Mechanical forces in mitosis

Comprehensive Biophysics

Volumn 4, Issue , 2012, Pages 298-320

  Dumont, S ^a   Mitchison, T J ^a  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Force production mechanisms; Kinetochore microtubule interface mechanics.; Mechanical force; Mitosis; Spindle mechanics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860722983     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-374920-8.00419-7     Document Type: Chapter

References (170)

1. Neumann B., Walter T., Hériché J.K., Bulkescher J., Erfle H., Conrad C., Rogers P., Poser I., Held M., Liebel U., Cetin C., Sieckmann F., Pau G., Kabbe R., Wünsche A., Satagopam V., Schmitz M.H., Chapuis C., Gerlich D.W., Schneider R., Eils R., Huber W., Peters J.M., Hyman A.A., Durbin R., Pepperkok R., Ellenberg J. Phenotypic profiling of the human genome by time-lapse microscopy reveals cell division genes. Nature 2010, 464:721-727.
2. Hutchins J.R., Toyoda Y., Hegemann B., Poser I., Hériché J.K., Sykora M.M., Augsburg M., Hudecz O., Buschhorn B.A., Bulkescher J., Conrad C., Comartin D., Schleiffer A., Sarov M., Pozniakovsky A., Slabicki M.M., Schloissnig S., Steinmacher I., Leuschner M., Ssykor A., Lawo S., Pelletier L., Stark H., Nasmyth K., Ellenberg J., Durbin R., Buchholz F., Mechtler K., Hyman A.A., Peters J.M. Systematic analysis of human protein complexes identifies chromosome segregation proteins. Science 2010, 328:593-599.
3. Walczak C.E., Heald R. Mechanisms of mitotic spindle assembly and function. Int. Rev. Cytol. 2008, 265:111-158.
4. Cheeseman I.M., Desai A. Molecular architecture of the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008, 9:33-46.
5. Olsen J.V., Vermeulen M., Santamaria A., Kumar C., Miller M.L., Jensen L.J., Gnad F., Cox J., Jensen T.S., Nigg E.A., Brunak S., Mann M. Quantitative phosphoproteomics reveals widespread full phosphorylation site occupancy during mitosis. Sci. Signal 2010, 3:ra3.
6. Morgan D.O. The Cell Cycle: Principles of Control 2006, New Science Press, Ltd, London.
7. Flemming W. Zellsubstanz, Kern und Zelltheilung; 1882, Vogel, Leipzig.
8. Dumont S., Mitchison T.J. Compression regulates spindle length by a mechanochemical switch at the poles. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:1086-1095.
9. Hays, T. S. The Force-Balance Mechanism of Chromosome Congression. Ph.D. thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 1985.
10. Inoué S. The effect of colchicine on the microscopic and submicroscopic structure of the mitotic spindle. Exp. Cell Res. Suppl. 1952, 2:305-318.
11. Inoué S. Effect of temperature on the birefringence of the mitotic spindle. Biol. Bull. 1952, 103:316.
12. Inoué S., Ritter H.J. Dynamics of Mitotic Spindle Organization and Function 1975, Vol. 30. Raven Press, New York, pp. 3-30.
13. Inoué S., Sato H. Cell motility by labile association of molecules. The nature of mitotic spindle fibers and their role in chromosome movement. J. Gen. Physiol. 1967, 50:259-292.
14. Itabashi T., Takagi J., Shimamoto Y., Onoe H., Kuwana K., Shimoyama I., Gaetz J., Kapoor T.M., Ishiwata S. Probing the mechanical architecture of the vertebrate meiotic spindle. Nat. Methods 2009, 6:167-172.
15. Salmon E.D. Pressure-induced depolymerization of spindle microtubules. J. Cell Biol. 1975, 65:603-614.
16. Chang P., Jacobson M.K., Mitchison T.J. Poly(ADP-ribose) is required for spindle assembly and structure. Nature 2004, 432:645-649.
17. Blower M.D., Feric E., Weis K., Heald R. Genome-wide analysis demonstrates conserved localization of messenger RNAs to mitotic microtubules. J. Cell Biol. 2007, 179:1365-1373.
18. Karsenti E., Vernos I. The mitotic spindle: a self-made machine. Science 2001, 294:543-547.
19. Inoué S., Salmon E.D. Force generation by microtubule assembly/disassembly in mitosis and related movements. Mol. Biol. Cell 1995, 6:1619-1640.
20. Nicklas R.B. Measurements of the force produced by the mitotic spindle in anaphase. J. Cell Biol. 1983, 97:532-548.
21. Nicklas R.B., Koch C.A. Chromosome micromanipulation III: Spindle fiber tension and the reorientation of mal-oriented chromosomes. J. Cell Biol. 1969, 43:40-50.
22. Nicklas R.B., Ward S.C. Elements of error correction in mitosis: microtubule capture, release, and tension. J. Cell Biol. 1994, 126:1241-1253.
23. Li X., Nicklas R.B. Mitotic forces control a cell-cycle checkpoint. Nature 1995, 373:630-632.
24. Skibbens R.V., Skeen V.P., Salmon E.D. 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.
25. Tolić-Nørrelykke I.M. Push-me-pull-you: how microtubules organize the cell interior. Eur. Biophys. J. 2008, 37:1271-1278.
26. Manneville J., Etienne-Manneville S. Positioning centrosomes and spindle poles: looking at the periphery to find the centre. Biol. Cell 2006, 98:557-565.
27. Grill S.W., Hyman A.A. Spindle positioning by cortical pulling forces. Dev. Cell 2005, 8:461-465.
28. Kapoor T.M., Compton D.A. Searching for the middle ground: mechanisms of chromosome alignment during mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 2002, 157:551-556.
29. Inoué S. Polarization optical studies of the mitotic spindle. I. The demonstration of spindle fibers in living cells. Chromosoma 1953, 5:487-500.
30. Grishchuk E.L., McIntosh J.R. Microtubule depolymerization can drive poleward chromosome motion in fission yeast. EMBO J. 2006, 25:4888-4896.
31. Dogterom M., Yurke B. Measurement of the force-velocity relation for growing microtubules. Science 1997, 278:856-860.
32. 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.
33. Grishchuk E.L., Molodtsov M.I., Ataullakhanov F.I., McIntosh J.R. Force production by disassembling microtubules. Nature 2005, 438:384-388.
34. Lombillo V.A., Stewart R.J., McIntosh J.R. Minus-end-directed motion of kinesin-coated microspheres driven bymicrotubule depolymerization. Nature 1995, 373:161-164.
35. Borisy G.G., Taylor E.W. The mechanism of action of colchicine. Binding of colchincine-3H to cellular protein. J. Cell Biol. 1967, 34:525-533.
36. Mohri H. Amino-acid composition of 'Tubulin' constituting microtubules of sperm flagella. Nature 1968, 217:1053-1054.
37. McDonald K.L., O'Toole E.T., Mastronarde D.N., McIntosh J.R. Kinetochore microtubules in PTK cells. J. Cell Biol. 1992, 118:369-383.
38. McEwen B.F., Ding Y., Heagle A.B. Relevance of kinetochore size and microtubule-binding capacity for stable chromosome attachment during mitosis in PtK1 cells. Chromosome Res. 1998, 6:123-132.
39. Nicklas R.B., Kubai D.F., Hays T.S. Spindle microtubules and their mechanical associations after micromanipulation in anaphase. J. Cell Biol. 1982, 95:91-104.
40. Begg D.A., Ellis G.W. Micromanipulation studies of chromosome movement. I. Chromosome-spindle attachment and the mechanical properties of chromosomal spindle fibers. J. Cell Biol. 1979, 82:528-541.
41. Nicklas R.B., Staehly C.A. Chromosome micromanipulation. I. The mechanics of chromosome attachment to the spindle. Chromosoma 1967, 21:1-16.
42. Hayden J.H., Bowser S.S., Rieder C.L. Kinetochores capture astral microtubules during chromosome attachment to the mitotic spindle: direct visualization in live newt lung cells. J. Cell Biol. 1990, 111:1039-1045.
43. Maiato H., Rieder C.L., Khodjakov A. Kinetochore-driven formation of kinetochore fibers contributes to spindle assembly during animal mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 2004, 167:831-840.
44. Zhai Y., Kronebusch P.J., Borisy G.G. Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and the metaphase-anaphase transition. J. Cell Biol. 1995, 131:731-734.
45. Mitchison T.J. Polewards microtubule flux in the mitotic spindle: evidence from photoactivation of fluorescence. J. Cell Biol. 1989, 109:637-652.
46. Mastronarde D.N., McDonald K.L., Ding R., McIntosh J.R. Interpolar spindle microtubules in PTK cells. J. Cell Biol. 1993, 123:1475-1489.
47. Heald R., Tournebize R., Blank T., Sandaltzopoulos R., Becker P., Hyman A., Karsenti E. Self-organization of microtubules into bipolar spindles around artificial chromosomes in Xenopus egg extracts. Nature 1996, 382:420-425.
48. Burbank K.S., Groen A.C., Perlman Z.E., Fisher D.S., Mitchison T.J. A new method reveals microtubule minus ends throughout the meiotic spindle. J. Cell Biol. 2006, 175:369-375.
49. Goodwin S.S., Vale R.D. Patronin regulates the microtubule network by protecting microtubule minus ends. Cell 2010, 143:263-274.
50. Mahoney N.M., Goshima G., Douglass A.D., Vale R.D. Making microtubules and mitotic spindles in cells without functional centrosomes. Curr. Biol. 2006, 16:564-569.
51. Saxton W.M., Stemple D.L., Leslie R.J., Salmon E.D., Zavortink M., McIntosh J.R. Tubulin dynamics in cultured mammalian cells. J. Cell Biol. 1984, 99:2175-2186.
52. Sawin K.E., Mitchison T.J. Poleward microtubule flux in mitotic spindles assembled in vitro. J. Cell Biol. 1991, 112:941-954.
53. Yang G., Cameron L.A., Maddox P.S., Salmon E.D., Danuser G. Regional variation of microtubule flux reveals microtubule organization in the metaphase meiotic spindle. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 182:631-639.
54. Needleman D.J., Groen A., Ohi R., Maresca T.J., Mirny L., Mitchison T.J. Fast microtubule dynamics in meiotic spindles measured by single molecule imaging: evidence that the spindle environment does not stabilize microtubules. Mol. Biol. Cell 2010, 21:323-333.
55. Yang G., Houghtaling B.R., Gaetz J., Liu J.Z., Danuser G., Kapoor T.M. Architectural dynamics of the meiotic spindle revealed by single-fluorophore imaging. Nat. Cell Biol. 2007, 9:1233-1242.
56. Burbank K.S., Mitchison T.J., Fisher D.S. Slide-and-cluster models for spindle assembly. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17:1373-1383.
57. Grill S.W., Howard J., Schäffer E., Stelzer E.H., Hyman A.A. The distribution of active force generators controls mitotic spindle position. Science 2003, 301:518-521.
58. Rusan N.M., Fagerstrom C.J., Yvon A.M., Wadsworth P. Cell cycle-dependent changes in microtubule dynamics in living cells expressing green fluorescent protein-alpha tubulin. Mol. Biol. Cell 2001, 12:971-980.
59. Waterman-Storer C.M., Desai A., Bulinski J.C., Salmon E.D. Fluorescent speckle microscopy, a method to visualize the dynamics of protein assemblies in living cells. Curr. Biol. 1998, 8:1227-1230.
60. O'Toole E.T., McDonald K.L., Mäntler J., McIntosh J.R., Hyman A.A., Müller-Reichert T. Morphologically distinct microtubule ends in the mitotic centrosome of Caenorhabditis elegans. J. Cell Biol. 2003, 163:451-456.
61. Manning A.L., Compton D.A. Structural and regulatory roles of nonmotor spindle proteins. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2008, 20:101-106.
62. Howard J. Mechanics of Motor Proteins and the Cytoskeleton 2001, Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA.
63. Hill T.L., Kirschner M.W. Bioenergetics and kinetics of microtubule and actin filament assembly-disassembly. Int. Rev. Cytol. 1982, 78:1-125.
64. Dogterom M., Kerssemakers W.J., Romet-Lemonne G., Janson M.E. Force generation by dynamic microtubules. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2005, 17:67-74.
65. Peskin C.S., Odell G.M., Oster G.F. Cellular motions and thermal fluctuations - the Brownian ratchet. Biophys. J. 1993, 65:316-324.
66. Akhmanova A., Hoogenraad C.C. Microtubule plus-end-tracking proteins: mechanisms and functions. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2005, 17:47-54.
67. Tran P.T., Marsh L., Doye V., Inoue S., Chang F. A mechanism for nuclear positioning in fission yeast based on microtubule pushing. J. Cell Biol. 2001, 153:397-411.
68. Wühr M., Dumont S., Groen A.C., Needleman D.J., Mitchison T.J. How does a millimeter-sized cell find its center?. Cell Cycle 2009, 8:1115-1121.
69. Maiato H., Khodjakov A., Rieder C.L. Drosophila CLASP is required for the incorporation of microtubule subunits into fluxing kinetochore fibres. Nat. Cell Biol. 2005, 7:42-47.
70. Toso A., Winter J.R., Garrod A.J., Amaro A.C., Meraldi P., McAinsh A.D. Kinetochore-generated pushing forces separate centrosomes during bipolar spindle assembly. J. Cell Biol. 2009, 184:365-372.
71. Waters J.C., Skibbens R.V., Salmon E.D. Oscillating mitotic newt lung cell kinetochores are, on average, under tension and rarely push. J. Cell Sci. 1996, 109:2823-2831.
72. 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.
73. Tanenbaum M.E., Macůrek L., Janssen A., Geers E.F., Alvarez-Fernández M., Medema R.H. Kif15 cooperates with eg5 to promote bipolar spindle assembly. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:1703-1711.
74. McIntosh J.R., Volkov V., Ataullakhanov F.I., Grishchuk E.L. Tubulin depolymerization may be an ancient biological motor. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 123:3425-3434.
75. Mitchison T.J., Evans L., Schulze E., Kirschner M. Sites of microtubule assembly and disassembly in the mitotic spindle. Cell 1986, 45:515-527.
76. Asbury C.L., Tien J.F., Davis T.N. Kinetochores' gripping feat: conformational wave or biased diffusion?. Trends Cell Biol. 2011, 21:38-46.
77. Hill T.L. Theoretical problems related to the attachment of microtubules to kinetochores. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 1985, 82:4404-4408.
78. Powers A.F., Franck A.D., Gestaut D.R., Cooper J., Gracyzk B., Wei R.R., Wordeman L., Davis T.N., Asbury C.L. The Ndc80 kinetochore complex forms load-bearing attachments to dynamic microtubule tips via biased diffusion. Cell 2009, 136:865-875.
79. Molodtsov M.I., Grishchuk E.L., Efremov A.K., McIntosh J.R., Ataullakhanov F.I. Force production by depolymerizing microtubules: a theoretical study. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2005, 102:4353-4358.
80. McIntosh J.R., Grishchuk E.L., Morphew M.K., Efremov A.K., Zhudenkov K., Volkov V.A., Cheeseman I.M., Desai A., Mastronarde D.N., Ataullakhanov F.I. Fibrils connect microtubule tips with kinetochores: a mechanism to couple tubulin dynamics to chromosome motion. Cell 2008, 135:322-333.
81. DeLuca J.G., Gall W.E., Ciferri C., Cimini D., Musacchio A., Salmon E.D. Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and attachment stability are regulated by Hec1. Cell 2006, 127:969-982.
82. Maddox P., Straight A., Coughlin P., Mitchison T.J., Salmon E.D. Direct observation of microtubule dynamics at kinetochores in Xenopus extract spindles: implications for spindle mechanics. J. Cell Biol. 2003, 162:377-382.
83. LaFountain J.R.J., Cohan C.S., Siegel A.J., LaFountain D.J. Direct visualization of microtubule flux during metaphase and anaphase in crane-fly spermatocytes. Mol. Biol. Cell 2004, 15:5724-5732.
84. McIntosh J.R., Hepler P.K., Van Wie D.G. Model for mitosis. Nature 1969, 224:659-663.
85. Enos A.P., Morris N.R. Mutation of a gene that encodes a kinesin-like protein blocks nuclear division in A. nidulans. Cell 1990, 60:1019-1027.
86. Meluh P.B., Rose M.D. KAR3, a kinesin-related gene required for yeast nuclear fusion. Cell 1990, 60:1029-1041.
87. Svoboda K., Block S.M. Force and velocity measured for single kinesin molecules. Cell 1994, 77:773-784.
88. Howard J., Hyman A.A. Microtubule polymerases and depolymerases. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2007, 19:31-35.
89. Sharp D.J., Rogers G.C., Scholey J.M. Microtubule motors in mitosis. Nature 2000, 407:41-47.
90. Bloom K.S. Beyond the code: the mechanical properties of DNA as they relate to mitosis. Chromosoma 2008, 117:103-110.
91. Gittes F., Mickey B., Nettleton J., Howard J. Flexural rigidity of microtubules and actin filaments measured from thermal fluctuations in shape. J. Cell Biol. 1993, 120:923-934.
92. Rubinstein B., Larripa K., Sommi P., Mogilner A. Elasticity of motor-microtubule bundles and shape of the mitotic spindle. Phys. Biol. 2009, 6:016005.
93. Brangwynne C.P., MacKintosh F.C., Kumar S., Geisse N.A., Talbot J., Mahadevan L., Parker K.K., Ingber D.E., Weitz D.A. Microtubules can bear enhanced compressive loads in living cells because of lateral reinforcement. J. Cell Biol. 2006, 173:733-741.
94. Nicklas R.B. The forces that move chromosomes in mitosis. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem. 1988, 17:431-449.
95. Sato M., Schwarz W.H., Pollard T.D. Dependence of the mechanical properties of actin/alpha-actinin gels on deformation rate. Nature 1987, 325:828-830.
96. McGrath J.L., Eungdamrong N.J., Fisher C.I., Peng F., Mahadevan L., Mitchison T.J., Kuo S.C. The force-velocity relationship for the actin-based motility of Listeria monocytogenes. Curr. Biol. 2003, 13:329-332.
97. Mogilner A., Craig E. Towards a quantitative understanding of mitotic spindle assembly and mechanics. J. Cell Sci. 2010, 123:3435-3445.
98. McNeill P.A., Berns M.W. Chromosome behavior after laser microirradiation of a single kinetochore in mitotic PtK2 cells. J. Cell Biol. 1981, 88:543-553.
99. Waters J.C., Mitchison T.J., Rieder C.L., Salmon E.D. The kinetochore microtubule minus-end disassembly associated with poleward flux produces a force that can do work. Mol. Biol. Cell 1996, 7:1547-1558.
100. Rogers G.C., Rogers S.L., Schwimmer T.A., Ems-McClung S.C., Walczak C.E., Vale R.D., Scholey J.M., Sharp D.J. Two mitotic kinesins cooperate to drive sister chromatid separation during anaphase. Nature 2004, 427:364-370.
101. Cameron L., Yang G., Cimini D., Canman J.C., Kisurina-Evgenieva O., Khodjakov A., Danuser G., Salmon E.D. Kinesin 5-independent poleward flux of kinetochore microtubules in PtK1 cells. J. Cell Biol. 2006, 173:173-179.
102. LaFountain J.R. Spindle shape changes as an indicator of force production in crane-fly spermatocytes. J. Cell Sci. 1972, 10:79-93.
103. Pickett-Heaps J.D., Forer A., Spurck T. Traction fibre: toward a 'tensegral' model of the spindle. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 1997, 37:1-6.
104. Mitchison T.J., Maddox P., Gaetz J., Groen A.C., Shirazu M., Desai A., Salmon E.D., Kapoor T.M. Roles of polymerization dynamics, opposed motors, and a tensile element in governing the length of Xenopus extract meiotic spindles. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16:3064-3076.
105. Dumont S., Mitchison T. Force and length in the mitotic spindle. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:R749-R761.
106. Östergren G. The mechanism of co-orientation in bivalents and multivalents. The theory of pulling. Hereditas 1951, 37:85-156.
107. Hays T.S., Wise D., Salmon E.D. Traction force on a kinetochore at metaphase acts as a linear function of kinetochore fiber length. J. Cell Biol. 1982, 93. 374-382, 389.
108. LaFountain J.R.J., Oldenbourg R. Maloriented bivalents have metaphase positions at the spindle equator with more kinetochore microtubules to one pole than to the other. Mol. Biol. Cell 2004, 15:5346-5355.
109. Dionne M.A., Howard L., Compton D.A. NuMA is a component of an insoluble matrix at mitotic spindle poles. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton 1999, 42:189-203.
110. Walker D.L., Wang D., Jin Y., Rath U., Wang Y., Johansen J., Johansen K.M. Skeletor, a novel chromosomal protein that redistributes during mitosis provides evidence for the formation of a spindle matrix. J. Cell Biol. 2000, 151:1401-1412.
111. Lu L., Ladinsky M.S., Kirchhausen T. Cisternal organization of the endoplasmic reticulum during mitosis. Mol. Biol. Cell 2009, 20:3471-3480.
112. De Souza C.P., Osmani S.A. Mitosis, not just open or closed. EGBRaryot. Cell 2007, 6:1521-1527.
113. Tsai M.Y., Wang S., Heidinger J.M., Shumaker D.K., Adam S.A., Goldman R.D., Zheng Y. A mitotic lamin B matrix induced by RanGTP required for spindle assembly. Science 2006, 311:1887-1893.
114. Brust-Mascher I., Sommi P., Cheerambathur D.K., Scholey J.M. Kinesin-5-dependent poleward flux and spindle length control in Drosophila embryo mitosis. Mol. Biol. Cell 2009, 20:1749-1762.
115. Kapoor T.M., Mayer T.U., Coughlin M.L., Mitchison T.J. Probing spindle assembly mechanisms with monastrol, a small molecule inhibitor of the mitotic kinesin, Eg5. J. Cell Biol. 2000, 150:975-988.
116. Levesque A.A., Compton D.A. The chromokinesin Kid is necessary for chromosome arm orientation and oscillation, but not congression, on mitotic spindles. J. Cell Biol. 2001, 154:1135-1146.
117. Goshima G., Scholey J.M. Control of mitotic spindle length. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2010, 26:21-57.
118. Marshall W.F. Cellular length control systems. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2004, 20:677-693.
119. Wühr M., Chen Y., Dumont S., Groen A.C., Needleman D.J., Salic A., Mitchison T.J. Evidence for an upper limit to mitotic spindle length. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:1256-1261.
120. Lohka M.J., Maller J.L. Induction of nuclear envelope breakdown, chromosome condensation, and spindle formation in cell-free extracts. J. Cell Biol. 1985, 101:518-523.
121. Brown K.S., Blower M.D., Maresca T.J., Grammer T.C., Harland R.M., Heald R. Xenopus tropicalis egg extracts provide insight into scaling of the mitotic spindle. J. Cell Biol. 2007, 176:765-770.
122. Fulton A.B., Isaacs W.B. Titin, a huge, elastic sarcomeric protein with a probable role in morphogenesis. Bioessays 1991, 13:157-161.
123. 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, 103:581-591.
124. Sluder G., Rieder C.L. Centriole number and the reproductive capacity of spindle poles. J. Cell Biol. 1985, 100:887-896.
125. Ke K., Cheng J., Hunt A.J. The distribution of polar ejection forces determines the amplitude of chromosome directional instability. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:807-815.
126. Bajer A.S. Functional autonomy of monopolar spindle and evidence for oscillatory movement in mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 1982, 93:33-48.
127. Tokai-Nishizumi N., Ohsugi M., Suzuki E., Yamamoto T. The chromokinesin Kid is required for maintenance of proper metaphase spindle size. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16:5455-5463.
128. Funabiki H., Murray A.W. The Xenopus chromokinesin Xkid is essential for metaphase chromosome alignment and must be degraded to allow anaphase chromosome movement. Cell 2000, 102:411-424.
129. Zhai Y., Borisy G.G. Quantitative determination of the proportion of microtubule polymer during the mitosis-interphase transition. J. Cell Sci. 1994, 107:881-890.
130. Eldar A., Elowitz M.B. Functional roles for noise in genetic circuits. Nature 2010, 467:167-173.
131. Cleveland D.W., Pittenger M.F., Feramisco J.R. Elevation of tubulin levels by microinjection suppresses new tubulin synthesis. Nature 1983, 305:738-740.
132. Verde F., Dogterom M., Stelzer E., Karsenti E., Leibler S. Control of microtubule dynamics and length by cyclin A- and cyclin B-dependent kinases in Xenopus egg extracts. J. Cell Biol. 1992, 118:1097-1108.
133. Goshima G., Wollman R., Stuurman N., Scholey J.M., Vale R.D. Length control of the metaphase spindle. Curr. Biol. 2005, 15:1979-1988.
134. Wollman R., Civelekoglu-Scholey G., Scholey J.M., Mogilner A. Reverse engineering of force integration during mitosis in the Drosophila embryo. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2008, 4:195.
135. Gatlin J.C., Matov A., Danuser G., Mitchison T.J., Salmon E.D. Directly probing the mechanical properties of the spindle and its matrix. J. Cell Biol. 2010, 188:481-489.
136. Caudron M., Bunt G., Bastiaens P., Karsenti E. Spatial coordination of spindle assembly by chromosome-mediated signaling gradients. Science 2005, 309:1373-1376.
137. Kaláb P., Pralle A., Isacoff E.Y., Heald R., Weis K. Analysis of a RanGTP-regulated gradient in mitotic somatic cells. Nature 2006, 440:697-701.
138. Fuller B.G., Lampson M.A., Foley E.A., Rosasco-Nitcher S., Le K.V., Tobelmann P., Brautigan D.L., Stukenberg P.T., Kapoor T.M. Midzone activation of aurora B in anaphase produces an intracellular phosphorylation gradient. Nature 2008, 453:1132-1136.
139. Gatlin J.C., Matov A., Groen A.C., Needleman D.J., Maresca T.J., Danuser G., Mitchison T.J., Salmon E.D. Spindle fusion requires dynein-mediated sliding of oppositely oriented microtubules. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:287-296.
140. Ohi R., Sapra T., Howard J., Mitchison T.J. Differentiation of cytoplasmic and meiotic spindle assembly MCAK functions by Aurora B-dependent phosphorylation. Mol. Biol. Cell 2004, 15:2895-2906.
141. Allshire R.C., Karpen G.H. Epigenetic regulation of centromeric chromatin: old dogs, new tricks?. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2008, 9:923-937.
142. Stimpson K.M., Sullivan B.A. Epigenomics of centromere assembly and function. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2010, 22:772-780.
143. Brinkley B.R., Stubblefield E. The fine structure of the kinetochore of a mammalian cell in vitro. Chromosoma 1966, 19:28-43.
144. Euteneuer U., McIntosh J.R. Structural polarity of kinetochore microtubules in PtK1 cells. J. Cell Biol. 1981, 89:338-345.
145. Dong Y., Vanden Beldt K.J., Meng X., Khodjakov A., McEwen B.F. The outer plate in vertebrate kinetochores is a flexible network with multiple microtubule interactions. Nat. Cell Biol. 2007, 9:516-522.
146. Wan X., O'Quinn R.P., Pierce H.L., Joglekar A.P., Gall W.E., DeLuca J.G., Carroll C.W., Liu S., Yen T.J., McEwen B.F., Stukenberg P.T., Desai A., Salmon E.D. Protein architecture of the human kinetochore microtubule attachment site. Cell 2009, 137:672-684.
147. Moroi Y., Peebles C., Fritzler M.J., Steigerwald J., Tan E.M. Autoantibody to centromere (kinetochore) in scleroderma sera. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 1980, 77:1627-1631.
148. Cooke C.A., Bernat R.L., Earnshaw W.C. CENP-B: a major human centromere protein located beneath the kinetochore. J. Cell Biol. 1990, 110:1475-1488.
149. Saitoh H., Tomkiel J., Cooke C.A., Ratrie H.r., Maurer M., Rothfield N.F., Earnshaw W.C. CENP-C, an autoantigen in scleroderma, is a component of the human inner kinetochore plate. Cell 1992, 70:115-125.
150. Santaguida S., Musacchio A. The life and miracles of kinetochores. EMBO J. 2009, 28:2511-2531.
151. Bloom K., Yeh E. Tension management in the kinetochore. Curr. Biol. 2010, 20:R1040-R1048.
152. Joglekar A.P., Bloom K.S., Salmon E.D. Mechanisms of force generation by end-on kinetochore-microtubule attachments. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2010, 22:57-67.
153. Maiato H., DeLuca J., Salmon E.D., Earnshaw W.C. The dynamic kinetochore-microtubule interface. J. Cell Sci. 2004, 117:5461-5477.
154. Tanaka T.U., Desai A. Kinetochore-microtubule interactions: the means to the end. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2008, 20:53-63.
155. Gorbsky G.J., Sammak P.J., Borisy G.G. Chromosomes move poleward in anaphase along stationary microtubules that coordinately disassemble from their kinetochore ends. J. Cell Biol. 1987, 104:9-18.
156. Gorbsky G.J., Sammak P.J., Borisy G.G. Microtubule dynamics and chromosome motion visualized in living anaphase cells. J. Cell Biol. 1988, 106:1185-1192.
157. Miranda J.J., De Wulf P., Sorger P.K., Harrison S.C. The yeast DASH complex forms closed rings on microtubules. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2005, 12:138-143.
158. Westermann S., Wang H.W., Avila-Sakar A., Drubin D.G., Nogales E., Barnes G. The Dam1 kinetochore ring complex moves processively on depolymerizing microtubule ends. Nature 2006, 440:565-569.
159. Alushin G.M., Ramey V.H., Pasqualato S., Ball D.A., Grigorieff N., Musacchio A., Nogales E. The Ndc80 kinetochore complex forms oligomeric arrays along microtubules. Nature 2010, 467:805-810.
160. Savoian M.S., Goldberg M.L., Rieder C.L. The rate of poleward chromosome motion is attenuated in Drosophila zw10 and rod mutants. Nat. Cell Biol. 2000, 2:948-952.
161. Yang Z., Tulu U.S., Wadsworth P., Rieder C.L. Kinetochore dynein is required for chromosome motion and congression independent of the spindle checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17:973-980.
162. Sharp D.J., Rogers G.C., Scholey J.M. Cytoplasmic dynein is required for poleward chromosome movement during mitosis in Drosophila embryos. Nat. Cell Biol. 2000, 2:922-930.
163. Miyamoto D.T., Perlman Z.E., Burbank K.S., Groen A.C., Mitchison T.J. The kinesin Eg5 drives poleward microtubule flux in Xenopus laevis egg extract spindles. J. Cell Biol. 2004, 167:813-818.
164. Waters J.C., Chen R.H., Murray A.W., Salmon E.D. Localization of Mad2 to kinetochores depends on microtubule attachment, not tension. J. Cell Biol. 1998, 141:1181-1191.
165. Akiyoshi B., Sarangapani K.K., Powers A.F., Nelson C.R., Reichow S.L., Arellano-Santoyo H., Gonen T., Ranish J.A., Asbury C.L., Biggins S. Tension directly stabilizes reconstituted kinetochore-microtubule attachments. Nature 2010, 468:576-579.
166. Compton D.A. Focusing on spindle poles. J. Cell Sci. 1998, 111:1477-1481.
167. O'Connell C.B., Wang Y.L. Mammalian spindle orientation and position respond to changes in cell shape in a dynein-dependent fashion. Mol. Biol. Cell 2000, 11:1765-1774.
168. Inoué S., Sato H., Tucker R.W. Heavy water enhancement of mitotic spindle birefringence. Biol. Bull. 1963, 125:380-381.
169. Bird A.W., Hyman A.A. Building a spindle of the correct length in human cells requires the interaction between TPX2 and Aurora A. J. Cell Biol. 2008, 182:289-300.
170. Ganem N.J., Compton D.A. The KinI kinesin Kif2a is required for bipolar spindle assembly through a functional relationship with MCAK. J. Cell Biol. 2004, 166:473-478.