Meiosis: Helping chromosomes and chromatids stay on track
Meiosis is a process that starts with a given number of chromosomes in the nucleus of a cell, and ends with gamete cells that each contain half the number of chromosomes that were in the original cell. Most human cells, for example, have 46 chromosomes, whereas sperm and egg cells have only 23 chromosomes. In the early stages of meiosis, the process of replication copies the DNA to produce chromosomes with two sister chromatids (see Figure 1). The next stage is for chromosomes with similar sequences, called homologs, to form pairs and exchange DNA in a process called recombination. The chromosomes then undergo two rounds of segregation to complete the process. Ensuring that all these steps occur in the correct order is clearly vital for successful meiosis. Now, in eLife, Matthew Miller, Elçin Ünal and Angelika Amon of MIT, working with Gloria Brar of UCSF, reveal the mechanisms used by cells to ensure that meiosis proceeds as nature intended (Miller et al., 2012).
During the first round of segregation, called meiosis I, spindle microtubules attach themselves to the chromosomes with the help of large protein complexes called kinetochores that are found on each chromatid (see Figure 1). In addition to attaching the microtubules to the chromosomes, the kinetochores also correct improper attachments and move the chromosomes along microtubules. In meiosis I, the paired chromosomes segregate to opposite ends (or poles) of the spindle. In meiosis II essentially the same cast of players (that is, spindle microtubules and kinetochores), segregate the sister chromatids to produce a total of four cells. The MIT-UCSF team used budding yeast as a model to study these processes and interactions in greater detail.
Three mechanisms help ensure the proper attachment of chromosomes to spindle microtubules in meiosis I. First, during prophase, which is the first stage of meiosis I, pairs of homologous chromosomes undergo recombination. This process creates physical links that hold the homologs together, and ensures their attachment to opposite spindle poles (Brar and Amon, 2008). Second, the sister kinetochores offer only one site for microtubules to bind to: in budding yeast, for example, a protein complex called monopolin clamps the sister kinetochores together just before microtubule attachment begins. Third, protein rings made up of cohesins are thought to encircle the two sister chromatids: this creates cohesion between the chromatids and prevents them from separating prematurely during meiosis I. When the two homologous chromosomes are attached to opposite spindle poles during metaphase I (a stage after prophase), the spindle forces are resisted by the physical linkages and the cohesion between sister chromatids. Together these three mechanisms ensure that homologous chromosomes are segregated in meiosis I, while sister chromatids remain together.
The work of Miller and Ünal, who are joint first authors on the paper, and their co-workers reveals another level of regulation of meiosis I that involves proteins called M phase cyclins. When the enzyme cyclin-dependent kinase (Cdk) is bound to a cyclin, it drives cell cycle events by phosphorylating substrates (Enserink and Kolodner, 2010). Two of the cyclins that have a role in driving the cells through meiosis, Clb1 and Clb3, are transcribed at the end of prophase (Dahmann and Futcher, 1995; Chu et al., 1998; Carlile and Amon, 2008). However, if either of these cyclins is expressed prematurely, the spindle microtubules are assembled too early and, as a result, sister chromatids are segregated rather than chromosomes in a significant fraction (∼40%) of the cells (see Figure 2). This is surprising because Cdk-Clb1 is normally present (and active) during meiosis I.
Previously Amon and co-workers have shown that the presence of the monopolin complex during mitosis (as opposed to meiosis) can clamp sister kinetochores together and lead to a meiosis I chromosome segregation pattern (Monje-Casas et al., 2007). Miller et al. now propose that for the monopolin complex to clamp sister kinetochores together, it must associate with them before they attach to microtubules. In the cells in which Clb1 or Clb3 are prematurely expressed, microtubules attach to both sister kinetochores before monopolin is active, and this leads to the segregation of sister chromatids. However, if attachment begins after monopolin becomes active, it is the chromosomes that are segregated.
To test this model, the MIT-UCSF team arrested cells undergoing mitosis after the microtubules had attached to the sister kinetochores and then induced monopolin: the sister kinetochores remained attached to the microtubules and segregated to opposite spindle poles when the cell was released from the arrest. However, if the drug nocodazole was used to depolymerize the microtubules during the arrest period, monopolin was able to clamp sister kinetochores together and almost half (48%) of sister chromatids moved to the same spindle pole. Furthermore, if the microtubules in cells that prematurely expressed Clb3 were depolymerized, the meiosis I chromosome segregation pattern was rescued. These experiments suggest that the timing of the attachment of chromosomes to microtubules is carefully regulated in meiosis to prevent premature kinetochore–microtubule interactions. And other experiments suggest that cells prevent premature interactions of kinetochores and microtubules by dismantling the outer regions of the kinetochore. Taken together all these results suggest that Miller et al have uncovered two additional mechanisms that cells use to ensure the segregation of chromosomes in meiosis I: restricting the activity of cyclin-dependent kinase bound to M phase cyclins in prophase, and also restricting the assembly of the kinetochore in prophase.
Miller, Ünal and co-workers have demonstrated that premature kinetochore–microtubule interactions lead to a mitotic pattern of chromosome segregation in meiosis I. Since this can lead to gametes with missing or extra chromosomes, which can cause miscarriage and birth defects in babies, it is crucial that we continue to improve our understanding of meiosis (Nagaoka et al., 2012). By revealing a number of hitherto unknown mechanisms used by cells to regulate the meiotic cell cycle, this work represents an important step in this quest.
References
-
Specialization of B-type cyclins for mitosis or meiosis in S. cerevisiaeGenetics 140:957–963.
-
Human aneuploidy: mechanisms and new insights into an age-old problemNat Rev Genetics 13:493–504.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3245
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2012, Lacefield
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 5,244
- views
-
- 81
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Further reading
-
- Cell Biology
- Neuroscience
Experience shapes the brain as neural circuits can be modified by neural stimulation or the lack of it. The molecular mechanisms underlying structural circuit plasticity and how plasticity modifies behaviour are poorly understood. Subjective experience requires dopamine, a neuromodulator that assigns a value to stimuli, and it also controls behaviour, including locomotion, learning, and memory. In Drosophila, Toll receptors are ideally placed to translate experience into structural brain change. Toll-6 is expressed in dopaminergic neurons (DANs), raising the intriguing possibility that Toll-6 could regulate structural plasticity in dopaminergic circuits. Drosophila neurotrophin-2 (DNT-2) is the ligand for Toll-6 and Kek-6, but whether it is required for circuit structural plasticity was unknown. Here, we show that DNT-2-expressing neurons connect with DANs, and they modulate each other. Loss of function for DNT-2 or its receptors Toll-6 and kinase-less Trk-like kek-6 caused DAN and synapse loss, impaired dendrite growth and connectivity, decreased synaptic sites, and caused locomotion deficits. In contrast, over-expressed DNT-2 increased DAN cell number, dendrite complexity, and promoted synaptogenesis. Neuronal activity modified DNT-2, increased synaptogenesis in DNT-2-positive neurons and DANs, and over-expression of DNT-2 did too. Altering the levels of DNT-2 or Toll-6 also modified dopamine-dependent behaviours, including locomotion and long-term memory. To conclude, a feedback loop involving dopamine and DNT-2 highlighted the circuits engaged, and DNT-2 with Toll-6 and Kek-6 induced structural plasticity in this circuit modifying brain function and behaviour.
-
- Cell Biology
Platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFR-α) activity is crucial in the process of dental and periodontal mesenchyme regeneration facilitated by autologous platelet concentrates (APCs), such as platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and concentrated growth factors (CGF), as well as by recombinant PDGF drugs. However, it is largely unclear about the physiological patterns and cellular fate determinations of PDGFR-α+ cells in the homeostasis maintaining of adult dental and periodontal mesenchyme. We previously identified NFATc1 expressing PDGFR-α+ cells as a subtype of skeletal stem cells (SSCs) in limb bone in mice, but their roles in dental and periodontal remain unexplored. To this end, in the present study we investigated the spatiotemporal atlas of NFATc1+ and PDGFR-α+ cells residing in dental and periodontal mesenchyme in mice, their capacity for progeny cell generation, and their inclusive, exclusive and hierarchical relations in homeostasis. We utilized CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing to generate two dual recombination systems, which were Cre-loxP and Dre-rox combined intersectional and exclusive reporters respectively, to concurrently demonstrate the inclusive, exclusive, and hierarchical distributions of NFATc1+ and PDGFR-α+ cells and their lineage commitment. By employing the state-of-the-art transgenic lineage tracing techniques in cooperating with tissue clearing-based advanced imaging and three-dimensional slices reconstruction, we systematically mapped the distribution atlas of NFATc1+ and PDGFR-α+ cells in dental and periodontal mesenchyme and tracked their in vivo fate trajectories in mice. Our findings extend current understanding of NFATc1+ and PDGFR-α+ cells in dental and periodontal mesenchyme homeostasis, and furthermore enhance our comprehension of their sustained therapeutic impact for future clinical investigations.