|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Report |
Maintaining the proper connection between the centrioles and the pericentriolar matrix requires Drosophila Centrosomin
Correspondence to Jordan W. Raff: j.raff{at}gurdon.cam.ac.uk
Centrosomes consist of two centrioles surrounded by an amorphous pericentriolar matrix (PCM), but it is unknown how centrioles and PCM are connected. We show that the centrioles in Drosophila embryos that lack the centrosomal protein Centrosomin (Cnn) can recruit PCM components but cannot maintain a proper attachment to the PCM. As a result, the centrioles "rocket" around in the embryo and often lose their connection to the nucleus in interphase and to the spindle poles in mitosis. This leads to severe mitotic defects in embryos and to errors in centriole segregation in somatic cells. The Cnn-related protein CDK5RAP2 is linked to microcephaly in humans, but cnn mutant brains are of normal size, and we observe only subtle defects in the asymmetric divisions of mutant neuroblasts. We conclude that Cnn maintains the proper connection between the centrioles and the PCM; this connection is required for accurate centriole segregation in somatic cells but is not essential for the asymmetric division of neuroblasts.
 |
Introduction |
|---|
 TopAbstract Introduction Results and discussionMaterials and methodsReferences |
|---|
Although much is known about the protein composition of the centrosome, it remains unclear how centrosome structure and organization are maintained. In flies, the centrosomal protein Centrosomin (Cnn) is required to recruit several proteins to the centrosome (Megraw et al., 1999, 2001; Vaizel-Ohayon and Schejter, 1999; Terada et al., 2003). In cnn mutant embryos, and in somatic cells lacking Cnn, the centrosomes fail to function as MTOCs during mitosis and anastral spindles assemble through a centrosome-independent pathway. This leads to dramatic mitotic defects in embryos (Megraw et al., 1999; Vaizel-Ohayon and Schejter, 1999) but only to subtle mitotic defects in somatic cells (Megraw et al., 2001; Mahoney et al., 2006), presumably because centrosomes are not essential for cell division in somatic cells (Bettencourt-Dias et al., 2005; Basto et al., 2006).
Cnn is a member of a family of structurally related proteins that have been implicated in organizing MT arrays. In the yeast S. pombe, the Cnn-related protein Mto1 recruits the 
-tubulin complex to several types of MTOCs (Sawin et al., 2004; Venkatram et al., 2004). In human cells, the Cnn-related proteins CDK5RAP2 and Myomegalin/PDE4-DIP are concentrated at centrosomes, but their function is unknown (Verde et al., 2001; Bond et al., 2005). Mutations in the gene encoding CDK5RAP2, however, cause autosomal recessive primary microcephaly, in which the brain is small at birth and thereafter (Bond et al., 2005). The underlying cause of microcephaly is unknown, but it has been proposed that a failure of the centrosomes to function as efficient MTOCs in mitosis might lead to defects in asymmetric neuroblast (NB) divisions during fetal development (Basto et al., 2006; Bond and Woods, 2006; Fish et al., 2006). Here, we have used live confocal imaging to examine how Cnn functions to ensure the proper organization of the centrosome in flies, and to test whether Cnn is required for asymmetric divisions in larval NBs.
|
Results and discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionResults and discussionMaterials and methodsReferences |
|---|
-tubulin ring complex), and GFP- D-TACC. It has previously been shown that Cnn can interact with both the -tubulin ring complex and Aurora A (Terada et al., 2003), but we found no evidence for an interaction between Cnn and D-TACC in coimmunoprecipitation experiments (unpublished data). In wild-type (WT) syncytial embryos, centrioles recruited approximately equal amounts of PCM at all stages of the rapid mitotic cycles, and they remained well centered within the PCM throughout the cell cycle (Fig. 1; Fig. S1; and Videos 1 and 2, available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200704081/DC1). During interphase, the centrioles were always closely associated with the nuclear envelope, whereas in mitosis, they were always closely associated with the spindle poles (Videos 1 and 2). In embryos laid by cnn homozygous females (hereafter, cnn embryos), we were surprised to observe that the centrioles were associated with appreciable amounts of PCM, but they were often not properly centered within it (Fig. 1; Fig. S1; and Videos 1 and 2). In video recordings of cnn embryos, the centrioles appeared to be constantly nucleating PCM but seemed unable to maintain their connection to it. The centrioles often exhibited irregular, stochastic movements, leaving a trail of PCM behind them as they moved away. This PCM trail was most easily seen in cnn embryos expressing GFP–D-TACC (Video 1), as this protein was recruited in particularly large amounts to the centrioles, and large clusters of GFP–D-TACC often remained in the cytoplasm for some time after the centrioles had moved away. Smaller amounts of Aurora A–GFP and Grip75-GFP were recruited to the centrioles (Video 2), and so only small amounts of these proteins remained associated with the centrioles as they moved around the embryo. As a result of this abnormal centriole behavior, the centrioles in cnn embryos often lost their attachment to the nuclear envelope in interphase and to the spindle poles in mitosis. We refer to this behavior of the centrioles as "centriole rocketing" (see the following section).
|
|
The injection of colchicine into cnn embryos also enabled the centrioles to remain associated with the PCM (Fig. 3), suggesting that it is the MT-dependent rocketing of the centrioles that ultimately breaks the link between the centrioles and the PCM in cnn embryos. Intriguingly, however, the injection of colchicine into cnn embryos did not correct the positioning defect of the centrioles within the PCM: whereas the centrioles were usually (>90%) well centered within the PCM in colchicine-injected WT embryos (between 50 and 100 centrioles observed with each of the three different PCM markers; Fig. 3 and Video 6, available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200704081/DC1), they were very rarely centered within the PCM in colchicine-injected cnn embryos (<10%) and were usually positioned at the very edge of the PCM (>100 centrioles observed with each of the three different PCM markers; Fig. 3 and Video 6).
|
Centriole segregation is defective in cnn mutant somatic cells
Maintaining the proper connection between the centrioles and the PCM is clearly crucial in syncytial embryos, as a lack of Cnn results in catastrophic failures in mitosis. In contrast, somatic cells that lack Cnn have few mitotic defects, and cnn mutant flies are viable (Megraw et al., 2001; Mahoney et al., 2006). To test whether Cnn was required to maintain the proper connection between the centrioles and the PCM in somatic cells, we treated third instar larval brain cells with colchicine to depolymerize the MTs and then fixed and stained them to examine the distribution of the centrioles and the PCM. We found that hardly any PCM was detectable around the centrioles in cnn brain cells that had not been treated with colchicine (unpublished data). In cnn cells treated with colchicine, however, considerable amounts of PCM accumulated around the centrioles, but, as in cnn embryos, the centrioles were displaced from the center of the PCM (Fig. S2, available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200704081/DC1).
To further investigate whether the centrioles in cnn somatic cells behaved in the same way as the centrioles in cnn embryos, we examined living third instar larval NBs expressing the centriole marker DSas-4–mRFP and GFP–
-tubulin. In WT NBs entering mitosis, the centrioles were always centered within astral MT arrays, and the centrioles remained tightly associated with the poles of the spindle throughout mitosis (Fig. 4 A).
In contrast, the centrioles in cnn NBs were often not associated with prominent astral MTs and exhibited irregular movements throughout the cell during mitosis. As a consequence, they were often abnormally displaced from the poles of the mitotic spindles (Fig. 4 B). Nevertheless, we could transiently detect astral MTs associated with some of the "rocketing" centrioles in some cnn NBs (Fig. 4 C, arrows; see the next section). In fixed larval cnn NBs, the centrioles were often randomly positioned around the cell (Fig. 4 E), and we noticed that 20–30% of brain cells had either too few or too many centrioles (Fig. 4 F). Taken together, these findings suggest that the centriole behavior is similar in cnn embryos and somatic cells; while these defects do not lead to dramatic errors in somatic cell division, they do lead to errors in centriole segregation. These findings support the hypothesis that centrioles have evolved the ability to recruit PCM to ensure the equal partitioning of the centrioles during cell division, rather than to ensure the efficient assembly of the mitotic spindle (Pickett-Heaps, 1969; Rieder et al., 2001).
|
This asymmetric centrosome behavior appears to be important in male GSCs, as the asymmetric division of these cells is dramatically perturbed in cnn mutants (Yamashita et al., 2003). Although cnn mutant NBs have defects in aligning their spindles with cortical determinants early in mitosis (Megraw et al., 2001), it is not clear that this ultimately leads to failures in asymmetric division: early mitotic spindle alignment defects are often corrected in these cells by the time the cells divide (Cai et al., 2001). To determine whether cnn mutant NBs ultimately divide asymmetrically, we analyzed living WT and cnn third instar larval NBs expressing only GFP–-tubulin.
As reported previously (Rebollo et al., 2007; Rusan and Peifer, 2007), a single, anchored MTOC was usually visible in WT NBs before the entry into mitosis (not depicted). After nuclear envelope breakdown (NEB), however, both centrosomes nucleated prominent arrays of MTs, and spindle assembly occurred primarily by a centrosomal pathway (Fig. 5 A and Video 7, available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200704081/DC1).
As expected, the cells divided asymmetrically to produce a large NB and a small ganglion mother cell (GMC). In most cnn NBs, no prominent MTOC was detectable before NEB, and spindle assembly occurred largely by an acentrosomal pathway (Fig. 5 B and Video 8). Nonetheless, 
95% of cnn NBs ultimately divided asymmetrically (n = 81; Fig. 5 B and Video 8), whereas 4% divided symmetrically (Fig. 5 C and Video 9) and 1% failed in cytokinesis (not depicted). Although this failure rate is modest, we believe it is considerably higher than in WT, as we observed only one symmetric division in >100 WT central brain NBs examined (unpublished data; Basto, R., and C.I. Dix, personal communication).
|
15% of NBs divided symmetrically, whereas 15% failed in cytokinesis; Basto et al., 2006). The much milder defects in asymmetric division that we observe in cnn NBs suggest that centrosomes are partially functional as MTOCs in cnn mutant somatic cells, consistent with our previous observations (Fig. 4 C and Fig. S2). Indeed, we frequently observed relatively well-focused astral MT arrays forming and disassembling in the cytoplasm, and these were often transiently associated with the spindle poles in cnn NBs (Fig. 5 D, arrow; and Video 10, available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200704081/DC1). Taken together, our observations on cnn and DSas-4 mutant NBs reveal that, unlike the situation in male GSCs, the asymmetric behavior of the centrosomes is not essential for the accurate asymmetric division of larval NBs. Nevertheless, mutations in the Drosophila homologues of two of the three human centrosomal proteins implicated in microcephaly do lead to relatively subtle defects in NB divisions in flies. Drosophila cnn and DSas-4 mutants do not have small brains, suggesting that flies are able to compensate for defects in these divisions in a way that perhaps humans cannot.
|
Materials and methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionResults and discussionMaterials and methodsReferences |
|---|
GFP and mRFP fusion proteins
GFP fusions to the following proteins were used in this study: Aurora A–GFP (Lau, J., personal communication), GFP–D-TACC (Lee et al., 2001), Grip75-GFP (Schnorrer et al., 2002), GFP–-tubulin (Grieder et al., 2000), and DSas-4–GFP (Peel et al., 2007). We also generated fusions between mRFP and the full-length fzr cDNA, the PACT domain of D-PLP (Martinez-Campos et al., 2004), and DSas-4 (Basto, R., personal communication). Most of these fusions were subcloned into the pWR-Ubq transformation vector that drives the ubiquitous expression of the fusion protein at moderately high levels. For Grip75-GFP and GFP–-tubulin, we used previously established lines in which the expression of these proteins is under the control of the UASp promoter (Rorth, 1998); we drove their expression in embryos using the maternal 67C -tubulin–GAL4 promoter (Lee et al., 2001), and in brains using the 69B enhancer trap line (Brand and Perrimon, 1993).
Transgenic lines were generated using standard methods. Most studies were performed using the cnnHK21 allele, but we obtained similar results with either the cnnf04547 allele or transheterozygous combinations of the two alleles.
Live imaging of syncytial embryos
Live embryos expressing fluorescent fusion proteins were examined as described previously (Huang and Raff, 1999). The embryos were observed on an ERS spinning disc confocal system (PerkinElmer), mounted on an inverted microscope (Axiovert 200M; Carl Zeiss MicroImaging, Inc.) that was equipped with a charge-coupled device camera (Orca ER; Hamamatsu), using a 63x/1.25 NA objective. For each combination of GFP and mRFP fusions, 4–15 WT and cnn mutant syncytial blastoderm stage embryos were examined. For drug injections, live embryos were injected at the desired stage with 5 mg/ml colchicine (Sigma-Aldrich). All images were captured and made into videos using the Ultraview ERS software (PerkinElmer).
Live imaging of larval NBs
Third instar larval brains were prepared as described previously (Basto et al., 2006), and central brain NBs were followed by time-lapse confocal microscopy as described, with a 100x/1.3 NA objective. 12–20 focal planes spaced by 0.5 µm were acquired every 25 or 45 s (0.5–1 s/frame, respectively). All images shown are maximum intensity projections of z stacks at selected time points.
Immunofluorescence of larval brain preparations
Third instar larval brains were fixed and stained as described previously (Martinez-Campos et al., 2004). For drug treatment, dissected brains were incubated for 2 h at 25°C in PBS containing 1 µg/ml colchicine before fixation. The following primary antibodies were used: rabbit anti–D-PLP at 1–2 µg/ml (Martinez-Campos et al., 2004); mouse anti–-tubulin at 1:1,000 (DM1; Sigma-Aldrich), mouse anti–-tubulin at 1:1,000 (GTU88; Sigma-Aldrich), and mouse anti–phospho-Histone H3 at 1:2,000 (Abcam). All secondary antibodies coupled to the appropriate fluorophore (Alexa 488 or 568; Invitrogen) were used at 1:1,000 in PBT. Fixed preparations were examined on a widefield upright microscope (Axioskop II; Carl Zeiss MicroImaging, Inc.), equipped with a camera (CoolSnap HQ; Photometrics) and MetaMorph software (Molecular Devices), using a 100x/1.3 NA objective. Images of fixed brain cells are all maximum intensity projections of optical sections acquired at 0.1– 0.2-µm intervals.
Preparation of figures
Individual images were imported into Photoshop 7.0 (Adobe) and adjusted to use the full range of pixel intensities. In panels for some figures, pixel intensities were adjusted using the "curves" control panel, and an unsharp mask and despeckle filter were applied to the whole image. In all cases, the images from control and experimental embryos were adjusted in the same way.
Quantification of the PCM recruitment around the centrioles in syncytial embryos
To quantify the amount of PCM recruited to centrioles, individual images were imported into MetaMorph. The centrosome was circled, and the integrated intensity was calculated for independent centrosomes after subtraction of cytoplasmic background fluorescence. The integrated intensity per pixel area was determined from at least three different WT and cnn embryos per centrosomal marker. A total of 45 centrosomes were scored for each marker. Error bars represent the SD. The data were analyzed for statistical significance using a two-tailed t test.
Quantification of centriole number in fixed larval brain cells
To quantify the number of centriole dots per mitotic cell, fixed preparations of third instar larval brains were stained with anti–D-PLP and anti–phospho-Histone H3 antibodies. We examined a minimum of 70 mitotic (phospho–Histone H3 positive) cells per larval brain from at least six different brains. A total of 718 mitotic cells from WT and 976 mitotic cells from homozygous cnnHK21 mutants were scored. Error bars represent the SD.
Centriole tracking
Semiautomated tracking software (Imaris 4.5.2; Bitplane AG) was used to identify and track DSas-4–GFP trajectories over time (150 time frames; 1 s/frame). Image segmentation was performed to convert pixel intensities above a given threshold into computerized spots, and this method was applied equally to all the images in the time series. Semiautomatic track building was based on autoregressive motion algorithms.
Online supplemental material
Fig. S1 shows the localization of Aurora A–GFP, Grip75-GFP, and centrioles in WT and cnn embryos. Fig. S2 shows the centriole positioning defects in cnn larval brain cells after colchicine treatment. 10 additional videos are also included, showing the behavior of centrioles and GFP-D-TACC in WT and cnn embryos (Video 1); centrioles and Aurora A–GFP or Grip75-GFP in WT and cnn embryos (Video 2); centrioles and GFP– -tubulin in a cnn embryo (Videos 3 and 4); centrioles in WT and cnn embryos before and after colchicine injection (Video 5); centrioles and PCM in WT and cnn embryos after colchicine injection (Video 6); a WT larval NB expressing GFP–-tubulin, dividing asymmetrically (Video 7); a cnn larval NB expressing GFP–-tubulin, dividing asymmetrically (Video 8); a cnn larval NB expressing GFP–-tubulin, dividing symmetrically (Video 9); a cnn larval NB expressing GFP–-tubulin with prominent astral MTs, and a small focus of MTs moving around the cell (Video 10). Online supplemental material is available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200704081/DC1.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
This work was funded by a Research Fellowship from Cancer Research UK (J.W. Raff) and a PhD studentship from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Portugal (E.P. Lucas).
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionResults and discussionMaterials and methodsReferences |
|---|
Badano, J.L., T.M. Teslovich, and N. Katsanis. 2005. The centrosome in human genetic disease. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6:194–205.[Medline]
Basto, R., J. Lau, T. Vinogradova, A. Gardiol, C.G. Woods, A. Khodjakov, and J.W. Raff. 2006. Flies without centrioles. Cell. 125:1375–1386.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bettencourt-Dias, M., A. Rodrigues-Martins, L. Carpenter, M. Riparbelli, L. Lehmann, M.K. Gatt, N. Carmo, F. Balloux, G. Callaini, and D.M. Glover. 2005. SAK/PLK4 is required for centriole duplication and flagella development. Curr. Biol. 15:2199–2207.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bond, J., and C.G. Woods. 2006. Cytoskeletal genes regulating brain size. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 18:95–101.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bond, J., E. Roberts, K. Springell, S.B. Lizarraga, S. Scott, J. Higgins, D.J. Hampshire, E.E. Morrison, G.F. Leal, E.O. Silva, et al. 2005. A centrosomal mechanism involving CDK5RAP2 and CENPJ controls brain size. Nat. Genet. 37:353–355.[CrossRef][Medline]
Borisy, G.G., and T.M. Svitkina. 2000. Actin machinery: pushing the envelope. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 12:104–112.[CrossRef][Medline]
Brand, A.H., and N. Perrimon. 1993. Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes. Development. 118:401–415.[Abstract]
Cai, Y., W. Chia, and X. Yang. 2001. A family of snail-related zinc finger proteins regulates two distinct and parallel mechanisms that mediate Drosophila neuroblast asymmetric divisions. EMBO J. 20:1704–1714.[CrossRef][Medline]
Davis, E.E., M. Brueckner, and N. Katsanis. 2006. The emerging complexity of the vertebrate cilium: new functional roles for an ancient organelle. Dev. Cell. 11:9–19.[CrossRef][Medline]
Doxsey, S., D. McCollum, and W. Theurkauf. 2005. Centrosomes in cellular regulation. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 21:411–434.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fish, J.L., Y. Kosodo, W. Enard, S. Paabo, and W.B. Huttner. 2006. Aspm specifically maintains symmetric proliferative divisions of neuroepithelial cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 103:10438–10443.
Grieder, N.C., M. de Cuevas, and A.C. Spradling. 2000. The fusome organizes the microtubule network during oocyte differentiation in Drosophila. Development. 127:4253–4264.[Abstract]
Higgs, H.N., and T.D. Pollard. 2001. Regulation of actin filament network formation through ARP2/3 complex: activation by a diverse array of proteins. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 70:649–676.[CrossRef][Medline]
Huang, J., and J.W. Raff. 1999. The disappearance of cyclin B at the end of mitosis is regulated spatially in Drosophila cells. EMBO J. 18:2184–2195.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, M.J., F. Gergely, K. Jeffers, S.Y. Peak-Chew, and J.W. Raff. 2001. Msps/XMAP215 interacts with the centrosomal protein D-TACC to regulate microtubule behaviour. Nat. Cell Biol. 3:643–649.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mahoney, N.M., G. Goshima, A.D. Douglass, and R.D. Vale. 2006. Making microtubules and mitotic spindles in cells without functional centrosomes. Curr. Biol. 16:564–569.[CrossRef][Medline]
Martinez-Campos, M., R. Basto, J. Baker, M. Kernan, and J.W. Raff. 2004. The Drosophila pericentrin-like protein is essential for cilia/flagella function, but appears to be dispensable for mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 165:673–683.
Megraw, T.L., K. Li, L.R. Kao, and T.C. Kaufman. 1999. The centrosomin protein is required for centrosome assembly and function during cleavage in Drosophila. Development. 126:2829–2839.[Abstract]
Megraw, T.L., L.R. Kao, and T.C. Kaufman. 2001. Zygotic development without functional mitotic centrosomes. Curr. Biol. 11:116–120.[CrossRef][Medline]
Peel, N., N.R. Stevens, R. Basto, and J.W. Raff. 2007. Overexpressing centriole-replication proteins in vivo induces centriole overduplication and de novo formation. Curr. Biol. 17:834–843.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pickett-Heaps, J. 1969. The evolution of the mitotic apparatus: an attempt at comparative ultrastuctural plant cytology in dividing plant cells. Cytobios. 3:257–280.
Rebollo, E., P. Sampaio, J. Januschke, S. Llamazares, H. Varmark, and C. Gonzalez. 2007. Functionally unequal centrosomes drive spindle orientation in asymmetrically dividing Drosophila neural stem cells. Dev. Cell. 12:467–474.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rieder, C.L., S. Faruki, and A. Khodjakov. 2001. The centrosome in vertebrates: more than a microtubule-organizing center. Trends Cell Biol. 11:413–419.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rorth, P. 1998. Gal4 in the Drosophila female germline. Mech. Dev. 78:113–118.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rusan, N.M., and M. Peifer. 2007. A role for a novel centrosome cycle in asymmetric cell division. J. Cell Biol. 177:13–20.
Sawin, K.E., P.C. Lourenco, and H.A. Snaith. 2004. Microtubule nucleation at non-spindle pole body microtubule-organizing centers requires fission yeast centrosomin-related protein mod20p. Curr. Biol. 14:763–775.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schnorrer, F., S. Luschnig, I. Koch, and C. Nusslein-Volhard. 2002. Gamma-tubulin37C and gamma-tubulin ring complex protein 75 are essential for bicoid RNA localization during Drosophila oogenesis. Dev. Cell. 3:685–696.[CrossRef][Medline]
Terada, Y., Y. Uetake, and R. Kuriyama. 2003. Interaction of Aurora-A and centrosomin at the microtubule-nucleating site in Drosophila and mammalian cells. J. Cell Biol. 162:757–763.
Vaizel-Ohayon, D., and E.D. Schejter. 1999. Mutations in centrosomin reveal requirements for centrosomal function during early Drosophila embryogenesis. Curr. Biol. 9:889–898.[CrossRef][Medline]
van der Gucht, J., E. Paluch, J. Plastino, and C. Sykes. 2005. Stress release drives symmetry breaking for actin-based movement. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 102:7847–7852.
van Oudenaarden, A., and J.A. Theriot. 1999. Cooperative symmetry-breaking by actin polymerization in a model for cell motility. Nat. Cell Biol. 1:493–499.[CrossRef][Medline]
Venkatram, S., J.J. Tasto, A. Feoktistova, J.L. Jennings, A.J. Link, and K.L. Gould. 2004. Identification and characterization of two novel proteins affecting fission yeast gamma-tubulin complex function. Mol. Biol. Cell. 15:2287–2301.
Verde, I., G. Pahlke, M. Salanova, G. Zhang, S. Wang, D. Coletti, J. Onuffer, S.L. Jin, and M. Conti. 2001. Myomegalin is a novel protein of the Golgi/centrosome that interacts with a cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase. J. Biol. Chem. 276:11189–11198.
Yamashita, Y.M., D.L. Jones, and M.T. Fuller. 2003. Orientation of asymmetric stem cell division by the APC tumor suppressor and centrosome. Science. 301:1547–1550.
Yamashita, Y.M., A.P. Mahowald, J.R. Perlin, and M.T. Fuller. 2007. Asymmetric inheritance of mother versus daughter centrosome in stem cell division. Science. 315:518–521.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Facebook 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
Related Article
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
