Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Journal of Cell Biology logoLink to The Journal of Cell Biology
. 1979 Aug 1;82(2):528–541. doi: 10.1083/jcb.82.2.528

Micromanipulation studies of chromosome movement. I. Chromosome-spindle attachment and the mechanical properties of chromosomal spindle fibers

PMCID: PMC2110461  PMID: 479315

Abstract

We have used micromanipulation to study the attachment of chromosomes to the spindle and the mechanical properties of the chromosomal spindle fibers. Individual chromosomes can be displaced about the periphery of the spindle, in the plane of the metaphase plate, without altering the structure of the spindle or the positions of the nonmanipulated chromosomes. From mid-prometaphase through the onset of anaphase, chromosomes resist displacement toward either spindle pole, or beyond the spindle periphery. In anaphase a chromosome can be displaced either toward its spindle pole or laterally, beyond the periphery of the spindle; however, the chromosome resists displacement away from the spindle pole. When an anaphase half-bivalent is displaced toward its spindle pole, it stops migrating until the nonmanipulated half- bivalents reach a similar distance from the pole. The manipulated half- bivalent then resumes its poleward migration at the normal anaphase rate. No evidence was found for mechanical attachments between separating half-bivalents in anaphase. Our observations demonstrate that chromosomes are individually anchored to the spindle by fibers which connect the kinetochores of the chromosomes to the spindle poles. These fibers are flexible, much less extensible than the chromosomes, and are to pivot about their attachment points. While the fibers are able to support a tensile force sufficient to stretch a chromosome, they buckle when subjected to a compressive force. Preliminary evidence suggests that the mechanical attachment fibers detected with micromanipulation correspond to the birefringent chromosomal spindle fibers observed with polarization microscopy.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (1.4 MB).

Selected References

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

  1. BAUER H., DIETZ R., ROEBBELEN C. [Spermatocyte division of Tipulae. III. Movement behavior of chromosomes in translocation heterozygotes of Tipula oleracea]. Chromosoma. 1961;12:116–189. doi: 10.1007/BF00328918. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bajer A. S. Interaction of microtubules and the mechanism of chromosome movement (zipper hypothesis). 1. General principle. Cytobios. 1973 Nov;8(31):139–160. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Begg D. A., Ellis G. W. Micromanipulation studies of chromosome movement. II. Birefringent chromosomal fibers and the mechanical attachment of chromosomes to the spindle. J Cell Biol. 1979 Aug;82(2):542–554. doi: 10.1083/jcb.82.2.542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. CARLSON J. G. Microdissection studies of the dividing neuroblast of the grasshopper, Chortophaga viridifasciata; de Geer. Chromosoma. 1952;5(3):199–220. doi: 10.1007/BF01271487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Camenzind R., Micklas R. B. The non-random chromosome segregation in spermatocytes of Gryllotalpa hexadactyla. A micromanipulation analysis. Chromosoma. 1968;24(3):324–335. doi: 10.1007/BF00336200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cande W. Z., Lazarides E., McIntosh J. R. A comparison of the distribution of actin and tubulin in the mammalian mitotic spindle as seen by indirect immunofluorescence. J Cell Biol. 1977 Mar;72(3):552–567. doi: 10.1083/jcb.72.3.552. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dietz R. Die Assembly-Hypothese der Chromosomenbewegung und die Veränderungen der Spindellänge während der Anaphase I in Spermatocyten von Pales ferruginea (Tipulidae, Diptera. Chromosoma. 1972;38(1):11–76. doi: 10.1007/BF00319955. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Ellis G. W. Piezoelectric Micromanipulators: Electrically operated micromanipulators add automatic high-speed movement to normal manual control. Science. 1962 Oct 12;138(3537):84–91. doi: 10.1126/science.138.3537.84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Forer A. Characterization of the mitotic traction system, and evidence that birefringent spindle fibers neither produce nor transmit force for chromosome movement. Chromosoma. 1966;19(1):44–98. doi: 10.1007/BF00332793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Forer A., Koch C. Influence of autosome movements and of sex-chromosome movements on sex-chromosome segregation in crane fly spermatocytes. Chromosoma. 1973;40(4):417–442. doi: 10.1007/BF00399432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Fujiwara K., Pollard T. D. Fluorescent antibody localization of myosin in the cytoplasm, cleavage furrow, and mitotic spindle of human cells. J Cell Biol. 1976 Dec;71(3):848–875. doi: 10.1083/jcb.71.3.848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Fuseler J. W. Mitosis in Tilia americana endosperm. J Cell Biol. 1975 Jan;64(1):159–171. doi: 10.1083/jcb.64.1.159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Henderson S. A., Koch C. A. Co-orientation stability by physical tension: A demonstration with experimentally interlocked bivalents. Chromosoma. 1970;29(2):207–216. doi: 10.1007/BF00326079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Henderson S. A., Nicklas R. B., Koch C. A. Temperature-induced orientation instability during meiosis: an experimental analysis. J Cell Sci. 1970 Mar;6(2):323–350. doi: 10.1242/jcs.6.2.323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Inoué S., Ritter H., Jr Dynamics of mitotic spindle organization and function. Soc Gen Physiol Ser. 1975;30:3–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Nicklas R. B. Chromosome micromanipulation. II. Induced reorientation and the experimental control of segregation in meiosis. Chromosoma. 1967;21(1):17–50. doi: 10.1007/BF00330545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Nicklas R. B., Koch C. A. Chromosome micromanipulation. 3. Spindle fiber tension and the reorientation of mal-oriented chromosomes. J Cell Biol. 1969 Oct;43(1):40–50. doi: 10.1083/jcb.43.1.40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Nicklas R. B., Koch C. A. Chromosome micromanipulation. IV. Polarized motions within the spindle and models for mitosis. Chromosoma. 1972;39(1):1–26. doi: 10.1007/BF00320586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Nicklas R. B., Staehly C. A. Chromosome micromanipulation. I. The mechanics of chromosome attachment to the spindle. Chromosoma. 1967;21(1):1–16. doi: 10.1007/BF00330544. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sanger J. W. Presence of actin during chromosomal movement. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1975 Jun;72(6):2451–2455. doi: 10.1073/pnas.72.6.2451. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. WHITE M. J. D. Cytogenetics of orthopteroid insects. Adv Genet. 1951;4:268–330. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES