Polo-like kinases (Plks) are potent regulators of M phase that are conserved from yeasts to humans. Their roles in mitotic entry, spindle pole functions and cytokinesis are broadly conserved despite physical and molecular differences in these processes in disparate organisms. Plks are characterized by their Polo-box domain, which mediates protein interactions. They are additionally controlled by phosphorylation, proteolysis and transcription, depending on the biological context. Plks are now recognized to link cell division to developmental processes and to function in differentiated cells. A comparison of Plk function and regulation between organisms offers insight into the rich variations of cell division.
We derived novel, testable predictions from a mathematical model of the budding yeast cell cycle. A key qualitative prediction of bistability was confirmed in a strain simultaneously lacking cdc14 and G1 cyclins. The model correctly predicted quantitative dependence of cell size on gene dosage of the G1 cyclin CLN3, but it incorrectly predicted strong genetic interactions between G1 cyclins and the anaphase-promoting complex specificity factor Cdh1. To provide constraints on model generation, we determined accurate concentrations for the abundance of all nine cyclins as well as the inhibitor Sic1 and the catalytic subunit Cdc28. For many of these we determined abundance throughout the cell cycle by centrifugal elutriation, in the presence or absence of Cdh1. In addition, perturbations to the Clb-kinase oscillator were introduced, and the effects on cyclin and Sic1 levels were compared between model and experiment. Reasonable agreement was obtained in many of these experiments, but significant experimental discrepancies from the model predictions were also observed. Thus, the model is a strong but incomplete attempt at a realistic representation of cell cycle control. Constraints of the sort developed here will be important in development of a truly predictive model.
BackgroundKinetochores are large multiprotein complexes indispensable for proper chromosome segregation. Although Drosophila is a classical model organism for studies of chromosome segregation, little is known about the organization of its kinetochores.Methodology/Principal FindingsWe employed bioinformatics, proteomics and cell biology methods to identify and analyze the interaction network of Drosophila kinetochore proteins. We have shown that three Drosophila proteins highly diverged from human and yeast Ndc80, Nuf2 and Mis12 are indeed their orthologues. Affinity purification of these proteins from cultured Drosophila cells identified a further five interacting proteins with weak similarity to subunits of the SPC105/KNL-1, MIND/MIS12 and NDC80 kinetochore complexes together with known kinetochore associated proteins such as dynein/dynactin, spindle assembly checkpoint components and heterochromatin proteins. All eight kinetochore complex proteins were present at the kinetochore during mitosis and MIND/MIS12 complex proteins were also centromeric during interphase. Their down-regulation led to dramatic defects in chromosome congression/segregation frequently accompanied by mitotic spindle elongation. The systematic depletion of each individual protein allowed us to establish dependency relationships for their recruitment onto the kinetochore. This revealed the sequential recruitment of individual members of first, the MIND/MIS12 and then, NDC80 complex.Conclusions/SignificanceThe Drosophila MIND/MIS12 and NDC80 complexes and the Spc105 protein, like their counterparts from other eukaryotic species, are essential for chromosome congression and segregation, but are highly diverged in sequence. Hierarchical dependence relationships of individual proteins regulate the assembly of Drosophila kinetochore complexes in a manner similar, but not identical, to other organisms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.