scholarly journals Swe1 and Mih1 regulate mitotic spindle dynamics in budding yeast via Bik1

2018 ◽  
Vol 131 (17) ◽  
pp. jcs213520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica Raspelli ◽  
Silvia Facchinetti ◽  
Roberta Fraschini
Keyword(s):  
Mitotic Spindle ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Spindle Dynamics

scholarly journals Genes Involved in Sister Chromatid Separation and Segregation in the Budding Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Genetics ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 159 (2) ◽  
pp. 453-470
Author(s):  
Sue Biggins ◽  
Needhi Bhalla ◽  
Amy Chang ◽  
Dana L Smith ◽  
Andrew W Murray
Keyword(s):  
Chromosome Segregation ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Mitotic Spindle ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Temperature Sensitive ◽  
Chromosome Behavior ◽  
Yeast Saccharomyces Cerevisiae ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Marked Chromosome ◽  
Sister Chromatid Separation

Abstract Accurate chromosome segregation requires the precise coordination of events during the cell cycle. Replicated sister chromatids are held together while they are properly attached to and aligned by the mitotic spindle at metaphase. At anaphase, the links between sisters must be promptly dissolved to allow the mitotic spindle to rapidly separate them to opposite poles. To isolate genes involved in chromosome behavior during mitosis, we microscopically screened a temperature-sensitive collection of budding yeast mutants that contain a GFP-marked chromosome. Nine LOC (loss of cohesion) complementation groups that do not segregate sister chromatids at anaphase were identified. We cloned the corresponding genes and performed secondary tests to determine their function in chromosome behavior. We determined that three LOC genes, PDS1, ESP1, and YCS4, are required for sister chromatid separation and three other LOC genes, CSE4, IPL1, and SMT3, are required for chromosome segregation. We isolated alleles of two genes involved in splicing, PRP16 and PRP19, which impair α-tubulin synthesis thus preventing spindle assembly, as well as an allele of CDC7 that is defective in DNA replication. We also report an initial characterization of phenotypes associated with the SMT3/SUMO gene and the isolation of WSS1, a high-copy smt3 suppressor.

scholarly journals Budding Yeast Bub2 Is Localized at Spindle Pole Bodies and Activates the Mitotic Checkpoint via a Different Pathway from Mad2

1999 ◽  
Vol 145 (5) ◽  
pp. 979-991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Fraschini ◽  
Elisa Formenti ◽  
Giovanna Lucchini ◽  
Simonetta Piatti
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Mitotic Spindle ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Spindle Pole Body ◽  
Mitotic Checkpoint ◽  
Spindle Pole ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Spindle Pole Bodies

The mitotic checkpoint blocks cell cycle progression before anaphase in case of mistakes in the alignment of chromosomes on the mitotic spindle. In budding yeast, the Mad1, 2, 3, and Bub1, 2, 3 proteins mediate this arrest. Vertebrate homologues of Mad1, 2, 3, and Bub1, 3 bind to unattached kinetochores and prevent progression through mitosis by inhibiting Cdc20/APC-mediated proteolysis of anaphase inhibitors, like Pds1 and B-type cyclins. We investigated the role of Bub2 in budding yeast mitotic checkpoint. The following observations indicate that Bub2 and Mad1, 2 probably activate the checkpoint via different pathways: (a) unlike the other Mad and Bub proteins, Bub2 localizes at the spindle pole body (SPB) throughout the cell cycle; (b) the effect of concomitant lack of Mad1 or Mad2 and Bub2 is additive, since nocodazole-treated mad1 bub2 and mad2 bub2 double mutants rereplicate DNA more rapidly and efficiently than either single mutant; (c) cell cycle progression of bub2 cells in the presence of nocodazole requires the Cdc26 APC subunit, which, conversely, is not required for mad2 cells in the same conditions. Altogether, our data suggest that activation of the mitotic checkpoint blocks progression through mitosis by independent and partially redundant mechanisms.

scholarly journals Budding Yeast Swe1 Is Involved in the Control of Mitotic Spindle Elongation and Is Regulated by Cdc14 Phosphatase during Mitosis

2014 ◽  
Vol 290 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica Raspelli ◽  
Corinne Cassani ◽  
Elena Chiroli ◽  
Roberta Fraschini
Keyword(s):  
Mitotic Spindle ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Spindle Elongation

scholarly journals Modeling reveals cortical dynein-dependent oscillations in bipolar spindle length

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dayna Mercadante ◽  
Amity Manning ◽  
Sarah Olson
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Data ◽  
Mitotic Spindle ◽  
Force Generation ◽  
Mitotic Progression ◽  
Computational Framework ◽  
Spindle Formation ◽  
Bipolar Spindle ◽  
Spindle Dynamics ◽  
Force Components ◽  
Over Time

AbstractProper formation and maintenance of the mitotic spindle is required for faithful cell division. While much work has been done to understand the roles of the key force components of the mitotic spindle, identifying the consequences of force perturbations in the spindle remains a challenge. We develop a computational framework accounting for the minimal force requirements of mitotic progression. To reflect early spindle formation, we account for microtubule dynamics and interactions with major force-generating motors, excluding chromosome interactions that dominate later in mitosis. We directly integrate our experimental data to define and validate the model, and then use simulations to analyze individual force components over time and their relationship to spindle dynamics, making it distinct from previously published models. Rather than achieving and maintaining a constant bipolar spindle length, oscillations in pole to pole distance occur that coincide with microtubule binding and force generation by cortical dynein. In the context of high kinesin-14 (HSET) activity, we identify the requirement of high cortical dynein activity for bipolar spindle formation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document