in an intact epidermal cell (EC) adjacent to a hypersensitive epidermal cell (EC*). The arrows point to the outer limiting membrane, which is seemingly derived from the tonoplast. Note that neighboring intravacuolar vesicles (in between two arrowheads) may result from degradation of double limiting membranes of intravacuolar MVBs or may be delivered into the vacuole by MVB-fusion with the tonoplast. (B) Paramural vesicles (arrowheads) in a paramural body associated with cell wall appositions (asterisk) deposited by an intact epidermal cell. (C) A multivesicular body (MVB) in contact with a paramural body (PMB) (a nonmedian section) associated with cell wall appositions (asterisk) deposited by an intact mesophyll cell adjacent to a hypersensitive mesophyll cell. Note that cell wall appositions deposit beside an intercellular space (IS). The arrows point to the tonoplast. (D) A paramural body (PMB) associated with cell wall appositions (asterisks) blocking plasmodesmata (in between two arrowheads) at the side of an intact mesophyll cell (MC) underlying a hypersensitive epidermal cell (EC*). The arrows point to the tonoplast. CV, central vacuole; CW, cell wall; MB, microbody. Bars, 1µm.Open in a separate windowFigure 2Hypothetical diagram of delivery of endocytosed cell surface materials via MVBs into the central vacuole or the extracellular space where intact barley cells deposit cell wall appositions. (A) Deposition of cell wall appositions (asterisk) beneath powdery mildew penetration attempts. AGT, appressorial germ tube; PP, penetration peg. (B) Deposition of cell wall appositions (asterisks) against constricted plasmodesmata (PD) between a hypersensitive epidermal cell (EC) penetrated by the powdery mildew fungus and an underlying mesophyll cell (MC). H, haustorium. Arrows and numbers show pathways of vesicle trafficking. 1, Secretion of Golgi-derived vesicles containing newly synthesized materials; G, Golgi body; TGN, trans-Golgi network; 2, Endocytosis of cell surface materials from coated pits (coated open circles) via coated vesicles (coated circles) to multivesicular bodies (MVB); 3, Delivery of endocytosed materials for degradation inside the central vacuole (CV) via membrane fusion between MVBs and the tonoplast (T); small broken circles, vesicles in degradation; 4, Delivery of endocytosed materials for degradation inside the central vacuole via engulfment of MVBs by the tonoplast; large broken circles; MVB limiting membranes in degradation; 5, delivery of endocytosed materials into the extracellular space for deposition of cell wall appositions (asterisks) via membrane fusion between MVBs and the plasma membrane (PM). CW, cell wall; PMB, paramural body. PD0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 represent stages of plugging plasmodesmata. PD0, open plasmodesmata between two intact mesophyll cells (MC) subjacent to the hypersensitive epidermal cell (EC); PD1, constriction of plasmodesmata by callose (grey dots) deposition at plasmodesmal neck region; PD2, constricted plasmodesmata associated with plasmodesma-targeted secretion; PD3, further blocking of plasmodesmata by deposition of cell wall appositions; PD4, completely blocked plasmodesmata.Earlier than the discovery in animal cell systems,⁴ it was proposed in two independent papers in 1967 that the fusion of MVBs with the plasma membrane might result in the release of small vesicles into the extracellular space in fungi and in higher plants.^10,11 Several lines of evidence support the occurrence of MVB-mediated secretion of exosome-like vesicles in plants. First, vesicles of the same morphology as MVB internal vesicles have been observed in extracellular spaces or paramural spaces in various types of plant cells in various plant species by TEM.¹² An early study on endocytosis by soybean protoplasts also showed small extracellular vesicles attaching on the plasma membrane.⁸ Second, cooccurrence of MVBs and paramural vesicles has been observed in processes of cell proliferation, cell differentiation, and cell response to abiotic and biotic stress. Examples are cell plate formation,^13,14 secondary wall thickening,^15,16 cold hardness,^17,18 and deposition of cell wall appositions upon pathogen attack.^5,6,19–21 Third, identical molecular components, such as arabinogalactan proteins^22,23 and peroxidases,⁶ have been immunolocalized in both MVBs and paramural bodies. Despite these pieces of evidence, a conclusive demonstration of MVB-mediated secretion of exosomes in plants requires further exploration.The presently available experimental systems, approaches, and membrane markers may allow future demonstration of MVB-mediated secretion of exosomes in plants. Recent in vivo real-time observation and colocalization of cell surface and endosomal markers have already revealed that endosomes filled with endocytosed preexisting cell wall and plasma membrane materials are rapidly delivered to cytokinetic spaces to form cell plates in dividing tobacco, Arabidopsis, and maize cells.²⁴ Because TEM observed paramural bodies attaching to cell plates¹³ and MVBs in the vicinity of cell plates during all stages of cell plate formation,^14,25,26 MVBs and paramural bodies may participate in delivery of endocytosed building blocks to cell plates. Jiang''s and Robinson''s labs together developed a transgenic tobacco BY-2 cell line stably expressing a YFP-labeled vacuolar sorting receptor protein and antibodies against the vacuolar sorting receptor protein localized to the limiting membrane of MVBs.⁹ These tools together with live cell imaging and immunoelectron microscopy may allow visualization of MVB-fusion to the new plasma membrane, of vacuolar sorting receptors in both the limiting membrane of MVBs and the new plasma membrane, and of identical cell plate components in both internal vesicles of MVBs and paramural vesicles.In spite of obvious differences in plant and animal cytokinesis, the generation of cell plates by cell-plate-directed fusion of endosomes resembles the plugging of midbody canals by midbody-directed endosomes to separate daughter cells at the terminal phase of animal cytokinesis.²⁷ Likely, functional similarities of the fusion between endosomal MVBs and the plasma membrane to eliminate unwanted cell contents may also exist in maturation of mammalian red blood cells and plant sieve elements in the sense that the fusion of MVBs with the plasma membrane may occur during maturation of the latter.²⁸ On the other hand, although plant cells may secrete MVB-derived exosomes in defense response upon pathogen attack,^5,6 plant cell walls rule out the direct intercellular communication during the immune response mediated by exosomes in the circulation of mammals.³ In contrast, plasmodesma-directed secretion of exosomes would block the cell-to-cell communication between hypersensitive cells and their neighboring cells during hypersensitive response.⁵ Further exploration will lead us to a better understanding of similarities and differences of exosome secretion between plants and animals.     

Partial protein domains: evolutionary insights and bioinformatics challenges

Protein domains are generally thought to correspond to units of evolution. New research raises questions about how such domains are defined with bioinformatics tools and sheds light on how evolution has enabled partial domains to be viable.With the rapid expansion in the number of determined protein sequences - over 92 million in UniProt in March 2015 - an ever-increasing number of biologists are using bioinformatics tools for annotation of these sequences. One widely used strategy is to identify occurrences of Pfam families within the sequence of interest [1]. A Pfam family is a multiple sequence alignment of the occurrences of a particular domain both in different species and in different regions of the same protein. The concept underpinning Pfam is that proteins typically comprise one or more domains (regions), each of which is an evolutionary unit that generally has a well-defined biological function. A significant sequence similarity between a query protein and a Pfam family provides the basis for annotations. Two recent articles [2,3] in Genome Biology evaluate the implications of having the query sequence only matching part of a Pfam family, which is an intriguing finding, given that a Pfam family is considered to be an evolutionary unit.     

Spatial and temporal population genetic structure of four northeastern Pacific littorinid gastropods: the effect of mode of larval development on variation at one mitochondrial and two nuclear DNA markers

We investigated the effect of development mode on the spatial and temporal population genetic structure of four littorinid gastropod species. Snails were collected from the same three sites on the west coast of Vancouver Island, Canada in 1997 and again in 2007. DNA sequences were obtained for one mitochondrial gene, cytochrome b ( Cyt b ), and for up to two nuclear genes, heat shock cognate 70 ( HSC70 ) and aminopeptidase N intron ( APN54 ). We found that the mean level of genetic diversity and long-term effective population sizes ( N _e) were significantly greater for two species, Littorina scutulata and L. plena , that had a planktotrophic larval stage than for two species, Littorina sitkana and L. subrotundata , that laid benthic egg masses which hatched directly into crawl-away juveniles. Predictably, two poorly dispersing species, L. sitkana and L. subrotundata , showed significant spatial genetic structure at an 11- to 65-km geographical scale that was not observed in the two planktotrophic species. Conversely, the two planktotrophic species had more temporal genetic structure over a 10-year interval than did the two direct-developing species and showed highly significant temporal structure for spatially pooled samples. The greater temporal genetic variation of the two planktotrophic species may have been caused by their high fecundity, high larval dispersal, and low but spatially correlated early survivorship. The sweepstakes-like reproductive success of the planktotrophic species could allow a few related females to populate hundreds of kilometres of coastline and may explain their substantially larger temporal genetic variance but lower spatial genetic variance relative to the direct-developing species.     

Induction as well as suppression: How aphid saliva may exert opposite effects on plant defense

Aphids ingest from the sieve tubes and by doing so they are confronted with sieve-tube occlusion mechanisms, which are part of the plant defense system. Because aphids are able to feed over longer periods, they must be able to prevent occlusion of the sieve plates induced by stylet penetration. Occlusion probably depends upon Ca²⁺-influx into the sieve element (SE) lumen. Aphid behavior, biochemical tests and in vitro experiments demonstrated that aphid''s watery saliva, injected during initial phase of a stylet penetration into the SE lumen, contains proteins that are able to bind calcium and prevent calcium-induced SE occlusion. In this addendum, we speculate on the consequences of saliva secretion for plant resistance. (a) The release of elicitors (e.g., oligogalacturonides) due to cell wall digestion by gel saliva enzymes may increase the resistance of cortex, phloem parenchyma cells and companion cells (CC) around the puncture site. (b) Ca²⁺-binding by aphid watery saliva may suppress the local defense responses in the SEs. (c) Signaling cascades triggered in CCs may lead to systemic resistance.Key words: aphid saliva, calcium binding, elicitor, oligogalacturonides, local plant defense, systemic plant defense, phloem translocation, aphid/plant-interactionAfter having penetrated the sieve-element (SE) plasma membrane, aphids encounter unspecific wound-induced occlusion reactions to prevent sap leakage.^1–4 Occlusion mechanisms by callose, structural P-proteins and forisomes are likely induced by a sudden calcium influx into the sieve-tube lumen.⁵ Calcium possibly enters the sieve-tube lumen through the stylet wounding-site in the plasma membrane and/or stretch-activated calcium-channels.^6–8 After SE penetration, aphids secrete watery saliva that contains calcium-binding proteins presumed to sabotage sieve-plate occlusion.^9,10We demonstrated that Megoura viciae (Buckton) is most likely able to prevent or reduce sieve-tube occlusion in Vicia faba by secretion of watery saliva. By in vitro confrontation of isolated forisomes, protein bodies responsible for sieve-tube occlusion in Fabaceaen,⁵ and watery saliva concentrate, we were able to show that salivary proteins convey forisomes from a dispersed (+Ca²⁺) into a condensed (−Ca²⁺) state.¹⁰ The dispersed forisome functions in vivo as a plug, leading to stoppage of mass flow.⁵This in vitro evidence was corroborated by aphid behavior in response to leaf tip burning, which triggers an electrical potential wave (EPW) along the sieve tubes. Such an EPW induces Ca²⁺-influx and corresponding SE occlusion along the pathway.¹¹ The passage of the EPW is associated with a prolonged secretion of watery saliva of aphids. This is interpreted as an attempt to unplug the SEs by calcium binding.¹⁰ Similar behavioral changes in response to leaf-tip burning were observed in an extended set of aphid/plant species combinations, indicating that attempted sabotage of sieve-tube occlusion by aphid saliva is a widespread phenomenon (unpublished).Aphid feeding was reported to induce local (on the same leaf) and systemic (in distant leaves) reactions of the host plant. The local response led to enhanced feeding,^12–14 while the systemic response showed reduced ingestion and extended periods of watery saliva secretion in sieve tubes distant from previous feeding sites.^12–14 These contrasting observations were described to be independent of the aphid species.¹³ The question arises how aphids induce these seemingly opposite plant responses?The aphid stylet pushing forward through cortical and vascular tissue is surrounded by a sheath of gel saliva, secreted into the apoplast.^15,16 Gel saliva contains cellulase and pectinase that amongst others produce oligogalacturonides (OGs) along the stylet sheath by digestion of cell wall material.^17,18 Usually, OGs act as elicitors, triggering a variety of plant responses against pathogens and insects in which the activation of calcium channels is involved.^19,20 This seems to conflict with a suppression of resistance as observed for the impact of watery saliva in SEs.¹⁰ We will make an attempt to explain this paradoxon.OG induced defense responses may be triggered in all cell types adjacent to the salivary sheath (Fig. 1). Because watery saliva is only secreted briefly into these cells, which are punctured for orientation purposes (Hewer et al., unpublished), it seems unlikely that OG induced defense is suppressed here by saliva-mediated calcium binding.¹⁵ The diffusion range of OGs may be restricted to the close vicinity of the stylet sheath leading to an enhanced regional defense with a limited sphere of action (Fig. 1). Because the settling distance of aphids is restricted by their body size (1–10 mm),²¹ aphids feeding on the same leaf are probably hardly confronted with the regional defense induced by another aphid (Fig. 1). Otherwise, they would show an increased number of test probes before first phloem activity, as described for volatile mediated plant defense in cortex cells.¹³ Circumstantial support in favor of our hypothesis is provided by production of hydrogen peroxide in the apoplast,²² which is most likely associated with the action of OGs.²² Observations of hydrogen peroxide production during aphid (Macrosiphum euphorbiae) infestation of tomato in a limited area along the leaf veins, the preferred feeding sites of this species, indicate a locally restricted defense response (Fig. 1 and ​and22).⁴ The question arises why the cell signals are not spread via plasmodesmata to adjacent cells to induce resistance in a more extended leaf area? Dissemination of the signals may be prevented by closure of plasmodesmata (Fig. 1) through callose deposition,^23,24 which is most likely directly coupled with calcium influx induced by OGs,²⁵ by apoplastic hydrogen peroxide and to a minor extent by stylet puncture (Fig. 2).^7,26Open in a separate windowFigure 1Hypothetical model on how stylet penetration induces and suppresses plant defense. Sheath saliva (light blue) that envelopes the stylet during propagation through the apoplast contains cellulase and pectinase,^17,18 enzymes producing elicitors (e.g., oligogalacturonides (oGs)) by local cell wall digestion.¹⁹ Parenchyma cells adjacent to the sheath may develop a defense response owing to signaling cascades triggered by oG-mediated Ca²⁺-influx.¹⁹ Together with a Ca²⁺-dependent transient closure of plasmodesmata by callose (black crosses),^23,24 the focused production of oGs may cause a defense response with a limited sphere of action (red—strong, brown—light, green—none). This restricted domain of defense may not be perceived by other aphids, since the settling distance is limited by the aphid body size. Nearby aphids do not show any sign of defense perception in their probing and feeding behavior.¹⁴ Signaling cascade compounds may be channeled from parenchyma cells to CCs (dashed yellow arrows), where they are subsequently released into the SEs. There they may act as long-distance systemic defense components (grey arrows). In contrast to the parenchyma domain (where only minor amounts of watery saliva are secreted), Ca²⁺-mediated reactions such as defense cascades and sieve-plate (SP) occlusion are suppressed in SEs by large amounts of watery saliva. The left aphid penetrates an SE and injects watery saliva (red cloud; ws) that inhibits local sieve-plate occlusion and,¹⁰ most likely, is transported by mass flow (black arrow) to adjacent SEs,²⁷ where occlusion is impeded as well. A short-distance systemic spread over a few centimeters may explain local suppression of plant defense resulting in a higher rate of colonization. Salivary proteins or their degradation products may serve as systemic defense signals as well (grey arrows), but may also diffuse via the PPUs into CCs where additional systemic signals are induced (yellow arrows).Open in a separate windowFigure 2Hypothetical involvement of Ca²⁺-channels in aphid-induced cell defense (detail). During probing with its stylet the aphid secretes gel saliva as a lubrication substance (light blue) into the apoplast.¹⁵ on the way to the sieve tubes, aphids briefly puncture most non-phloem cells (red) after which the puncturing sites are sealed with gel saliva.^7,16 Gel saliva also most likely prevents the influx of apoplastic calcium into pierced sieve elements (green) by sealing the penetration site.⁷ Watery saliva (red cloud), injected into the SE lumen,⁹ contains proteins which bind calcium ions (marked by X) that enter the SE via e.g., mechano sensitive Ca²⁺-channels activated by stylet penetration (blue tons).¹⁰ In this way, aphids suppress SE occlusion and activation of local defense cascades. In the parenchyma cells around the gel saliva sheath, a small cylindrical zone of defense may be induced by oligogalacturonides (oGs; brown triangles) produced by cell wall (grey) digestion.^17–19 Perceived by unknown receptor proteins (R; e.g., a receptor like protein kinase)³⁴ and kinase mediation (black dotted and dashed arrows), oGs lead to a Ca²⁺-influx through kinase activated calcium channels (orange tons).²⁵ Around the probing site, aphids apparently induce the production of superoxide by Ca²⁺-induced activation of the NADPH oxidase (violet box) and its following conversion to hydrogen peroxide (red spots) is mediated by superoxide dismutase (SoD).⁴ Hydrogen peroxide activates Ca²⁺-channels (violet tons) and diffuses through plasma membrane (curled arrows) therefore potentially acting as a intracellular signal.²⁶By contrast, Ca²⁺-influx into SEs, induced by presence of OGs or stylet insertion (Fig. 2), is not expected to trigger local defense given the abundant excretion of Ca²⁺-binding watery saliva.^7,10,25 Watery saliva may spread to down-stream and adjacent SEs through transverse and lateral sieve plates (Fig. 1).^7,27 Aphids puncturing nearby SEs may therefore encounter less severe sieve-plate occlusion which results in facilitated settling and thus in increased population growth. Aggregation of feeding aphids would self-amplify population growth until a certain density is attained. Farther from the colonization site, this effect may be lost due to dilution. Stimulation of aphid feeding by aphid infestation was observed locally on potato by Myzus persicae and M. euphorbiae, respectively, 96 h after infestation.¹³ However, a similar effect was not observed for M. persicae on Arabidopsis thaliana where aphids induced premature leaf senescence and resistance 12 h after infestation,²⁸ possibly induced by OGs.¹⁹As a speculation, OG induced Ca²⁺-influx into parenchyma cells adjacent to the salivary sheath activate Ca²⁺-induced signaling cascades via CaM,^26,29 CDPKs,^30,31 MAPKinases and reactive oxygen species (Fig. 2).³² Systemic resistance, induced by aphid infestation,^12–14 is mediated by unknown compounds such as, e.g., salivary proteins, their degradation products, signal cascade products or volatiles.¹³ Compounds produced in CCs first have to pass the PPUs, while SE signaling elements can be directly transported via mass flow (Fig. 1).The question arises if aphids profit from induced resistance on local (cortex and parenchyma cells) and systemic (distant plant organs) levels as holds for suppression of defense in SEs. Possibly settling and subsequent spread of competing pathogens/herbivores (e.g., fungi or other piercing-sucking insects) are suppressed by induced defense. In this context it is intriguing to understand how aphids cope with the self-induced systemic resistance, which probably lasts over weeks.³³     

Genetic islands of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Streptococcus agalactiae</Emphasis> strains NEM316 and 2603VR and their presence in other Group B Streptococcal strains

Background  

Streptococcus agalactiae (Group B Streptococcus; GBS) is a major contributor to obstetric and neonatal bacterial sepsis. Serotype III strains cause the majority of late-onset sepsis and meningitis in babies, and thus appear to have an enhanced invasive capacity compared with the other serotypes that cause disease predominantly in immunocompromised pregnant women. We compared the serotype III and V whole genome sequences, strains NEM316 and 2603VR respectively, in an attempt to identify genetic attributes of strain NEM316 that might explain the propensity of strain NEM316 to cause late-onset disease in babies. Fourteen putative pathogenicity islands were described in the strain NEM316 whole genome sequence. Using PCR- and targeted microarray- strategies, the presence of these islands were assessed in a diverse strain collection including 18 colonizing isolates from healthy pregnant women, and 13 and 8 invasive isolates from infants with early- and late-onset sepsis, respectively.     

Assembly and disassembly of mammalian chromosome pellicle

By means of indirect double immunofluorescent staining,the coordination of PI antigen and perichromonucleolin(PCN),the constituent of nuclear periphery and nucleolus respectively,in the assembly and disassembly of chromosome pellicle during mitosis was studied.It was found that in 3T3 cells,during mitosis PI antigen began to coat the condensing chromosome surface earlier than PCN did.However,both of them completed their coating on chromosome at approximately the same stage of mitosis,prometaphase metaphase,The dissociation of mitosis,Prometaphase metaphase.The dissociation of PI antigen from chromosome pellicle to participate the formation of nuclear periphery took place also ahead of that of PCN,At early telophase PI antigen had been extensively involved in the formation of nuclear periphery,while PCN remained in association with the surface of decondensing chromosomes.At late telophase,when PI antigen was localized in an fairly well formed nuclear periphery,PCN was in a stage of forming prenucleolar bodies.