Search

SummaryCdc48 (p97/VCP) is a AAA-ATPase that can extract ubiquitinated proteins from their binding partners and channel substrates to the proteasome. A fission yeast cdc48 mutant (cdc48-353) shows low levels of the cohesin protease, separase, and pronounced chromosome segregation defects in mitosis. Separase initiates chromosome segregation when its binding partner securin is ubiquitinated and degraded. The low separase levels in the cdc48-353 mutant have been attributed to a failure to extract ubiquitinated securin from separase resulting in co-degradation of separase along with securin. If true, this establishes Cdc48 as a key regulator of mitosis. In contrast, we show here that low separase levels in the cdc48-353 mutant are independent of mitosis. Moreover, we find no evidence of enhanced separase degradation in the mutant. Instead, we suggest that the cdc48-353 mutant uncovers specific requirements for separase translation. Our results highlight a need to better understand how this key mitotic enzyme is synthesized.

Cdc48 (p97/VCP) is a AAA-ATPase that can extract ubiquitinated proteins from their binding partners and can cooperate with the proteasome for their degradation. A fission yeast cdc48 mutant (cdc48-353) shows low levels of the cohesin protease, separase, and pronounced chromosome segregation defects in mitosis. Separase initiates chromosome segregation when its binding partner securin is ubiquitinated and degraded. The low separase levels in the cdc48-353 mutant have been attributed to a failure to extract ubiquitinated securin from separase, resulting in co-degradation of separase along with securin. If true, Cdc48 would be important in mitosis. In contrast, we show here that low separase levels in the cdc48-353 mutant are independent of mitosis. Moreover, we find no evidence of enhanced separase degradation in the mutant. Instead, we suggest that the cdc48-353 mutant uncovers specific requirements for separase translation. Our results highlight a need to better understand how this key mitotic enzyme is synthesized. Virginia Tech Open Access Subvention Fund; NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences [R35GM119723]; German Academic Ex-change Service (DAAD) Published version We thank Tatiana Boluarte for help with yeast strain construction; Michael Boddy, Peter Espenshade, Yoshinori Watanabe, and Mitsuhiro Yanagida for providing yeast strains; Susan Forsburg for providing plasmids; Shiv Grewal for generously providing resources to establish radioactive labeling; Andrea Ciliberto, Julia Kamenz, and all members of the Hauf Lab for critical reading of the manuscript; as well as the Virginia Tech Open Access Subvention Fund for subsidizing article processing charges. This work was supported by the NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences under award R35GM119723. J.M. acknowledges support by the German Academic Ex-change Service (DAAD) .

The separation of chromosomes in anaphase is a precarious step in the cell cycle. The separation is irreversible, and any error can lead to cell death or genetic instability. Chromosome separation is controlled by the protease separase. Here we discuss recent work that has revealed additional layers of separase regulation and has deepened our understanding of how separase activation is coordinated with other events of mitotic exit.

The mitotic checkpoint (also called spindle assembly checkpoint) is a signaling pathway that ensures faithful chromosome segregation. Mitotic checkpoint proteins inhibit the anaphase-promoting complex (APC/C) and its activator Cdc20 to prevent precocious anaphase. Checkpoint signaling leads to a complex of APC/C, Cdc20, and checkpoint proteins, in which the APC/C is inactive. In principle, this final product of the mitotic checkpoint can be obtained via different pathways, whose relevance still needs to be fully ascertained experimentally. Here, we use mathematical models to compare the implications on checkpoint response of the possible pathways leading to APC/C inhibition. We identify a previously unrecognized funneling effect for Cdc20, which favors Cdc20 incorporation into the inhibitory complex and therefore promotes checkpoint activity. Furthermore, we find that the presence or absence of one specific assembly reaction determines whether the checkpoint remains functional at elevated levels of Cdc20, which can occur in cancer cells. Our results reveal the inhibitory logics behind checkpoint activity, predict checkpoint efficiency in perturbed situations, and could inform molecular strategies to treat malignancies that exhibit Cdc20 overexpression., Author summary Cell division is a fundamental event in the life of cells. It requires that a mother cell gives rise to two daughters which carry the same genetic material of their mother. Thus, during each cell cycle the genetic material needs to be replicated, compacted into chromosomes and redistributed to the two daughter cells. Any mistake in chromosome segregation would attribute the wrong number of chromosomes to the progeny. Hence, the process of chromosome segregation is closely watched by a surveillance mechanism known as the mitotic checkpoint. The molecular players of the checkpoint pathway are well known: we know both the input (ie, the species to be inhibited and their inhibitors), and the output (ie, the inhibited species). However, we do not exactly know the path that leads from the former to the latter. In this manuscript, we use a mathematical approach to explore the properties of plausible mitotic checkpoint networks. We find that seemingly similar circuits show very different behaviors for high levels of the protein targeted by the mitotic checkpoint, Cdc20. Interestingly, this protein is often overexpressed in cancer cells. For physiological levels of Cdc20, instead, all the models we have analyzed are capable to mount an efficient response. We find that this is due to a series of consecutive protein-protein binding reactions that funnel Cdc20 towards its inhibited state. We call this the funneling effect. Our analysis helps understanding the inhibitory logics underlying the checkpoint, and proposes new concepts that could be applied to other inhibitory pathways.

To quantify cell cycle-dependent fluctuations on a proteome-wide scale, we performed integrative analysis of the proteome and phosphoproteome during the four major phases of the cell cycle in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. In highly synchronized cells, we identified 3753 proteins and 3682 phosphorylation events and relatively quantified 65% of the data across all phases. Quantitative changes during the cell cycle were infrequent and weak in the proteome but prominent in the phosphoproteome. Protein phosphorylation peaked in mitosis, where the median phosphorylation site occupancy was 44%, about 2-fold higher than in other phases. We measured copy numbers of 3178 proteins, which together with phosphorylation site stoichiometry enabled us to estimate the absolute amount of protein-bound phosphate, as well as its change across the cell cycle. Our results indicate that 23% of the average intracellular ATP is utilized by protein kinases to phosphorylate their substrates to drive regulatory processes during cell division. Accordingly, we observe that phosphate transporters and phosphate-metabolizing enzymes are phosphorylated and therefore likely to be regulated in mitosis.

The spindle assembly checkpoint is a conserved mitotic signalling pathway that ensures the equal segregation of chromosomes to daughter cells. Despite intensive work in many model organisms, key features of this safety mechanism remain unexplained. In the present review, I briefly summarize advances made in the last few years, and then focus on unexplored corners of this signalling pathway.

The eukaryotic spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) delays anaphase in the presence of chromosome attachment errors. Bub3 has been reported to be required for SAC activity in all eukaryotes examined so far. We find that Bub3, unlike its binding partner Bub1, is not essential for the SAC in fission yeast. As Bub3 is needed for the efficient kinetochore localization of Bub1, and of Mad1, Mad2 and Mad3, this implies that most SAC proteins do not need to be enriched at the kinetochores for the SAC to function. We find that Bub3 is also dispensable for shugoshin localization to the centromeres, which is the second known function of Bub1. Instead, Bub3, together with Bub1, has a specific function in promoting the conversion from chromosome mono-orientation to bi-orientation.

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.

The kinesin-8 family is unique among kinesins in that its members have the ability both to walk along microtubules and to specifically influence the dynamics of microtubule plus-ends. This capacity is used to regulate microtubule length and dynamic behavior. Kif18A is the most studied member of the human kinesin-8 family. Its mRNA – and in some cases the protein – has been found elevated in several cancers and this correlates with poor prognosis. However, there is little evidence to date that these high levels actively promote tumorigenesis. Because Kif18A abundance is higher in mitotic cells, the increased abundance may reflect a higher percentage of proliferative cells. Reduction of Kinesin-8 delays cells in mitosis and perturbs microtubule dynamics. Inhibitors of Kinesin-8 may therefore influence the proliferative capacity or may impair the migratory potential of cancer cells. These ideas remain to be tested.

Shugoshin (Sgo) proteins constitute a conserved protein family defined as centromeric protectors of Rec8-containing cohesin complexes in meiosis [1–4]. In vertebrate mitosis, Scc1/Rad21-containing cohesin complexes are also protected at centromeres because arm cohesin, but not centromeric cohesin, is largely dissociated in pro- and prometaphase [5, 6]. The dissociation process is dependent on the activity of polo-like kinase (Plk1) and partly dependent on Aurora B [7–9]. Recently, it has been demonstrated that vertebrate shugoshin is required for preserving centromeric cohesion during mitosis [10]; however, it was not addressed whether human shugoshin protects cohesin itself. Here, we show that the persistence of human Scc1 at centromeres in mitosis is indeed dependent on human Sgo1. In fission yeast, Sgo localization depends on Bub1, a conserved spindle checkpoint protein, which is enigmatically also required for chromosome congression during prometaphase in vertebrate cells. We demonstrate that human Sgo1 fails to localize at centromeres in Bub1-repressed cells, and centromeric cohesion is significantly loosened. Remarkably, in these cells, Sgo1 relocates to chromosomes all along their length and provokes ectopic protection from dissociation of Scc1 on chromosome arms. These results reveal a hitherto concealed role for human Bub1 in defining the persistent cohesion site of mitotic chromosomes.

Sister chromatid separation in anaphase depends on the removal of cohesin complexes from chromosomes [1]. In vertebrates, the bulk of cohesin is already removed from chromosome arms during prophase and prometaphase [2, 3], whereas cohesin remains at centromeres until metaphase, when cohesin is cleaved by the protease separase [3, 4]. In unperturbed mitoses, arm cohesion nevertheless persists throughout metaphase and is principally sufficient to maintain sister chromatid cohesion [5]. How arm cohesion is maintained until metaphase is unknown. Here we show that small amounts of cohesin can be detected in the interchromatid region of metaphase chromosome arms. If prometaphase is prolonged by treatment of cells with microtubule poisons, these cohesin complexes dissociate from chromosome arms, and arm cohesion is dissolved. If cohesin dissociation in prometaphase-arrested cells is prevented by depletion of Plk1 or inhibition of Aurora B, arm cohesion is maintained. These observations imply that, in unperturbed mitoses, small amounts of cohesin maintain arm cohesion until metaphase. When cells lacking Plk1 and Aurora B activity enter anaphase, chromatids lose cohesin. This loss is prevented by proteasome inhibitors, implying that it depends on separase activation. Separase may therefore be able to cleave cohesin at centromeres and on chromosome arms., Research in the laboratory of C.T. is supported by the Dirección General de Investigación del Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnologı́a (Project BMC2001-2195). I.S. and T.H. are supported by fellowships from the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), respectively. Research in the laboratory of J.-M.P. is supported by Boehringer Ingelheim, Wiener Wirtschaftsförderungsfonds (WWFF), and EMBO.

The proper segregation of sister chromatids in mitosis depends on bipolar attachment of all chromosomes to the mitotic spindle. We have identified the small molecule Hesperadin as an inhibitor of chromosome alignment and segregation. Our data imply that Hesperadin causes this phenotype by inhibiting the function of the mitotic kinase Aurora B. Mammalian cells treated with Hesperadin enter anaphase in the presence of numerous monooriented chromosomes, many of which may have both sister kinetochores attached to one spindle pole (syntelic attachment). Hesperadin also causes cells arrested by taxol or monastrol to enter anaphase within

In yeast, anaphase depends on cohesin cleavage. How anaphase is controlled in vertebrates is unknown because their cohesins dissociate from chromosomes before anaphase. We show that residual amounts of the cohesin SCC1 remain associated with human centromeres until the onset of anaphase when a similarly small amount of SCC1 is cleaved. In Xenopus extracts, SCC1 cleavage depends on the anaphase-promoting complex and separin. Separin immunoprecipitates are sufficient to cleave SCC1, indicating that separin is associated with a protease activity. Separin activation coincides with securin destruction and partial separin cleavage, suggesting that several mechanisms regulate separin activity. We propose that in vertebrates, a cleavage-independent pathway removes cohesin from chromosome arms during prophase, whereas a separin-dependent pathway cleaves centromeric cohesin at the metaphase–anaphase transition.

Kinases of the Aurora family are essential for the proper execution of mitosis in eukaryotes, and Aurora inhibitors are in clinical trials as anticancer drugs. We applied site-specific quantitative phosphoproteomics in conjunction with chemical inhibition of Aurora to identify mitotic Aurora substrates in fission yeast on a proteome-wide scale. We detected 8000 phosphorylation events, of which we assigned almost 6000 to a specific residue; 220 were reduced in cells exposed to the Aurora inhibitor. After controlling for unspecific effects of the inhibitor, we classified 70 sites (on 42 proteins) as probable targets of Aurora, which enabled refinement of the consensus sequence for phosphorylation by Aurora. Several of the substrate candidates were known targets of Aurora, validating the approach, but most represented newly detected Aurora substrates. The involvement of these Aurora substrates in diverse aspects of chromatin dynamics suggests that in addition to its established role in controlling chromosome compaction and attachment to the mitotic spindle, Aurora influences other aspects of chromatin architecture and function during mitosis.

This Podcast features conversations with authors of studies on cell cycle–dependent protein phosphorylation that appear in the 28 June 2011 issue of Science Signaling and the 24 June 2011 issue of Science . The senior author of the Science Signaling Research Article by Koch et al . describes her group’s identification of substrates of the kinase Aurora, which is required for mitosis throughout eukaryotes, and the implications of these findings in light of the recent development of Aurora inhibitors for treating cancer. Authors of a Research Report by Keck et al . that appears in Science discuss their phosphoproteomic analysis of centrosomal proteins that are phosphorylated during mitosis. Given the conserved nature of many of the proteins that control mitosis, both studies have important implications for understanding the dynamics of protein phosphorylation, and therefore regulation, during the cell cycle.

Fission yeast shugoshin Sgo1 is meiosis specific and cooperates with protein phosphatase 2A to protect centromeric cohesin at meiosis I. The other shugoshin-like protein Sgo2, which requires the heterochromatin protein Swi6/HP1 for full viability, plays a crucial role for proper chromosome segregation at both mitosis and meiosis; however, the underlying mechanisms are totally elusive. We here demonstrate that, unlike Sgo1, Sgo2 is dispensable for centromeric protection of cohesin. Instead, Sgo2 interacts with Bir1/Survivin and promotes Aurora kinase complex localization to the pericentromeric region, to correct erroneous attachment of kinetochores and thereby enable tension-generating attachment. Forced localization of Bir1 to centromeres partly restored the defects of sgo2Δ. This newly identified interaction of shugoshin with Survivin is conserved between mitosis and meiosis and presumably across eukaryotes. We propose that ensuring bipolar attachment of kinetochores is the primary role of shugoshin and the role of cohesion protection might have codeveloped to facilitate this process.

Kinetochores are the major point of contact between spindle microtubules and chromosomes. They are assemblies of more than 50 different proteins and take part in regulating and controlling their own interaction with the spindle. We review recent advance in understanding how kinetochores are properly placed onto the chromosome, and how their interaction with the microtubules of the spindle is regulated. Kinetochore orientation in meiosis I shows some particular features, and we also discuss similarities and differences between mitosis and meiosis I.

Cohesin is a protein complex that is required to hold sister chromatids together. Cleavage of the Scc1 subunit of cohesin by the protease separase releases the complex from chromosomes and thereby enables the separation of sister chromatids in anaphase. In vertebrate cells, the bulk of cohesin dissociates from chromosome arms already during prophase and prometaphase without cleavage of Scc1. Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) and Aurora-B are required for this dissociation process, and Plk1 can phosphorylate the cohesin subunits Scc1 and SA2 in vitro, consistent with the possibility that cohesin phosphorylation by Plk1 triggers the dissociation of cohesin from chromosome arms. However, this hypothesis has not been tested yet, and in budding yeast it has been found that phosphorylation of Scc1 by the Polo-like kinase Cdc5 enhances the cleavability of cohesin, but does not lead to separase-independent dissociation of cohesin from chromosomes. To address the functional significance of cohesin phosphorylation in human cells, we have searched for phosphorylation sites on all four subunits of cohesin by mass spectrometry. We have identified numerous mitosis-specific sites on Scc1 and SA2, mutated them, and expressed nonphosphorylatable forms of both proteins stably at physiological levels in human cells. The analysis of these cells lines, in conjunction with biochemical experiments in vitro, indicate that Scc1 phosphorylation is dispensable for cohesin dissociation from chromosomes in early mitosis but enhances the cleavability of Scc1 by separase. In contrast, our data reveal that phosphorylation of SA2 is essential for cohesin dissociation during prophase and prometaphase, but is not required for cohesin cleavage by separase. The similarity of the phenotype obtained after expression of nonphosphorylatable SA2 in human cells to that seen after the depletion of Plk1 suggests that SA2 is the critical target of Plk1 in the cohesin dissociation pathway.