Force on spindle microtubule minus ends moves chromosomes

Journal of Cell Biology

Volumn 206, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 245-256

  Elting, Mary Williard ^a   Hueschen, Christina L ^a   Udy, Dylan B ^a   Dumont, Sophie ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DYNACTIN; DYNEIN ADENOSINE TRIPHOSPHATASE;

ANAPHASE; ARTICLE; CENTROMERE; CHROMOSOME; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS LINKING; CYTOARCHITECTURE; FORCE; HUMAN; IMMUNOFLUORESCENCE; LASER SURGERY; METAPHASE CHROMOSOME; MITOSIS SPINDLE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; POLAR MICROTUBULE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPINDLE POLE; STEADY STATE; TURNOVER TIME;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL TRANSPORT; CELL LINE; CHROMOSOMES; DYNEINS; KINETOCHORES; MICROTUBULE-ASSOCIATED PROTEINS; MICROTUBULES; NUCLEAR MATRIX-ASSOCIATED PROTEINS; POTOROIDAE; SPINDLE APPARATUS;

EID: 84904627490     PISSN: 00219525     EISSN: 15408140     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1083/jcb.201401091     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Begg, D.A., and G.W. Ellis. 1979. Micromanipulation studies of chromosome movement. I. Chromosome-spindle attachment and the mechanical properties of chromosomal spindle fibers. J. Cell Biol. 82:528-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.82.2.528
2. Bird, A.W., and A.A. Hyman. 2008. Building a spindle of the correct length in human cells requires the interaction between TPX2 and Aurora A. J. Cell Biol. 182:289-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200802005
3. Brugués, J., V. Nuzzo, E. Mazur, and D.J. Needleman. 2012. Nucleation and transport organize microtubules in metaphase spindles. Cell. 149:554- 564. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.03.027
4. Burbank, K.S., T.J. Mitchison, and D.S. Fisher. 2007. Slide-and-cluster models for spindle assembly. Curr. Biol. 17:1373-1383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.07.058
5. Cameron, L.A., G. Yang, D. Cimini, J.C. Canman, O. Kisurina-Evgenieva, A. Khodjakov, G. Danuser, and E.D. Salmon. 2006. Kinesin 5-independent poleward flux of kinetochore microtubules in PtK1 cells. J. Cell Biol. 173:173-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200601075
6. Charlebois, B.D., S. Kollu, H.T. Schek, D.A. Compton, and A.J. Hunt. 2011. Spindle pole mechanics studied in mitotic asters: dynamic distribution of spindle forces through compliant linkages. Biophys. J. 100:1756-1764. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2011.02.017
7. Chen, W., and D. Zhang. 2004. Kinetochore fibre dynamics outside the context of the spindle during anaphase. Nat. Cell Biol. 6:227-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb1104
8. Dick, A.E., and D.W. Gerlich. 2013. Kinetic framework of spindle assembly checkpoint signalling. Nat. Cell Biol. 15:1370-1377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb2842
9. Dionne, M.A., L. Howard, and D.A. Compton. 1999. NuMA is a component of an insoluble matrix at mitotic spindle poles. Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton. 42:189-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002(SICI)1097-0169(1999)42:3<189::AID-CM3>3.0.CO;2-X
10. Du, Q., L. Taylor, D.A. Compton, and I.G. Macara. 2002. LGN blocks the ability of NuMA to bind and stabilize microtubules. A mechanism for mitotic spindle assembly regulation. Curr. Biol. 12:1928-1933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(02)01298-8
11. Dumont, S., and T.J. Mitchison. 2009. Compression regulates mitotic spindle length by a mechanochemical switch at the poles. Curr. Biol. 19:1086- 1095. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.05.056
12. Gaglio, T., A. Saredi, and D.A. Compton. 1995. NuMA is required for the organization of microtubules into aster-like mitotic arrays. J. Cell Biol. 131:693-708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.131.3.693
13. Gaglio, T., M.A. Dionne, and D.A. Compton. 1997. Mitotic spindle poles are organized by structural and motor proteins in addition to centrosomes. J. Cell Biol. 138:1055-1066. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.138.5.1055
14. Gatlin, J.C., A. Matov, A.C. Groen, D.J. Needleman, T.J. Maresca, G. Danuser, T.J. Mitchison, and E.D. Salmon. 2009. Spindle fusion requires dyneinmediated sliding of oppositely oriented microtubules. Curr. Biol. 19:287- 296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.01.055
15. Gill, S.R., T.A. Schroer, I. Szilak, E.R. Steuer, M.P. Sheetz, and D.W. Cleveland. 1991. Dynactin, a conserved, ubiquitously expressed component of an activator of vesicle motility mediated by cytoplasmic dynein. J. Cell Biol. 115:1639-1650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.115.6.1639
16. Gordon, M.B., L. Howard, and D.A. Compton. 2001. Chromosome movement in mitosis requires microtubule anchorage at spindle poles. J. Cell Biol. 152:425-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.152.3.425
17. Goshima, G., F. Nédélec, and R.D. Vale. 2005. Mechanisms for focusing mitotic spindle poles by minus end-directed motor proteins. J. Cell Biol. 171:229-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200505107
18. Goshima, G., M. Mayer, N. Zhang, N. Stuurman, and R.D. Vale. 2008. Augmin: a protein complex required for centrosome-independent microtubule generation within the spindle. J. Cell Biol. 181:421-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200711053
19. Haren, L., and A. Merdes. 2002. Direct binding of NuMA to tubulin is mediated by a novel sequence motif in the tail domain that bundles and stabilizes microtubules. J. Cell Sci. 115:1815-1824.
20. Heald, R., R. Tournebize, T. Blank, R. Sandaltzopoulos, P. Becker, A. Hyman, and E. Karsenti. 1996. Self-organization of microtubules into bipolar spindles around artificial chromosomes in Xenopus egg extracts. Nature. 382:420-425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/382420a0
21. Heald, R., R. Tournebize, A. Habermann, E. Karsenti, and A. Hyman. 1997. Spindle assembly in Xenopus egg extracts: respective roles of centrosomes and microtubule self-organization. J. Cell Biol. 138:615-628. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.138.3.615
22. Jiang, K., S. Hua, R. Mohan, I. Grigoriev, K.W. Yau, Q. Liu, E.A. Katrukha, A.F. Altelaar, A.J. Heck, C.C. Hoogenraad, and A. Akhmanova. 2014. Microtubule minus-end stabilization by polymerization-driven CAMSAP deposition. Dev. Cell. 28:295-309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2014.01.001
23. Khodjakov, A., L. Copenagle, M.B. Gordon, D.A. Compton, and T.M. Kapoor. 2003. Minus-end capture of preformed kinetochore fibers contributes to spindle morphogenesis. J. Cell Biol. 160:671-683. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200208143
24. Kisurina-Evgenieva, O., G. Mack, Q. Du, I. Macara, A. Khodjakov, and D.A. Compton. 2004. Multiple mechanisms regulate NuMA dynamics at spindle poles. J. Cell Sci. 117:6391-6400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1242/jcs.01568
25. Kiyomitsu, T., and I.M. Cheeseman. 2012. Chromosome- and spindle-polederived signals generate an intrinsic code for spindle position and orientation. Nat. Cell Biol. 14:311-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb2440
26. Lancaster, O.M., M. Le Berre, A. Dimitracopoulos, D. Bonazzi, E. Zlotek-Zlotkiewicz, R. Picone, T. Duke, M. Piel, and B. Baum. 2013. Mitotic rounding alters cell geometry to ensure efficient bipolar spindle formation. Dev. Cell. 25:270-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2013.03.014
27. Lees-Miller, J.P., D.M. Helfman, and T.A. Schroer. 1992. A vertebrate actinrelated protein is a component of a multisubunit complex involved in microtubule-based vesicle motility. Nature. 359:244-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/359244a0
28. Maiato, H., C.L. Rieder, and A. Khodjakov. 2004. Kinetochore-driven formation of kinetochore fibers contributes to spindle assembly during animal mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 167:831-840. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200407090
29. Manning, A.L., and D.A. Compton. 2007. Mechanisms of spindle-pole organization are influenced by kinetochore activity in mammalian cells. Curr. Biol. 17:260-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.11.071
30. Meng, W., Y. Mushika, T. Ichii, and M. Takeichi. 2008. Anchorage of microtubule minus ends to adherens junctions regulates epithelial cell-cell contacts. Cell. 135:948-959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.09.040
31. Merdes, A., K. Ramyar, J.D. Vechio, and D.W. Cleveland. 1996. A complex of NuMA and cytoplasmic dynein is essential for mitotic spindle assembly. Cell. 87:447-458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81365-3
32. Merdes, A., R. Heald, K. Samejima, W.C. Earnshaw, and D.W. Cleveland. 2000. Formation of spindle poles by dynein/dynactin-dependent transport of NuMA. J. Cell Biol. 149:851-862. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.149.4.851
33. Meunier, S., and I. Vernos. 2011. K-fibre minus ends are stabilized by a RanGTPdependent mechanism essential for functional spindle assembly. Nat. Cell Biol. 13:1406-1414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb2372
34. Nicklas, R.B. 1988. The forces that move chromosomes in mitosis. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem. 17:431-449. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.bb.17.060188.002243
35. Nicklas, R.B., and C.A. Staehly. 1967. Chromosome micromanipulation. I. The mechanics of chromosome attachment to the spindle. Chromosoma. 21:1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00330544
36. Nicklas, R.B., D.F. Kubai, and T.S. Hays. 1982. Spindle microtubules and their mechanical associations after micromanipulation in anaphase. J. Cell Biol. 95:91-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.95.1.91
37. Petry, S., A.C. Groen, K. Ishihara, T.J. Mitchison, and R.D. Vale. 2013. Branching microtubule nucleation in Xenopus egg extracts mediated by augmin and TPX2. Cell. 152:768-777. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.12.044
38. Quintyne, N.J., and T.A. Schroer. 2002. Distinct cell cycle-dependent roles for dynactin and dynein at centrosomes. J. Cell Biol. 159:245-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200203089
39. Radulescu, A.E., and D.W. Cleveland. 2010. NuMA after 30 years: the matrix revisited. Trends Cell Biol. 20:214-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2010.01.003
40. Royle, S.J., N.A. Bright, and L. Lagnado. 2005. Clathrin is required for the function of the mitotic spindle. Nature. 434:1152-1157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature03502
41. Rusan, N.M., U.S. Tulu, C. Fagerstrom, and P. Wadsworth. 2002. Reorganization of the microtubule array in prophase/prometaphase requires cytoplasmic dynein-dependent microtubule transport. J. Cell Biol. 158:997-1003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200204109
42. Saxton, W.M., D.L. Stemple, R.J. Leslie, E.D. Salmon, M. Zavortink, and J.R. McIntosh. 1984. Tubulin dynamics in cultured mammalian cells. J. Cell Biol. 99:2175-2186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.99.6.2175
43. Sheykhani, R., N. Baker, V. Gomez-Godinez, L.H. Liaw, J. Shah, M.W. Berns, and A. Forer. 2013. The role of actin and myosin in PtK2 spindle length changes induced by laser microbeam irradiations across the spindle. Cytoskeleton (Hoboken). 70:241-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cm.21104
44. Shimamoto, Y., Y.T. Maeda, S. Ishiwata, A.J. Libchaber, and T.M. Kapoor. 2011. Insights into the micromechanical properties of the metaphase spindle. Cell. 145:1062-1074. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2011.05.038
45. Shubeita, G.T., S.L. Tran, J. Xu, M. Vershinin, S. Cermelli, S.L. Cotton, M.A. Welte, and S.P. Gross. 2008. Consequences of motor copy number on the intracellular transport of kinesin-1-driven lipid droplets. Cell. 135:1098- 1107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.021
46. Silk, A.D., A.J. Holland, and D.W. Cleveland. 2009. Requirements for NuMA in maintenance and establishment of mammalian spindle poles. J. Cell Biol. 184:677-690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200810091
47. Snyder, J.A., L. Armstrong, O.G. Stonington, T.P. Spurck, and J.D. Pickett-Heaps. 1991. UV-microbeam irradiations of the mitotic spindle: spindle forces and structural analysis of lesions. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 55:122-132.
48. Spurck, T.P., O.G. Stonington, J.A. Snyder, J.D. Pickett-Heaps, A. Bajer, and J. Mole-Bajer. 1990. UV microbeam irradiations of the mitotic spindle. II. Spindle fiber dynamics and force production. J. Cell Biol. 111:1505- 1518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.111.4.1505
49. Sturgill, E.G., and R. Ohi. 2013. Kinesin-12 differentially affects spindle assembly depending on its microtubule substrate. Curr. Biol. 23:1280-1290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.05.043
50. Tulu, U.S., N.M. Rusan, and P. Wadsworth. 2003. Peripheral, non-centrosomeassociated microtubules contribute to spindle formation in centrosomecontaining cells. Curr. Biol. 13:1894-1899. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2003.10.002
51. Verde, F., J.M. Berrez, C. Antony, and E. Karsenti. 1991. Taxol-induced microtubule asters in mitotic extracts of Xenopus eggs: requirement for phosphorylated factors and cytoplasmic dynein. J. Cell Biol. 112:1177-1187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.112.6.1177
52. Vladimirou, E., N. Mchedlishvili, I. Gasic, J.W. Armond, C.P. Samora, P. Meraldi, and A.D. McAinsh. 2013. Nonautonomous movement of chromosomes in mitosis. Dev. Cell. 27:60-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2013.08.004
53. Yang, G., L.A. Cameron, P.S. Maddox, E.D. Salmon, and G. Danuser. 2008. Regional variation of microtubule flux reveals microtubule organization in the metaphase meiotic spindle. J. Cell Biol. 182:631-639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200801105
54. Zheng, Y., M.L. Wong, B. Alberts, and T. Mitchison. 1995. Nucleation of microtubule assembly by a γ-tubulin-containing ring complex. Nature. 378: 578-583. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/378578a0