Plk1 phosphorylates Sgt1 at the kinetochores to promote timely kinetochore-microtubule attachment

Molecular and Cellular Biology

Volumn 32, Issue 19, 2012, Pages 4053-4067

  Shawn Liu, X ^a,c   Song, Bing ^b,c   Tang, Jiabin ^a   Liu, Weiyi ^a   Kuang, Shihuan ^a   Liu, Xiaoqi ^a,c  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Purdue University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL CYCLE PROTEIN 37; NDC80 COMPLEX; POLO LIKE KINASE 1; SERINE; SGT1 PROTEIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANAPHASE; ARTICLE; BINDING SITE; CELL ADHESION; CENTROMERE; CHROMOSOMAL INSTABILITY; CHROMOSOME; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MICROTUBULE; MITOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROMETAPHASE; PROTEIN LOCALIZATION; PROTEIN PHOSPHORYLATION;

CELL CYCLE PROTEINS; HEK293 CELLS; HELA CELLS; HUMANS; KINETOCHORES; MICROTUBULE-ASSOCIATED PROTEINS; MICROTUBULES; MITOSIS; PHOSPHORYLATION; PROTEIN-SERINE-THREONINE KINASES; PROTO-ONCOGENE PROTEINS; SERINE;

EID: 84868695288     PISSN: 02707306     EISSN: 10985549     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/MCB.00516-12     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Alexander J, et al. 2011. Spatial exclusivity combined with positive and negative selection of phosphorylation motifs is the basis for contextdependent mitotic signaling. Sci. Signal. 4:ra42. doi:10.1126/ scisignal.2001796.
2. Bansal PK, Abdulle R, Kitagawa K. 2004. Sgt1 associates with Hsp90: an initial step of assembly of the core kinetochore complex. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24:8069-8079.
3. Bansal PK, Mishra A, High AA, Abdulle R, Kitagawa K. 2009. Sgt1 dimerization is negatively regulated by protein kinase CK2-mediated phosphorylation at Ser361. J. Biol. Chem. 284:18692-18698.
4. Barr FA, Sillje HH, Nigg EA. 2004. Polo-like kinases and the orchestration of cell division. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 5:429-440.
5. Chan GK, Liu ST, Yen TJ. 2005. Kinetochore structure and function. Trends Cell Biol. 15:589 -598.
6. Cheeseman IM, Chappie JS, Wilson-Kubalek EM, Desai A. 2006. The conservedKMNnetwork constitutes the core microtubule-binding site of the kinetochore. Cell 127:983-997.
7. Cheeseman IM, et al. 2004. A conserved protein network controls assembly of the outer kinetochore and its ability to sustain tension. Genes Dev. 18:2255-2268.
8. Davies AE, Kaplan KB. 2010. Hsp90-Sgt1 and Skp1 target human Mis12 complexes to ensure efficient formation of kinetochore-microtubule binding sites. J. Cell Biol. 189:261-274.
9. DeLuca JG, et al. 2006. Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and attachment stability are regulated by Hec1. Cell 127:969 -982.
10. Foltz DR, et al. 2006. The human CENP-A centromeric nucleosomeassociated complex. Nat. Cell Biol. 8:458-469.
11. Golsteyn RM, Mundt KE, Fry AM, Nigg EA. 1995. Cell cycle regulation of the activity and subcellular localization of Plk1, a human protein kinase implicated in mitotic spindle function. J. Cell Biol. 129:1617-1628.
12. Goto H, et al. 2006. Complex formation of Plk1 and INCENP required for metaphase-anaphase transition. Nat. Cell Biol. 8:180 -187.
13. Hemmerich P, et al. 2008. Dynamics of inner kinetochore assembly and maintenance in living cells. J. Cell Biol. 180:1101-1114.
14. 2 and spreads in an ordered fashion coincident with mitotic chromosome condensation. Chromosoma 106:348 -360.
15. Holt LJ, et al. 2009. Global analysis of Cdk1 substrate phosphorylation sites provides insights into evolution. Science 325:1682-1686.
16. Hori T, et al. 2008. CCAN makes multiple contacts with centromeric DNA to provide distinct pathways to the outer kinetochore. Cell 135: 1039-1052.
17. Howell BJ, Hoffman DB, Fang G, Murray AW, Salmon ED. 2000. Visualization of Mad2 dynamics at kinetochores, along spindle fibers, and at spindle poles in living cells. J. Cell Biol. 150:1233-1250.
18. Joglekar AP, Bloom KS, Salmon ED. 2010. Mechanisms of force generation by end-on kinetochore-microtubule attachments. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 22:57- 67.
19. Kang YH, et al. 2006. Self-regulated Plk1 recruitment to kinetochores by the Plk1-PBIP1 interaction is critical for proper chromosome segregation. Mol. Cell 24:409-422.
20. Kettenbach AN, et al. 2011. Quantitative phosphoproteomics identifies substrates and functional modules of Aurora and Polo-like kinase activities in mitotic cells. Sci. Signal. 4:rs5. doi:10.1126/scisignal.2001497.
21. Kitagawa K, Skowyra D, Elledge SJ, Harper JW, Hieter P. 1999. SGT1 encodes an essential component of the yeast kinetochore assembly pathway and a novel subunit of the SCF ubiquitin ligase complex. Mol. Cell 4:21-33.
22. Lampson MA, Kapoor TM. 2005. The human mitotic checkpoint protein BubR1 regulates chromosome-spindle attachments. Nat. Cell Biol. 7:93-98.
23. Lenart P, et al. 2007. The small-molecule inhibitor BI 2536 reveals novel insights into mitotic roles of polo-like kinase 1. Curr. Biol. 17:304 -315.
24. Lingelbach LB, Kaplan KB. 2004. The interaction between Sgt1p and Skp1p is regulated by HSP90 chaperones and is required for proper CBF3 assembly. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24:8938-8950.
25. Liu X, Erikson RL. 2002. Activation of Cdc2/cyclin B and inhibition of centrosome amplification in cells depleted of Plk1 by siRNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99:8672- 8676.
26. Lowery DM, et al. 2007. Proteomic screen defines the Polo-box domain interactome and identifies Rock2 as a Plk1 substrate. EMBO J. 26:2262- 2273.
27. Martins T, Maia AF, Steffensen S, Sunkel CE. 2009. Sgt1, a co-chaperone of Hsp90 stabilizes Polo and is required for centrosome organization. EMBO J. 28:234 -247.
28. Mayer TU, et al. 1999. Small molecule inhibitor of mitotic spindle bipolarity identified in a phenotype-based screen. Science 286:971-974.
29. Mitchison T, Kirschner M. 1984. Dynamic instability of microtubule growth. Nature 312:237-242.
30. Mitchison T, Kirschner M. 1984. Microtubule assembly nucleated by isolated centrosomes. Nature 312:232-237.
31. Musacchio A, Salmon ED. 2007. The spindle-assembly checkpoint in space and time. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8:379 -393.
32. Nishino M, et al. 2006. NudC is required for Plk1 targeting to the kinetochore and chromosome congression. Curr. Biol. 16:1414 -1421.
33. Petronczki M, Lenart P, Peters JM. 2008. Polo on the rise: from mitotic entry to cytokinesis with Plk1. Dev. Cell 14:646-659.
34. Qi W, Tang Z, Yu H. 2006. Phosphorylation- and polo-box-dependent binding of Plk1 to Bub1 is required for the kinetochore localization of Plk1. Mol. Biol. Cell 17:3705-3716.
35. Rodrigo-Brenni MC, Thomas S, Bouck DC, Kaplan KB. 2004. Sgt1p and Skp1p modulate the assembly and turnover of CBF3 complexes required for proper kinetochore function. Mol. Biol. Cell 15:3366 -3378.
36. Steensgaard P, et al. 2004. Sgt1 is required for human kinetochore assembly. EMBO Rep. 5:626-631.
37. Strebhardt K. 2010. Multifaceted polo-like kinases: drug targets and antitargets for cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Drug Disc. 9:643- 660.
38. Sumara I, et al. 2004. Roles of polo-like kinase 1 in the assembly of functional mitotic spindles. Curr. Biol. 14:1712-1722.
39. Vassilev LT, et al. 2006. Selective small-molecule inhibitor reveals critical mitotic functions of human CDK1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 103: 10660-10665.
40. Wan X, et al. 2009. Protein architecture of the human kinetochore microtubule attachment site. Cell 137:672- 684.
41. Waters JC, Chen RH, Murray AW, Salmon ED. 1998. Localization of Mad2 to kinetochores depends on microtubule attachment, not tension. J. Cell Biol. 141:1181-1191.
42. Welburn JP, Cheeseman IM. 2008. Toward a molecular structure of the eukaryotic kinetochore. Dev. Cell 15:645- 655.