Cargando…

Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacKenzie, Anne, Vicory, Victoria, Lacefield, Soni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9881877/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36711621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.01.02.522494
_version_ 1784879200797196288
author MacKenzie, Anne
Vicory, Victoria
Lacefield, Soni
author_facet MacKenzie, Anne
Vicory, Victoria
Lacefield, Soni
author_sort MacKenzie, Anne
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9881877
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98818772023-01-28 Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage MacKenzie, Anne Vicory, Victoria Lacefield, Soni bioRxiv Article 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. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023-01-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9881877/ /pubmed/36711621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.01.02.522494 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
spellingShingle Article
MacKenzie, Anne
Vicory, Victoria
Lacefield, Soni
Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
title Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
title_full Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
title_fullStr Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
title_full_unstemmed Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
title_short Meiotic Cells Escape Prolonged Spindle Checkpoint Activity Through Premature Silencing and Slippage
title_sort meiotic cells escape prolonged spindle checkpoint activity through premature silencing and slippage
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9881877/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36711621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.01.02.522494
work_keys_str_mv AT mackenzieanne meioticcellsescapeprolongedspindlecheckpointactivitythroughprematuresilencingandslippage
AT vicoryvictoria meioticcellsescapeprolongedspindlecheckpointactivitythroughprematuresilencingandslippage
AT lacefieldsoni meioticcellsescapeprolongedspindlecheckpointactivitythroughprematuresilencingandslippage