Mechanisms of Chromosome Congression during Mitosis

Abstract

Chromosome congression during prometaphase culminates with the establishment of a metaphase plate, a hallmark of mitosis in metazoans. Classical views resulting from more than 100 years of research on this topic have attempted to explain chromosome congression based on the balance between opposing pulling and/or pushing forces that reach an equilibrium near the spindle equator. However, in mammalian cells, chromosome bi-orientation and force balance at kinetochores are not required for chromosome congression, whereas the mechanisms of chromosome congression are not necessarily involved in the maintenance of chromosome alignment after congression. Thus, chromosome congression and maintenance of alignment are determined by different principles. Moreover, it is now clear that not all chromosomes use the same mechanism for congressing to the spindle equator. Those chromosomes that are favorably positioned between both poles when the nuclear envelope breaks down use the so-called “direct congression” pathway in which chromosomes align after bi-orientation and the establishment of end-on kinetochore-microtubule attachments. This favors the balanced action of kinetochore pulling forces and polar ejection forces along chromosome arms that drive chromosome oscillatory movements during and after congression. The other pathway, which we call “peripheral congression”, is independent of end-on kinetochore microtubule-attachments and relies on the dominant and coordinated action of the kinetochore motors Dynein and Centromere Protein E (CENP-E) that mediate the lateral transport of peripheral chromosomes along microtubules, first towards the poles and subsequently towards the equator. How the opposite polarities of kinetochore motors are regulated in space and time to drive congression of peripheral chromosomes only now starts to be understood. This appears to be regulated by position-dependent phosphorylation of both Dynein and CENP-E and by spindle microtubule diversity by means of tubulin post-translational modifications. This so-called “tubulin code” might work as a navigation system that selectively guides kinetochore motors with opposite polarities along specific spindle microtubule populations, ultimately leading to the congression of peripheral chromosomes. We propose an integrated model of chromosome congression in mammalian cells that depends essentially on the following parameters: (1) chromosome position relative to the spindle poles after nuclear envelope breakdown; (2) establishment of stable end-on kinetochore-microtubule attachments and bi-orientation; (3) coordination between kinetochore- and arm-associated motors; and (4) spatial signatures associated with post-translational modifications of specific spindle microtubule populations. The physiological consequences of abnormal chromosome congression, as well as the therapeutic potential of inhibiting chromosome congression are also discussed.

References 543

1. 1.

   Darlington C.D. Recent Advances in Cytology. 1937.

   Not in our library

2. 2.

   Straight A.F., Marshall W.F., Sedat J.W., Murray A.W. Mitosis in living budding yeast: Anaphase a but no metaphase plate. Science. 1997;277:574-578.

   Not in our library10.1126/science.277.5325.574

3. 3.

   Goshima G., Scholey J.M. Control of mitotic spindle length. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2010;26:21-57.

   Not in our library10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100109-104006

4. 4.

   Matos I., Pereira A.J., Lince-Faria M., Cameron L.A., Salmon E.D., Maiato H. Synchronizing chromosome segregation by flux-dependent force equalization at kinetochores. J. Cell Biol. 2009;186:11-26.

   Not in our library10.1083/jcb.200904153

5. 5.

   Joglekar A.P. A cell biological perspective on past, present and future investigations of the spindle assembly checkpoint. Biology. 2016;5:44.

   Not in our library10.3390/biology5040044

6. 6.

   Barisic M., Aguiar P., Geley S., Maiato H. Kinetochore motors drive congression of peripheral polar chromosomes by overcoming random arm-ejection forces. Nat. Cell Biol. 2014;16:1249-1256.

   Not in our library10.1038/ncb3060

7. 7.

   Ye A.A., Deretic J., Hoel C.M., Hinman A.W., Cimini D., Welburn J.P., Maresca T.J. Aurora A Kinase Contributes to a Pole-Based Error Correction Pathway. Curr. Biol. 2015;25:1842-1851.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2015.06.021

8. 8.

   Chmatal L., Yang K., Schultz R.M., Lampson M.A. Spatial Regulation of Kinetochore Microtubule Attachments by Destabilization at Spindle Poles in Meiosis I. Curr. Biol. 2015;25:1835-1841.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2015.05.013

9. 9.

   King J.M., Nicklas R.B. Tension on chromosomes increases the number of kinetochore microtubules but only within limits. J. Cell Sci. 2000;113:3815-3823.

   Not in our library10.1242/jcs.113.21.3815

10. 10.

    Wilson E.B. The Cell in Development and Heredity. 1925.

    Not in our library

11. 11.

    Lawrence W.J.C. The genetics and cytology of Dahlia variabilis. J. Genet. 1931;24:257-306.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02985563

12. 12.

    Drüner L. Studien über den mechanismus der zellteilung. Jenaische Ztschr. Naturw. 1895;29:271-344.

    Not in our library

13. 13.

    Östergren G. Considerations on some elementary features of mitosis. Hereditas. 1950;36:1-18.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1601-5223.1950.tb03360.x

14. 14.

    Belar K. Beiträge zur kausalanalyse der mitose II. Arch. Entwickl. 1929;118:359-480.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02108879

15. 15.

    Rashevsky N. Some remarks on the movement of chromosomes during cell division. Bull. Math. Biophys. 1941;3:1-3.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02478101

16. 16.

    Wada B. The mechanism of mitosis based on studies of the submicroscopic structure and of the living state of the Tradescantia cell. Cytologia. 1950;16:1-26.

    Not in our library10.1508/cytologia.16.1

17. 17.

    Östergren G. Equilibrium of trivalents and the mechanism of chromosome movements. Hereditas. 1945;31:498.

    Not in our library

18. 18.

    Schrader F. Mitosis—The Movements of Chromosomes in Cell Division. 1953.

    Not in our library

19. 19.

    Böök J.A. Equilibrium of trivalents at metaphase. Hereditas. 1945;31:499.

    Not in our library

20. 20.

    Izutsu K. Irradiation of parts of single mitotic apparatus in grasshopper spermatocytes with an ultraviolet-microbeam. Mie Med. J. 1959;9:15-29.

    Not in our library

21. 21.

    Takeda S., Izutsu K. Partial irradiation of individual mitotic cells with ultraviolet microbeam. Symposia Cell Chem. 1960;10:245-259.

    Not in our library

22. 22.

    Izutsu K. Effects of ultraviolet microbeam irradiation upon division in grasshoper spermatocytes. II. Results of irradiation during metaphase and anaphase I. Mie Med. J. 1961;11:213-232.

    Not in our library

23. 23.

    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.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.88.3.543

24. 24.

    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;93:374-389.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.93.2.374

25. 25.

    Dietz R. Anaphase behaviour of inversions in living crane-fly spermatocytes. Chromosom. Today. 1972;3:70-85.

    Not in our library

26. 26.

    Hays T.S., Salmon E.D. Poleward force at the kinetochore in metaphase depends on the number of kinetochore microtubules. J. Cell Biol. 1990;110:391-404.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.110.2.391

27. 27.

    LaFountain J.R., 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.

    Not in our library10.1091/mbc.e04-06-0524

28. 28.

    McEwen B.F., Heagle A.B., Cassels G.O., Buttle K.F., Rieder C.L. Kinetochore fiber maturation in PtK1 cells and its implications for the mechanisms of chromosome congression and anaphase onset. J. Cell Biol. 1997;137:1567-1580.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.137.7.1567

29. 29.

    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.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.200407090

30. 30.

    Forer A. Local Reduction of Spindle Fiber Birefringence in Living Nephrotoma Suturalis (Loew) Spermatocytes Induced by Ultraviolet Microbeam Irradiation. J. Cell Biol. 1965;25:95-117.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.25.1.95

31. 31.

    Inoue S. Organization and function of the mitotic spindle. Primitive Motile Systems in Cell Biology. 1964.

    Not in our library

32. 32.

    Spurck T.P., Stonington O.G., Snyder J.A., Pickett-Heaps J.D., Bajer A., Mole-Bajer J. UV microbeam irradiations of the mitotic spindle. II. Spindle fiber dynamics and force production. J. Cell Biol. 1990;111:1505-1518.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.111.4.1505

33. 33.

    Nicklas R.B. The motor for poleward chromosome movement in anaphase is in or near the kinetochore. J. Cell Biol. 1989;109:2245-2255.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.109.5.2245

34. 34.

    Czaban B.B., Forer A., Bajer A.S. Ultraviolet microbeam irradiation of chromosomal spindle fibres in Haemanthus katherinae endosperm. I. Behaviour of the irradiated region. J. Cell Sci. 1993;105:571-578.

    Not in our library10.1242/jcs.105.2.571

35. 35.

    Sikirzhytski V., Magidson V., Steinman J.B., He J., Le Berre M., Tikhonenko I., Ault J.G., McEwen B.F., Chen J.K., Sui H., et al. Direct kinetochore-spindle pole connections are not required for chromosome segregation. J. Cell Biol. 2014;206:231-243.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.201401090

36. 36.

    Elting M.W., Hueschen C.L., Udy D.B., Dumont S. Force on spindle microtubule minus ends moves chromosomes. J. Cell Biol. 2014;206:245-256.

    Not in our library10.1083/jcb.201401091

37. 37.
    Overlap microtubules link sister k-fibres and balance the forces on bi-oriented kinetochores · 2016

    No notice
38. 38.

    Milas A., Tolic I.M., Zür M. Relaxation of interkinetochore tension after severing of a k-fiber depends on the length of the k-fiber stub. Matters. 2016.

    Not in our library10.19185/matters.201603000025

39. 39.

    Bajer A.S., Molè-Bajer J. Spindle dynamics and chromosome movements. Int. Rev. Cytol. 1972;(Supplement 3):1-271.

    Not in our library

40. 40.

    Luykx P. Cellular mechanisms of chromosome distribution. Int. Rev. Cytol. 1970;(Supplement 2):1-173.

    Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 3

• A mitotic chromatin phase transition prevents perforation by microtubules · 2022
  No notice
• The mitotic spindle is chiral due to torques within microtubule bundles · 2018
  Not checked
• A Molecular View of Kinetochore Assembly and Function · 2017
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.