Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
MacKenzie, A.; Vicory, V.; Lacefield, S.
Show abstract
To prevent chromosome mis-segregation, a surveillance mechanism known as the spindle checkpoint delays the cell cycle if kinetochores are not attached to spindle microtubules, allowing the cell additional time to correct improper attachments. During spindle checkpoint activation, checkpoint proteins bind the unattached kinetochore and send a diffusible signal to inhibit the anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C). Previous work has shown that mitotic cells with depolymerized microtubules can escape prolonged spindle checkpoint activation in a process called mitotic slippage. During slippage, spindle checkpoint proteins bind unattached kinetochores, but the cells cannot maintain the checkpoint arrest. We asked if meiotic cells had as robust of a spindle checkpoint response as mitotic cells and whether they also undergo slippage after prolonged spindle checkpoint activity. We performed a direct comparison between mitotic and meiotic budding yeast cells that signal the spindle checkpoint due to a lack of either kinetochore-microtubule attachments or due to a loss of tension-bearing attachments. We find that the spindle checkpoint is not as robust in meiosis I or meiosis II compared to mitosis, overcoming a checkpoint arrest approximately 150 minutes earlier in meiosis. In addition, cells in meiosis I escape spindle checkpoint signaling using two mechanisms, silencing the checkpoint at the kinetochore and through slippage. We propose that meiotic cells undertake developmentally-regulated mechanisms to prevent persistent spindle checkpoint activity to ensure the production of gametes. AUTHOR SUMMARYMitosis and meiosis are the two major types of cell divisions. Mitosis gives rise to genetically identical daughter cells, while meiosis is a reductional division that gives rise to gametes. Cell cycle checkpoints are highly regulated surveillance mechanisms that prevent cell cycle progression when circumstances are unfavorable. The spindle checkpoint promotes faithful chromosome segregation to safeguard against aneuploidy, in which cells have too many or too few chromosomes. The spindle checkpoint is activated at the kinetochore and then diffuses to inhibit cell cycle progression. Although the checkpoint is active in both mitosis and meiosis, most studies involving checkpoint regulation have been performed in mitosis. By activating the spindle checkpoint in both mitosis and meiosis in budding yeast, we show that cells in meiosis elicit a less persistent checkpoint signal compared to cells in mitosis. Further, we show that cells use distinct mechanisms to escape the checkpoint in mitosis and meiosis I. While cells in mitosis and meiosis II undergo anaphase onset while retaining checkpoint proteins at the kinetochore, cells in meiosis I prematurely lose checkpoint protein localization at the kinetochore. If the mechanism to remove the checkpoint components from the kinetochore is disrupted, meiosis I cells can still escape checkpoint activity. Together, these results highlight that cell cycle checkpoints are differentially regulated during meiosis to avoid long delays and to allow gametogenesis.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Chromosome biorientation requires Aurora B's spatial separation from its outer kinetochore substrates but not its turnover at kinetochores 97%
- Meiotic sister chromatid exchanges are rare in C. elegans 96%
- Chimeras of Kinesin-6 and Kinesin-14 reveal head-neck-tail domain functions and dysfunctions that lead to aneuploidy in fission yeast 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Distinct Aurora B pools at the inner centromere and kinetochore have different contributions to meiotic and mitotic chromosome segregation 97%
- Amino acid-level differences in alpha tubulin sequences are uniquely required for meiosis 97%
- Mps1 promotes poleward chromosome movements in meiotic pro-metaphase 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- The CDK Pef1 and Protein Phosphatase 4 oppose each other for regulating cohesin binding to fission yeast chromosomes 96%
- The copy-number and varied strengths of MELT motifs in Spc105 balance the strength and responsiveness the Spindle Assembly Checkpoint 95%
- Mechanisms of chromosome biorientation and bipolar spindle assembly analyzed by computational modeling 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Bub3 and Bub1 maintain the balance of kinetochore-localized Aurora B Kinase and Protein Phosphatase I to Regulate Chromosome Segregation and Anaphase Onset in Meiosis 96%
- Mechanisms of nuclear segregation in a multinucleate multibudding yeast 96%
- Minimization of cross-talk between mitotic Checkpoint silencing and error correction 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.