The 7th International Fission Yeast Meeting: Pombe2013
Interplay between mitotic kinesins and the Aurora kinase–PP1 (protein phosphatase 1) axis John C. Meadows*1 *Division of Biomedical Cell Biology, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.
Biochemical Society Transactions
www.biochemsoctrans.org
Abstract Correct transmission of genetic information from mother to daughter cells is necessary for development and survival. Accurate segregation is achieved by bipolar attachment of sister kinetochores in each chromatid pair to spindle microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles, a process known as chromosome biorientation. Achieving this requires dynamic interplay between kinetochore proteins, kinesin motor proteins and cell cycle regulators. Chromosome bi-orientation is monitored by a surveillance mechanism known as the SAC (spindle assembly checkpoint). The Aurora B kinase, which is bound to the inner centromere during early mitosis, plays a central role in both chromosome bi-orientation and the spindle checkpoint. The application of tension across centromeres establishes a spatial gradient of high phosphorylation activity at the inner centromere and low phosphorylation activity at the outer kinetochore. This gradient is further refined by the association of PP1 (protein phosphatase 1) to the outer kinetochore, which stabilizes kinetochore– microtubule interactions and silences the spindle checkpoint by dephosphorylating Aurora B kinase targets when chromosome bi-orientation is achieved. In the present review, I discuss emerging evidence that bidirectional cross-talk between mitotic kinesins and the Aurora kinase–PP1 axis is crucial for co-ordinating chromosome bi-orientation and spindle checkpoint signalling in eukaryotes.
Spatial gradients of Aurora kinase and PP1 Somatic mammalian cells contain two Aurora kinases, Aurora A and Aurora B, whereas fission and budding yeast each contain only one Aurora B-like kinase. In mammalian cells, Aurora A localizes to centrosomes throughout mitosis where it is involved in centrosome maturation, chromosome congression and segregation, microtubule flux, spindle formation and stability [1]. Aurora B kinase, on the other hand, is the catalytic component of a complex of proteins known as the CPC (chromosomal passenger complex) which binds the inner centromere during prometaphase and metaphase [2]. Association of CPC to the inner centromere is thought to create a gradient of phosphorylation activity so that incorrect microtubule–kinetochore attachments bring substrates at the outer kinetochore into close proximity to Aurora B, promoting their phosphorylation [3]. Such events preferentially destabilize aberrant kinetochore–microtubule interactions (for example via phosphorylation of Ndc80/HEC1 [4]) and, secondly, activate the SAC (spindle assembly checkpoint). Inappropriate microtubule detachment is required for subsequent rounds of microtubule–kinetochore reattachment until chromosome bi-orientation is achieved. The application of tension not only causes both an increase in interkinetochore distance, but also induces intra-kinetochore
Key words: Aurora kinase, kinesin, kinetochore, mitosis, protein phosphatase 1, spindle. Abbreviations used: CENP-E, centromere protein E; CPC, chromosomal passenger complex; MCAK, mitotic centromere-associated kinesin; PP1, protein phosphatase 1; SAC, spindle assembly checkpoint. 1 email [email protected]
Biochem. Soc. Trans. (2013) 41, 1761–1765; doi:10.1042/BST20130191
stretch, which is thought to be the prime trigger for onset of anaphase [5,6]. However, spatial separation of Aurora B from the outer kinetochore alone is not sufficient, as substrates still need to be dephosphorylated. PP1 (protein phosphatase 1) has emerged as the key enzyme that antagonizes Aurora B kinase both to establish chromosome bi-orientation [7] and to silence the SAC [8]. Upon correct bipolar attachment it is thought that a specific pool of PP1 bound to the kinetochore component KNL1 [9] is important for both of these functions [10–12]. Inactivation of the SAC removes inhibition of the anaphase-promoting complex allowing for destruction of cyclin B and securin and the transition from metaphase to anaphase. At onset of anaphase CPC relocalizes away from the inner-centromere regions to the overlapping antiparallel microtubules of the spindle midzone [2].
Kinesins as regulators and effectors of the Aurora kinase–PP1 gradient Kinesins are a superfamily containing 14 classes of molecular motors that hydrolyse ATP to carry out work [13]. In most kinesins this work translates as directional translocation along a polar microtubule. This movement is frequently coupled with an ability to carry cargo, which can range from a vesicle to a chromosome. Other kinesins are more specialized and instead of movement along microtubules they act catalytically to depolymerize tubulin subunits from microtubule ends, whereas others cross-link parallel or antiparallel microtubules by forming dimers or tetramers. The following kinesin families play recognized roles in mitosis: C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
1761
1762
Biochemical Society Transactions (2013) Volume 41, part 6
kinesin-5 and kinesin-14 in spindle formation, kinesin-7 and kinesin-8 in chromosome congression to the metaphase plate, kinesin-6 in spindle midzone formation, and kinesin13 in controlling the dynamics of kinetochore-attached microtubules. In the present review, I describe emerging links between mitotic kinesins and the Aurora kinase–PP1 spatial activity gradient that shed light on how accurate and timely chromosome segregation is achieved in eukaryotic systems.
Kinesin-7 The mammalian kinesin-7, CENP-E (centromere protein E), is required for congression of chromosomes to the metaphase plate [14,15] following retrieval to the poles by dynein [16]. Kim et al. [17] found that CENP-E is phosphorylated on Thr422 by Aurora A and Aurora B, and that this phosphorylation both reduces the affinity for microtubules and decreases the processivity of the motor; however, it is required for chromosome congression. Phosphorylation of this site also opposes association of CENP-E to PP1 as a PP1-binding motif is nested within the Aurora site, indicating that CENP-E is either phosphorylated or bound to PP1. The proposed mechanism for CENP-E function relies on the Aurora A gradient being high at the poles and decreasing towards the middle of the spindle where the metaphase plate will be established. Following dyneindependent retrieval to the pole, Aurora A phosphorylates CENP-E due to its proximity to the poles and this action displaces PP1. When Thr422 is phosphorylated CENP-E processivity decreases, ensuring that stable high-density kfibres are preferred for binding and translocation, promoting movement of chromosomes to the metaphase plate on established k-fibres. At some distance from the pole, and thus the influence of Aurora A, CENP-E is dephosphorylated and able to bind PP1, resulting in an increase in processivity for the motor. Binding of PP1 to CENP-E also results in a high local density of PP1 at kinetochores which may promote dephosphorylation of key Aurora targets such as Ndc80 and KNL1, which in turn would increase their affinity for microtubules and promote end-on attachment. The role of Aurora B in this mechanism remains largely mysterious as CPC bound at the inner centromeres could theoretically phosphorylate CENP-E at any time during this process. Indeed once the metaphase plate is established, regulation by Aurora B over processivity of CENP-E may be beneficial. Perhaps the large size of CENP-E (∼230 nm) enables it to escape phosphorylation by Aurora B at the centromeres, while still being able to couple chromosome movement to the nascent metaphase plate. Importantly, neither budding nor fission yeast contains a kinesin-7 protein. It is tempting to speculate that the smaller size of the mitotic spindle precludes the requirement for such a lateral sliding chromosome congressor.
Kinesin-13 Members of the non-motile kinesin-13 family have their motor domain in the middle of the protein and are ATPdependent microtubule depolymerases. Somatic mammalian C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
cells usually contain three kinesins-13, Kif2A, Kif2B and Kif2C, or MCAK (mitotic centromere-associated kinesin), depletion of which fails to correct attachment errors [18]. Kif2A, which is negatively regulated by Aurora A [19], binds to centrosomes where it is thought to be involved in microtubule flux and disassembly, although this is the subject of some debate [20–22]. Kif2B binds to centrosomes, spindles and kinetochores [23]. Kif2C/MCAK binds to kinetochores and weakly to centrosomes [24] and is regulated by Aurora phosphorylation. MCAK is phosphorylated on Ser192 by either Aurora A or Aurora B and this inhibits its microtubule depolymerase activity by reducing its affinity for microtubules [25–27]. MCAK localization is also controlled by Aurora phosphorylation, with phosphorylation by Aurora B targeting it to centromeres and dephosphorylation favouring kinetochores. However, the interplay between phosphorylation and localization is complex, with some sites needing to be phosphorylated (Ser110 ) and others (Thr95 ) dephosphorylated for centromere loading [28]. Therefore Aurora B phosphorylation appears to both inhibit the depolymerase activity and promote localization of MCAK to the centromeres. Perhaps this complexity hints at the spatial and temporal regulation necessary to preferentially correct erroneous kfibre microtubule–kinetochore attachments. Indeed the local action of phosphatases could potentially activate MCAK without disrupting its localization by dephosphorylating certain sites but not others. As well as direct regulation via Aurora kinase phosphorylation, MCAK is also indirectly controlled through the Aurora–PP1 axis. Aurora B phosphorylation of Sgo2 is required for centromeric MCAK localization [29], whereas PP1–Repo-Man dephosphorylates centrosomal histones to regulate Aurora B and MCAK targeting in an interaction that is itself regulated by Aurora B [30,31]. However, just like kinesin-7, neither budding nor fission yeast contains a member of the kinesin-13 family. This may be because yeast kinetochores bind far fewer microtubules (one in budding yeast, and three or four in fission yeast), so the risk of merotelic microtubule–kinetochore interactions is either lower or absent.
Kinesin-8 We recently found that, in addition to KNL1–PP1, association of PP1 to two members of the kinesin-8 family in fission yeast, Klp5 and Klp6, via conserved binding motifs in their C-terminal tails is important for establishing chromosome bi-orientation and silencing the spindle checkpoint [11]. Although it was previously thought that kinesin-8 family members were exclusively microtubule depolymerases [32–34], it is now believed that they act instead as dynamicity factors for microtubules, in that they can both increase the polymerization and depolymerization rate [35,36]. Several members of this class of kinesins (including mammalian Kif18A and budding yeast Kip3) have a second microtubule-binding site in the tail region that increases the processivity of the motor domain [37–39]. In all cell
The 7th International Fission Yeast Meeting: Pombe2013
types so far examined, kinesin-8 motors are crucial for regulating spindle length, chromosome congression, accurate segregation and the timing of onset of anaphase [40–43]. Although both Kif18A and Kip3 contain PP1-binding motifs in their C-terminal tails, it is currently unknown whether they bind PP1 or whether the role of kinesin-8–PP1 in spindle checkpoint silencing and chromosome segregation is conserved. Nevertheless, these results suggest that, at least in fission yeast, two distinct pools of PP1, one kinetochore-bound and one kinesin-bound, are needed to antagonize Aurora B activity to both establish chromosome bi-orientation and silence the SAC. It is presently unclear whether the CENP-E–PP1 also contributes to silencing of the SAC in mammalian cells. Although the pool of PP1 bound to kinesin-8 motors antagonizes Aurora B kinase, it is currently unknown whether Aurora B reciprocally regulates kinesin-8 PP1binding and/or motor function. For this reason it is important to determine whether members of the kinesin8 family are substrates of Aurora B kinase. To add to this complexity, kinesins-8 can also interact with members of other kinesin families. Kif18A has been reported to bind to and stabilize CENP-E [44], whereas Kif18B has been shown to deliver MCAK to the plus ends of microtubules [45] and, intriguingly, the interaction between Kif18B and MCAK is negatively regulated by Aurora activity.
Figure 1 Model highlighting the known interactions between mitotic kinesin families and the Aurora–PP1 axis At least four families of kinesins are either differentially regulated by or regulate the Aurora–PP1 axis themselves. Kinesins-8, Klp5 and Klp6, recruit a population of PP1 to the kinetochore, whereas kinesin-13, MCAK, activity is directly regulated by Aurora phosphorylation. Kinesin-7, CENP-E, is both directly regulated by Aurora phosphorylation and also recruits PP1 to kinetochores in a mutually exclusive manner. Finally, kinesin-6, Mklp2, acts to remove Aurora B from the inner centromere at the metaphase-to-anaphase transition, thus disestablishing the Aurora B–PP1 axis.
Conclusions Kinesin-6 At the metaphase-to-anaphase transition CPC relocalizes from the inner-centromere region to the overlapping antiparallel microtubules of the mitotic spindle, effectively disestablishing the Aurora B–PP1 kinetochore gradient. This relocalization is dependent on the mammalian kinesin6 family member Mklp2 and Aurora B activity, but is negatively regulated by Cdk1 activity [46,47]. In the absence of Mklp2, CPC is retained at centromeres during anaphase B, which triggers the rebinding of several SAC components, including Bub1, BubR1 and Mps1, to the kinetochore [48]. It has therefore been proposed that Mklp2mediated relocalization of CPC from centromeres to the spindle midzone helps to prevent reactivation of the SAC after the onset of anaphase. Consequently both kinesin-8 and kinesin-6 family members can antagonize the spindle checkpoint, but by different mechanisms. Whereas kinesin8 brings PP1 to the kinetochore to antagonize Aurora Bmediated phosphorylation, kinesin-6 takes Aurora B, and other components of the CPC, away from centromeres at the onset of anaphase. This latter mechanism is not conserved in budding yeast as this organism lacks a member of the kinesin6 family. However, recent evidence suggests that in fission yeast the timing of anaphase onset is delayed in the absence of Klp9, the single kinesin-6 in Schizosaccharomyces pombe, and that Klp9, like Mklp2, binds the CPC at the spindle midzone during anaphase B (J.C. Meadows, unpublished work).
In summary, it is clear that mitotic kinesin function can be altered by Aurora B-mediated phosphorylation (kinesin7 and kinesin-13) and that kinesins can influence the cellcycle-dependent localization of Aurora B (kinesin-6) and its antagonist PP1 (kinesin-8) (Figure 1). Thus reciprocal regulation of the Aurora–PP1 axis by mitotic motors provides a mechanism to couple force generation at the kinetochore with signal transmission to the cell cycle machinery. It is notable, however, that members of two of the kinesin families mentioned above (kinesin-7 and kinesin-13) exist in mammalian cells but not in yeast, and members of the kinesin6 family are found in mammalian cells and fission yeast, but not in budding yeast. One possibility is that fungal kinesins-8 may perform some of the functions provided by kinesin-13 (in terms of depolymerase activity) and kinesin-7 (in terms of PP1 association). Regardless, this suggests that the interplay between Aurora B kinase and the kinesin-8–PP1 complex may lie at the heart of how chromosome bi-orientation and spindle checkpoint signalling are co-ordinated in all eukaryotes. Therefore further dissection of this relationship is clearly merited. Importantly, Aurora kinases and several mitotic kinesins are overexpressed in specific types of human cancers and are thought to contribute to tumorigenesis. For this reason both classes of enzyme are of interest to the pharmaceutical industry as the targets of small-molecule inhibitor drug trials [49,50]. Although it is difficult to predict the full extent of the interactions between the Aurora–PP1 axis and C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
1763
1764
Biochemical Society Transactions (2013) Volume 41, part 6
kinesins, the present review highlights the fact that their functions are intimately intertwined. However, to gain an understanding of how to preferentially perturb this system for therapeutic benefit, much further work is needed to dissect this fascinating and multifaceted relationship.
Acknowledgements I apologize to those researchers whose work I could not cite due to space constraints. I thank Jonathan Millar and Andrew McAinsh for their critical reading of this paper.
Funding J.C.M. is funded by a Global Research Fellowship from the Institute of Advanced Study, University of Warwick.
References 1 Vader, G. and Lens, S.M. (2008) The Aurora kinase family in cell division and cancer. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1786, 60–72 2 Carmena, M., Wheelock, M., Funabiki, H. and Earnshaw, W.C. (2012) The chromosomal passenger complex (CPC): from easy rider to the godfather of mitosis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 13, 789–803 3 Lampson, M.A. and Cheeseman, I.M. (2011) Sensing centromere tension: Aurora B and the regulation of kinetochore function. Trends Cell Biol. 21, 133–140 4 Welburn, J.P., Vleugel, M., Liu, D., Yates, 3rd, J.R., Lampson, M.A., Fukagawa, T. and Cheeseman, I.M. (2010) Aurora B phosphorylates spatially distinct targets to differentially regulate the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Mol. Cell 38, 383–392 5 Maresca, T.J. and Salmon, E.D. (2009) Intrakinetochore stretch is associated with changes in kinetochore phosphorylation and spindle assembly checkpoint activity. J. Cell Biol. 184, 373–381 6 Uchida, K.S., Takagaki, K., Kumada, K., Hirayama, Y., Noda, T. and Hirota, T. (2009) Kinetochore stretching inactivates the spindle assembly checkpoint. J. Cell Biol. 184, 383–390 7 Francisco, L., Wang, W. and Chan, C.S. (1994) Type 1 protein phosphatase acts in opposition to IpL1 protein kinase in regulating yeast chromosome segregation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 4731–4740 8 Vanoosthuyse, V. and Hardwick, K.G. (2009) A novel protein phosphatase 1-dependent spindle checkpoint silencing mechanism. Curr. Biol. 19, 1176–1181 9 Liu, D., Vleugel, M., Backer, C.B., Hori, T., Fukagawa, T., Cheeseman, I.M. and Lampson, M.A. (2010) Regulated targeting of protein phosphatase 1 to the outer kinetochore by KNL1 opposes Aurora B kinase. J. Cell Biol. 188, 809–820 10 Espeut, J., Cheerambathur, D.K., Krenning, L., Oegema, K. and Desai, A. (2012) Microtubule binding by KNL-1 contributes to spindle checkpoint silencing at the kinetochore. J. Cell Biol. 196, 469–482 11 Meadows, J.C., Shepperd, L.A., Vanoosthuyse, V., Lancaster, T.C., Sochaj, A.M., Buttrick, G.J., Hardwick, K.G. and Millar, J.B. (2011) Spindle checkpoint silencing requires association of PP1 to both Spc7 and kinesin-8 motors. Dev. Cell 20, 739–750 12 Rosenberg, J.S., Cross, F.R. and Funabiki, H. (2011) KNL1/Spc105 recruits PP1 to silence the spindle assembly checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 21, 942–947 13 Miki, H., Okada, Y. and Hirokawa, N. (2005) Analysis of the kinesin superfamily: insights into structure and function. Trends Cell Biol. 15, 467–476 14 Schaar, B.T., Chan, G.K., Maddox, P., Salmon, E.D. and Yen, T.J. (1997) CENP-E function at kinetochores is essential for chromosome alignment. J. Cell Biol. 139, 1373–1382 15 Wood, K.W., Sakowicz, R., Goldstein, L.S. and Cleveland, D.W. (1997) CENP-E is a plus end-directed kinetochore motor required for metaphase chromosome alignment. Cell 91, 357–366 C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
16 Sharp, D.J., Rogers, G.C. and Scholey, J.M. (2000) Cytoplasmic dynein is required for poleward chromosome movement during mitosis in Drosophila embryos. Nat. Cell Biol. 2, 922–930 17 Kim, Y., Holland, A.J., Lan, W. and Cleveland, D.W. (2010) Aurora kinases and protein phosphatase 1 mediate chromosome congression through regulation of CENP-E. Cell 142, 444–455 18 Bakhoum, S.F., Thompson, S.L., Manning, A.L. and Compton, D.A. (2009) Genome stability is ensured by temporal control of kinetochore-microtubule dynamics. Nat. Cell Biol. 11, 27–35 19 Jang, C.Y., Coppinger, J.A., Seki, A., Yates, 3rd, J.R. and Fang, G. (2009) Plk1 and Aurora A regulate the depolymerase activity and the cellular localization of Kif2a. J. Cell Sci. 122, 1334–1341 20 Gaetz, J. and Kapoor, T.M. (2004) Dynein/dynactin regulate metaphase spindle length by targeting depolymerizing activities to spindle poles. J. Cell Biol. 166, 465–471 21 Ganem, N.J., Upton, K. and Compton, D.A. (2005) Efficient mitosis in human cells lacking poleward microtubule flux. Curr. Biol. 15, 1827–1832 22 Ohi, R., Burbank, K., Liu, Q. and Mitchison, T.J. (2007) Nonredundant functions of kinesin-13s during meiotic spindle assembly. Curr. Biol. 17, 953–959 23 Manning, A.L., Ganem, N.J., Bakhoum, S.F., Wagenbach, M., Wordeman, L. and Compton, D.A. (2007) The kinesin-13 proteins Kif2a, Kif2b, and Kif2c/MCAK have distinct roles during mitosis in human cells. Mol. Biol. Cell 18, 2970–2979 24 Walczak, C.E., Mitchison, T.J. and Desai, A. (1996) XKCM1: a Xenopus kinesin-related protein that regulates microtubule dynamics during mitotic spindle assembly. Cell 84, 37–47 25 Andrews, P.D., Ovechkina, Y., Morrice, N., Wagenbach, M., Duncan, K., Wordeman, L. and Swedlow, J.R. (2004) Aurora B regulates MCAK at the mitotic centromere. Dev. Cell 6, 253–268 26 Lan, W., Zhang, X., Kline-Smith, S.L., Rosasco, S.E., Barrett-Wilt, G.A., Shabanowitz, J., Hunt, D.F., Walczak, C.E. and Stukenberg, P.T. (2004) Aurora B phosphorylates centromeric MCAK and regulates its localization and microtubule depolymerization activity. Curr. Biol. 14, 273–286 27 Ohi, R., Sapra, T., Howard, J. and Mitchison, T.J. (2004) Differentiation of cytoplasmic and meiotic spindle assembly MCAK functions by Aurora B-dependent phosphorylation. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 2895–2906 28 Zhang, X., Lan, W., Ems-McClung, S.C., Stukenberg, P.T. and Walczak, C.E. (2007) Aurora B phosphorylates multiple sites on mitotic centromere-associated kinesin to spatially and temporally regulate its function. Mol. Biol. Cell 18, 3264–3276 29 Tanno, Y., Kitajima, T.S., Honda, T., Ando, Y., Ishiguro, K. and Watanabe, Y. (2010) Phosphorylation of mammalian Sgo2 by Aurora B recruits PP2A and MCAK to centromeres. Genes Dev. 24, 2169–2179 30 Qian, J., Beullens, M., Lesage, B. and Bollen, M. (2013) Aurora B defines its own chromosomal targeting by opposing the recruitment of the phosphatase scaffold repo-man. Curr. Biol. 23, 1136–1143 31 Qian, J., Lesage, B., Beullens, M., Van Eynde, A. and Bollen, M. (2011) PP1/Repo-man dephosphorylates mitotic histone H3 at T3 and regulates chromosomal aurora B targeting. Curr. Biol. 21, 766–773 32 Gupta, Jr, M.L., Carvalho, P., Roof, D.M. and Pellman, D. (2006) Plus end-specific depolymerase activity of Kip3, a kinesin-8 protein, explains its role in positioning the yeast mitotic spindle. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 913–923 33 Mayr, M.I., Hummer, S., Bormann, J., Gruner, T., Adio, S., Woehlke, G. and Mayer, T.U. (2007) The human kinesin Kif18A is a motile microtubule depolymerase essential for chromosome congression. Curr. Biol. 17, 488–498 34 Varga, V., Helenius, J., Tanaka, K., Hyman, A.A., Tanaka, T.U. and Howard, J. (2006) Yeast kinesin-8 depolymerizes microtubules in a length-dependent manner. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 957–962 35 Du, Y., English, C.A. and Ohi, R. (2010) The kinesin-8 Kif18A dampens microtubule plus-end dynamics. Curr. Biol. 20, 374–380 36 Erent, M., Drummond, D.R. and Cross, R.A. (2012) S. pombe kinesins-8 promote both nucleation and catastrophe of microtubules. PLoS ONE 7, e30738 37 Stumpff, J., Du, Y., English, C.A., Maliga, Z., Wagenbach, M., Asbury, C.L., Wordeman, L. and Ohi, R. (2011) A tethering mechanism controls the processivity and kinetochore-microtubule plus-end enrichment of the kinesin-8 Kif18A. Mol. Cell 43, 764–775 38 Su, X., Qiu, W., Gupta, Jr, M.L., Pereira-Leal, J.B., Reck-Peterson, S.L. and Pellman, D. (2011) Mechanisms underlying the dual-mode regulation of microtubule dynamics by Kip3/kinesin-8. Mol. Cell 43, 751–763 39 Weaver, L.N., Ems-McClung, S.C., Stout, J.R., LeBlanc, C., Shaw, S.L., Gardner, M.K. and Walczak, C.E. (2011) Kif18A uses a microtubule binding site in the tail for plus-end localization and spindle length regulation. Curr. Biol. 21, 1500–1506
The 7th International Fission Yeast Meeting: Pombe2013
40 Garcia, M.A., Koonrugsa, N. and Toda, T. (2002) Two kinesin-like Kin I family proteins in fission yeast regulate the establishment of metaphase and the onset of anaphase A. Curr. Biol. 12, 610–621 41 Stumpff, J., von Dassow, G., Wagenbach, M., Asbury, C. and Wordeman, L. (2008) The kinesin-8 motor Kif18A suppresses kinetochore movements to control mitotic chromosome alignment. Dev. Cell 14, 252–262 42 Wargacki, M.M., Tay, J.C., Muller, E.G., Asbury, C.L. and Davis, T.N. (2010) Kip3, the yeast kinesin-8, is required for clustering of kinetochores at metaphase. Cell Cycle 9, 2581–2588 43 West, R.R., Malmstrom, T. and McIntosh, J.R. (2002) Kinesins klp5 + and klp6 + are required for normal chromosome movement in mitosis. J. Cell Sci. 115, 931–940 44 Huang, Y., Yao, Y., Xu, H.Z., Wang, Z.G., Lu, L. and Dai, W. (2009) Defects in chromosome congression and mitotic progression in KIF18A-deficient cells are partly mediated through impaired functions of CENP-E. Cell Cycle 8, 2643–2649 45 Tanenbaum, M.E., Macurek, L., van der Vaart, B., Galli, M., Akhmanova, A. and Medema, R.H. (2011) A complex of Kif18b and MCAK promotes microtubule depolymerization and is negatively regulated by Aurora kinases. Curr. Biol. 21, 1356–1365
46 Gruneberg, U., Neef, R., Honda, R., Nigg, E.A. and Barr, F.A. (2004) Relocation of Aurora B from centromeres to the central spindle at the metaphase to anaphase transition requires MKlp2. J. Cell Biol. 166, 167–172 47 Hummer, S. and Mayer, T.U. (2009) Cdk1 negatively regulates midzone localization of the mitotic kinesin Mklp2 and the chromosomal passenger complex. Curr. Biol. 19, 607–612 48 Vazquez-Novelle, M.D. and Petronczki, M. (2010) Relocation of the chromosomal passenger complex prevents mitotic checkpoint engagement at anaphase. Curr. Biol. 20, 1402–1407 49 Boss, D.S., Beijnen, J.H. and Schellens, J.H. (2009) Clinical experience with aurora kinase inhibitors: a review. Oncologist 14, 780–793 50 Rath, O. and Kozielski, F. (2012) Kinesins and cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12, 527–539
Received 9 August 2013 doi:10.1042/BST20130191
C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
1765
Copyright of Biochemical Society Transactions is the property of Portland Press Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Interplay between mitotic kinesins and the Aurora kinase–PP1 (protein phosphatase 1) axis John C. Meadows*1 *Division of Biomedical Cell Biology, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.
Biochemical Society Transactions
www.biochemsoctrans.org
Abstract Correct transmission of genetic information from mother to daughter cells is necessary for development and survival. Accurate segregation is achieved by bipolar attachment of sister kinetochores in each chromatid pair to spindle microtubules emanating from opposite spindle poles, a process known as chromosome biorientation. Achieving this requires dynamic interplay between kinetochore proteins, kinesin motor proteins and cell cycle regulators. Chromosome bi-orientation is monitored by a surveillance mechanism known as the SAC (spindle assembly checkpoint). The Aurora B kinase, which is bound to the inner centromere during early mitosis, plays a central role in both chromosome bi-orientation and the spindle checkpoint. The application of tension across centromeres establishes a spatial gradient of high phosphorylation activity at the inner centromere and low phosphorylation activity at the outer kinetochore. This gradient is further refined by the association of PP1 (protein phosphatase 1) to the outer kinetochore, which stabilizes kinetochore– microtubule interactions and silences the spindle checkpoint by dephosphorylating Aurora B kinase targets when chromosome bi-orientation is achieved. In the present review, I discuss emerging evidence that bidirectional cross-talk between mitotic kinesins and the Aurora kinase–PP1 axis is crucial for co-ordinating chromosome bi-orientation and spindle checkpoint signalling in eukaryotes.
Spatial gradients of Aurora kinase and PP1 Somatic mammalian cells contain two Aurora kinases, Aurora A and Aurora B, whereas fission and budding yeast each contain only one Aurora B-like kinase. In mammalian cells, Aurora A localizes to centrosomes throughout mitosis where it is involved in centrosome maturation, chromosome congression and segregation, microtubule flux, spindle formation and stability [1]. Aurora B kinase, on the other hand, is the catalytic component of a complex of proteins known as the CPC (chromosomal passenger complex) which binds the inner centromere during prometaphase and metaphase [2]. Association of CPC to the inner centromere is thought to create a gradient of phosphorylation activity so that incorrect microtubule–kinetochore attachments bring substrates at the outer kinetochore into close proximity to Aurora B, promoting their phosphorylation [3]. Such events preferentially destabilize aberrant kinetochore–microtubule interactions (for example via phosphorylation of Ndc80/HEC1 [4]) and, secondly, activate the SAC (spindle assembly checkpoint). Inappropriate microtubule detachment is required for subsequent rounds of microtubule–kinetochore reattachment until chromosome bi-orientation is achieved. The application of tension not only causes both an increase in interkinetochore distance, but also induces intra-kinetochore
Key words: Aurora kinase, kinesin, kinetochore, mitosis, protein phosphatase 1, spindle. Abbreviations used: CENP-E, centromere protein E; CPC, chromosomal passenger complex; MCAK, mitotic centromere-associated kinesin; PP1, protein phosphatase 1; SAC, spindle assembly checkpoint. 1 email [email protected]
Biochem. Soc. Trans. (2013) 41, 1761–1765; doi:10.1042/BST20130191
stretch, which is thought to be the prime trigger for onset of anaphase [5,6]. However, spatial separation of Aurora B from the outer kinetochore alone is not sufficient, as substrates still need to be dephosphorylated. PP1 (protein phosphatase 1) has emerged as the key enzyme that antagonizes Aurora B kinase both to establish chromosome bi-orientation [7] and to silence the SAC [8]. Upon correct bipolar attachment it is thought that a specific pool of PP1 bound to the kinetochore component KNL1 [9] is important for both of these functions [10–12]. Inactivation of the SAC removes inhibition of the anaphase-promoting complex allowing for destruction of cyclin B and securin and the transition from metaphase to anaphase. At onset of anaphase CPC relocalizes away from the inner-centromere regions to the overlapping antiparallel microtubules of the spindle midzone [2].
Kinesins as regulators and effectors of the Aurora kinase–PP1 gradient Kinesins are a superfamily containing 14 classes of molecular motors that hydrolyse ATP to carry out work [13]. In most kinesins this work translates as directional translocation along a polar microtubule. This movement is frequently coupled with an ability to carry cargo, which can range from a vesicle to a chromosome. Other kinesins are more specialized and instead of movement along microtubules they act catalytically to depolymerize tubulin subunits from microtubule ends, whereas others cross-link parallel or antiparallel microtubules by forming dimers or tetramers. The following kinesin families play recognized roles in mitosis: C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
1761
1762
Biochemical Society Transactions (2013) Volume 41, part 6
kinesin-5 and kinesin-14 in spindle formation, kinesin-7 and kinesin-8 in chromosome congression to the metaphase plate, kinesin-6 in spindle midzone formation, and kinesin13 in controlling the dynamics of kinetochore-attached microtubules. In the present review, I describe emerging links between mitotic kinesins and the Aurora kinase–PP1 spatial activity gradient that shed light on how accurate and timely chromosome segregation is achieved in eukaryotic systems.
Kinesin-7 The mammalian kinesin-7, CENP-E (centromere protein E), is required for congression of chromosomes to the metaphase plate [14,15] following retrieval to the poles by dynein [16]. Kim et al. [17] found that CENP-E is phosphorylated on Thr422 by Aurora A and Aurora B, and that this phosphorylation both reduces the affinity for microtubules and decreases the processivity of the motor; however, it is required for chromosome congression. Phosphorylation of this site also opposes association of CENP-E to PP1 as a PP1-binding motif is nested within the Aurora site, indicating that CENP-E is either phosphorylated or bound to PP1. The proposed mechanism for CENP-E function relies on the Aurora A gradient being high at the poles and decreasing towards the middle of the spindle where the metaphase plate will be established. Following dyneindependent retrieval to the pole, Aurora A phosphorylates CENP-E due to its proximity to the poles and this action displaces PP1. When Thr422 is phosphorylated CENP-E processivity decreases, ensuring that stable high-density kfibres are preferred for binding and translocation, promoting movement of chromosomes to the metaphase plate on established k-fibres. At some distance from the pole, and thus the influence of Aurora A, CENP-E is dephosphorylated and able to bind PP1, resulting in an increase in processivity for the motor. Binding of PP1 to CENP-E also results in a high local density of PP1 at kinetochores which may promote dephosphorylation of key Aurora targets such as Ndc80 and KNL1, which in turn would increase their affinity for microtubules and promote end-on attachment. The role of Aurora B in this mechanism remains largely mysterious as CPC bound at the inner centromeres could theoretically phosphorylate CENP-E at any time during this process. Indeed once the metaphase plate is established, regulation by Aurora B over processivity of CENP-E may be beneficial. Perhaps the large size of CENP-E (∼230 nm) enables it to escape phosphorylation by Aurora B at the centromeres, while still being able to couple chromosome movement to the nascent metaphase plate. Importantly, neither budding nor fission yeast contains a kinesin-7 protein. It is tempting to speculate that the smaller size of the mitotic spindle precludes the requirement for such a lateral sliding chromosome congressor.
Kinesin-13 Members of the non-motile kinesin-13 family have their motor domain in the middle of the protein and are ATPdependent microtubule depolymerases. Somatic mammalian C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
cells usually contain three kinesins-13, Kif2A, Kif2B and Kif2C, or MCAK (mitotic centromere-associated kinesin), depletion of which fails to correct attachment errors [18]. Kif2A, which is negatively regulated by Aurora A [19], binds to centrosomes where it is thought to be involved in microtubule flux and disassembly, although this is the subject of some debate [20–22]. Kif2B binds to centrosomes, spindles and kinetochores [23]. Kif2C/MCAK binds to kinetochores and weakly to centrosomes [24] and is regulated by Aurora phosphorylation. MCAK is phosphorylated on Ser192 by either Aurora A or Aurora B and this inhibits its microtubule depolymerase activity by reducing its affinity for microtubules [25–27]. MCAK localization is also controlled by Aurora phosphorylation, with phosphorylation by Aurora B targeting it to centromeres and dephosphorylation favouring kinetochores. However, the interplay between phosphorylation and localization is complex, with some sites needing to be phosphorylated (Ser110 ) and others (Thr95 ) dephosphorylated for centromere loading [28]. Therefore Aurora B phosphorylation appears to both inhibit the depolymerase activity and promote localization of MCAK to the centromeres. Perhaps this complexity hints at the spatial and temporal regulation necessary to preferentially correct erroneous kfibre microtubule–kinetochore attachments. Indeed the local action of phosphatases could potentially activate MCAK without disrupting its localization by dephosphorylating certain sites but not others. As well as direct regulation via Aurora kinase phosphorylation, MCAK is also indirectly controlled through the Aurora–PP1 axis. Aurora B phosphorylation of Sgo2 is required for centromeric MCAK localization [29], whereas PP1–Repo-Man dephosphorylates centrosomal histones to regulate Aurora B and MCAK targeting in an interaction that is itself regulated by Aurora B [30,31]. However, just like kinesin-7, neither budding nor fission yeast contains a member of the kinesin-13 family. This may be because yeast kinetochores bind far fewer microtubules (one in budding yeast, and three or four in fission yeast), so the risk of merotelic microtubule–kinetochore interactions is either lower or absent.
Kinesin-8 We recently found that, in addition to KNL1–PP1, association of PP1 to two members of the kinesin-8 family in fission yeast, Klp5 and Klp6, via conserved binding motifs in their C-terminal tails is important for establishing chromosome bi-orientation and silencing the spindle checkpoint [11]. Although it was previously thought that kinesin-8 family members were exclusively microtubule depolymerases [32–34], it is now believed that they act instead as dynamicity factors for microtubules, in that they can both increase the polymerization and depolymerization rate [35,36]. Several members of this class of kinesins (including mammalian Kif18A and budding yeast Kip3) have a second microtubule-binding site in the tail region that increases the processivity of the motor domain [37–39]. In all cell
The 7th International Fission Yeast Meeting: Pombe2013
types so far examined, kinesin-8 motors are crucial for regulating spindle length, chromosome congression, accurate segregation and the timing of onset of anaphase [40–43]. Although both Kif18A and Kip3 contain PP1-binding motifs in their C-terminal tails, it is currently unknown whether they bind PP1 or whether the role of kinesin-8–PP1 in spindle checkpoint silencing and chromosome segregation is conserved. Nevertheless, these results suggest that, at least in fission yeast, two distinct pools of PP1, one kinetochore-bound and one kinesin-bound, are needed to antagonize Aurora B activity to both establish chromosome bi-orientation and silence the SAC. It is presently unclear whether the CENP-E–PP1 also contributes to silencing of the SAC in mammalian cells. Although the pool of PP1 bound to kinesin-8 motors antagonizes Aurora B kinase, it is currently unknown whether Aurora B reciprocally regulates kinesin-8 PP1binding and/or motor function. For this reason it is important to determine whether members of the kinesin8 family are substrates of Aurora B kinase. To add to this complexity, kinesins-8 can also interact with members of other kinesin families. Kif18A has been reported to bind to and stabilize CENP-E [44], whereas Kif18B has been shown to deliver MCAK to the plus ends of microtubules [45] and, intriguingly, the interaction between Kif18B and MCAK is negatively regulated by Aurora activity.
Figure 1 Model highlighting the known interactions between mitotic kinesin families and the Aurora–PP1 axis At least four families of kinesins are either differentially regulated by or regulate the Aurora–PP1 axis themselves. Kinesins-8, Klp5 and Klp6, recruit a population of PP1 to the kinetochore, whereas kinesin-13, MCAK, activity is directly regulated by Aurora phosphorylation. Kinesin-7, CENP-E, is both directly regulated by Aurora phosphorylation and also recruits PP1 to kinetochores in a mutually exclusive manner. Finally, kinesin-6, Mklp2, acts to remove Aurora B from the inner centromere at the metaphase-to-anaphase transition, thus disestablishing the Aurora B–PP1 axis.
Conclusions Kinesin-6 At the metaphase-to-anaphase transition CPC relocalizes from the inner-centromere region to the overlapping antiparallel microtubules of the mitotic spindle, effectively disestablishing the Aurora B–PP1 kinetochore gradient. This relocalization is dependent on the mammalian kinesin6 family member Mklp2 and Aurora B activity, but is negatively regulated by Cdk1 activity [46,47]. In the absence of Mklp2, CPC is retained at centromeres during anaphase B, which triggers the rebinding of several SAC components, including Bub1, BubR1 and Mps1, to the kinetochore [48]. It has therefore been proposed that Mklp2mediated relocalization of CPC from centromeres to the spindle midzone helps to prevent reactivation of the SAC after the onset of anaphase. Consequently both kinesin-8 and kinesin-6 family members can antagonize the spindle checkpoint, but by different mechanisms. Whereas kinesin8 brings PP1 to the kinetochore to antagonize Aurora Bmediated phosphorylation, kinesin-6 takes Aurora B, and other components of the CPC, away from centromeres at the onset of anaphase. This latter mechanism is not conserved in budding yeast as this organism lacks a member of the kinesin6 family. However, recent evidence suggests that in fission yeast the timing of anaphase onset is delayed in the absence of Klp9, the single kinesin-6 in Schizosaccharomyces pombe, and that Klp9, like Mklp2, binds the CPC at the spindle midzone during anaphase B (J.C. Meadows, unpublished work).
In summary, it is clear that mitotic kinesin function can be altered by Aurora B-mediated phosphorylation (kinesin7 and kinesin-13) and that kinesins can influence the cellcycle-dependent localization of Aurora B (kinesin-6) and its antagonist PP1 (kinesin-8) (Figure 1). Thus reciprocal regulation of the Aurora–PP1 axis by mitotic motors provides a mechanism to couple force generation at the kinetochore with signal transmission to the cell cycle machinery. It is notable, however, that members of two of the kinesin families mentioned above (kinesin-7 and kinesin-13) exist in mammalian cells but not in yeast, and members of the kinesin6 family are found in mammalian cells and fission yeast, but not in budding yeast. One possibility is that fungal kinesins-8 may perform some of the functions provided by kinesin-13 (in terms of depolymerase activity) and kinesin-7 (in terms of PP1 association). Regardless, this suggests that the interplay between Aurora B kinase and the kinesin-8–PP1 complex may lie at the heart of how chromosome bi-orientation and spindle checkpoint signalling are co-ordinated in all eukaryotes. Therefore further dissection of this relationship is clearly merited. Importantly, Aurora kinases and several mitotic kinesins are overexpressed in specific types of human cancers and are thought to contribute to tumorigenesis. For this reason both classes of enzyme are of interest to the pharmaceutical industry as the targets of small-molecule inhibitor drug trials [49,50]. Although it is difficult to predict the full extent of the interactions between the Aurora–PP1 axis and C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
1763
1764
Biochemical Society Transactions (2013) Volume 41, part 6
kinesins, the present review highlights the fact that their functions are intimately intertwined. However, to gain an understanding of how to preferentially perturb this system for therapeutic benefit, much further work is needed to dissect this fascinating and multifaceted relationship.
Acknowledgements I apologize to those researchers whose work I could not cite due to space constraints. I thank Jonathan Millar and Andrew McAinsh for their critical reading of this paper.
Funding J.C.M. is funded by a Global Research Fellowship from the Institute of Advanced Study, University of Warwick.
References 1 Vader, G. and Lens, S.M. (2008) The Aurora kinase family in cell division and cancer. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1786, 60–72 2 Carmena, M., Wheelock, M., Funabiki, H. and Earnshaw, W.C. (2012) The chromosomal passenger complex (CPC): from easy rider to the godfather of mitosis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 13, 789–803 3 Lampson, M.A. and Cheeseman, I.M. (2011) Sensing centromere tension: Aurora B and the regulation of kinetochore function. Trends Cell Biol. 21, 133–140 4 Welburn, J.P., Vleugel, M., Liu, D., Yates, 3rd, J.R., Lampson, M.A., Fukagawa, T. and Cheeseman, I.M. (2010) Aurora B phosphorylates spatially distinct targets to differentially regulate the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Mol. Cell 38, 383–392 5 Maresca, T.J. and Salmon, E.D. (2009) Intrakinetochore stretch is associated with changes in kinetochore phosphorylation and spindle assembly checkpoint activity. J. Cell Biol. 184, 373–381 6 Uchida, K.S., Takagaki, K., Kumada, K., Hirayama, Y., Noda, T. and Hirota, T. (2009) Kinetochore stretching inactivates the spindle assembly checkpoint. J. Cell Biol. 184, 383–390 7 Francisco, L., Wang, W. and Chan, C.S. (1994) Type 1 protein phosphatase acts in opposition to IpL1 protein kinase in regulating yeast chromosome segregation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 4731–4740 8 Vanoosthuyse, V. and Hardwick, K.G. (2009) A novel protein phosphatase 1-dependent spindle checkpoint silencing mechanism. Curr. Biol. 19, 1176–1181 9 Liu, D., Vleugel, M., Backer, C.B., Hori, T., Fukagawa, T., Cheeseman, I.M. and Lampson, M.A. (2010) Regulated targeting of protein phosphatase 1 to the outer kinetochore by KNL1 opposes Aurora B kinase. J. Cell Biol. 188, 809–820 10 Espeut, J., Cheerambathur, D.K., Krenning, L., Oegema, K. and Desai, A. (2012) Microtubule binding by KNL-1 contributes to spindle checkpoint silencing at the kinetochore. J. Cell Biol. 196, 469–482 11 Meadows, J.C., Shepperd, L.A., Vanoosthuyse, V., Lancaster, T.C., Sochaj, A.M., Buttrick, G.J., Hardwick, K.G. and Millar, J.B. (2011) Spindle checkpoint silencing requires association of PP1 to both Spc7 and kinesin-8 motors. Dev. Cell 20, 739–750 12 Rosenberg, J.S., Cross, F.R. and Funabiki, H. (2011) KNL1/Spc105 recruits PP1 to silence the spindle assembly checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 21, 942–947 13 Miki, H., Okada, Y. and Hirokawa, N. (2005) Analysis of the kinesin superfamily: insights into structure and function. Trends Cell Biol. 15, 467–476 14 Schaar, B.T., Chan, G.K., Maddox, P., Salmon, E.D. and Yen, T.J. (1997) CENP-E function at kinetochores is essential for chromosome alignment. J. Cell Biol. 139, 1373–1382 15 Wood, K.W., Sakowicz, R., Goldstein, L.S. and Cleveland, D.W. (1997) CENP-E is a plus end-directed kinetochore motor required for metaphase chromosome alignment. Cell 91, 357–366 C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
16 Sharp, D.J., Rogers, G.C. and Scholey, J.M. (2000) Cytoplasmic dynein is required for poleward chromosome movement during mitosis in Drosophila embryos. Nat. Cell Biol. 2, 922–930 17 Kim, Y., Holland, A.J., Lan, W. and Cleveland, D.W. (2010) Aurora kinases and protein phosphatase 1 mediate chromosome congression through regulation of CENP-E. Cell 142, 444–455 18 Bakhoum, S.F., Thompson, S.L., Manning, A.L. and Compton, D.A. (2009) Genome stability is ensured by temporal control of kinetochore-microtubule dynamics. Nat. Cell Biol. 11, 27–35 19 Jang, C.Y., Coppinger, J.A., Seki, A., Yates, 3rd, J.R. and Fang, G. (2009) Plk1 and Aurora A regulate the depolymerase activity and the cellular localization of Kif2a. J. Cell Sci. 122, 1334–1341 20 Gaetz, J. and Kapoor, T.M. (2004) Dynein/dynactin regulate metaphase spindle length by targeting depolymerizing activities to spindle poles. J. Cell Biol. 166, 465–471 21 Ganem, N.J., Upton, K. and Compton, D.A. (2005) Efficient mitosis in human cells lacking poleward microtubule flux. Curr. Biol. 15, 1827–1832 22 Ohi, R., Burbank, K., Liu, Q. and Mitchison, T.J. (2007) Nonredundant functions of kinesin-13s during meiotic spindle assembly. Curr. Biol. 17, 953–959 23 Manning, A.L., Ganem, N.J., Bakhoum, S.F., Wagenbach, M., Wordeman, L. and Compton, D.A. (2007) The kinesin-13 proteins Kif2a, Kif2b, and Kif2c/MCAK have distinct roles during mitosis in human cells. Mol. Biol. Cell 18, 2970–2979 24 Walczak, C.E., Mitchison, T.J. and Desai, A. (1996) XKCM1: a Xenopus kinesin-related protein that regulates microtubule dynamics during mitotic spindle assembly. Cell 84, 37–47 25 Andrews, P.D., Ovechkina, Y., Morrice, N., Wagenbach, M., Duncan, K., Wordeman, L. and Swedlow, J.R. (2004) Aurora B regulates MCAK at the mitotic centromere. Dev. Cell 6, 253–268 26 Lan, W., Zhang, X., Kline-Smith, S.L., Rosasco, S.E., Barrett-Wilt, G.A., Shabanowitz, J., Hunt, D.F., Walczak, C.E. and Stukenberg, P.T. (2004) Aurora B phosphorylates centromeric MCAK and regulates its localization and microtubule depolymerization activity. Curr. Biol. 14, 273–286 27 Ohi, R., Sapra, T., Howard, J. and Mitchison, T.J. (2004) Differentiation of cytoplasmic and meiotic spindle assembly MCAK functions by Aurora B-dependent phosphorylation. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 2895–2906 28 Zhang, X., Lan, W., Ems-McClung, S.C., Stukenberg, P.T. and Walczak, C.E. (2007) Aurora B phosphorylates multiple sites on mitotic centromere-associated kinesin to spatially and temporally regulate its function. Mol. Biol. Cell 18, 3264–3276 29 Tanno, Y., Kitajima, T.S., Honda, T., Ando, Y., Ishiguro, K. and Watanabe, Y. (2010) Phosphorylation of mammalian Sgo2 by Aurora B recruits PP2A and MCAK to centromeres. Genes Dev. 24, 2169–2179 30 Qian, J., Beullens, M., Lesage, B. and Bollen, M. (2013) Aurora B defines its own chromosomal targeting by opposing the recruitment of the phosphatase scaffold repo-man. Curr. Biol. 23, 1136–1143 31 Qian, J., Lesage, B., Beullens, M., Van Eynde, A. and Bollen, M. (2011) PP1/Repo-man dephosphorylates mitotic histone H3 at T3 and regulates chromosomal aurora B targeting. Curr. Biol. 21, 766–773 32 Gupta, Jr, M.L., Carvalho, P., Roof, D.M. and Pellman, D. (2006) Plus end-specific depolymerase activity of Kip3, a kinesin-8 protein, explains its role in positioning the yeast mitotic spindle. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 913–923 33 Mayr, M.I., Hummer, S., Bormann, J., Gruner, T., Adio, S., Woehlke, G. and Mayer, T.U. (2007) The human kinesin Kif18A is a motile microtubule depolymerase essential for chromosome congression. Curr. Biol. 17, 488–498 34 Varga, V., Helenius, J., Tanaka, K., Hyman, A.A., Tanaka, T.U. and Howard, J. (2006) Yeast kinesin-8 depolymerizes microtubules in a length-dependent manner. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 957–962 35 Du, Y., English, C.A. and Ohi, R. (2010) The kinesin-8 Kif18A dampens microtubule plus-end dynamics. Curr. Biol. 20, 374–380 36 Erent, M., Drummond, D.R. and Cross, R.A. (2012) S. pombe kinesins-8 promote both nucleation and catastrophe of microtubules. PLoS ONE 7, e30738 37 Stumpff, J., Du, Y., English, C.A., Maliga, Z., Wagenbach, M., Asbury, C.L., Wordeman, L. and Ohi, R. (2011) A tethering mechanism controls the processivity and kinetochore-microtubule plus-end enrichment of the kinesin-8 Kif18A. Mol. Cell 43, 764–775 38 Su, X., Qiu, W., Gupta, Jr, M.L., Pereira-Leal, J.B., Reck-Peterson, S.L. and Pellman, D. (2011) Mechanisms underlying the dual-mode regulation of microtubule dynamics by Kip3/kinesin-8. Mol. Cell 43, 751–763 39 Weaver, L.N., Ems-McClung, S.C., Stout, J.R., LeBlanc, C., Shaw, S.L., Gardner, M.K. and Walczak, C.E. (2011) Kif18A uses a microtubule binding site in the tail for plus-end localization and spindle length regulation. Curr. Biol. 21, 1500–1506
The 7th International Fission Yeast Meeting: Pombe2013
40 Garcia, M.A., Koonrugsa, N. and Toda, T. (2002) Two kinesin-like Kin I family proteins in fission yeast regulate the establishment of metaphase and the onset of anaphase A. Curr. Biol. 12, 610–621 41 Stumpff, J., von Dassow, G., Wagenbach, M., Asbury, C. and Wordeman, L. (2008) The kinesin-8 motor Kif18A suppresses kinetochore movements to control mitotic chromosome alignment. Dev. Cell 14, 252–262 42 Wargacki, M.M., Tay, J.C., Muller, E.G., Asbury, C.L. and Davis, T.N. (2010) Kip3, the yeast kinesin-8, is required for clustering of kinetochores at metaphase. Cell Cycle 9, 2581–2588 43 West, R.R., Malmstrom, T. and McIntosh, J.R. (2002) Kinesins klp5 + and klp6 + are required for normal chromosome movement in mitosis. J. Cell Sci. 115, 931–940 44 Huang, Y., Yao, Y., Xu, H.Z., Wang, Z.G., Lu, L. and Dai, W. (2009) Defects in chromosome congression and mitotic progression in KIF18A-deficient cells are partly mediated through impaired functions of CENP-E. Cell Cycle 8, 2643–2649 45 Tanenbaum, M.E., Macurek, L., van der Vaart, B., Galli, M., Akhmanova, A. and Medema, R.H. (2011) A complex of Kif18b and MCAK promotes microtubule depolymerization and is negatively regulated by Aurora kinases. Curr. Biol. 21, 1356–1365
46 Gruneberg, U., Neef, R., Honda, R., Nigg, E.A. and Barr, F.A. (2004) Relocation of Aurora B from centromeres to the central spindle at the metaphase to anaphase transition requires MKlp2. J. Cell Biol. 166, 167–172 47 Hummer, S. and Mayer, T.U. (2009) Cdk1 negatively regulates midzone localization of the mitotic kinesin Mklp2 and the chromosomal passenger complex. Curr. Biol. 19, 607–612 48 Vazquez-Novelle, M.D. and Petronczki, M. (2010) Relocation of the chromosomal passenger complex prevents mitotic checkpoint engagement at anaphase. Curr. Biol. 20, 1402–1407 49 Boss, D.S., Beijnen, J.H. and Schellens, J.H. (2009) Clinical experience with aurora kinase inhibitors: a review. Oncologist 14, 780–793 50 Rath, O. and Kozielski, F. (2012) Kinesins and cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12, 527–539
Received 9 August 2013 doi:10.1042/BST20130191
C The
C 2013 Biochemical Society Authors Journal compilation
1765
Copyright of Biochemical Society Transactions is the property of Portland Press Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
