FORMIN a link between kinetochores and microtubule ends

Trends in Cell Biology

Volumn 21, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 625-629

  Mao, Yinghui ^a  

^a Department of Neurology and the Taub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACTIN; METHENAMINE; TUBULIN;

BINDING AFFINITY; CELL MIGRATION; CENTROMERE; ENERGY RESOURCE; METAPHASE CHROMOSOME; MICROTUBULE; MICROTUBULE ASSEMBLY; OSCILLATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN STABILITY; REGULATORY MECHANISM; REVIEW;

ANIMALS; CARRIER PROTEINS; CHROMOSOMES; HUMANS; KINETOCHORES; METAPHASE; MICROTUBULE-ASSOCIATED PROTEINS; MICROTUBULES; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL;

MAMMALIA;

EID: 80755135384     PISSN: 09628924     EISSN: 18793088     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2011.08.005     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Cleveland D.W., et al. Centromeres and kinetochores: from epigenetics to mitotic checkpoint signaling. Cell 2003, 112:407-421.
2. Cheeseman I.M., Desai A. Molecular architecture of the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008, 9:33-46.
3. Joglekar A.P., et al. Mechanisms of force generation by end-on kinetochore-microtubule attachments. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2010, 22:57-67.
4. Santaguida S., Musacchio A. The life and miracles of kinetochores. EMBO J. 2009, 28:2511-2531.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Raaijmakers J.A., et al. RAMA1 is a novel kinetochore protein involved in kinetochore-microtubule attachment. J. Cell Sci. 2009, 122:2436-2445.
8. Welburn J.P., et al. The human kinetochore Ska1 complex facilitates microtubule depolymerization-coupled motility. Dev. Cell 2009, 16:374-385.
9. Cheng L., et al. Aurora B regulates formin mDia3 in achieving metaphase chromosome alignment. Dev. Cell 2011, 20:342-352.
10. Yasuda S., et al. Cdc42 and mDia3 regulate microtubule attachment to kinetochores. Nature 2004, 428:767-771.
11. Skibbens R.V., et al. Directional instability of kinetochore motility during chromosome congression and segregation in mitotic newt lung cells: a push-pull mechanism. J. Cell Biol. 1993, 122:859-875.
12. Higgs H.N., Peterson K.J. Phylogenetic analysis of the formin homology 2 domain. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16:1-13.
13. Rivero F., et al. A comparative sequence analysis reveals a common GBD/FH3-FH1-FH2-DAD architecture in formins from Dictyostelium, fungi and metazoa. BMC Genomics 2005, 6:28.
14. Bartolini F., Gundersen G.G. Formins and microtubules. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2009, 1803:164-173.
15. Chesarone M.A., et al. Unleashing formins to remodel the actin and microtubule cytoskeletons. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010, 11:62-74.
16. Goode B.L., Eck M.J. Mechanism and function of formins in the control of actin assembly. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2007, 76:593-627.
17. Bartolini F., et al. The formin mDia2 stabilizes microtubules independently of its actin nucleation activity. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 181:523-536.
18. Wen Y., et al. EB1 and APC bind to mDia to stabilize microtubules downstream of Rho and promote cell migration. Nat. Cell Biol. 2004, 6:820-830.
19. Tirnauer J.S., et al. EB1 targets to kinetochores with attached, polymerizing microtubules. Mol. Biol. Cell 2002, 13:4308-4316.
20. Gundersen G.G., Bulinski J.C. Selective stabilization of microtubules oriented toward the direction of cell migration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1988, 85:5946-5950.
21. Palazzo A.F., et al. mDia mediates Rho-regulated formation and orientation of stable microtubules. Nat. Cell Biol. 2001, 3:723-729.
22. Infante A.S., et al. Detyrosinated (Glu) microtubules are stabilized by an ATP-sensitive plus-end cap. J. Cell Sci. 2000, 113:3907-3919.
23. Drechsel D.N., et al. Modulation of the dynamic instability of tubulin assembly by the microtubule-associated protein tau. Mol. Biol. Cell 1992, 3:1141-1154.
24. Pryer N.K., et al. Brain microtubule-associated proteins modulate microtubule dynamic instability in vitro. Real-time observations using video microscopy. J. Cell Sci. 1992, 103:965-976.
25. Vasquez R.J., et al. XMAP from Xenopus eggs promotes rapid plus end assembly of microtubules and rapid microtubule polymer turnover. J. Cell Biol. 1994, 127:985-993.
26. Ciferri C., et al. Implications for kinetochore-microtubule attachment from the structure of an engineered Ndc80 complex. Cell 2008, 133:427-439.
27. 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.
28. Wan X., et al. Protein architecture of the human kinetochore microtubule attachment site. Cell 2009, 137:672-684.
29. Cheeseman I.M., et al. The conserved KMN network constitutes the core microtubule-binding site of the kinetochore. Cell 2006, 127:983-997.
30. DeLuca J.G., et al. Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and attachment stability are regulated by Hec1. Cell 2006, 127:969-982.
31. Deluca K.F., et al. Temporal changes in Hec1 phosphorylation control kinetochore-microtubule attachment stability during mitosis. J. Cell Sci. 2011, 124:622-634.
32. Ault J.G., Rieder C.L. Chromosome mal-orientation and reorientation during mitosis. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 1992, 22:155-159.
33. Lampson M.A., Cheeseman I.M. Sensing centromere tension: Aurora B and the regulation of kinetochore function. Trends Cell Biol. 2011, 21:133-140.
34. Kohno H., et al. Bni1p implicated in cytoskeletal control is a putative target of Rho1p small GTP binding protein in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO J. 1996, 15:6060-6068.
35. Lee L., et al. Control of mitotic spindle position by the Saccharomyces cerevisiae formin Bni1p. J. Cell Biol. 1999, 144:947-961.
36. Adames N.R., Cooper J.A. Microtubule interactions with the cell cortex causing nuclear movements in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Cell Biol. 2000, 149:863-874.
37. Bloom K. It's a kar9ochore to capture microtubules. Nat. Cell Biol. 2000, 2:E96-E98.
38. Schuyler S.C., Pellman D. Search, capture and signal: games microtubules and centrosomes play. J. Cell Sci. 2001, 114:247-255.
39. Slep K.C. Structural and mechanistic insights into microtubule end-binding proteins. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2010, 22:88-95.
40. Bieling P., et al. Reconstitution of a microtubule plus-end tracking system in vitro. Nature 2007, 450:1100-1105.
41. Dragestein K.A., et al. Dynamic behavior of GFP-CLIP-170 reveals fast protein turnover on microtubule plus ends. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 180:729-737.
42. Zhang J., et al. BubR1 and APC/EB1 cooperate to maintain metaphase chromosome alignment. J. Cell Biol. 2007, 178:773-784.
43. Draviam V.M., et al. Misorientation and reduced stretching of aligned sister kinetochores promote chromosome missegregation in EB1- or APC-depleted cells. EMBO J. 2006, 25:2814-2827.
44. Green R.A., Kaplan K.B. Chromosome instability in colorectal tumor cells is associated with defects in microtubule plus-end attachments caused by a dominant mutation in APC. J. Cell Biol. 2003, 163:949-961.
45. Green R.A., et al. APC and EB1 function together in mitosis to regulate spindle dynamics and chromosome alignment. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16:4609-4622.
46. 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.
47. Montenegro Gouveia S., et al. In vitro reconstitution of the functional interplay between MCAK and EB3 at microtubule plus ends. Curr. Biol. 2010, 20:1717-1722.
48. Civelekoglu-Scholey G., et al. Model of chromosome motility in Drosophila embryos: adaptation of a general mechanism for rapid mitosis. Biophys. J. 2006, 90:3966-3982.
49. Gardner M.K., Odde D.J. Modeling of chromosome motility during mitosis. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2006, 18:639-647.
50. Hyman A.A., Mitchison T.J. Modulation of microtubule stability by kinetochores in vitro. J. Cell Biol. 1990, 110:1607-1616.
51. Zhai Y., et al. Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and the metaphase-anaphase transition. J. Cell Biol. 1995, 131:721-734.
52. Amaro A.C., et al. Molecular control of kinetochore-microtubule dynamics and chromosome oscillations. Nat. Cell Biol. 2010, 12:319-329.
53. Stumpff J., et al. The kinesin-8 motor Kif18A suppresses kinetochore movements to control mitotic chromosome alignment. Dev. Cell 2008, 14:252-262.
54. Khodjakov A., Rieder C.L. Kinetochores moving away from their associated pole do not exert a significant pushing force on the chromosome. J. Cell Biol. 1996, 135:315-327.