Molecular Biology of the Cell click for CBE Life Science Education Page

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published as MBC in Press, 10.1091/mbc.E09-05-0370 on June 3, 2009

Vol. 20, Issue 15, 3491-3502, August 1, 2009

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Materials
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
E09-05-0370v1
20/15/3491    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hans, F.
Right arrow Articles by Margolis, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hans, F.
Right arrow Articles by Margolis, R. L.

Molecular Distinctions between Aurora A and B: A Single Residue Change Transforms Aurora A into Correctly Localized and Functional Aurora B

Fabienne Hans*,{dagger}, Dimitrios A. Skoufias{dagger},{ddagger}, Stefan Dimitrov*, and Robert L. Margolis{ddagger},§

*Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Université Joseph Fourier-Grenoble 1, and Institut Albert Bonniot U823, Site Santé-BP 170, 38042 Grenoble, France; {ddagger}Institut de Biologie Structurale Jean Pierre Ebel (Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique/Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique/Université Joseph Fourier), 38027 Grenoble Cedex 1, France; and §Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, San Diego, CA 92121

Submitted May 6, 2009; Revised May 19, 2009; Accepted May 22, 2009
Monitoring Editor: Daniel J. Lew

Aurora A and Aurora B, paralogue mitotic kinases, share highly similar primary sequence. Both are important to mitotic progression, but their localizations and functions are distinct. We have combined shRNA suppression with overexpression of Aurora mutants to address the cause of the distinction between Aurora A and Aurora B. Aurora A residue glycine 198 (G198), mutated to asparagine to mimic the aligned asparagine 142 (N142) of Aurora B, causes Aurora A to bind the Aurora B binding partner INCENP but not the Aurora A binding partner TPX2. The mutant Aurora A rescues Aurora B mitotic function. We conclude that binding to INCENP is alone critical to the distinct function of Aurora B. Although G198 of Aurora A is required for TPX2 binding, N142G Aurora B retains INCENP binding and Aurora B function. Thus, although a single residue change transforms Aurora A, the reciprocal mutation of Aurora B does not create Aurora A function. An Aurora A-{Delta}120 N-terminal truncation construct reinforces Aurora A similarity to Aurora B, because it does not associate with centrosomes but instead associates with kinetochores.

This article was published online ahead of print in MBC in Press (http://www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1091/mbc.E09-05-0370) on June 3, 2009.

{dagger} These authors have contributed equally to this work.

Address correspondence to: Robert L. Margolis (rmargolis{at}skcc.org) or Stefan Dimitrov (stefan.dimitrov{at}ujf-grenoble.fr)

Abbreviations used: AurA, Aurora A; AurB, Aurora B; HA, hemagglutinin; shRNA, small hairpin RNA.






Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Copyright © 2009 by The American Society for Cell Biology. Terms of copyright protection, warranties, and disclaimers.