|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vol. 13, Issue 11, 3890-3900, November 2002

§ and
*Department of Biological Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New
Hampshire 03755-3576; and
Department of Biology,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Whitehead Institute,
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cohesion between sister chromatids is a prerequisite for accurate chromosome segregation during mitosis and meiosis. To allow chromosome condensation during prophase, the connections that hold sister chromatids together must be maintained but still permit extensive chromatin compaction. In Drosophila, null mutations in the orientation disruptor (ord) gene lead to meiotic nondisjunction in males and females because cohesion is absent by the time that sister kinetochores make stable microtubule attachments. We provide evidence that ORD is concentrated within the extrachromosomal domains of the nuclei of Drosophila primary spermatocytes during early G2, but accumulates on the meiotic chromosomes by mid to late G2. Moreover, using fluorescence in situ hybridization to monitor cohesion directly, we show that cohesion defects first become detectable in ordnull spermatocytes shortly after the time when wild-type ORD associates with the chromosomes. After condensation, ORD remains bound at the centromeres of wild-type spermatocytes and persists there until centromeric cohesion is released during anaphase II. Our results suggest that association of ORD with meiotic chromosomes during mid to late G2 is required to maintain sister-chromatid cohesion during prophase condensation and that retention of ORD at the centromeres after condensation ensures the maintenance of centromeric cohesion until anaphase II.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Sister-chromatid cohesion is essential for
accurate chromosome segregation during cell division (Lee and
Orr-Weaver, 2001
; Nasmyth, 2001
). For proper kinetochore
orientation, bipolar microtubule attachment and timing of the
metaphase/anaphase transition to occur, sister chromatids must stay
associated with each other from the time of their synthesis until
anaphase (Amon, 1999
; Cohen-Fix, 2001
). Several gene products that
control cohesion are conserved from yeast to humans and function during
meiosis as well as mitosis (van Heemst and Heyting, 2000
; Lee and
Orr-Weaver, 2001
; Uhlmann, 2001
). A multiprotein complex, known as
cohesin, appears to provide a structural link between sisters that must
be severed to release cohesion during both mitosis and meiosis (Nasmyth
et al., 2000
; Cohen-Fix, 2001
). However, cleavage of
centromeric cohesin subunits by the endopeptidase separase must be
inhibited during meiosis I (Klein et al., 1999
; Watanabe and
Nurse, 1999
; Pasierbek et al., 2001
). Although separase
activity is required to release arm cohesion and allow the segregation
of recombinant homologs during anaphase I (Buonomo et al.,
2000
; Siomos et al., 2001
), maintenance of centromeric
cohesion until anaphase II is essential for accurate segregation of the
sister chromatids during the second meiotic division (Bickel and
Orr-Weaver, 1996
). At least a subset of meiotic cohesins at the
centromeres are resistant to separase cleavage until anaphase II (Klein
et al., 1999
; Watanabe and Nurse, 1999
; Pasierbek et
al., 2001
), although the mechanism by which their cleavage is
prevented during meiosis I is not yet understood.
The Drosophila ORD protein is essential for
normal sister-chromatid cohesion during meiosis. Several ord
alleles have been isolated and characterized, and all result in
aberrant meiotic chromosome segregation in males and females in genetic
assays that monitor the fidelity of sex chromosome transmission (Mason, 1976
; Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel et al., 1997
).
Moreover, the frequency and distribution of aneuploid gametes recovered from ordnull flies indicate that in the
absence of ORD function, sister chromatids segregate randomly through
both meiotic divisions (Bickel et al., 1997
). These data
support the conclusion that in meiotic cells lacking ORD activity,
sister-chromatid cohesion is totally absent when
kinetochores make microtubule attachments during
prometaphase I. Consistent with this model, premature separation of
sister chromatids before metaphase I has been documented cytologically in ord oocytes and spermatocytes (Goldstein, 1980
; Lin and
Church, 1982
; Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel et al.,
1997
, 2002
).
Here, we show that wild-type, as well as ORD tagged with green fluorescent protein (GFP), is concentrated within the extrachromosomal domains of the nucleus in primary spermatocytes during early G2 of the meiotic cell cycle. GFP-ORD protein redistributes within the nucleus and accumulates on the chromatin before the cells enter prophase I and the chromosomes condense. Using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to monitor the state of cohesion directly, we observe cohesion defects in ord spermatocytes shortly after the time when GFP-ORD accumulates on the chromosomes in wild-type cells. After chromosome condensation, GFP-ORD is detectable only at the centromeres and remains there until cohesion is lost at anaphase II. Our results suggest that association of ORD with spermatocyte chromosomes before condensation is required to maintain cohesion during meiosis I and that retention of ORD at the centromeres ensures the maintenance of centromeric cohesion until anaphase II.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Fly Strains
Flies were raised at 25°C on standard cornmeal molasses media.
Cytological analyses of wild-type spermatocytes were performed using
testes from y/y+Y; cn bw sp
flies. To generate ord5/Df
larvae, y/Y; ord5 bw/CyO,
y+ males were crossed to y/y; cn Df(2R)
W1370/CyO, y+ virgins. Mutant ord
larvae were selected by the presence of yellow mouth parts because they
lack the y+ gene carried on the
CyO balancer chromosome. In flies containing the
P{w+mC ori Amp = gfp::ord} transposon, expression of GFP-ORD is
controlled by the ord promoter and 5'-regulatory sequences.
P{w+mC ori Amp = gfp::ord} is a CaSpeR 4 (Pirrotta, 1988
) derivative that contains 6899 base pairs of genomic DNA encompassing the entire
ord gene. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used to
engineer an XbaI site immediately after the initiator AUG of
the ORD coding region and enhanced GFP (Clontech, Palo Alto, CA)
was inserted at this site. This construct results in the expression of
ORD protein tagged at its N terminus with GFP. Several independent insertion lines were established. For most lines, the presence of the
GFP-ORD insertion rescued the meiotic segregation phenotype of
ord1/ord3
males and females in our standard genetic assay (Kerrebrock et al., 1992
). One rescuing insertion on the third chromosome (T076) was chosen to construct an
ord10/ord10;
P{gfp::ord}/P{gfp::ord} stock that was
used for cytological analyses. Because the
ord10 allele contains a nonsense mutation
at codon 24 (Bickel et al., 1997
), GFP-ORD is the only ORD
protein in these cells.
Generation of ORD Antiserum
An EcoRI ord cDNA fragment corresponding
to the C-terminal region of the ORD open reading frame (ORF) was cloned
into pGEX1
t (Amersham Pharmacia, Piscataway, NJ). The resulting
protein contained GST fused to the C-terminal 210 amino acids of ORD.
After protein induction with isopropyl
-D-thiogalactoside, GST-ORD containing inclusion bodies were isolated and solubilized with 8 M urea and 2%
SDS. After preparative SDS-PAGE, GST-ORD was electroeluted from the
acrylamide slice and was concentrated. Immunogen was sent to Cocalico
Biologicals (Reamstown, PA) to generate guinea-pig antiserum, GP43.
Immunolocalization of ORD
Testes were dissected from third instar larvae or young adults
in saline testes buffer containing 183 mM KCl, 47 mM NaCl, 10 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 6.8, and 1 mM EDTA (Gatti and Baker, 1989
). Each set of
testes was transferred to saline testes buffer containing 2 mM Pefabloc
(Sigma, St. Louis, MO) on a precleaned Superfrost Plus slide (VWR, West
Chester, PA). Adult testes were cut with tungsten needles before
squashing. A siliconized 18-mm coverslip was gently lowered onto the
testes to squash them and the preparation was quick frozen in liquid
nitrogen. On removal from liquid nitrogen, the coverslip was quickly
removed and the slide was immediately placed in 90% MeOH/20 mM EGTA
(at
30°C) for ~5-15 min. Squashes were then fixed for 5 min at
room temperature in 1× PHEM (Starr et al., 1998
; 60 mM
Pipes, 25 mM HEPES, pH 7.0, 10 mM EGTA, and 4 mM
MgSO4) containing 4% formaldehyde (Ted Pella,
Redding, CA). Slides were rinsed three times in phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS; 130 mM NaCl, 7 mM
NaH2PO4, and 3 mM
NaH2PO4) and stored (up to 1 h) in PBS. Before the addition of antibody, slides were
incubated three times for 5 min each in PBS/0.1% Triton-X 100 (PBT),
and then rinsed three times with PBS. The tissue was blocked in 5% normal donkey serum (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove,
PA), 2% bovine serum albumin (BSA), 0.2× Superblock/PBS (Pierce,
Rockford, IL), and 0.01% NaAzide for 1.0 h at room temperature. All subsequent antibody incubations were performed at room temperature in a humidified chamber unless noted otherwise. After each antibody incubation, slides were rinsed three times and washed for three 8-min
periods in PBS.
To stain for ORD, squashes were incubated for 1.0 h in guinea-pig
ORD antiserum (GP43) diluted 1:1000 in 0.2× Superblock. For
ORD/EAST double-labeling experiments, polyclonal mouse EAST antisera ED3 and ED4 (Wasser and Chia, 2000
) were diluted 1:1000 in
0.2× Superblock containing GP43 antiserum (also diluted 1:1000). To
detect GFP-ORD, affinity-purified rabbit anti-GFP antibodies (Molecular
Probes, Eugene, OR) were diluted 1:1000 in 0.2× Superblock (except for
Figure 3C, 1:250 dilution and Figures 1I,
3E and 6K, 1:500 dilution) and used in a 1-h antibody
incubation. Cy3 affinity-purified anti-guinea-pig and anti-rabbit
antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories) were used to detect
ORD and GFP-ORD, respectively, except for ORD/GFP-ORD double-labeling
experiments where Cy5 affinity-purified anti-rabbit antibodies (Jackson
ImmunoResearch Laboratories) were used to detect GFP-ORD. Alexa 488 anti-mouse antibodies (Molecular Probes) were used to visualize EAST
protein. MEI-S332 immunofluorescence was performed as described by Tang
et al. (1998)
, and MEI-S332 protein was visualized using Cy5
affinity-purified anti-guinea-pig antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch
Laboratories). All secondary antibodies were diluted in PBS/0.5% BSA,
and incubations were performed for 45 min in the dark. Tubulin or
nuclear lamin staining was performed after ORD, EAST, GFP, and/or
MEI-S332 primary and secondary antibody incubations were completed.
Anti-tubulin rat monoclonal antibodies YL1/2 and YOL1/34 (Sera-Lab,
Loughborough, UK) were used together, each at a dilution of 1:5. Mouse
monoclonal nuclear lamin antibodies (T40; a gift from H. Saumweber)
were used at a dilution of 1:50. Squashes were incubated for 30-45 min
in PBS/0.5% BSA containing the appropriate antibodies. Alexa 488 anti-rat antibodies (Molecular Probes) were used to detect tubulin, and
Cy5 anti-mouse antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories) were
used to detect lamin. To visualize DNA, slides were stained for 10 min
with 1 µg/ml 4'6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; Molecular Probes) in
PBS followed by three rinses in PBS. An 18-mm coverslip containing 5 µl of Prolong Antifade reagent (Molecular Probes) was lowered onto
the tissue and was allowed to dry overnight.
|
Analysis of GFP-ORD in Living Spermatocytes
Wild-type and ord10/ord10; P{gfp::ord}/P{gfp::ord} third instar larvae and adults were dissected in Shields and Sang M3 insect medium (Sigma) containing 10% fetal calf serum (Life Technologies/BRL, Grand Island, NY). Testes were transferred to Shields and Sang M3 insect medium and 10% fetal calf serum supplemented with 1.0 µg/ml Hoechst 33342 (Molecular Probes) on a precleaned Superfrost slide (VWR), opened with tungsten needles, and gently squashed using an 18-mm coverslip. Coverslips were immediately sealed to the slides with vasoline:lanolin:paraffin (1:1:1), and cells were visualized by epifluorescence to monitor GFP localization.
Generation of FISH Probes
An X chromosome probe (X het) directed
against the 359-base pair 1.686 g/cm3 satellite
repeat located near the centromere of the X chromosome was
generated as described previously (Bickel et al., 2002
). To generate an X-chromosome arm probe (X arm),
bacteria artificial chromosome DNA spanning 3C1-6 (RPCI-98 34.O.3;
BACPAC Resources, Oakland, CA) was fragmented as described by Dernburg
(Dernburg, 2000
). Approximately 10 µg of digested DNA was labeled
with 60 U of terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase (NE Biolabs,
Beverly, MA) in a 100-µl reaction containing 135 µM dTTP and 67.5 µM Cy3-dUTP (Amersham Pharmacia). The probe was precipitated in 2 M
ammonium acetate to remove unincorporated nucleotides, resupended in
Tris-EDTA, and stored at
20°C in the dark.
FISH Analysis
For the analysis of cohesion on interphase chromatin, testes were dissected from either yw/Y; ord+/ord+ or y/Y; ord5 bw/Df third instar larvae and were squashed and fixed as described in the immunofluorescence section above. A modified fixation method was used to analyze centromeric cohesion on condensed meiotic chromosomes. Testes from either yw/Y; ord+/ord+, y/Y; ord5 bw/Df, or y/Y; ord10 bw/Df adults were dissected in 0.7% NaCl and were placed in 0.5% Na citrate for 10 min. Testes then were transferred to 5.0 µl of 45% acetic acid/2% formaldehyde (Ted Pella) on a siliconized 18-mm coverslip where they were opened with tungsten needles and fixed for 3 min. Squashing was performed by lowering a precleaned Superfrost slide (VWR) onto the coverslip and pressing firmly downward for ~5 s. The slides were then placed and stored (up to 2 h) in liquid nitrogen. On removal from liquid nitrogen, coverslips were removed and slides were placed in PBS.
Before hybridization, fixed slides (both procedures) were rinsed in PBS, incubated twice for 10 min in 70% EtOH, once for 10 min in 100% EtOH, and were permitted to air dry at room temperature. To rehydrate, the squashes were incubated in 2× SSC/0.1% Tween 20 (SSCT) for 30 min with two changes of buffer. Slides were then incubated in 25% formamide/2× SSCT for 10 min, followed by another 10 min wash in 50% formamide/2× SSCT. The tissue was covered in 500 µl of 50% formamide/2× SSCT and was allowed to prehybridize for at least 3 h at 37°C in a humidified chamber. Ten microliters of probe solution containing Fluorogreen-labeled 359-base pair X het probe diluted to 0.5 ng/µl and Cy3-labeled X arm probe diluted to ~10 ng/µl in hybridization buffer (3× SSC, 50% formamide, 10% Dextran sulfate) were added to each slide. Siliconized coverslips were placed over the tissue and sealed to the slides with rubber cement. Probe and chromosomal DNA were denatured at 94°C for 2 min (Boekl slide moat). After denaturation, slides were placed in a humidified chamber and were hybridized overnight at 37°C. After hybridization, coverslips were removed in 37°C prewarmed 50% formamide/2× SSCT and were incubated in 50% formamide/2× SSCT at 37°C for 2 h with one change of buffer. Slides were placed in 25% formamide/2× SSCT and incubated at room temperature for 10 min, followed by three 10-min washes in 2× SSCT without formamide. The tissue was counterstained and mounted as described in the immunofluorescence section above. Scoring of FISH signals was performed on full projections of z-series. Single FISH signals or two closely associated signals (within 0.3 µm) were scored as together. Two signals separated by a distance greater than 0.3 µm were scored as separated.
Microscopy and Image Analysis
Confocal microscopy was performed on a confocal microscope equipped with UV, Ar, Kr/Ar, and He/Ne lasers (TCS SP2; Leica, Deerfield, IL). All images were collected using a 63X Plan-APO objective and sequential scanning mode. Single channel TIFF images were combined and cropped using Openlab 3.0 software (Improvision, Lexington, MA). Epifluorescence microscopy was performed on a Zeiss Axioplan2 microscope (Jena, Germany) using a 63X Plan-APOCHROMAT objective. Single-channel images were collected with a Hamamatsu ORCA-ER camera (Hamamatsu, Japan) controlled by Openlab 3.0 software. Registration differences between channels were eliminated using the registration module of Openlab 3.0 software and Tetraspeck fluorescently labeled beads (Molecular Probes). Deconvolution was performed using Volocity 1.3 software (Improvision).
Quantification of the level of GFP-ORD protein within individual nuclei from single fields of cells was performed on deconvolved volumes. The GFP-ORD signal intensity (0-216 units) within a volumetric region of interest (VROI) was calculated using the measurements function of Volocity 1.4.4. Total signal = (mean intensity/voxel) × total number of voxels within VROI. The average value (mean intensity/voxel) for several regions with no visible signal in each field was used to determine the background signal due to mechanical noise for that field. This value was subtracted from mean intensity/voxel values for each nuclear VROI before multiplying by the total volume. Because the amount of DNA remains constant throughout G2, we used the quantified DAPI signal within each nucleus to normalize the GFP-ORD values. The average normalized GFP-ORD value for each stage is shown in Figure 4C for three separate fields of cells. Figure 4, A and B, shows a subset of cells within field 1.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Extrachromosomal Localization of ORD during Early G2
To study the expression and localization of ORD in meiotic cells,
we generated guinea-pig antiserum (GP43) against a GST fusion protein
containing the C-terminal 210 amino acids of the ORD protein (Figure
1A). Immunoblot analysis of wild-type ovary and testis extracts indicates that GP43 antibodies recognize a single band that
migrates at ~60 kDa (Figure 1B), slightly larger than the predicted
molecular mass of ORD (55 kDa) calculated from its primary sequence.
This band is absent in gonadal extracts prepared from ord5/Df flies (Figure 1B). The
ord5 nonsense allele (Bickel et
al., 1996
) encodes a truncated ORD protein that is missing the
C-terminal fragment used as the immunogen (Figure 1A). Therefore, lack
of signal in ord5/Df extracts
indicates that the GP43 antiserum is ORD specific.
Within the Drosophila testis, germ-line stem cell division
gives rise to a spermatagonial cell that subsequently undergoes four
mitotic divisions in which cytokinesis is incomplete, thereby producing
a cyst of 16 interconnected primary spermatocytes (see Figure 1C).
After synchronous DNA replication, the primary spermatocytes within
each cyst enter an extensive G2 growth phase (80-90 h; Lindsley and
Tokuyasu, 1980
; Fuller, 1993
) that precedes chromosome condensation and
the meiotic divisions. Based on a number of morphological criteria,
Cenci et al. (1994)
have divided G2 progression into seven
intervals (S1, S2a, S2b, S3, S4, S5, and S6, see Figure 1C) that can be
distinguished cytologically. Unlike meiotic progression in
Drosophila oocytes, synaptonemal complex formation does not occur during male meiosis and homologous chromosomes do not undergo recombination. Instead, spermatocytes use an alternative mechanism to
ensure pairing of homologs during meiosis I (McKee, 1996
).
Figure 1D shows the subcellular distribution of ORD protein in stage
S2b primary spermatocytes when fixed squashes are immunostained with
GP43 ORD antiserum. Because premeiotic S phase occurs soon after
completion of the fourth spermatogonial mitotic division (Cenci
et al., 1994
), most small 16-cell cysts have entered G2. Double staining with nuclear lamin antibodies indicates that the most
intense ORD signal is present within the nucleus (Figure 1D). ORD is
enriched near the nuclear periphery, with the majority of ORD signal
lying interior to nuclear lamin staining. In addition, ORD is
concentrated within projections that extend into the nuclear interior
(Figure 1D). Although some ORD appears to colocalize with chromatin in
young G2 spermatocytes, a majority of the ORD signal within the nucleus
corresponds to regions adjacent to but not overlapping with the DAPI
signal. We refer to such areas as extrachromosomal domains.
Concentration of ORD within extrachromosomal domains was also observed
when testes were detergent extracted during squash preparation or
sample fixation (our unpublished data).
Little or no immunostaining is detectable in ord5/Df spermatocytes (Figure 1E), confirming that the signal observed in wild type is specific. In addition, ORD staining is absent in the two somatically derived cyst cells that surround each cyst of germ cells (Figure 1D, arrow). Absence of ORD signal in cyst cells indicates that ORD expression is germ cell specific within the testis.
Because ORD is essential for meiotic sister-chromatid cohesion, we were surprised that it did not extensively colocalize with the spermatocyte chromosomes, but instead was found predominantly within extrachromosomal spaces of the nucleus. However, epifluorescence analysis of GFP localization in spermatocytes expressing a P{gfp::ord} transgene confirmed our immunofluorescence observations (Figure 1F). In P{gfp::ord} flies, expression of the transgene is controlled by wild-type ord regulatory sequences. The transgene complements strong ord mutations (our unpublished data) and indicates that GFP-ORD protein is functional. Moreover, by immunoblot analysis with GP43 antiserum, the relative level of GFP-ORD in transgenic testes extracts is similar to that of endogenous ORD in wild-type testes extracts (our unpublished data).
We examined live squash preparations of ord mutant spermatocytes in which the P{gfp::ord} transgene provided the only source of ORD protein. In young G2 spermatocytes, GFP-ORD localizes predominantly to the nucleus (Figure 1F) where it exhibits an extrachromosomal distribution pattern similar to that observed with GP43 ORD immunostaining. However, GFP fluorescence is significantly weaker than the signal we observe using GP43 antibodies, most likely because the ORD signal is amplified during the indirect immunodetection procedure. We also visualized GFP-ORD localization in fixed squashes using anti-GFP antibodies and again observed nuclear staining that was largely extrachromosomal (Figure 1G). Immunolocalization of GFP-ORD protein in P{gfp::ord} spermatocytes using both GP43 ORD and GFP antibodies resulted in nearly identical staining patterns (Figure 1I), suggesting that both antibodies detect the same population of ORD molecules during early G2. No GFP signal was detected in live (not shown) or fixed preparations (Figure 1H) from flies lacking the P{gfp::ord} transgene. In addition, GFP-ORD was not visible in cyst cells (our unpublished data). Thus, using three different methods, we observe that ORD resides primarily in the spaces surrounding meiotic chromosomes during early G2. We also detected the same localization pattern in spermatogonial mitotic cysts (our unpublished data). Therefore, although ORD is primarily nuclear when germ cells undergo mitotic divisions, as well as during premeiotic S phase and early G2, ORD protein is not extensively associated with chromatin during these stages.
Colocalization of ORD and EAST
Enrichment of ORD in the spaces between meiotic chromosomes was
reminiscent of the localization pattern reported for EAST, a
Drosophila protein implicated in the assembly of an
expandable nuclear endoskeleton (Wasser and Chia, 2000
). Overexpression
of EAST in the polyploid nuclei of larval salivary glands and in diploid male germline cells results in the expansion of an
EAST-containing extrachromosomal domain, accompanied by changes in the
spacing of chromosomes (Wasser and Chia, 2000
). Therefore, we used
confocal microscopy to determine whether the subnuclear distribution of ORD in primary spermatocytes coincided with that of the endogenous EAST protein.
During stages S1-S3, ORD and EAST exhibit extensive nuclear
colocalization, especially near the nuclear periphery (Figure 2, A and B). The staining patterns of the
two proteins also coincide within projections that extend into the
nuclear interior. Although ORD and EAST display remarkably similar
localization patterns, there are sites at which only one of the two
proteins is detected. Moreover, ORD localization appears normal in
spermatocytes lacking EAST protein and EAST staining is unaffected by
ord mutations that eliminate ORD activity (our unpublished
data). Therefore, ORD and EAST do not depend upon one another
for correct subnuclear targeting in primary spermatocytes. However,
colocalization of EAST and ORD confirms our assessment that ORD is
concentrated within extrachromosomal domains of the spermatocyte
nucleus during early G2 and raises the possibility that localization of
ORD at this stage might be supported by attachment to a nuclear
endoskeleton.
|
ORD Accumulates on the Chromosomes by Late G2
Although a large proportion of GFP-ORD protein does not colocalize
with DNA during early G2 (S1-S3), GFP-ORD staining on the meiotic
chromosomes becomes apparent as spermatocytes progress through G2. The
GFP-ORD localization pattern appears more uniform within the nuclei of
early S4 cells than during preceding stages (Figure
3A, arrow). As spermatocytes mature,
GFP-ORD staining becomes concentrated on the chromosomes, which occupy
distinct territories near the nuclear periphery (Figure 3, C and D).
The chromatin-associated GFP-ORD signal is fairly homogeneous,
suggesting that ORD protein localizes along the entire length of the
chromatids. However, bright foci of staining are also visible (Figure
3, A and C) and may correspond to enrichment at centromeric regions (see below).
|
Our localization results suggest that accumulation of ORD protein on
the chromosomes during spermatogenesis is an active process that begins
during mid to late G2 (stage S4). However, the intensity of nuclear
GFP-ORD staining appears to decrease as spermatocytes grow. Therefore,
an alternative possibility is that ORD protein occupying
extrachromosomal domains is selectively degraded, thereby revealing low
levels of GFP-ORD already associated with the chromatin. To test this
model, we quantified the GFP-ORD immunofluorescence signal within
individual nuclei at different developmental stages (Figure 4). Using
three-dimensional reconstructions of deconvolved z-series that included
multiple stages of spermatocytes, we compared the total amount of
GFP-ORD protein within different nuclei by summing the intensity values
for voxels within a selected region of interest. As an internal
control, we calculated the total DAPI signal/nucleus and confirmed that
the level of DNA remained relatively constant throughout G2. We then
normalized the GFP-ORD intensity values/nucleus against the average DNA
signal/nucleus for each stage. Calculated values for three fields of
cells are shown in Figure 4C. A subset of cells from field 1 is shown
in Figure 4, A and B. Our results indicate that the total amount of
nuclear GFP-ORD protein is greater in the mid to late G2 stages (S3-6) than in early G2 (S2a/b). These results are not consistent with selective degradation of an extrachromosomal pool of ORD exposing low
levels of chromatin-associated ORD. Instead, our data support the
conclusion that changes in the GFP-ORD staining pattern during spermatogenesis reflect the redistribution of GFP-ORD protein as it
moves from extrachromosomal spaces onto the chromosomes.
|
Interestingly, although GP43 antiserum recognized ORD and GFP-ORD
located within extrachromosomal domains of S1-S3 spermatocyte nuclei
(Figure 1, D and I), GP43 nuclear signal was minimal at later stages.
Figure 3E shows a P{gfp::ord} spermatocyte
costained with GP43 and GFP antibodies. Although chromosomal GFP-ORD is detectable with GFP antibodies, GP43 does not appear to recognize GFP-ORD and results in a signal comparable with that observed in
ord5/Df spermatocytes (our
unpublished data). Furthermore, foci of GFP-ORD detected with
GFP antibodies on condensed meiotic chromosomes were not observed by
GP43 immunofluorescence (Figure 6K). These observations suggest that
after ORD associates with chromatin, the C terminus of ORD is less
accessible to GP43 antibodies. Masking of the C terminus when ORD
associates with chromatin is consistent with our previous genetic
analysis of mutant ord alleles, which suggested that this
region of ORD mediates interactions that are required for ORD activity
(Bickel et al., 1996
; Bickel and Orr-Weaver, 1998
). One
possibility is that C-terminal interactions are required for ORD to
associate with chromatin. Although ORD could be interacting directly
with DNA, no obvious DNA-binding motifs are found within the ORD coding
region (Bickel et al., 1996
). More likely, protein-protein interactions drive the association of ORD with chromatin during mid to
late G2 and reduce the ability of GP43 antibodies to bind ORD.
Cohesion Deteriorates during Late G2 in ord Spermatocytes
In genetic assays, the frequency and classes of aneuploid gametes
that arise in ordnull flies indicate that
sister chromatids segregate randomly during both meiotic divisions
(Bickel et al., 1997
). Therefore, in flies lacking ORD
activity, meiotic cohesion is absent before the chromosomes make stable
microtubule attachments. In orcein-stained squash preparations, gross
cohesion defects have been observed in ord primary
spermatocytes during prometaphase I (Goldstein, 1980
; Lin and Church,
1982
; Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel et al., 1997
).
However, the state of cohesion in ord mutants before the
chromosomes condense has not been investigated.
To determine when meiotic cohesion defects first become evident in
ord males, we performed FISH experiments using two
X chromosome probes (Figure
5A). Hybridization with a probe that
recognizes the 359-base pair satellite repeat on the X
chromosome (designated X het) allowed us to monitor sister
cohesion within the heterochromatin near the centromere (red) and a
second nonrepetitive probe (X arm; cytological location
3C1-6) provided an assay for arm cohesion (green). After DNA
replication, a primary spermatocyte contains two X
chromatids and thus a single arm and centromere proximal FISH signal
within each nucleus would indicate that sister X chromatids are held together along their entire length. However, if arm or centromere proximal cohesion is not established or is lost prematurely, two separated hybridization signals will be visible for a single probe.
|
During early G2, the hybridization of X
chromosome probes to spermatocyte chromatin resulted in single arm and
het signals in the nuclei of both wild-type and
ord5/Df cells (Figure 5B),
indicating that sister chromatids are held together at their arms and
near their centromeres at this time in both genotypes. Our results are
consistent with the GFP reporter analysis of live wild-type
spermatocytes by Vazquez et al. (2002)
, which indicates that
sister chromatids are associated along their entire length during early
G2. Using the nonrepetitive X arm probe, we were unable to
obtain a reliable FISH signal in mature, late G2 spermatocytes, most
likely because of the expanded volume occupied by the chromosomes
within the nucleus at these stages. However, Vazquez et al.
(2002)
have observed that sister chromatid arms, but not centromeres,
separate shortly after the formation of chromosome territories during
G2 (S3) in wild-type spermatocytes. Therefore, maintenance of arm
cohesion does not appear to be required for normal meiotic segregation
during male meiosis and suggests that disruption of centromeric
cohesion is the primary defect in male ord mutants.
Interestingly, separated X het signals were rare in
ord mutant spermatocytes until S5/6 (Figure 5B), when 30%
of ord5/Df nuclei exhibited
cohesion defects near the centromere (Figure 5C). Although the
incidence of separated sisters in wild-type S5/6 spermatocytes was
higher than expected, the number of
ord5/Df cells with cohesion
defects was significantly greater (2 × 2
2 contingency analysis, 0.01<P<0.02).
Because ord+ males exhibit minimal levels
of meiotic nondisjunction (<1%) in genetic tests (Bickel et
al., 1997
; Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
), separated X
het FISH signals in mature (S5/6) wild-type spermatocytes are unlikely
to reflect true defects in centromeric cohesion. Instead, we believe
that our squash procedure may have resulted in artificially elevated
levels of separated FISH signals (17%) in late G2 cells.
Alternatively, because our probe recognizes heterochromatin that lies
near the centromere but not within the centromere, the incidence of
cohesion defects that we detect in wild-type spermatocytes may reflect
an extension of the separation of chromatid arms observed by Vazquez
et al. (2002)
. In either case, our results indicate that
ord5/Df spermatocytes exhibit
centromere proximal cohesion defects ~13% more frequently than
wild-type cells.
Our FISH data suggest that after DNA replication and during early G2,
sister chromatids remain associated along their entire length in
ord primary spermatocytes. However, without ORD activity, cohesion near the centromere is lost prematurely. Interestingly, defects in cohesion within heterochromatin become visible in mutant cells shortly after the time that we first observe GFP-ORD protein accumulating on the chromosomes in wild-type spermatocytes. Although cohesion defects in ordnull spermatocytes
are low during late G2, FISH analysis (Figure 5D) confirms our previous
genetic analysis (Bickel et al., 1997
) that cohesion is
absent after chromosomes undergo condensation. These data are
consistent with the model that ORD must load onto the chromosomes
during G2 to stabilize cohesion between sisters during the process of
condensation. In the absence of functional ORD protein, sister
chromatids separate prematurely as the chromosomes compact. We propose
that the redistribution of ORD protein during mid to late G2 is
required to maintain the association of sister chromatids during
chromosome condensation in prophase I.
ORD Remains at the Centromere until Cohesion Is Lost at Anaphase II
As chromosomes begin to condense during S6, the intensity of the
GFP-ORD signal decreases. However, distinct foci of GFP-ORD staining
are visible on condensed chromosomes undergoing prometaphase I
congression (Figure 6, A and C). We never
observed more than eight signals per nucleus, suggesting that each spot
might correspond to the centromeric constriction of each pair of
sisters. Association of ORD with meiotic centromeres was confirmed by
colocalization of GFP-ORD with MEI-S332, a centromeric cohesion protein
(Figure 6, C and E). MEI-S332 loads onto centromeres during
prometaphase I and is required to maintain centric cohesion from
anaphase I until anaphase II (Kerrebrock et al., 1995
; Moore
et al., 1998
; Tang et al., 1998
). Although the
ORD and MEI-S332 signals aligned closely, they did not overlap
completely.
|
We do not attribute failure to detect GFP-ORD on condensed chromatid arms (Figure 6A) to limited antibody accessibility, because we observed the same pattern when monitoring GFP fluorescence in unfixed spermatocytes (our unpublished data). These observations suggest that the majority of ORD molecules dissociate from the chromosomes during condensation, whereas a subset remains at the centromeres.
During the first meiotic division, GFP-ORD persists at sister centromeres and GFP-ORD foci remain visible on telophase I chromosomes (Figure 6B). Although we can detect GFP-ORD staining on metaphase II centromeres (Figure 6E), no GFP-ORD signal is detectable on meiotic chromosomes during anaphase II or later (Figure 6G). Therefore, ORD persists at sister centromeres until centric cohesion is released.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Our FISH analysis of sister-chromatid cohesion in wild-type
spermatocytes agrees well with the results of Vazquez et al.
(2002)
. During early G2, sister chromatids are connected along their
entire length. In addition, cohesion at the centromere is maintained throughout G2. Using FISH, we are unable to monitor arm cohesion during
late G2, but the experiments of Vazquez et al. (2002)
clearly demonstrate that arm cohesion is released in
Drosophila spermatocytes by late G2. One explanation for
this unexpected finding is that, unlike Drosophila females,
males do not undergo meiotic recombination and, therefore, arm cohesion
is not essential to maintain chiasmata and ensure correct meiosis I
segregation. However, cohesion at the centromere is absolutely
essential in both sexes to ensure proper segregation during both
meiotic divisions.
We have shown that GFP-ORD accumulates on meiotic chromosomes shortly
before cohesion defects near the centromere become detectable in
ord mutant spermatocytes. By FISH analysis, moderate defects in cohesion are apparent in ordnull
spermatocytes before chromosome condensation. However, genetic assays
indicate that centromeric cohesion is completely lost before metaphase
I in flies lacking ORD activity (Bickel et al., 1997
). Our
cytological analysis of cohesion defects in prophase I
ordnull spermatocytes supports this
conclusion. These data argue that association of ORD with spermatocyte
chromosomes during G2 is required to prevent premature separation of
sister centromeres before and during chromosome condensation in meiosis
I. In addition, continued centromeric localization of ORD during the
first meiotic division suggests that ORD is required to stabilize
sister-chromatid cohesion at the centromere until anaphase II. This
hypothesis is supported by genetic evidence that weak ord
alleles disrupt the maintenance of meiotic cohesion between anaphase I
and II (Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel et al., 1997
).
Disappearance of ORD signal from chromatid arms during condensation is
similar to that described for metazoan cohesins during mitosis (Losada
et al., 1998
; Sumara et al., 2000
; Waizenegger et al., 2000
; Warren et al., 2000
). In addition,
retention of ORD at meiotic centromeres until anaphase II mimics the
behavior of the meiosis-specific cohesin subunit, Rec8 (Klein et
al., 1999
; Watanabe and Nurse, 1999
; Pasierbek et al.,
2000
). Because no Rec8 ortholog has been identified in the
Drosophila genome, one possibility is that ORD functions as
a meiotic cohesin subunit. However, in sharp contrast to the behavior
of cohesins, ORD does not appear to accumulate on spermatocyte
chromosomes until well after S phase. Although defects in cohesion are
not evident in ord spermatocytes until late G2, we cannot
rule out the possibility that ORD function is required when cohesion is
established or during early G2. Catenation of the sister chromatids
could be masking cohesion defects at this time. However, the extensive redistribution of ORD in mature primary spermatocytes during mid to
late G2 argues that ORD stabilizes meiotic cohesion by a novel mechanism not previously described. Although ORD appears to associate with chromatid arms and centromeres during late G2, our results combined with those of Vazquez et al. (2002)
indicate that
ORD activity does not maintain arm cohesion in mature wild-type
spermatocytes. However, ORD function is essential to maintain
centromeric cohesion until anaphase II. One possibility is that
accumulation of ORD on chromosome arms before condensation somehow
contributes to the stabilization of centromeric cohesion during
prophase I.
ORD is essential for meiotic cohesion in both males and females (Mason,
1976
; Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel et al., 1997
).
Our data are consistent with the model that ORD is required to maintain
cohesion during the compaction of meiotic chromosomes and to prevent
the release of centromeric cohesion until anaphase II. The observation
that orcein-stained bivalents in ord spermatocytes appear
less condensed than wild-type (Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel
et al., 1997
) supports the hypothesis that ORD also facilitates normal condensation. Spermatocyte chromosomes condense in
meiosis I just before their segregation. In contrast, oocyte chromosomes compact during assembly of the synaptonemal complex (Carpenter, 1975
), well before meiotic chromosome segregation occurs.
Decreased levels of meiotic recombination in ord females (Mason, 1976
; Miyazaki and Orr-Weaver, 1992
; Bickel et al.,
1997
) suggest that ORD performs an essential role during prophase
compaction of meiotic chromosomes in females as well as males. In
addition, ORD activity is required to maintain arm cohesion and
stabilize chiasmata in Drosophila oocytes until anaphase I
(Bickel et al., 2002
). After metaphase I, both ORD and
MEI-S332 activity are required in both sexes to prevent the release of
centromeric cohesion until anaphase II. Although MEI-S332 can localize
to meiotic centromeres in the absence of ORD protein, MEI-S332 is
unable to maintain cohesion in ordnull
flies (Bickel et al., 1998
). Moreover, additional genetic
experiments suggest that a balance of ORD and MEI-S332 activity is
required for proper regulation of meiotic cohesion in
Drosophila (Bickel et al., 1998
). Together, ORD
and MEI-S332 may prevent cleavage of centromeric cohesins until
anaphase II.
Although ORD sequence homologs have not been identified, ORD-like
activity may be essential in other organisms. Consistent with this
hypothesis, recent findings indicate that in vertebrates, Drosophila, and yeast, securin proteins are unrelated at the
sequence level but exhibit functional similarities that are essential
for proper regulation of cohesion (Funabiki et al., 1996
;
Ciosk et al., 1998
; Zou et al., 1999
; Leismann
et al., 2000
). Because of the small number of chromosomes in
Drosophila, viable gametes are recovered even if meiotic
cohesion is completely abolished and sister segregation is randomized.
Therefore, the study of cohesion in Drosophila meiosis
offers an opportunity to unravel aspects of regulation that may not be
accessible in other model systems, and continued molecular analysis of
ORD function will provide critical information about the regulation of
meiotic cohesion in metazoans.
We propose that our analysis of ORD function during Drosophila spermatogenesis has uncovered a novel aspect of how the maintenance of cohesion must be coordinated with the extensive compaction of chromosomes during prophase. We show that accumulation of ORD on meiotic chromosomes during mid to late G2 is required to maintain sister-chromatid cohesion before and during prophase condensation. In addition, our results support the model that retention of ORD at the centromeres after condensation ensures the maintenance of centromeric cohesion until anaphase II. We believe that these findings provide the first description of an activity that is required to maintain centromeric cohesion from late G2 until anaphase II during meiosis in a metazoan.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank H. Saumweber for providing T40 nuclear lamin monoclonal antibodies, M. Wasser and W. Chia for providing EAST ED3/ED4 antisera and easthop-7 flies, and T. Tang and T. L. Orr-Weaver for providing MEI-S332 antibodies. We thank H. Webber for generating the ord10 stock containing the P{gfp::ord} insertion used for cytology and S. Randall of Improvision for advice and support with imaging. We also thank C. R. McClung, R. Sloboda, T.L. Orr-Weaver, J. Vazquez, and members of the Bickel laboratory for providing helpful comments on the manuscript. The GST-ORD construct used for antibody production and the transgenic P{gfp::ord} lines were generated in the laboratory of T.L. Orr-Weaver in work funded by the March of Dimes. E.M.B. is supported by a National Institutes of Health training grant (GM-08704). This work was funded by the National Institutes of Health (grant GM59354 to S.E.B.) and by the March of Dimes (grant 5-FY98-738 to S.E.B).
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Present address: Department of Molecular,
Cellular, and Developmental Biology, University of South Carolina, 700 Sumter Street, Columbia, SC 29205.
§ Present address: Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, 401 Baker Hall #3204, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720.
Corresponding author. E-mail address:
s.bickel{at}dartmouth.edu.
Article published online ahead of print. Mol. Biol. Cell 10.1091/mbc.E02-06-0332. Article and publication date are at www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1091/mbc.E02-06-0332.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Hirai, S. Toyohira, T. Ohsako, and M.-T. Yamamoto Isolation and Cytogenetic Characterization of Male Meiotic Mutants of Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, April 1, 2004; 166(4): 1795 - 1806. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||