Skip to main content
PMC home page
The Journal of Cell Biology logoLink to The Journal of Cell Biology
. 1995 Aug 2;130(4):941–948. doi: 10.1083/jcb.130.4.941

The checkpoint delaying anaphase in response to chromosome monoorientation is mediated by an inhibitory signal produced by unattached kinetochores

PMCID: PMC2199954  PMID: 7642709

Abstract

During mitosis in Ptk1 cells anaphase is not initiated until, on average, 23 +/- 1 min after the last monooriented chromosome acquires a bipolar attachment to the spindle--an event that may require 3 h (Rieder, C. L., A. Schultz, R. W. Cole, and G. Sluder. 1994. J. Cell Biol. 127:1301-1310). To determine the nature of this cell-cycle checkpoint signal, and its site of production, we followed PtK1 cells by video microscopy prior to and after destroying specific chromosomal regions by laser irradiation. The checkpoint was relieved, and cells entered anaphase, 17 +/- 1 min after the centromere (and both of its associated sister kinetochores) was destroyed on the last monooriented chromosome. Thus, the checkpoint mechanism monitors an inhibitor of anaphase produced in the centromere of monooriented chromosomes. Next, in the presence of one monooriented chromosome, we destroyed one kinetochore on a bioriented chromosome to create a second monooriented chromosome lacking an unattached kinetochore. Under this condition anaphase began in the presence of the experimentally created monooriented chromosome 24 +/- 1.5 min after the nonirradiated monooriented chromosome bioriented. This result reveals that the checkpoint signal is not generated by the attached kinetochore of a monooriented chromosome or throughout the centromere volume. Finally, we selectively destroyed the unattached kinetochore on the last monooriented chromosome. Under this condition cells entered anaphase 20 +/- 2.5 min after the operation, without congressing the irradiated chromosome. Correlative light microscopy/elctron microscopy of these cells in anaphase confirmed the absence of a kinetochore on the unattached chromatid. Together, our data reveal that molecules in or near the unattached kinetochore of a monooriented PtK1 chromosome inhibit the metaphase-anaphase transition.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.9 MB).

Selected References

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

  1. Ault J. G., Nicklas R. B. Tension, microtubule rearrangements, and the proper distribution of chromosomes in mitosis. Chromosoma. 1989 Jun;98(1):33–39. doi: 10.1007/BF00293332. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bernat R. L., Delannoy M. R., Rothfield N. F., Earnshaw W. C. Disruption of centromere assembly during interphase inhibits kinetochore morphogenesis and function in mitosis. Cell. 1991 Sep 20;66(6):1229–1238. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90045-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Berns M. W., Aist J., Edwards J., Strahs K., Girton J., McNeill P., Rattner J. B., Kitzes M., Hammer-Wilson M., Liaw L. H. Laser microsurgery in cell and developmental biology. Science. 1981 Jul 31;213(4507):505–513. doi: 10.1126/science.7017933. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Berns M. W. The laser microbeam as a probe for chromatin structure and function. Methods Cell Biol. 1978;18:277–294. doi: 10.1016/s0091-679x(08)60143-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Berns M. W., Wright W. H., Wiegand Steubing R. Laser microbeam as a tool in cell biology. Int Rev Cytol. 1991;129:1–44. doi: 10.1016/s0074-7696(08)60507-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Brenner S. L., Liaw L. H., Berns M. W. Laser microirradiation of kinetochores in mitotic PtK2 cells: chromatid separation and micronucleus formation. Cell Biophys. 1980 Jun;2(2):139–152. doi: 10.1007/BF02795840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Campbell M. S., Gorbsky G. J. Microinjection of mitotic cells with the 3F3/2 anti-phosphoepitope antibody delays the onset of anaphase. J Cell Biol. 1995 Jun;129(5):1195–1204. doi: 10.1083/jcb.129.5.1195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Cassimeris L., Rieder C. L., Rupp G., Salmon E. D. Stability of microtubule attachment to metaphase kinetochores in PtK1 cells. J Cell Sci. 1990 May;96(Pt 1):9–15. doi: 10.1242/jcs.96.1.9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Desai A., Mitchison T. J. A new role for motor proteins as couplers to depolymerizing microtubules. J Cell Biol. 1995 Jan;128(1-2):1–4. doi: 10.1083/jcb.128.1.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Earnshaw W. C., Bernat R. L., Cooke C. A., Rothfield N. F. Role of the centromere/kinetochore in cell cycle control. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1991;56:675–685. doi: 10.1101/sqb.1991.056.01.076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Earnshaw W. C., Mackay A. M. Role of nonhistone proteins in the chromosomal events of mitosis. FASEB J. 1994 Sep;8(12):947–956. doi: 10.1096/fasebj.8.12.8088460. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Gorbsky G. J., Ricketts W. A. Differential expression of a phosphoepitope at the kinetochores of moving chromosomes. J Cell Biol. 1993 Sep;122(6):1311–1321. doi: 10.1083/jcb.122.6.1311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hartwell L. H., Weinert T. A. Checkpoints: controls that ensure the order of cell cycle events. Science. 1989 Nov 3;246(4930):629–634. doi: 10.1126/science.2683079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hays T. S., Salmon E. D. Poleward force at the kinetochore in metaphase depends on the number of kinetochore microtubules. J Cell Biol. 1990 Feb;110(2):391–404. doi: 10.1083/jcb.110.2.391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Li X., Nicklas R. B. Mitotic forces control a cell-cycle checkpoint. Nature. 1995 Feb 16;373(6515):630–632. doi: 10.1038/373630a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Liang H., Wright W. H., Rieder C. L., Salmon E. D., Profeta G., Andrews J., Liu Y., Sonek G. J., Berns M. W. Directed movement of chromosome arms and fragments in mitotic newt lung cells using optical scissors and optical tweezers. Exp Cell Res. 1994 Jul;213(1):308–312. doi: 10.1006/excr.1994.1203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Marko M., Leith A., Parsons D. Three-dimensional reconstruction of cells from serial sections and whole-cell mounts using multilevel contouring of stereo micrographs. J Electron Microsc Tech. 1988 Aug;9(4):395–411. doi: 10.1002/jemt.1060090406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. McIntosh J. R. Structural and mechanical control of mitotic progression. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1991;56:613–619. doi: 10.1101/sqb.1991.056.01.070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. McNeill P. A., Berns M. W. Chromosome behavior after laser microirradiation of a single kinetochore in mitotic PtK2 cells. J Cell Biol. 1981 Mar;88(3):543–553. doi: 10.1083/jcb.88.3.543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Murray A. Cell cycle checkpoints. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 1994 Dec;6(6):872–876. doi: 10.1016/0955-0674(94)90059-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Nicklas R. B., Ward S. C. Elements of error correction in mitosis: microtubule capture, release, and tension. J Cell Biol. 1994 Sep;126(5):1241–1253. doi: 10.1083/jcb.126.5.1241. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Rattner J. B., Berns M. W. Light and electron microscopy of laser microirradiated chromosomes. J Cell Biol. 1974 Aug;62(2):526–533. doi: 10.1083/jcb.62.2.526. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Rieder C. L., Davison E. A., Jensen L. C., Cassimeris L., Salmon E. D. Oscillatory movements of monooriented chromosomes and their position relative to the spindle pole result from the ejection properties of the aster and half-spindle. J Cell Biol. 1986 Aug;103(2):581–591. doi: 10.1083/jcb.103.2.581. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rieder C. L. Formation of the astral mitotic spindle: ultrastructural basis for the centrosome-kinetochore interaction. Electron Microsc Rev. 1990;3(2):269–300. doi: 10.1016/0892-0354(90)90005-d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Rieder C. L., Salmon E. D. Motile kinetochores and polar ejection forces dictate chromosome position on the vertebrate mitotic spindle. J Cell Biol. 1994 Feb;124(3):223–233. doi: 10.1083/jcb.124.3.223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Rieder C. L., Schultz A., Cole R., Sluder G. Anaphase onset in vertebrate somatic cells is controlled by a checkpoint that monitors sister kinetochore attachment to the spindle. J Cell Biol. 1994 Dec;127(5):1301–1310. doi: 10.1083/jcb.127.5.1301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Rieder C. L. The formation, structure, and composition of the mammalian kinetochore and kinetochore fiber. Int Rev Cytol. 1982;79:1–58. doi: 10.1016/s0074-7696(08)61672-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Rieder C. L. Thick and thin serial sectioning for the three-dimensional reconstruction of biological ultrastructure. Methods Cell Biol. 1981;22:215–249. doi: 10.1016/s0091-679x(08)61879-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Roos U. P. Light and electron microscopy of rat kangaroo cells in mitosis. I. Formation and breakdown of the mitotic apparatus. Chromosoma. 1973;40(1):43–82. doi: 10.1007/BF00319836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. SHAW M. W., KROOTH R. S. THE CHROMOSOMES OF THE TASMANIAN RAT-KANGAROO (POTOROUS TRIDACTYLIS APICALIS). Cytogenetics. 1964;3:19–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Sluder G., Miller F. J., Thompson E. A., Wolf D. E. Feedback control of the metaphase-anaphase transition in sea urchin zygotes: role of maloriented chromosomes. J Cell Biol. 1994 Jul;126(1):189–198. doi: 10.1083/jcb.126.1.189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Tomkiel J., Cooke C. A., Saitoh H., Bernat R. L., Earnshaw W. C. CENP-C is required for maintaining proper kinetochore size and for a timely transition to anaphase. J Cell Biol. 1994 May;125(3):531–545. doi: 10.1083/jcb.125.3.531. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES