Skip to main content
PMC home page
The Journal of Cell Biology logoLink to The Journal of Cell Biology
. 1973 Sep 1;58(3):608–617. doi: 10.1083/jcb.58.3.608

CONTRAST BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL pH DEPENDENCIES OF PROPHASING AND NUCLEAR MEMBRANE FORMATION IN INTERPHASE-METAPHASE CELLS

Yoshitaka Obara 1, Hiroshi Yoshida 1, Lee S Chai 1, Herbert Weinfeld 1, Avery A Sandberg 1
PMCID: PMC2109076  PMID: 4795862

Abstract

In Chinese hamster Don cells, fusion of an interphase cell with a metaphase cell resulted either in prophasing of the interphase nucleus, including loss of the nuclear envelope (NE), or in the formation of a double membrane around the metaphase chromosomes. Only one of these phenomena occurred in a given interphase-metaphase (I–M) binucleate cell. At pH 7.4, there was about an equal probability that either event could occur amongst the population of I–M cells. The effect of pH changes in the medium containing the fused cells was examined. At pH 6.6, prophasing was the predominant event; at pH 8.0, membrane formation predominated. It was found that the rate of progression of a mononucleate cell from G2 to metaphase was appreciably faster at pH 6.6 than at pH 8.0. Conversely, the progression from metaphase to G1 was faster at pH 8.0 than at pH 6.6. These results with the mononucleate cells strengthen the hypothesis that structural changes in I–M cells are reflections of normal mitotic phenomena. Additional evidence for this hypothesis was produced by electron microscope examination after direct fixation in chrom-osmium. The double membrane around the chromosomes of the I–M cell was indistinguishable from the normal NE. The results obtained by varying the pH of the medium containing the fused cells provide an indication that disruption or formation of the NE of Don cells depends on the balance reached between disruptive and formative processes.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (929.0 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aya T., Sandberg A. A. Chromosome pulverization and RNA synthesis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1971 Nov;47(5):961–969. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ceccarini C., Eagle H. pH as a determinant of cellular growth and contact inhibition. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1971 Jan;68(1):229–233. doi: 10.1073/pnas.68.1.229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gulyas B. J. The rabbit zygote. 3. Formation of the blastomere nucleus. J Cell Biol. 1972 Dec;55(3):533–541. doi: 10.1083/jcb.55.3.533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ikeuchi T., Sanbe M., Weinfeld H., Sandberg A. A. Induction of nuclear envelopes around metaphase chromosomes after fusion with interphase cells. J Cell Biol. 1971 Oct;51(1):104–115. doi: 10.1083/jcb.51.1.104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Johnson R. T., Rao P. N. Mammalian cell fusion: induction of premature chromosome condensation in interphase nuclei. Nature. 1970 May 23;226(5247):717–722. doi: 10.1038/226717a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Kato H., Sandberg A. A. Chromosome pulverization in chinese hamster cells induced by Sendai virus. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1968 Nov;41(5):1117–1123. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Matsui S. I., Yoshida H., Weinfeld H., Sandberg A. A. Induction of prophase in interphase nuclei by fusion with metaphase cells. J Cell Biol. 1972 Jul;54(1):120–132. doi: 10.1083/jcb.54.1.120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Matsui S., Weinfeld H., Sandberg A. A. Dependence of chromosome pulverization in virus-fused cells on events in the G2 period. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1971 Aug;47(2):401–411. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Matsui S., Weinfeld H., Sandberg A. A. Fate of chromatin of interphase nuclei subjected to "phosphasing" in virus-fused cells. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1972 Dec;49(6):1621–1630. doi: 10.1093/jnci/49.6.1621. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Moore G. E., Ito E., Ulrich K., Sandberg A. A. Culture of human leukemia cells. Cancer. 1966 May;19(5):713–723. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(196605)19:5<713::aid-cncr2820190518>3.0.co;2-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. PAUL J. Environmental influences on the metabolism and composition of cultured cells. J Exp Zool. 1959 Oct-Dec;142:475–505. doi: 10.1002/jez.1401420122. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Rubin H. pH and population density in the regulation of animal cell multiplication. J Cell Biol. 1971 Dec;51(3):686–702. doi: 10.1083/jcb.51.3.686. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Sanbe M., Aya T., Ikeuchi T., Sandberg A. A. Electron microscopic study of fused cells, with special reference to chromosome pulvrization. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1970 May;44(5):1079–1089. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Sandberg A. A., Aya T., Ikeuchi T., Weinfeld H. Definition and morphologic features of chromosome pulverization: a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1970 Oct;45(4):615–623. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Stubblefield E., Klevecz R. Synchronization of Chinese hamster cells by reversal of colcemid inhibition. Exp Cell Res. 1965 Dec;40(3):660–664. doi: 10.1016/0014-4827(65)90244-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of Cell Biology are provided here courtesy of The Rockefeller University Press

RESOURCES