|
||
Article |
The S. pombe mitotic regulator Cut12 promotes spindle pole body activation and integration into the nuclear envelope
Correspondence to Iain M. Hagan: ihagan{at}picr.man.ac.uk
The fission yeast spindle pole body (SPB) comprises a cytoplasmic structure that is separated from an ill-defined nuclear component by the nuclear envelope. Upon mitotic commitment, the nuclear envelope separating these domains disperses as the two SPBs integrate into a hole that forms in the nuclear envelope. The SPB component Cut12 is linked to cell cycle control, as dominant cut12.s11 mutations suppress the mitotic commitment defect of cdc25.22 cells and elevated Cdc25 levels suppress the monopolar spindle phenotype of cut12.1 loss of function mutations. We show that the cut12.1 monopolar phenotype arises from a failure to activate and integrate the new SPB into the nuclear envelope. The activation of the old SPB was frequently delayed, and its integration into the nuclear envelope was defective, resulting in leakage of the nucleoplasm into the cytoplasm through large gaps in the nuclear envelope. We propose that these activation/integration defects arise from a local deficiency in mitosis-promoting factor activation at the new SPB.
K. Tanakas present address is National Institute of Technology and Evaluation, Kisarazu-shi, Chiba 292-0818, Japan.
Abbreviations used in this paper: β-Gal, β-galactosidase; MPF, mitosis-promoting factor; MTOC, microtubule-organizing center; SPB, spindle pole body.
© 2009 Tallada et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike–No Mirror Sites license for the first six months after the publication date (see http://www.jcb.org/misc/terms.shtml). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported license, as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/).
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Mitotic commitment in S. pombe is accompanied by a dramatic change in the microtubule cytoskeleton, as cytoplasmic microtubules depolymerize and microtubules are nucleated by the two spindle pole bodies (SPBs; McCully and Robinow, 1971; Hagan and Hyams, 1988; Ding et al., 1993, 1997). The SPB is composed of a large cytoplasmic component that is connected to a poorly defined nuclear component by fine striations that run through the nuclear envelope that separates these two domains (Ding et al., 1997). SPB duplication in fission yeast is poorly understood. Genetic analyses and a recent EM study suggest that duplication occurred in G1 phase of the cell cycle (Vardy and Toda, 2000; Uzawa et al., 2004), whereas another EM study suggested that it was in G2 phase (Ding et al., 1997). The clear presence of a bridge structure between the cytoplasmic components of duplicated SPBs suggests that duplication in fission yeast may well mimic that in budding yeast SPB, in which a half bridge extends from one side of the SPB to form a full bridge that is capped by a satellite structure from which a new SPB is assembled (McCully and Robinow, 1971; Ding et al., 1997; Adams and Kilmartin, 2000). Such conservative duplication is consistent with the ability to differentiate between old and new SPBs with a slow folding fluorescent protein in both budding and fission yeast (Pereira et al., 2001; Grallert et al., 2004).
The nuclear envelope that separates the nuclear and cytoplasmic components fragments upon commitment to mitosis to generate a fenestra in the nuclear membrane (Ding et al., 1997). This localized nuclear envelope breakdown is confined to the region within the SPBs. The two SPB domains then fuse to plug this hole and nucleate microtubules to form the spindle. During anaphase B, the nuclear envelope grows back once more between the two components to completely separate them in the next cycle (Ding et al., 1997).
The SPB components Cut11 and Sad1 contain regions that have the potential to integrate into the nuclear membrane (Hagan and Yanagida, 1995; West et al., 1998). Cut11 is the fission yeast equivalent of the conserved Ndc1 protein that was first identified because it was required for the insertion of the budding yeast SPB into the nuclear envelope (Winey et al., 1993; West et al., 1998; Stavru et al., 2006). Metazoan Ndc1 associates with nuclear pores throughout interphase, whereas budding yeast Ndc1 associates with both the SPBs and nuclear pores throughout the cell cycle (Chial et al., 1998; Stavru et al., 2006). Like other Ndc1 family members, cut11+ encodes six or seven regions that are predicted to constitute membrane-spanning domains (West et al., 1998; Stavru et al., 2006), and it associates with nuclear pores throughout the cell cycle and the SPB in mitosis. EM of a temperature-sensitive cut11 mutant revealed monopolar spindles emanating from a single SPB and a defect in SPB integration into the nuclear membrane. In extreme cases, SPBs failed to insert into the fenestra in the nuclear envelope and fell into the nucleoplasm (West et al., 1998). Sad1 possesses a single trans-membrane–spanning domain and is the founding member of the SUN (Sad1/UNC-84) domain family of proteins that anchors centrosomes to nuclear envelopes in higher eukaryotes (Hagan and Yanagida, 1995; Malone et al., 1999; Tzur et al., 2006; Wilhelmsen et al., 2006). In fission yeast, Sad1 has been linked to the association of centromeres with the interphase SPB (Funabiki et al., 1993; Goto et al., 2001; King et al., 2008).
The cut12+ gene also encodes an SPB component (Bridge et al., 1998). Like the cut11.1 mutant, cut12.1 arrests mitotic commitment because it forms a monopolar rather than a bipolar spindle (Bridge et al., 1998; West et al., 1998). In the case of cut12.1, staining with antibodies to Sad1 has established that microtubules emanate from just one of the two SPBs and that Sad1 is often preferentially enriched on the nonfunctional SPB (Bridge et al., 1998). cut12.1 and cut11.1 mutants display synthetic lethality, suggesting that Cut12 may function in concert with Cut11 and so, potentially, may have a role in SPB insertion into the nuclear envelope (West et al., 1998). However, the cloning of cut12+ showed that it does not contain any regions that would be predicted to span the nuclear envelope and led to the unexpected realization that cut12+ was allelic to the stf1+ gene (Bridge et al., 1998). The dominant stf1 mutations had been identified as suppressors of conditional mutations in the Cdc25 phosphatase that remove the inhibitory phosphate from Cdc2 during mitotic commitment (Hudson et al., 1990, 1991). Further genetic analysis has revealed that enhancing Cdc25 levels suppresses the cut12.1 mutation, and the cdc25.22 mutation exacerbates the phenotype of cut12.1 mutants (Bridge et al., 1998; Tallada et al., 2007). This reciprocal relationship between Cdc25 and Cut12 indicates that this SPB component plays a major role in regulating commitment to mitosis. Several studies indicate that this impact is likely to be exerted through alterations in the behavior of the mitosis-promoting factor (MPF), amplifying the positive feedback loop kinase polo with which it associates (Mulvihill et al., 1999; MacIver et al., 2003; Petersen and Hagan, 2005).
S. pombe polo kinase, Plo1, normally associates with mitotic and late G2 interphase SPBs (Bähler et al., 1998; Mulvihill et al., 1999). The stf1.1 gain of function mutation of cut12 (referred to from here on as cut12.s11) enhances the recruitment of Plo1 to the G2 SPB and boosts the activity of the kinase throughout the cell cycle (Mulvihill et al., 1999; MacIver et al., 2003). Furthermore, mutation of a single residue on Plo1 to glutamic acid to mimic phosphorylation also increases Plo1 recruitment to the G2 SPB and accelerates mitotic commitment (Petersen and Hagan, 2005; Petersen and Nurse, 2007). Crucially, mutation of this same residue to alanine stops both the suppression of cdc25.22 and the interphase recruitment of Plo1 that is induced by the cut12.s11 mutation. It also blocks the ability of constitutively active Plo1 to suppress cdc25.22 (Petersen and Hagan, 2005). Thus, the recruitment of polo kinase to the SPB plays a key role in regulating commitment to mitosis in fission yeast and couples mitotic control to signaling from the nutrient-sensing TOR (target of rapamycin) kinase pathway and the fission yeast NIMA (never in mitosis A)-related kinase Fin1 (Grallert and Hagan, 2002; Petersen and Nurse, 2007).
In this study, we characterize the cut12.1 phenotype at the level of EM and address the distinction between the functions of Cut12 in promoting the mitotic state of the SPB and Cut11 in physically inserting the SPB into the nuclear envelope. We show that the new SPB appears to be unable to be converted into a mitotic state and insert into the nuclear envelope in cut12.1. The old SPB is activated to nucleate microtubules; however, its integration into the nuclear envelope is defective, resulting in a gapped membrane deformation in the nuclear envelope through which nucleoplasm leaks into the cytoplasm. We discuss why we believe that this SPB insertion defect arises from defective MPF activation at the SPB.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
-tubulin and Sad1 (Hagan and Yanagida, 1995). The remainder of the culture was observed by live cell microscopy at 36°C. Immunofluorescence microscopy of cut12.1 cells established that 89% (n = 52) of mitotic cells had monopolar spindles. In 70% of these monopolar spindles, microtubules emanated from one of two distinct Sad1 SPB signals, whereas in the remaining 30%, the microtubules extended from a single focus of SPB staining (Bridge et al., 1998; unpublished data). In contrast, live cell imaging of the same population indicated that in all cells in which a single focus of SPB staining was discerned, the microtubules were extending from the RFP fluorescent marker on the old SPB (n = 21; Fig. 2 A). We conclude that it is the new SPB that fails to activate and insert into the nuclear envelope in cut12.1 mutants.
|
Nuclear/cytoplasmic partitioning persists in wild-type mitosis
In addition to the SPB activation defect addressed in the previous sections, EM analysis revealed gapped membrane distortions in the nuclear envelope of cut12.1 cells at 36°C (Fig. 3, A–D). In many instances, the nucleoplasm spilled out through this gapped membrane distortion to mix with the cytoplasm (Fig. 3, A and D). When SPBs were discerned in a section with a hole in the nuclear envelope, the SPB was always adjacent to the hole (Fig. 3, A–C). Although we failed to observe such holes in or any distortion of the nuclear envelopes of wild-type cells (unpublished data), it is possible that the cut12.1 mutant cells had intact nuclear envelopes before fixation but that membrane disruption was induced during processing. Therefore, we decided to study the integrity of the nuclear envelope. We used a well-characterized nuclear marker, the NLS-GFP–β-galactosidase (β-Gal) fusion protein (Yoshida and Sazer, 2004). Live cell imaging of wild-type cells that expressed a red fluorescent tubulin fusion protein (pRep81 Cherry-tubulin) confirmed that the fluorescent signal of this NLS-GFP–β-Gal remained constrained within the nuclear envelope throughout the cell cycle of wild-type cells (Fig. 4 A and Video 1; Yoshida and Sazer, 2004).
|
|
|
Having established that the NLS-GFP–β-Gal marker is retained within the nuclei of cells that maintain the integrity of the nuclear envelope during mitosis but not in those in which integrity is compromised, we monitored NLS-GFP–β-Gal fluorescence in cut12.1 cells at 36°C. 52 of the 54 cells observed formed a monopolar spindle with microtubules emanating from a single point within the cell. The formation of each of these monopolar spindles was accompanied by a brief efflux of GFP signal from the nuclei (Fig. 4 D and Video 4). Thus, the compromised Cut12 function of the cut12.1 allele disrupted the integrity of the nuclear envelope as cells attempted to form a spindle. This would explain our ability to identify cells in which an active SPB had apparently lost its association with the membrane completely and fallen into the middle of the nucleus (Fig. 3 E) and the proximity of the SPB to these gaps in the membrane (Fig. 3, A–C).
cut12.1 and cut11.1 mutations delay SPB activation during commitment to mitosis
The visualization of microtubules in the cut12.1, cut11.1, and cut7.24 backgrounds to monitor the timing of commitment to mitosis revealed an additional defect in SPB activation during mitotic commitment in cut11.1 and cut12.1 cells. The dissolution of cytoplasmic interphase microtubules is either coincident with or rapidly followed by (within 4 min) the nucleation of spindle microtubules from the mitotic SPBs when wild-type or cut7.24 cells commit to mitosis (Fig. 6, A, B, and E). In contrast, the timing of spindle appearance in cut12.1 and cut11.1 mutants was highly variable. In just 2 out of the 15 cells examined, the spindle formed immediately upon the dissolution of interphase microtubules, whereas in the remainder, spindle microtubules failed to appear for up to 2 h after the interphase microtubules had depolymerized (Fig. 6, C–E). We conclude that the failure of the new SPB to activate in cut12.1 is accompanied by an inability of the old SPB to integrate appropriately into the nuclear envelope and significant delays in the activation of this old SPB.
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Despite these striking similarities between the cut11 and cut12 mutant phenotypes, the genetic relationship of cut11.1 with an integrated version of the cdc25.d1 allele that elevates the levels of Cdc25 to promote premature mitosis (Daga and Jimenez, 1999; Tallada et al., 2007) was different. Elevation of Cdc25 levels to boost MPF activity promoted the activation of the otherwise inactive new SPB in the majority of cut12.1 cells. In contrast, the presence of cdc25.d1 had no impact on the spindle formation or abnormal mitotic or temperature-sensitive lethality phenotypes of the cut11.1 mutation. Although this distinction is based on the analysis of a single allele, it would be consistent with the view that Cut11 is a physical component of the SPB that is required to generate an interface through which the proteinaceous SPB becomes an integral part of the nuclear envelope, whereas Cut12 is a regulatory protein that is required for SPB activation and the control of mitotic commitment.
Because MPF is recruited to the SPBs of late G2 cells (Alfa et al., 1990; Decottignies et al., 2001), we propose that the compromised Cut12 function of cut12.1 cells reduced the activation of MPF on the new SPB below the critical threshold required for SPB integration into the membrane (Figs. 8 and 9). The elevation of global Cdc25 levels via the introduction of the cdc25.d1 allele then raised global MPF activity to drive the local level at the SPB back above the threshold for, and so restored, SPB integration. The morphology of the nuclear envelope underlying the cytoplasmic SPB component of the inactive SPB in cut12.1 mutants supports this view of defective MPF at the new SPB, as it retains the differentiated appearance that is the hallmark of an interphase SPB (Ding et al., 1997).
|
and cdc25.22 cells in a polo-dependent fashion (Hudson et al., 1990, 1991; MacIver et al., 2003) suggests that these events on the SPB are amplified and harnessed by different pathways to influence the global control of mitotic commitment (Fig. 9, green arrows). Such global control from a defined structure echoes the mechanism by which a single unattached kinetochore arrests cell cycle progression (Musacchio and Salmon, 2007). This proposed importance of SPB-associated events in regulating mitotic commitment in fission yeast is supported by the observation that constitutively active Plo1 kinase is only able to suppress cdc25.22 mutants when it is able to associate with the SPB (Petersen and Hagan, 2005). Elevating Cdc25 levels suppressed the efflux of the NLS-GFP–β-Gal nuclear marker to a lesser degree than it suppressed the SPB activation and insertion defect. This suggests that SPB activation is regulated in a manner that is distinct from the controls that govern membrane insertion. A further striking feature of the efflux of the GFP marker was the speed with which the GFP nuclear marker reaccumulated in the nuclei after efflux in cut12.1 and cut11.1 cells. Current technologies have not allowed us to address the duration of the different phases of rupture, repair (assuming that there is repair), and reimport. It is possible that the breach of the nuclear envelope is very transient, after which it takes 40 min to reimport the entire population of NLS-GFP–β-Gal back into the nucleus, or that the rupture persists but that the RAN GTP system can establish a gradient that is sufficient to direct import even though membrane integrity is compromised at one point. Given the size of the breach to the nuclear envelope recorded in images such as that in Fig. 3 D, it is hard to imagine how the nuclear envelope could reseal. In this respect, it may be important to consider the distinctions between the point at which cut7 and cut12 mutant cells loose viability as they undergo a defective mitosis. The death of cut7.446 cells coincides with the inability to form the mitotic spindle, whereas the viability of cut12.1 cells has already fallen to 60% of its starting value by the time that the first spindle appears (Hagan and Yanagida, 1990, Bridge et al., 1998). This may indicate that although the NLS-GFP–β-Gal reaccumulates within the nuclei after efflux, there is lasting damage to nuclear integrity. This would favor the interpretation that the RAN GTP system can accommodate a moderate perturbation of nuclear cytoplasmic partitioning.
Sad1 often preferentially associates with the inactive new SPB in both cut11.1 and cut12.1 mutant cells (Fig. 2 B; Bridge et al., 1998). This asymmetry reflects the membrane association of the two SPBs. Like all SUN domain proteins that anchor MTOCs to the nuclear envelope (Tzur et al., 2006; Wilhelmsen et al., 2006), the trans-membrane domain of Sad1 gives it an intrinsic affinity for the nuclear envelope (Hagan and Yanagida, 1995). If this affinity were to be greater than its affinity for the SPB, Sad1 would preferentially partition with the inactive, membrane-associated rather than the active, membrane-free SPB. In contrast to cut12.1, a complete loss of Cut12 function arising from deletion of the cut12+ gene results in two equally staining Sad1 foci with microtubules emanating from another site within the heart of the nucleoplasm (Bridge et al., 1998). It is tempting to speculate that the complete absence of Cut12 protein from these germinating spores blocks the dissolution of the nuclear envelope within both SPBs, leaving the nuclear component to become active, nucleate microtubules, and drift away from the sites at which the cytoplasmic domains remain associated with the nuclear envelope. The asynchrony of germination of spores makes it impractical to address this phenotype by EM of germinating cut12.d1 spores; however, it maybe possible to address this in the future, should conditional mutants that mimic this phenotype arise in future analyses of Cut12 function.
Interpreting the significance of the appearance of monopolar spindles in the first cell division after G2 cells are shifted to the restrictive temperature relies on a concrete understanding of when SPB duplication occurs. If SPB duplication occurs in G1 phase, the data suggest that there is an intrinsic difference in the response of the two SPBs to the compromised Cut12 activity. However, if the SPB duplicates in G2 phase, it may simply be that the SPB that forms after the shift to the restrictive temperature failed to incorporate sufficient functional Cut12 and so was unable to function, whereas the molecular interactions within the older SPB enabled it to retain function. The fact that Cut11 only associates with the SPB upon mitotic commitment and yet cut11 mutants have a monopolar phenotype (West et al., 1998) argues that it arises from an intrinsic difference in the potential of the SPBs to cope with alterations in SPB function. This view is supported by our demonstration of an inherent functional distinction between the two anaphase B SPBs, as the septum initiation network promotes septation from the new, not the old, SPB (Sohrmann et al., 1998; Grallert et al., 2004). A recent study suggests that these distinctions are established by G2 phase, as the KASH (Klarsicht/ANC-1/Syne-1 homology) domain protein Kms2 associated with only one of the two Sad1-staining SPBs in ima1.
mutants (King et al., 2008). Furthermore, Fin1 association with SPBs shows that, just like metazoan centrioles (Vorobjev and Chentsov, 1982), a novice S. pombe SPB actually takes more than one cell cycle to fully mature (Grallert et al., 2004). In the model, to account for this SPB maturation, we proposed that passage through mitosis or G1 modifies one of the two SPBs such that its behavior in the next cell cycle is altered (Grallert et al., 2004). In other words, exposure to a mitotic environment or transit through START could modify the SPB such that its threshold requirement for Cut12 function is lower than that of the neighboring new SPB that is yet to experience these modifications (Fig. 8 A). Whatever the explanation, it is clear that there are inherent differences between the two SPBs in each cell, and it appears that Cut12 function is sensitive to these distinctions.
Live cell imaging also revealed a variable delay between the dissolution of interphase microtubules and the formation of the mitotic spindle when the integrity of the nuclear envelope was compromised by either the cut11 or cut12 mutations. This delay may arise from altered partitioning of key cell cycle regulators between the cytoplasm and nucleoplasm or the leakage of critical spindle components, such as tubulin from the mitotic nuclei through the gapped membrane distortions that accompany the defective mitoses in these mutants. In conclusion, we propose that Cut12 acts in cis to promote the changes that drive the integration and activation of SPBs into the nuclear envelope at the start of mitosis and globally to control the rate at which cells execute the global decision to commit to mitosis.
| Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
EM
Plunge freeze substitution fixation and subsequent preparation of cut7.24 cells for EM were performed according to Kanbe et al. (1989). 3 h after shift of an early-log phase culture from 25°C to 36°C, cell suspensions were dotted onto filter paper and then sandwiched between two copper grids. Fixation was achieved by plunging into liquid propane. Subsequent substitution with anhydrous acetone containing 2% OsO4 and 0.05% uranyl acetate took 48 h at –79°C. The temperature was then increased to –20°C for 2 h followed by 1.5 h at 4°C before incubation at room temperature for 30 min. After four washes in anhydrous acetone, step-wise infiltration with Epon-Araldite led to a final infiltration of 100%. Samples were sandwiched between Teflon-coated glass and polymerized at 70°C for 48 h. Blocks were trimmed, and serial sections were prepared with a diamond knife and mounted on Formvar-coated single-slot grids for staining with uranyl acetate and lead citrate. Images were taken with an electron microscope (100 CX; JEOL) operated at 100 kV.
High pressure freeze substitution of cut12.1 cells was performed as described previously (Murray, 2008). cut12.1 cells were synchronized with respect to cell cycle progression by centrifugal elutriation according to Creanor and Mitchison (1979) using an elutriator rotor (JE-5.0; Beckman Coulter). After filtration onto 0.45-µm membrane filters (Millipore), cells were loaded into interlocking brass hats (Swiss Precision) and fixed by high pressure freezing with a high pressure freezer (HPM010; Bal-Tec). Freeze substitution into 2% OsO4 + 0.1% uranyl acetate in anhydrous acetone was conducted using an automatic freeze substitution chamber unit (AFS; Leica) at 90°C for 72 h with a 5°C h–1 slope to raise the temperature to –20°C, at which point cells were held for 2 h before a final increase to 4°C for 4 h at a rate of 5°C h–1. After infiltration with Spurrs resin, blocks were trimmed, and serial sections were prepared with a diamond knife, mounted on Formvar/carbon-coated single-slot grids, stained with Reynoldss solution for 5 min, and imaged on a transmission electron microscope (model 1220; JEOL) at 80 kV.
Live cell microscopy
Live cell image capture and analysis were performed according to Grallert et al. (2006). Cells were grown in supplemented, filter-sterilized EMM2 at 25°C before being mounted on an FCS2 chamber (Bioptechs) coated with soybean lectin (Sigma-Aldrich). The chamber was mounted onto a Deltavision Spectris system (Applied Precision, LLC) that uses a microscope (IX71; Olympus). The Precision Control Weather Station heating chamber (Applied Precision, LLC) surrounding the stage and the FCS2 chamber were set at 36°C as was the objective heating collar (Bioptechs) on the 100x NA 1.45 objective (Carl Zeiss, Inc.) that was used to capture images. This led to a temperature shift of the cells from 25 to 36°C in 2 min after mounting on the microscope. Image capture started once the focus had stabilized (45 min). 20 0.3-µm consecutive slices were captured every 4 min with a camera (Cascade II 512b; Photometrics) using the SoftWoRx (Applied Precision, LLC) image capture program. The Z series was then compressed to a maximal projection in Imaris software (Bitplane). Individual panels were extracted into Photoshop (Adobe) to generate the panels for the figures.
Immunofluorescence microscopy
Immunofluorescence microscopy was performed according to Hagan and Yanagida (1995), in which the TAT1 anti–
-tubulin monoclonal antibody (Woods et al., 1989) that was used at a dilution of 1 in 80 was detected with FITC-conjugated goat anti–mouse IgG (Sigma-Aldrich) and the cAP9.5 anti-Sad1 antibody that was used at a dilution of 1 in 25 was detected with CY3-conjugated goat anti–rabbit IgG antibody (Sigma-Aldrich). Samples were imaged and processed as for live imaging with the exception that cells were mounted on soybean lectin–coated, standard 18 x 18–mm 1.5 coverslips and no heating of the sample was used. pRep81Cherry-tubulin was a gift from K. Tanaka (University of Leicester, Leicester, England, UK).
Online supplemental material
Fig. S1 shows further detail of the cell shown in Fig. 1. Fig. S2 shows a second example of electron microscopic sections from a cut12.1 cell in which one SPB is active and nucleating microtubules, whereas the structure of the second SPB is highly reminiscent of the structure of a wild-type interphase SPB in which the cytoplasmic component associates with the outside of the nuclear envelope. Fig. S3 shows a second example of EM analysis of a cut7.24 cell to show the two active SPBs inserted into a continuous nuclear envelope. Videos 1 and 2 show the retention of the NLS-GFP–β-Gal nuclear integrity marker in wild-type and cut7.24 mitoses, respectively. Videos 3 and 4 show the transient efflux of this marker as cut11.1 and cut12.1 cells, respectively, transit mitosis. Table S1 lists the strains used in this study. Online supplemental material is available at http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/jcb.200812108/DC1.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
This work was supported by Cancer Research UK grant C147/A6058, grants from the Human Frontier Science Program and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, and the Spanish Government Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación grant JC2008-00017.
Submitted: 17 December 2008
Accepted: 8 May 2009
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Adams, I.R., and J.V. Kilmartin. 2000. Spindle pole body duplication: a model for centrosome duplication? Trends Cell Biol. 10:329–335.[CrossRef][Medline]
Alfa, C.E., B. Ducommun, D. Beach, and J.S. Hyams. 1990. Distinct nuclear and spindle pole body populations of cyclin-cdc2 in fission yeast. Nature. 347:680–682.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bähler, J., A.B. Steever, S. Wheatley, Y.L. Wang, J.R. Pringle, K.L. Gould, and D. McCollum. 1998. Role of polo kinase and Mid1p in determining the site of cell division in fission yeast. J. Cell Biol. 143:1603–1616.
Bridge, A.J., M. Morphew, R. Bartlett, and I.M. Hagan. 1998. The fission yeast SPB component Cut12 links bipolar spindle formation to mitotic control. Genes Dev. 12:927–942.
Chial, H.J., M.P. Rout, T.H. Giddings, and M. Winey. 1998. Saccharomyces cerevisiae Ndc1p is a shared component of nuclear pore complexes and spindle pole bodies. J. Cell Biol. 143:1789–1800.
Creanor, J., and J.M. Mitchison. 1979. Reduction of perturbations in leucine incorporation in synchronous cultures of Schizosaccharomyces pombe made by elutriation. J. Gen. Microbiol. 112:385–388.
Daga, R.R., and J. Jimenez. 1999. Translational control of the Cdc25 cell cycle phosphatase: a molecular mechanism coupling mitosis to cell growth. J. Cell Sci. 112:3137–3146.[Abstract]
Decottignies, A., P. Zarzov, and P. Nurse. 2001. In vivo localisation of fission yeast cyclin-dependent kinase cdc2p and cyclin B cdc13p during mitosis and meiosis. J. Cell Sci. 114:2627–2640.[Medline]
Ding, R., K.L. McDonald, and J.R. McIntosh. 1993. Three-dimensional reconstruction and analysis of mitotic spindles from the yeast, Schizosaccharomyces pombe. J. Cell Biol. 120:141–151.
Ding, R., R.R. West, M. Morphew, and J.R. McIntosh. 1997. The spindle pole body of Schizosaccharomyces pombe enters and leaves the nuclear envelope as the cell cycle proceeds. Mol. Biol. Cell. 8:1461–1479.[Abstract]
Dutcher, S.K. 2003. Elucidation of basal body and centriole functions in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Traffic. 4:443–451.[CrossRef][Medline]
Flory, M.R., M.M. Morphew, J.D. Joseph, A.R. Means, and T.R. Davis. 2002. Pcp1, an Spc110p related calmodulin target at the centrosome of the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Cell Growth Differ. 13:47–58.
Funabiki, H., I. Hagan, S. Uzawa, and M. Yanagida. 1993. Cell cycle–dependent specific positioning and clustering of centromeres and telomeres in fission yeast. J. Cell Biol. 121:961–976.
Goto, B., K. Okazaki, and O. Niwa. 2001. Cytoplasmic microtubular system implicated in de novo formation of a Rabl-like orientation of chromosomes in fission yeast. J. Cell Sci. 114:2427–2435.
Grallert, A., and I.M. Hagan. 2002. Schizosaccharomyces pombe NIMA-related kinase, Fin1, regulates spindle formation and an affinity of Polo for the SPB. EMBO J. 21:3096–3107.[CrossRef][Medline]
Grallert, A., A. Krapp, S. Bagley, V. Simanis, and I.M. Hagan. 2004. Recruitment of NIMA kinase shows that maturation of the S. pombe spindle-pole body occurs over consecutive cell cycles and reveals a role for NIMA in modulating SIN activity. Genes Dev. 18:1007–1021.
Grallert, A., C. Beuter, R.A. Craven, S. Bagley, D. Wilks, U. Fleig, and I.M. Hagan. 2006. S. pombe CLASP needs dynein, not EB1 or CLIP170, to induce microtubule instability and slows polymerization rates at cell tips in a dynein-dependent manner. Genes Dev. 20:2421–2436.
Hagan, I., and M. Yanagida. 1990. Novel potential mitotic motor protein encoded by the fission yeast cut7+ gene. Nature. 347:563–566.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hagan, I., and M. Yanagida. 1995. The product of the spindle formation gene sad1+ associates with the fission yeast spindle pole body and is essential for viability. J. Cell Biol. 129:1033–1047.
Hagan, I.M., and J.S. Hyams. 1988. The use of cell-division cycle mutants to investigate the control of microtubule distribution in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. J. Cell Sci. 89:343–357.
Hagan, I.M., and J. Petersen. 2000. The microtubule organizing centers of Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 49:133–159.[Medline]
Hudson, J.D., H. Feilotter, and P.G. Young. 1990. stf1: non wee mutations epistatic to cdc25 in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genetics. 126:309–315.[Abstract]
Hudson, J.D., H. Feilotter, C. Lingner, R. Rowley, and P. Young. 1991. stf1: a new supressor of the mitotic control gene cdc25 in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 56:599–604.
Jaspersen, S.L., and M. Winey. 2004. The budding yeast spindle pole body: structure, duplication, and function. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 20:1–28.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kanbe, T., I. Kobayashi, and K. Tanaka. 1989. Dynamics of cytoplasmic organelles in the cell-cycle of the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe: three-dimensional reconstruction from serial sections. J. Cell Sci. 94:647–656.
Kilburn, C.L., C.G. Pearson, E.P. Romijn, J.B. Meehl, T.H. Giddings, Jr., B.P. Culver, J.R. Yates, III, and M. Winey. 2007. New Tetrahymena basal body protein components identify basal body domain structure. J. Cell Biol. 178:905–912.
Kim, S.H., D.P. Lin, S. Matsumoto, A. Kitazono, and T. Matsumoto. 1998. Fission yeast Slp1: an effector of the Mad2 dependent spindle checkpoint. Science. 279:1045–1047.
King, M.C., T.G. Drivas, and G. Blobel. 2008. A network of nuclear envelope membrane proteins linking centromeres to microtubules. Cell. 134:427–438.[CrossRef][Medline]
MacIver, F.H., K. Tanaka, A.M. Robertson, and I.M. Hagan. 2003. Physical and functional interactions between polo kinase and the spindle pole component Cut12 regulate mitotic commitment in S. pombe. Genes Dev. 17:1507–1523.
Malone, C.J., W.D. Fixsen, H.R. Horvitz, and M. Han. 1999. UNC-84 localizes to the nuclear envelope and is required for nuclear migration and anchoring during C. elegans development. Development. 126:3171–3181.[Abstract]
McCully, E.K., and C.F. Robinow. 1971. Mitosis in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe: a comparative study with light and electron microscopy. J. Cell Sci. 9:475–507.
Moreno, S., A. Klar, and P. Nurse. 1991. Molecular genetic analysis of fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Methods Enzymol. 194:795–823.[Medline]
Mulvihill, D.P., J. Petersen, H. Ohkura, D.M. Glover, and I.M. Hagan. 1999. Plo1 kinase recruitment to the spindle pole body and its role in cell division in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Mol. Biol. Cell. 10:2771–2785.
Murray, S. 2008. High pressure freezing and freeze substitution of Schizosaccharomyces pombe and Saccharomyces cerevisiae for TEM. Methods Cell Biol. 88:3–17.[CrossRef][Medline]
Musacchio, A., and E.D. Salmon. 2007. The spindle-assembly checkpoint in space and time. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8:379–393.[CrossRef][Medline]
Oakley, C.E., and B.R. Oakley. 1989. Identification of gamma-tubulin, a new member of the tubulin superfamily encoded by mipA gene of Aspergillus nidulans. Nature. 338:662–664.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pereira, G., T.U. Tanaka, K. Nasmyth, and E. Schiebel. 2001. Modes of spindle pole body inheritance and segregation of the Bfa1p-Bub2p checkpoint protein complex. EMBO J. 20:6359–6370.[CrossRef][Medline]
Petersen, J., and I.M. Hagan. 2005. Polo kinase links the stress pathway to cell cycle control and tip growth in fission yeast. Nature. 435:507–512.[CrossRef][Medline]
Petersen, J., and P. Nurse. 2007. TOR signalling regulates mitotic commitment through the stress MAP kinase pathway and the Polo and Cdc2 kinases. Nat. Cell Biol. 9:1263–1272.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sohrmann, M., S. Schmidt, I. Hagan, and V. Simanis. 1998. Asymmetric segregation on spindle poles of the Schizosaccharomyces pombe septum-inducing protein kinase Cdc7p. Genes Dev. 12:84–94.
Stavru, F., B.B. Hulsmann, A. Spang, E. Hartmann, V.C. Cordes, and D. Gorlich. 2006. NDC1: a crucial membrane-integral nucleoporin of metazoan nuclear pore complexes. J. Cell Biol. 173:509–519.
Tallada, V.A., A.J. Bridge, P.E. Emery, and I.M. Hagan. 2007. Suppression of the S. pombe cut12.1 cell cycle defect by mutations in cdc25 and genes involved in transcriptional and translational control. Genetics. 176:73–83.
Tzur, Y.B., K.L. Wilson, and Y. Gruenbaum. 2006. SUN-domain proteins: Velcro that links the nucleoskeleton to the cytoskeleton. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7:782–788.[CrossRef][Medline]
Uzawa, S., F. Li, Y. Jin, K.L. McDonald, M.B. Braunfeld, D.A. Agard, and W.Z. Cande. 2004. Spindle pole body duplication in fission yeast occurs at the G1/S boundary but maturation is blocked until exit from S by an event downstream of cdc10+. Mol. Biol. Cell. 15:5219–5230.
Vardy, L., and T. Toda. 2000. The fission yeast gamma-tubulin complex is required in G1 phase and is a component of the spindle assembly checkpoint. EMBO J. 19:6098–6111.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vorobjev, I.A., and Y.S. Chentsov. 1982. Centrioles in the cell cycle. 1. Epithelial cells. J. Cell Biol. 93:938–949.
West, R.R., E.V. Vaisberg, R. Ding, P. Nurse, and J.R. McIntosh. 1998. cut11+: A gene required for cell cycle-dependent spindle pole body anchoring in the nuclear envelope and bipolar spindle formation in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Mol. Biol. Cell. 9:2839–2855.
Wilhelmsen, K., M. Ketema, H. Truong, and A. Sonnenberg. 2006. KASH-domain proteins in nuclear migration, anchorage and other processes. J. Cell Sci. 119:5021–5029.
Winey, M., M.A. Hoyt, C. Chan, L. Goetsch, D. Botstein, and B. Byers. 1993. NDC1: a nuclear periphery component required for yeast spindle pole body duplication. J. Cell Biol. 122:743–751.
Woods, A., T. Sherwin, R. Sasse, T.H. MacRae, A.J. Baines, and K. Gull. 1989. Definition of individual components within the cytoskeleton of Trypanosoma brucei by a library of monoclonal antibodies. J. Cell Sci. 93:491–500.
Yoshida, M., and S. Sazer. 2004. Nucleocytoplasmic transport and nuclear envelope integrity in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Methods. 33:226–238.[CrossRef][Medline]
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|