Analysis of Ipl1-mediated phosphorylation of the Ndc80 kinetochore protein in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Division of Basic Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington 98109, USA.
Genetics (Impact Factor: 4.87). 10/2009; 183(4):1591-5. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.109.109041
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Phosphorylation of the Ndc80 kinetochore protein by the Ipl1/Aurora B kinase reduces its microtubule binding activity in vitro. We found that kinetochore-bound Ndc80 is phosphorylated on Ipl1 sites in vivo, but this phosphorylation is not essential. Instead, we show that additional Ipl1 targets contribute to segregation and the spindle checkpoint.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sport fishermen keep tension on their lines to prevent hooked fish from releasing. A molecular version of this angler's trick, operating at kinetochores, ensures accuracy during mitosis: the mitotic spindle attaches randomly to chromosomes and then correctly bioriented attachments are stabilized due to the tension exerted on them by opposing microtubules. Incorrect attachments, which lack tension, are unstable and release quickly, allowing another chance for biorientation. Stabilization of molecular interactions by tension also occurs in other physiological contexts, such as cell adhesion, motility, hemostasis, and tissue morphogenesis. Here, we review models for the stabilization of kinetochore attachments with an eye toward emerging models for other force-activated systems. Although attention in the mitosis field has focused mainly on one kinase-based mechanism, multiple mechanisms may act together to stabilize properly bioriented kinetochores and some principles governing other tension-sensitive systems may also apply to kinetochores.
    Trends in Genetics 03/2014; · 11.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Studies on budding yeast have exposed the highly conserved mechanisms by which duplicated chromosomes are evenly distributed to daughter cells at the metaphase-anaphase transition. The establishment of proteinaceous bridges between sister chromatids, a function provided by a ring-shaped complex known as cohesin, is central to accurate segregation. It is the destruction of this cohesin that triggers the segregation of chromosomes following their proper attachment to microtubules. Since it is irreversible, this process must be tightly controlled and driven to completion. Furthermore, during meiosis, modifications must be put in place to allow the segregation of maternal and paternal chromosomes in the first division for gamete formation. Here, I review the pioneering work from budding yeast that has led to a molecular understanding of the establishment and destruction of cohesion.
    Genetics 01/2014; 196(1):31-63. · 4.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Proper chromosome segregation during cell division is essential for proliferation, and this is facilitated by kinetochores, large protein complexes assembled on the centromeric region of the chromosomes. Although the sequences of centromeric DNA differ totally among organisms, many components of the kinetochores assembled on centromeres are very well conserved among eukaryotes. To define the identity of centromeres, centromere protein A (CENP-A), which is homologous to canonical histone H3, acts as a landmark for kinetochore assembly. Kinetochores mediate spindle-microtubule attachment and control the movement of chromosomes during mitosis and meiosis. To conduct faithful chromosome segregation, kinetochore assembly and microtubule attachment are elaborately regulated. Here we review the current understanding of the composition, assembly, functions and regulation of kinetochores revealed mainly through studies on fission and budding yeasts. Moreover, because recent cumulative evidence suggests the importance of the regulation of the orientation of kinetochore-microtubule attachment, which differs distinctly between mitosis and meiosis, we focus especially on the molecular mechanisms underlying this regulation.
    FEMS microbiology reviews 10/2013; · 13.81 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 21, 2014