Protein phosphatase 1 inactivates Mps1 to ensure efficient spindle assembly checkpoint silencing

  1. Margarida Moura
  2. Mariana Osswald
  3. Nelson Leça
  4. João Barbosa
  5. António J Pereira
  6. Helder Maiato
  7. Claudio E Sunkel  Is a corresponding author
  8. Carlos Conde  Is a corresponding author
  1. i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Portugal

Abstract

Faithfull genome partitioning during cell division relies on the Spindle Assembly Checkpoint (SAC), a conserved signaling pathway that delays anaphase onset until all chromosomes are attached to spindle microtubules. Mps1 kinase is an upstream SAC regulator that promotes the assembly of an anaphase inhibitor through a sequential multi-target phosphorylation cascade. Thus, the SAC is highly responsive to Mps1, whose activity peaks in early mitosis as a result of its T-loop autophosphorylation. However, the mechanism controlling Mps1 inactivation once kinetochores attach to microtubules and the SAC is satisfied remains unknown. Here we show in vitro and in Drosophila that Protein Phosphatase 1 (PP1) inactivates Mps1 by dephosphorylating its T-loop. PP1-mediated dephosphorylation of Mps1 occurs at kinetochores and in the cytosol, and inactivation of both pools of Mps1 during metaphase is essential to ensure prompt and efficient SAC silencing. Overall, our findings uncover a mechanism of SAC inactivation required for timely mitotic exit.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Margarida Moura

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Mariana Osswald

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Nelson Leça

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. João Barbosa

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. António J Pereira

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Helder Maiato

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Claudio E Sunkel

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    For correspondence
    cesunkel@ibmc.up.pt
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Carlos Conde

    i3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
    For correspondence
    cconde@ibmc.up.pt
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4177-8519

Funding

FEDER-Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional funds through the COMPETE 2020 (Norte-01-0145-FEDER-000029)

  • Margarida Moura
  • Claudio E Sunkel
  • Carlos Conde

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (PTDC7BEX-BCM/1921/2014-PR041602)

  • Claudio E Sunkel

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (PEst-C/SAU/LA0002/2013-Incentivo2014-BGCT)

  • Claudio E Sunkel

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT Investigator grant IF/01755/2014)

  • Carlos Conde

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (GABBA PhD Program grant PD/BD/105746/2014)

  • Mariana Osswald

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT PhD grant SFRH/BD/87871/2012)

  • João Barbosa

European Research Council (PRECISE)

  • Helder Maiato

European Research Council (CODECHECK)

  • Helder Maiato

FLAD Life Science

  • Helder Maiato

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2017, Moura et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 10,451
    views
  • 729
    downloads
  • 50
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

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)

  1. Margarida Moura
  2. Mariana Osswald
  3. Nelson Leça
  4. João Barbosa
  5. António J Pereira
  6. Helder Maiato
  7. Claudio E Sunkel
  8. Carlos Conde
(2017)
Protein phosphatase 1 inactivates Mps1 to ensure efficient spindle assembly checkpoint silencing
eLife 6:e25366.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.25366

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.25366

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Tamás Visnovitz, Dorina Lenzinger ... Edit I Buzas
    Short Report

    Recent studies showed an unexpected complexity of extracellular vesicle (EV) biogenesis pathways. We previously found evidence that human colorectal cancer cells in vivo release large multivesicular body-like structures en bloc. Here, we tested whether this large EV type is unique to colorectal cancer cells. We found that all cell types we studied (including different cell lines and cells in their original tissue environment) released multivesicular large EVs (MV-lEVs). We also demonstrated that upon spontaneous rupture of the limiting membrane of the MV-lEVs, their intraluminal vesicles (ILVs) escaped to the extracellular environment by a ‘torn bag mechanism’. We proved that the MV-lEVs were released by ectocytosis of amphisomes (hence, we termed them amphiectosomes). Both ILVs of amphiectosomes and small EVs separated from conditioned media were either exclusively CD63 or LC3B positive. According to our model, upon fusion of multivesicular bodies with autophagosomes, fragments of the autophagosomal inner membrane curl up to form LC3B positive ILVs of amphisomes, while CD63 positive small EVs are of multivesicular body origin. Our data suggest a novel common release mechanism for small EVs, distinct from the exocytosis of multivesicular bodies or amphisomes, as well as the small ectosome release pathway.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Adam D Longhurst, Kyle Wang ... David P Toczyski
    Tools and Resources

    Progression through the G1 phase of the cell cycle is the most highly regulated step in cellular division. We employed a chemogenetic approach to discover novel cellular networks that regulate cell cycle progression. This approach uncovered functional clusters of genes that altered sensitivity of cells to inhibitors of the G1/S transition. Mutation of components of the Polycomb Repressor Complex 2 rescued proliferation inhibition caused by the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib, but not to inhibitors of S phase or mitosis. In addition to its core catalytic subunits, mutation of the PRC2.1 accessory protein MTF2, but not the PRC2.2 protein JARID2, rendered cells resistant to palbociclib treatment. We found that PRC2.1 (MTF2), but not PRC2.2 (JARID2), was critical for promoting H3K27me3 deposition at CpG islands genome-wide and in promoters. This included the CpG islands in the promoter of the CDK4/6 cyclins CCND1 and CCND2, and loss of MTF2 lead to upregulation of both CCND1 and CCND2. Our results demonstrate a role for PRC2.1, but not PRC2.2, in antagonizing G1 progression in a diversity of cell linages, including chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), breast cancer, and immortalized cell lines.