Centromere elasticity;Élasticité du centromère

Medecine/Sciences

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 261-266

  Labbé, Jean Pierre ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COHESIN; CONNECTIN; SEPARASE; CELL CYCLE PROTEIN; COHESINS; FUNGAL PROTEIN; MUSCLE PROTEIN; NONHISTONE PROTEIN; NUCLEAR PROTEIN; PROTEIN KINASE;

ANAPHASE; CELL STRUCTURE; CENTROMERE; CHROMOSOME SEGREGATION; CHROMOSOME STRUCTURE; DNA FLANKING REGION; ELASTICITY; HUMAN; MICROTUBULE; REVIEW; SISTER CHROMATID; SPINDLE CELL; PHYSIOLOGY; SISTER CHROMATID EXCHANGE; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

CELL CYCLE PROTEINS; CENTROMERE; CHROMOSOMAL PROTEINS, NON-HISTONE; FUNGAL PROTEINS; HUMANS; MUSCLE PROTEINS; NUCLEAR PROTEINS; PROTEIN KINASES; SISTER CHROMATID EXCHANGE;

EID: 23044444326     PISSN: 07670974     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1051/medsci/2005213261     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Pidoux AL, Allshire RC. Centromeres: getting a grip of chromosomes. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2000; 2: 308-19.
2. Fukagawa T. Centromere DNA, proteins and kinetochore assembly in vertebrates cells. Chrom Res 2004; 12: 557-67.
3. Roos UP. Light and electron microscopy of rat kangaroo cell in mitosis II kinetochore structure and function. Chromosoma 1973; 4: 195-220.
4. Mehes K, Bühler EM. Premature centromere division. Am J Med Genet 1995; 56: 76-9.
5. Fitzgerald H, Archer SZ, Morris CM. Evidence for the repeat primary non disjunction of Chr-las the result of premature centromere division. Hum Genet 1986; 72: 58-62.
6. Vig BK. Sequence of centromere separation: orderly separation of multicentric chromosomes in mouse cells. Chromosoma 1984; 90: 39-45.
7. Mehes G, Tarnok K, Pajor L, Mehes K. Objective analysis of centromere separation. Hum Genet 1996; 97: 365-6.
8. Ghosh S, Paweletz N, Schroeter D. Failure of centromere separation leads to formation of diplochromosomes in next mitosis in okadaic acid treated HeLa cells. Cell Biol Int 1993; 17: 949-52.
9. Van Hooser AA, Mancini M, Allis CD, et al. The mammalian centromer: structural domains and the attenuation of chromatin modelling. FASEB J 1999; 13(suppl 2):S216-20.
10. Rattner JB. The structure of mamalian centromere. BioEssays 1991; 13: 51-6.
11. Wheatley SP, Kandels-Lewis SE, Adams RR, et al. INCENP binds directly to tubulin and requires dynamic microtubules to target to the cleavage furrow. Exp Cell Res 2001; 262: 122-7.
12. Hirano T. SMC protein complexes and higher order chromosomes dynamics. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1998; 10: 317-22.
13. Nicklas RB. Measurements of the force produced by the mitotic spindle in anaphase. J Cell Biol 1983; 987: 542-8.
14. Rieder CL, Cole RW, Khodjakov A, Sluder G. The chekpoint delaying anaphase in reponse to chromosome monoorientation is mediated by an inhibitory signal produced by unattached kinetochore. J Cell Biol 1995; 130: 941-8.
15. Shelby RD, Hahn KM, Sullivan KF. Dynamic elastic behavior of α-satellite DNA domains visualized in situ in living human cells. J Cell Biol 1996; 135: 545-57.
16. Lan W, Zhang X, Kline-Smith SL, et al. Aurora B phosphorylates centromeric MCAK and regulates its localization and microtubule depolymerisation activity. Curr Biol 2004; 14: 273-86.
17. Yanagida M. Frontier questions about sister chromatid separation in anaphase. BioEssays 1995; 17: 519-26.
18. Koshland D, Guacci V. Sister chromatid cohesion: the beginning of a long and beautiful relationships. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2000; 12: 297-301.
19. Michaelis C, Ciosk R, Nasmyth K. Cohesins: chromosomal proteins that prevent premature separation of sister chromatids. Cell 1997; 91: 35-45.
20. Hearing CH, Nasmyth K. Building and breaking bridges between sisters chromatids. BioEssays 2003; 25: 1178-91.
21. Tanaka T, Fuchs J, Loidl J, Nasmyth K. Cohesin ensures bipolar attachment of microtubules to sister centromeres and resist their precocious separation. Nat Cell Biol 2000; 2: 492-5.
22. Campbell JL, Cohen-Fix O. Chromosome cohesion: ring around the sisters. Trends Biochem Sci 2002; 27: 492-5.
23. Bernard P, Allshire RC. Centromeres become unstuck without heterochromatin. Trends Cell Biol 2002; 12: 419-24.
24. Losada J, Hirano T. Intermodular DNA interactions stimulated by the cohesion complex in vitro. Implications for sister chromatides cohesion. Curr Biol 2001; 11: 268-72.
25. Claussen U, Mazur A, Rubtsov N. Chromosomes are highly elastic and can be stretched. Cytogenet Cell Genet 1994; 66: 120-5.
26. Houchmandzadeh B, Marko JF, Chatenay D, Libchaber L. Elasticity and structure of the eukaryotic chromosome studied by micromanipulation and micropipette aspiration. J Cell Biol 1997; 139: 1-12.
27. Houchmandzadeh B, Dimitrov S. Elasticity measurments show the existence of thin rigid cores inside mitotic chromosomes. J Cell Biol 1999; 145: 215-23.
28. Machado C, Andrew D. D-titin: a giant protein with dual roles in chromosomes and muscles. J Cell Biol 2000; 151: 639-52.
29. Machado C, Sunkel CE, Andrew D. Human antibodies reveal titin as chromosomal protein. J Cell Biol 1998; 141: 321-33.
30. Astier C, Labbe JP, Roustan C, Benyamin Y. Effect of different enzymatic treatments on the release of titin fragments from rabbit skeletal myofibrils. Biochem J 1993; 293: 731-4.
31. Astier C, Raynaud F, Lebart MC, et al. Binding of the native titin fragments to actin is regulated by PIP2. FEBS lett 1998; 429: 95-8.
32. Runger-Brandle E, Chapponnier C, Gabbiani G. Intranuclear injection of anti-actin antibodies into Xenopus oocytes bloks chromosomes condensation. Nature 1979; 282: 320-1.
33. Silverman RV, Forer A. Evidence that actin and myosin are involved in the polarward flux of tubulin in metaphase kinetochore microtubules of crane-fly spermatocytes. J Cell Sci 2000; 113: 597-609.