Kinetochores' gripping feat: Conformational wave or biased diffusion?

Trends in Cell Biology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 38-46

  Asbury, Charles L ^a   Tien, Jerry F ^b   Davis, Trisha N ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL DIVISION; CENTROMERE; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CONFORMATION; DIFFUSION; MICROTUBULE; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

ANIMALS; CELL CYCLE; HUMANS; KINETOCHORES; MICROTUBULES; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 78650537294     PISSN: 09628924     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2010.09.003     Document Type: Review

References (83)

1. McAinsh A.D., et al. Structure, function, and regulation of budding yeast kinetochores. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2003, 19:519-539.
2. Westermann S., et al. Structures and functions of yeast kinetochore complexes. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2007, 76:563-591.
3. Miranda J.J., et al. The yeast DASH complex forms closed rings on microtubules. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2005, 12:138-143.
4. Gestaut D.R., et al. Reconstitution and functional analysis of kinetochore subcomplexes. Methods Cell Biol. 2010, 95:641-656.
5. Wei R.R., et al. Molecular organization of the Ndc80 complex, an essential kinetochore component. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2005, 102:5363-5367.
6. Westermann S., et al. Formation of a dynamic kinetochore- microtubule interface through assembly of the Dam1 ring complex. Mol. Cell 2005, 17:277-290.
7. Grishchuk E.L., McIntosh J.R. Microtubule depolymerization can drive poleward chromosome motion in fission yeast. EMBO J. 2006, 25:4888-4896.
8. Weaver B.A., et al. Centromere-associated protein-E is essential for the mammalian mitotic checkpoint to prevent aneuploidy due to single chromosome loss. J. Cell Biol. 2003, 162:551-563.
9. Kapoor T.M., et al. Chromosomes can congress to the metaphase plate before biorientation. Science 2006, 311:388-391.
10. Yang Z., et al. Kinetochore dynein is required for chromosome motion and congression independent of the spindle checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17:973-980.
11. Koshland D.E., et al. Polewards chromosome movement driven by microtubule depolymerization in vitro. Nature 1988, 331:499-504.
12. Hill T.L. Theoretical problems related to the attachment of microtubules to kinetochores. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1985, 82:4404-4408.
13. Mandelkow E.M., et al. Microtubule dynamics and microtubule caps: a time-resolved cryo-electron microscopy study. J. Cell Biol. 1991, 114:977-991.
14. Molodtsov M.I., et al. Force production by depolymerizing microtubules: a theoretical study. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2005, 102:4353-4358.
15. Efremov A., et al. In search of an optimal ring to couple microtubule depolymerization to processive chromosome motions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2007, 104:19017-19022.
16. Howard J. Mechanics of Motor Proteins and the Cytoskeleton 2001, Sinauer Associates.
17. Spudich J.A. The myosin swinging cross-bridge model. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2001, 2:387-392.
18. Mogilner A., Oster G. Polymer motors: pushing out the front and pulling up the back. Curr. Biol. 2003, 13:R721-733.
19. Pollard T.D., Borisy G.G. Cellular motility driven by assembly and disassembly of actin filaments. Cell 2003, 112:453-465.
20. Tran P.T., et al. A mechanism for nuclear positioning in fission yeast based on microtubule pushing. J. Cell Biol. 2001, 153:397-411.
21. Dogterom M., et al. Force generation by dynamic microtubules. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2005, 17:67-74.
22. Wilson R.J. Kinesin's walk: springy or gated head coordination?. Biosystems 2009, 96:121-126.
23. Shiroguchi K., Kinosita K. Myosin V walks by lever action and Brownian motion. Science 2007, 316:1208-1212.
24. Kline-Smith S.L., et al. Kinetochore-spindle microtubule interactions during mitosis. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2005, 17:35-46.
25. Nicklas R.B., Ward S.C. Elements of error correction in mitosis: microtubule capture, release, and tension. J. Cell Biol. 1994, 126:1241-1253.
26. Desai A., et al. Kin I kinesins are microtubule-destabilizing enzymes. Cell 1999, 96:69-78.
27. Kerssemakers J.W., et al. Assembly dynamics of microtubules at molecular resolution. Nature 2006, 442:709-712.
28. Tran P.T., et al. How tubulin subunits are lost from the shortening ends of microtubules. J. Struct Biol. 1997, 118:107-118.
29. Salmon E.D. Microtubules: a ring for the depolymerization motor. Curr. Biol. 2005, 15:R299-302.
30. Westermann S., et al. The Dam1 kinetochore ring complex moves processively on depolymerizing microtubule ends. Nature 2006, 440:565-569.
31. Asbury C.L., et al. The Dam1 kinetochore complex harnesses microtubule dynamics to produce force and movement. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103:9873-9878.
32. Gestaut D.R., et al. Phosphoregulation and depolymerization-driven movement of the Dam1 complex do not require ring formation. Nat. Cell Biol. 2008, 10:407-414.
33. Grishchuk E.L., et al. Different assemblies of the DAM1 complex follow shortening microtubules by distinct mechanisms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2008, 105:6918-6923.
34. Gao Q., et al. A non-ring-like form of the Dam1 complex modulates microtubule dynamics in fission yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2010, 107:13330-13335.
35. Miranda J.J., et al. Protein arms in the kinetochore-microtubule interface of the yeast DASH complex. Mol. Biol. Cell 2007, 18:2503-2510.
36. McIntosh J.R., et al. Fibrils connect microtubule tips with kinetochores: a mechanism to couple tubulin dynamics to chromosome motion. Cell 2008, 135:322-333.
37. Grishchuk E.L., et al. Force production by disassembling microtubules. Nature 2005, 438:384-388.
38. Franck A.D., et al. Tension applied through the Dam1 complex promotes microtubule elongation providing a direct mechanism for length control in mitosis. Nat. Cell Biol. 2007, 9:832-837.
39. Tien J.F., et al. Cooperation of the Dam1 and Ndc80 kinetochore complexes enhances microtubule coupling and is regulated by aurora B. J. Cell Biol. 2010, 189:713-723.
40. Akiyoshi, B. et al. (2010) Tension directly stabilizes reconstituted kinetochore-microtubule attachments. In preparation.
41. VandenBeldt K.J., et al. Kinetochores use a novel mechanism for coordinating the dynamics of individual microtubules. Curr. Biol. 2006, 16:1217-1223.
42. McEwen B.F., Dong Y. Contrasting models for kinetochore microtubule attachment in mammalian cells. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 2010, 67:2163-2172.
43. Joglekar A.P., et al. Molecular architecture of the kinetochore-microtubule attachment site is conserved between point and regional centromeres. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 181:587-594.
44. Joglekar A.P., et al. Molecular architecture of a kinetochore-microtubule attachment site. Nat. Cell Biol. 2006, 8:581-585.
45. Emanuele M.J., et al. Measuring the stoichiometry and physical interactions between components elucidates the architecture of the vertebrate kinetochore. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16:4882-4892.
46. Powers A.F., et al. The Ndc80 kinetochore complex forms load-bearing attachments to dynamic microtubule tips via biased diffusion. Cell 2009, 136:865-875.
47. Lampert F., et al. The Dam1 complex confers microtubule plus end-tracking activity to the Ndc80 kinetochore complex. J. Cell Biol. 2010, 189:641-649.
48. Ciferri C., et al. Implications for kinetochore-microtubule attachment from the structure of an engineered Ndc80 complex. Cell 2008, 133:427-439.
49. Wei R.R., et al. The Ndc80/HEC1 complex is a contact point for kinetochore-microtubule attachment. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2007, 14:54-59.
50. Wang H.W., et al. Architecture and flexibility of the yeast Ndc80 kinetochore complex. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 383:894-903.
51. Guimaraes G.J., et al. Kinetochore-microtubule attachment relies on the disordered N-terminal tail domain of Hec1. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:1778-1784.
52. Miller S.A., et al. Kinetochore attachments require an interaction between unstructured tails on microtubules and Ndc80(Hec1). Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:1785-1791.
53. Dong Y., et al. The outer plate in vertebrate kinetochores is a flexible network with multiple microtubule interactions. Nat. Cell Biol. 2007, 9:516-522.
54. DeLuca J.G., et al. Hec1 and nuf2 are core components of the kinetochore outer plate essential for organizing microtubule attachment sites. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16:519-531.
55. Nicklas R.B. The forces that move chromosomes in mitosis. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem. 1988, 17:431-449.
56. Fisher J.K., et al. DNA relaxation dynamics as a probe for the intracellular environment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2009, 106:9250-9255.
57. Pearson C.G., et al. Budding yeast chromosome structure and dynamics during mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 2001, 152:1255-1266.
58. Brower-Toland B.D., et al. Mechanical disruption of individual nucleosomes reveals a reversible multistage release of DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99:1960-1965.
59. Janke C., et al. Four new subunits of the Dam1-Duo1 complex reveal novel functions in sister kinetochore biorientation. EMBO J. 2002, 21:181-193.
60. Tanaka K., et al. Molecular mechanisms of microtubule-dependent kinetochore transport toward spindle poles. J. Cell Biol. 2007, 178:269-281.
61. Armond J.W., Turner M.S. Force transduction by the microtubule-bound Dam1 ring. Biophys. J. 2010, 98:1598-1607.
62. Liu J., Onuchic J.N. A driving and coupling "Pac-Man" mechanism for chromosome poleward translocation in anaphase A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103:18432-18437.
63. VanBuren V., et al. Estimates of lateral and longitudinal bond energies within the microtubule lattice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99:6035-6040.
64. Desai A., Mitchison T.J. Microtubule polymerization dynamics. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 1997, 13:83-117.
65. Caplow M., et al. The free energy for hydrolysis of a microtubule-bound nucleotide triphosphate is near zero: all of the free energy for hydrolysis is stored in the microtubule lattice. J. Cell Biol. 1994, 127:779-788.
66. Mickey B., Howard J. Rigidity of microtubules is increased by stabilizing agents. J. Cell Biol. 1995, 130:909-917.
67. Beer F.P., Johnston E.R. Mechanics of Materials 1981, McGraw-Hill.
68. Cheeseman I.M., Desai A. Molecular architecture of the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008, 9:33-46.
69. Wilson-Kubalek E.M., et al. Orientation and structure of the Ndc80 complex on the microtubule lattice. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 182:1055-1061.
70. Shimogawa M.M., et al. Mps1 phosphorylation of Dam1 couples kinetochores to microtubule plus ends at metaphase. Curr. Biol. 2006, 16:1489-1501.
71. Cheeseman I.M., et al. Phospho-regulation of kinetochore-microtubule attachments by the Aurora kinase Ipl1p. Cell 2002, 111:163-172.
72. Shang C., et al. Kinetochore protein interactions and their regulation by the Aurora kinase Ipl1p. Mol. Biol. Cell 2003, 14:3342-3355.
73. Daum J.R., et al. Ska3 is required for spindle checkpoint silencing and the maintenance of chromosome cohesion in mitosis. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:1467-1472.
74. Gaitanos T.N., et al. Stable kinetochore-microtubule interactions depend on the Ska complex and its new component Ska3/C13Orf3. EMBO J. 2009, 28:1442-1452.
75. Hanisch A., et al. Timely anaphase onset requires a novel spindle and kinetochore complex comprising Ska1 and Ska2. EMBO J. 2006, 25:5504-5515.
76. Raaijmakers J.A., et al. RAMA1 is a novel kinetochore protein involved in kinetochore-microtubule attachment. J. Cell Sci. 2009, 122:2436-2445.
77. Theis M., et al. Comparative profiling identifies C13orf3 as a component of the Ska complex required for mammalian cell division. EMBO J. 2009, 28:1453-1465.
78. Welburn J.P., et al. The human kinetochore Ska1 complex facilitates microtubule depolymerization-coupled motility. Dev. Cell 2009, 16:374-385.
79. Nekrasov V.S., et al. Interactions between centromere complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Biol. Cell 2003, 14:4931-4946.
80. Pagliuca C., et al. Roles for the conserved spc105p/kre28p complex in kinetochore-microtubule binding and the spindle assembly checkpoint. PLoS One 2009, 4:e7640.
81. Cheeseman I.M., et al. The conserved KMN network constitutes the core microtubule-binding site of the kinetochore. Cell 2006, 127:983-997.
82. Cheeseman I.M., et al. A conserved protein network controls assembly of the outer kinetochore and its ability to sustain tension. Genes Dev. 2004, 18:2255-2268.
83. Desai A., et al. KNL-1 directs assembly of the microtubule-binding interface of the kinetochore in C. elegans. Genes Dev. 2003, 17:2421-2435.