|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vol. 13, Issue 5, 1501-1511, May 2002
Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853
Submitted September 4, 2001; Revised January 15, 2002; Accepted January 24, 2002| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The spindle checkpoint prevents anaphase from occurring until all chromosomes have attached properly to the mitotic spindle. The checkpoint components Mad1 and Mad2 associate with unattached kinetochores and are probably involved in triggering the checkpoint. We now demonstrate that in Xenopus egg extracts Mad1 and Mad2 form a stable complex, whereas a fraction of Mad2 molecules is not bound to Mad1. The checkpoint establishment and maintenance are lost upon titrating out free Mad2 with an excess of Mad1 or a truncated Mad1 (amino acids 326-718, Mad1C) that contains the Mad2-binding region. Mad1N (amino acids 1-445) that binds kinetochores, but not Mad2, reduces Mad1 and Mad2 at kinetochores and abolishes checkpoint maintenance. Furthermore, the association between Mad2 and Cdc20, the activator for the anaphase-promoting complex, is enhanced under checkpoint-active condition compared with that at metaphase. Immunodepletion analysis shows that the Mad1-free Mad2 protein is unable to bind Cdc20, consistent with the model that kinetochore localization of Mad2 facilitates the formation of Mad2-Cdc20 complex. This study demonstrates that the ratio between Mad1 and Mad2 is critical for maintaining a pool of Mad1-free Mad2 that is necessary for the spindle checkpoint. We propose that Mad2 may become activated and dissociated from Mad1 at kinetochores and is replenished by the pool of Mad1-free Mad2.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Segregation of newly duplicated sister chromatids into daughter
cells during anaphase is a critical event in each cell division cycle.
Any mishap in this process gives rise to aneuploidy that is common in
human cancers and some forms of genetic disorders. In eukaryotic cells,
anaphase initiates only after all chromosomes have established stable
attachment to spindle microtubules emanating from opposite spindle
poles. Defects in spindle assembly or chromosome attachment prevent the
onset of anaphase by activating the spindle checkpoint. The checkpoint
signal is generated at kinetochores that are not occupied
by microtubules (Rieder et al., 1995
) or lack tension that
normally comes from bipolar attachment of microtubules (Li and Nicklas,
1995
).
Some of the spindle checkpoint components are evolutionarily conserved
from yeast to human. They include Mad1, Mad2, Mad3/BubR1 (Bub1-related), Bub1, Bub3, and Mps1 (reviewed in Shah and Cleveland, 2000
). Genetic analysis shows that Mad1, Mad2, Mad3, Bub1, and Bub3 lie
in the same checkpoint pathway that controls anaphase onset by
monitoring spindle integrity. On the other hand, Bub2 lies in a
distinct pathway that controls mitotic exit by monitoring the position
of the mitotic spindle (Gardner and Burke, 2000
; reviewed in Hoyt,
2000
). Yeast Mad1 is a nuclear protein that becomes hyperphosphorylated
during normal mitosis and when spindle assembly is disrupted (Hardwick
and Murray, 1995
). The upstream kinase for Mad1 is likely to be Mps1
(Hardwick et al., 1996
; Weiss and Winey, 1996
), and its
overexpression results in hyperphosphorylation of Mad1 and a mitotic
arrest (Hardwick et al., 1996
). Besides Mps1,
phosphorylation of Mad1 requires Mad2, Bub1, and Bub3 (Hardwick and
Murray, 1995
; Hardwick et al., 1996
; Weiss and Winey, 1996
). Mad2 forms a complex with Mad1 and this interaction is essential for
Mad1 phosphorylation (Chen et al., 1999
).
Some of the checkpoint components are localized to
kinetochores in metazoans and are probably involved in
generating the checkpoint signal. These components include Mad1 (Chen
et al., 1998
; Jin et al., 1998
), Mad2 (Chen
et al., 1996
; Li and Benezra, 1996
), Bub1 (Taylor and
McKeon, 1997
), BubR1 (Chan et al., 1999
), Bub3 (Taylor
et al., 1998
), and Mps1 (Abrieu et al., 2001
).
These proteins locate to kinetochores at the end of
prophase. Mad1 and Mad2 dissociate from kinetochores that
have attached to spindle microtubules (Chen et al., 1996
,
1998
; Waters et al., 1998
), whereas Bub1 and Bub3 remain at
kinetochores until early anaphase (Jablonski et
al., 1998
; Basu et al., 1999
; Sharp-Baker and Chen,
2001
). Xenopus Mad1 forms a complex with Mad2 and functions,
at least in part, to recruit Mad2 to unattached
kinetochores (Chen et al., 1998
). Bub1 is also
required for Mad1 and Mad2 to bind kinetochores
(Sharp-Baker and Chen, 2001
).
The downstream target of the spindle checkpoint is the
anaphase-promoting complex (APC), the ubiquitin protein ligase involved in ubiquitination and degradation of the anaphase inhibitor Pds1 and
cyclin B (reviewed in Page and Hieter, 1999
). Degradation of Pds1 and
cyclin B triggers anaphase onset and exit from mitosis, respectively.
The specificity of APC to different substrates is conferred by its
associated specificity factor/activator (Visintin et al.,
1997
). APC bound with Cdc20 targets Pds1, whereas the APC-Cdh1 complex
recognizes cyclin B (Visintin et al., 1997
). When the
spindle checkpoint is activated, Mad2 probably binds and inhibits Cdc20
(Fang et al., 1998
; Hwang et al., 1998
; Kim et al., 1998
), thus preventing Pds1 degradation and sister
chromatid segregation. BubR1 has also been shown recently to have a
similar inhibitory effect on APCCdc20 in vitro
(Tang et al., 2001
). A hypothesis suggests that
unattached kinetochores convert checkpoint proteins, such
as Mad2, to their active form (Chen et al., 1998
; Gorbsky
et al., 1999
). On activation, these molecules may then leave
kinetochores to inhibit the APCCdc20.
The active molecule probably loses its activity with time and needs to
be replenished through unattached kinetochores. This hypothesis has been supported by fluorescence recovery after
photobleaching (FRAP) analysis that demonstrates a turnover rate of
24-28 s for Mad2 at kinetochores (Howell et
al., 2000
). The unattached kinetochore may facilitate
assembly of active Mad2 along with other spindle checkpoint components.
Interestingly, it has been shown recently that a complex containing
Mad2, Bub3, and BubR1 is a more potent inhibitor for
APCCdc20 in vitro than Mad2 alone (Sudakin
et al., 2001
).
Previous immunodepletion analysis suggests that a fraction of Mad2
molecules in Xenopus egg extract might not be associated with Mad1 (Chen et al., 1998
). In this study, we explore the
possibility that the Mad1-free Mad2 may play a role in the spindle checkpoint.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Preparation of Xenopus Egg Extracts, Spindle Checkpoint Assay, Immunoblot, and Immunodepletion
CSF-arrested extracts were obtained from the cytoplasm of
unfertilized Xenopus eggs that are arrested at metaphase of
the second meiotic division by the cytostatic factor (CSF).
CSF-arrested extract and demembranated sperm nuclei were prepared as
described previously (Murray, 1991
). The spindle checkpoint was
activated in the CSF-arrested extract after incubation with 10 µg/ml
nocodazole and sperm nuclei at 9,000-15,000 nuclei/µl of extract
(Minshull et al., 1994
). Once the checkpoint is activated,
addition of calcium is unable to induce the mitotic exit as determined
by condensed chromosomes and a sustained Cdc2-associated histone H1
kinase activity. Spindle checkpoint assays, immunoblot, and
immunodepletion were performed as described (Chen et al.,
1996
, 1998
). For interphase extract shown in Figure 9A, the
CSF-arrested extract was driven into interphase by incubation with 0.5 mM calcium chloride for 30 min at 22°C, followed by addition of 100 ng/µl cycloheximide to prevent synthesis of cyclin B and mitotic
entry. The checkpoint extract was prepared in CSF-arrested extract
incubated with 15,000 sperm nuclei/µl of extract at 22°C for 10 min
and another 20-min incubation with 10 ng/µl nocodazole. All three
types of extract shown in Figure 9A contained the same number of nuclei
and were incubated at 22°C for the same amount of time.
Gel Filtration Analysis
The CSF-arrested or spindle checkpoint-active extracts were
diluted with an equal volume of 2× lysis buffer (20 mM
KPO4, pH 7.5, 2 mM EDTA, 10 mM EGTA, 100 mM
-glycerophosphate, 2 mM MgCl2) plus 20%
glycerol, 0.2% Triton X-100, and 0.2 µM microcystin-LR (Calbiochem,
San Diego, CA). The diluted samples were spun at 50,000 rpm for 1 h at 4°C in a TLA100.3 rotor (Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA).
The supernatant (100 µl) was passed through a 0.2-µm filter
(ultra-free MC centrifugal filter units; Millipore, Bedford, MA) before
being loaded onto a Superose 6 HR 10/30 column (Amersham Biosciences,
Piscataway, NJ) that has been equilibrated with 2 column volumes of 1×
lysis buffer containing 10% glycerol. The column was subsequently
eluted with 1.5 column volume of lysis buffer plus 10% glycerol and
1-ml fractions were collected. It took ~2 h from dilution of the
extracts to the end of column elution. The eluates were concentrated by
trichloroacetic acid precipitation and one-fifth of each
fraction was used for immunoblot analysis.
In Vitro Transcription and Translation in Egg Extracts
Xenopus MAD1, MAD2, or CDC20
was inserted into a modified pGEM transcription vector that contains
5'- and 3'-untranslated regions of Xenopus cyclin B1 and the
Kozak consensus sequence (ACCATGG) to facilitate translation in egg
extracts. The plasmids used in this article encode Mad1-HA2 (tagged
with two copies of hemagglutinin [HA] epitope, pRC309), Mad1-HA
(pRC304), Mad1 (without any tag, pRC341), Mad2 (without any tag,
pRC285), Mad1N (amino acids 1-445, pRC291), Mad1C (amino acids
326-718, pRC288), and full-length Cdc20 (pRC474). The plasmids were
first linearized by cleavage at a unique restriction site 3' to the
polyadenylation signal. The linearized plasmids were used to produce
transcripts by using the mMESSAGE mMACHINE T7 transcription kit
(Ambion, Austin, TX). We typically reconstitute the transcripts from a
20-µl transcription reaction with 5 µl of water, yielding
transcripts of ~4 mg/ml. To remove secondary structures, the
transcripts were heated to 65°C for 3 min and left on ice immediately
before use. Translation reaction was performed as described
(Sharp-Baker and Chen, 2001
) in CSF-arrested extracts that were intact
or immunodepleted of endogenous Mad1 by anti-Mad1 antibodies, or both
Mad1 and Mad2 by anti-Mad2 antibodies. Mad1 and Mad2 produced in the
standard reactions were usually two- to fourfold over the endogenous
level, and Cdc20 at 40-fold endogenous level. For results shown in
Figures 2, 3, 6, and 7, mock translation was added to samples that did not receive Mad1 or Mad2 translation, so that all samples contained equal amount of the translation reactions.
Immunofluorescence
To assemble mitotic chromosomes in egg extracts, 20 µl of
CSF-arrested extract was incubated with sperm nuclei (~1000/µl of extract) at 23°C for 10 min followed by addition of nocodazole to 10 µg/ml and incubation for another 20 min at 23°C to disrupt microtubules. The samples were fixed by diluting 10-fold with XB (10 mM
HEPES, pH 7.8, 50 mM sucrose, 100 mM KCl, 10 mM
MgCl2, and 1 mM CaCl2)
containing 0.1% Triton X-100 and 1% formaldehyde, and incubated for
10 min at room temperature. Samples were then layered over 5 ml of a
30% glycerol cushion made in XB plus 0.1% Triton X-100, and spun in a
HB-4 rotor at 10,000 rpm for 10 min at 4°C to collect chromosomes
onto a coverslip. Immunofluorescence staining was performed as
described previously (Chen et al., 1998
). Images were
collected using a charge-coupled device camera (MicroMAX-5 MHz;
Princeton Instruments, Princeton, NJ) attached to a fluorescence microscope (E800; Nikon, Melville, NY). Images were collected and
processed with the MetaMorph Imaging System (version 4.0; Universal
Imaging, Downingtown, PA) and converted to Photoshop format (Adobe
Systems, Mountain View, CA).
Titration of Mad1-free Mad2
In vitro-translated Mad1-HA or Mad1 was added to CSF-arrested extracts before spindle checkpoint activation. For experiments shown in Figure 2, the control sample contained 12 µl of CSF-arrested extract (60% of the total volume) mixed with 8 µl of mock translation (40%) that was made in extract depleted for both Mad1 and Mad2. For samples containing an increasing amount of Mad1-HA, 12 µl of CSF-arrested extract was mixed with 2, 4, or 8 µl of Mad1-HA translation and additional mock translation to bring the final concentration of the translation to 40% for all samples. For Figure 3, various translations made in Mad1- and Mad2-depleted extracts were added to 25% of the total volume. The extract and translation mix was incubated at 23°C for 15 min before checkpoint activation with sperm nuclei and nocodazole. Samples were taken for histone H1 kinase assays and for immunoblots. To detect the level of Mad1-free Mad2, 10 µl of the sample was incubated at 4°C for 1 h with Affi-prep protein A beads (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) coated with anti-Mad1 antibodies. At the end of incubation, the beads were pelleted by centrifugation to precipitate Mad1 and its associated Mad2, and the supernatants were taken for immunoblot analysis. The levels of the protein were quantitated with NIH Image (version 1.61).
Immunoblot of Chromosomal Proteins
Sperm nuclei were incubated at 23°C for 10 min with 40 µl of CSF-arrested extracts containing various translation reactions, followed by incubation with or without 10 µg/ml nocodazole for another 20 min. At the end of incubation, samples were diluted with 360 µl of ice-cold XB containing 0.1% Triton X-100 and leupeptin, pepstatin, and chymostatin (LPC), and mixed gently by inverting the tubes few times. They were then layered over 1 ml of XB containing 30% sucrose, 0.1% Triton X-100, and LPC, and spun in HB-6 rotor at 10,000 rpm for 15 min. After centrifugation, the supernatant was removed and the chromosome pellets were washed with 0.5 ml of XB containing 30% sucrose, 0.1% Triton X-100, and LPC, and spun again in HB-6 rotor at 10,000 rpm for 5 min. After removing the supernatant, the pellets were solubilized in SDS-PAGE sample buffer and analyzed by immunoblot. The intensity of the signals on the blot was measured by NIH Image (version 1.61).
Immunoprecipitation of Cdc20
The Xenopus CDC20 homology, also named Fizzy
(Lorca et al., 1998
), that lacks the N-terminal 69 amino
acids was produced in bacteria as a glutathione S-tranferase
(GST) fusion (plasmid provided by Dr. T. Lorca, CNRS, Montpellier,
France). The expression of GST-Cdc20 fusion protein was induced
in bacteria by the addition of 0.1 mM isopropyl
-D-thiogalactoside for 4 h, and the
GST-Cdc20 fusion protein in the inclusion bodies was prepared as
described for Xenopus Mad1 protein (Chen et al.,
1998
). The purified protein was used to produce antibodies in rabbits
(Convance Research, Denver, PA) and to purify the antibodies.
For immunoprecipitation of Cdc20, affinity-purified anti-Cdc20
antibodies were coupled to Affi-prep protein A beads and the beads were
washed twice with lysis buffer containing 0.1% Triton-100, 200 nM
microcystin-LR, and 10 µg/ml each of LPC. The beads were then mixed
at 4°C for 1 h with 30 µl of extracts that had been incubated
at 22°C for 30 min with nuclei at 15,000 nuclei/µl or at nuclear
densities indicated in Figure 9D. After mixing, the beads were washed
twice with the same buffer as described above, twice with the buffer plus 0.5 M NaCl, and once with buffer without additional NaCl. It took
~30 min to complete the washing steps. The immunoprecipitates were
then solubilized in SDS-sample buffer and subjected to
immunoblot analysis.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Excess Mad1 Abolishes Checkpoint
The spindle checkpoint proteins Mad1 and Mad2 coimmunoprecipitate
from yeast (Chen et al., 1999
) and Xenopus egg
extracts (Chen et al., 1998
). In egg extracts, Mad1 seems to
be the limiting factor in the complex formation, because all of the
Mad1 molecules were removed along with Mad2 when anti-Mad2 antibodies
were used in the immunodepletion (Chen et al., 1998
).
However, only 20-40% of Mad2 was removed when Mad1 was immunodepleted
(Chen et al., 1998
), indicating that only a fraction of Mad2
was in a complex with Mad1. Gel filtration analysis of metaphase egg
extracts showed that Mad1 eluted in one peak that corresponded to a
size of >669 kDa (Figure 1A). On the
other hand, Mad2 was fractionated into two peaks, the first of which
overlapped with the peak of Mad1 (Figure 1A). The majority of Mad2 was
eluted in the second peak at ~158 kDa (Figure 1A), consistent with
the notion that the majority of Mad2 is not complexed with Mad1. When
the spindle checkpoint was activated in the extract with a high density
of nuclei and nocodazole, the elution profile of Mad1 and Mad2 was
similar to that seen in metaphase extract (Figure 1B).
|
In extract depleted for Mad1, the residual Mad2 was unable to bind
kinetochores and the checkpoint was impaired (Chen et
al., 1998
). To test whether the pool of Mad1-free Mad2 plays any
role in the checkpoint, an excess of Mad1 was added to the extract to
sequester Mad2 in the complex with Mad1. We overproduced epitope-tagged Mad1 directly in the egg extract from corresponding RNA synthesized in
vitro. Purified recombinant proteins were not used for the following
reasons. First, we were not able to generate soluble Mad1 protein
either in bacterial or baculoviral expression systems, even when the
protein was coexpressed with Mad2. Second, the protein produced
directly in egg extract is more likely to be in its native conformations. Indeed, Mad1 and Mad2 produced in this manner restored the spindle checkpoint in extracts depleted for endogenous Mad1 and
Mad2 (our unpublished data). To reduce the level of Mad1-free Mad2,
Mad1 was first translated in extract depleted for Mad1 and Mad2 with
anti-Mad2 antibody. The translation reaction was then added to a
separate aliquot of egg extract to increase the ratio of Mad1 to Mad2.
Immunoblot analysis showed that the addition of Mad1
reduced the level of free Mad2 left in the supernatant after
immunodepletion of Mad1 (Figure 2A). When
Mad1 was present at 2.7-fold over the endogenous level, the free Mad2
was reduced to 23% of normal concentration (Figure 2B). The extract
containing excess Mad1 failed to support the spindle checkpoint in a
dose-dependent manner, as evidenced by the decline of Cdc2-associated
H1 kinase activity after adding calcium to inactivate the CSF activity
(Figure 2C). Furthermore, the addition of translated Mad2 along with
Mad1 restored the fraction of Mad1-free Mad2 as determined by the
immunoblot (Figure 3A). The
checkpoint function was also restored in this extract (Figure 3B),
indicating that excess Mad1 interferes with the function of Mad2,
rather than other molecules.
|
|
Dominant Negative Mad1 Proteins
Do Mad1-free Mad2 molecules regulate the levels of Mad1 and Mad2
on kinetochores? Is the interaction between Mad1 and Mad2 required for Mad1 to bind kinetochores? To answer these
questions we first tested whether Mad1 was able to localize to
kinetochores in the absence of Mad2. Truncated Mad1
molecules were generated that contain or lack the binding region for
Mad2, which is expected to reside within amino acids 467-586 based on
analogy with the human Mad1 (Jin et al., 1998
). HA-tagged
full-length Mad1 or proteins corresponding to amino acids 1-445
(Mad1N) or 326-718 (Mad1C) were translated in egg extracts.
Immunoprecipitation of these extracts with anti-HA antibodies showed
that Mad2 coimmunoprecipitated with both full-length Mad1 and Mad1C
(Figure 4), indicating that Mad1C
contains the Mad2-binding region. To determine the
kinetochore binding ability, HA-tagged full-length Mad1,
Mad1N, or Mad1C were translated in extracts immunodepleted for the
endogenous Mad1. After incubating the extracts with sperm nuclei and
nocodazole, chromosomes were isolated and stained for anti-HA and
anti-Mad2 antibodies. Both full-length Mad1 and Mad1N were found at
kinetochores, whereas Mad1C was not (Figure
5), indicating that the
kinetochore binding region resides within amino acids
1-445 of Mad1. As expected, Mad2 was absent at
kinetochores when only Mad1N was present, due to a lack of
interaction between Mad1N and Mad2 (Figure 5, middle). Consistent with
the result of Mad1 depletion (Chen et al., 1998
), Mad2
associated with Mad1C was not localized to kinetochores, because Mad1C was unable to bind kinetochores (Figure 5,
bottom).
|
|
We then asked whether Mad1N and Mad1C had an effect on
kinetochore-bound Mad1 or Mad2. Sperm nuclei and nocodazole
were first incubated in mitotic extract to assemble
kinetochores with endogenous Mad1 and Mad2. Mock, Mad1,
Mad1N, or Mad1C translation was then added. Immunofluorescence staining
of chromosomes using anti-HA and anti-Mad2 antibodies showed that both
Mad1 and Mad1N were recruited onto kinetochores (Figure
6). The addition of Mad1N reduced Mad2
staining at kinetochores compared with mock addition, probably due to the replacement of endogenous Mad1 with Mad1N that was
unable to bind Mad2. Interestingly, we consistently found that Mad2
staining decreased slightly upon the addition of Mad1C or Mad1 (Figure
6).
|
The effect of additional Mad1, Mad1N, and Mad1C on the level of Mad2 at
kinetochores was also assessed by immunoblot of
isolated chromosomes. Mitotic chromosomes assembled in crude egg
extracts were isolated through a sucrose cushion. The predominant
proteins in this chromosomal fraction were the known chromosomal
proteins, including histones and XCAPs (Figure
7A), similar to that obtained from
chromosomes assembled in a high-speed supernatant of the extract
(Hirano and Mitchison, 1994
). Immunoblot of the chromosomal fraction with anti-Mad1 and anti-Mad2 antibodies showed that there was
a marked increase of these proteins associated with chromosomes isolated from nocodazole-treated extract compared with those from untreated extract (Figure 7B, compare lanes 6 and 7), consistent with
the immunofluorescence study showing that Mad1 and Mad2 are localized
to unattached kinetochores (Chen et al., 1998
).
The level of Mad2 on chromosomes that were first bound with endogenous Mad1/Mad2 and then challenged with Mad1N was ~43% of that on
chromosomes challenged with mock translation (Figure 7B, lane 8). Those
challenged with Mad1C or Mad1 contained ~70% of Mad2 (Figure 7B,
lanes 9 and 10). These results demonstrate that titrating out Mad1-free Mad2 with Mad1C or full-length Mad1 decreases the level of Mad2 on
kinetochores.
|
The reduction of Mad2 on kinetochores upon addition of
either Mad1N or Mad1C during checkpoint maintenance suggests that these truncated proteins probably behave as dominant negatives for the spindle checkpoint. To test whether Mad1N or Mad1C interferes with the
checkpoint establishment, we incubated nuclei and nocodazole in
extracts containing Mad1N or Mad1C at approximately threefold and
sevenfold, respectively, molar excess of the endogenous Mad1 (Figure
8B). To examine the effect on checkpoint
maintenance, the checkpoint was first activated in extracts by
incubation with nuclei and nocodazole, followed by addition of Mad1N or
Mad1C and incubation for another 30 min. At the end of incubation,
calcium chloride was added to all samples to induce the mitotic exit. Figure 8A shows that addition of Mad1N or Mad1C to egg extracts during
the checkpoint establishment or maintenance resulted in a decline of
Cdc2 activity upon addition of calcium to egg extracts, indicating that
the checkpoint was impaired and that Mad1N and Mad1C are dominant
negative for the checkpoints.
|
Dependence of Mad2-Cdc20 Interaction on Unattached Chromosome
The target of Mad2 has been shown to be Cdc20. Binding of Mad2 to
Cdc20 prevents Cdc20 from activating the APC. Deletion analysis has
shown that Mad2 lacking C-terminal 10 amino acids is unable to bind
Mad1 (our unpublished data; Sironi et al., 2001
) and also fails to inhibit the APC (Fang et al., 1998
; Sironi et
al., 2001
), raising the possibility that the same region of Mad2
may interact with both Mad1 and Cdc20. Excess Mad1 or Mad1C thus may
abolish the spindle checkpoint simply by outcompeting Cdc20 in binding to Mad2. We thus examined the interaction between Mad2 and Cdc20 by
coimmunoprecipitation. Mad2 was not detectable in the Cdc20 immunoprecipitate prepared from interphase extract, and was present in
the immunoprecipitate from metaphase extract (Figure
9A). Cdc20 immunoprecipitated from
spindle checkpoint-active extract contained a higher level of Mad2
compared with that from metaphase extract (Figure 9A, compare lanes 5 and 6). The difference in the degree of Mad2-Cdc20 association is not
due to a change in the protein level, because both Cdc20 and Mad2 were
present in similar levels under these conditions (Figure 9A, lanes
1-3). This result shows that the Mad2-Cdc20 interaction is enhanced
when the checkpoint is activated.
|
The concentrations of Cdc20 and Mad2 in the egg extract are ~10
and 200 nM, respectively (our unpublished data), indicating that Cdc20
is the limiting factor for its association with Mad2. Indeed, when
various amounts of Cdc20 translation were incubated with
checkpoint-active extract, the level of Mad2 in the Cdc20 immunoprecipitate increased with increasing concentration of Cdc20 (Figure 9B). Despite the vast excess of Mad2 over Cdc20 and a large
fraction of Mad2 in the Mad1-free pool, Mad2 interacted only weakly
with Cdc20 when the checkpoint was not active (Figure 9A, compare lanes
5 and 6). One possibility for the enhanced interaction induced by the
checkpoint is that Mad2 is converted into an active form at unattached
kinetochores and acquires a higher affinity for Cdc20. To
determine whether binding of Mad2 to kinetochores facilitates its interaction with Cdc20, we examined the Mad2-Cdc20 interaction in extracts depleted for Mad1 or Mad2. In Mad1-depleted extract, Mad2 failed to localize to kinetochores (Chen
et al., 1998
) and the protein was not detectable in the
Cdc20 immunoprecipitate even though the extract still contained >50%
of Mad2 molecules after the depletion (Figure 9C, lanes 4). The lack of
Mad2-Cdc20 interaction was not due to the reduced level of Mad2,
because the interaction was observed in extract that contained 50%
normal levels of Mad1 and Mad2 through partial depletion with anti-Mad2 antibody (Figure 9C, lane 2). This result supports the notion that
recruitment of Mad2 to kinetochores enhances its ability to
associate with Cdc20.
If unattached kinetochores facilitate assembly of a Mad2-Cdc20 complex, we expect that the level of Mad2 associated with Cdc20 will be dependent on the concentration of unattached kinetochores. We tested this hypothesis by adding various amounts of sperm nuclei into egg extracts in the presence of nocodazole, followed by Mad2-Cdc20 coimmunoprecipitation analysis. Figure 9D shows that there was indeed a dose dependency between Mad2-Cdc20 interaction and the nuclear density. The level of Mad2 in the Cdc20 immunoprecipitate leveled off at 8000-16000 nuclei/µl (Figure 9D, lanes 8-10), consistent with our finding that Cdc20 is limiting for Mad2-Cdc20 interaction.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Mad1-free Mad2 Molecules Are Important for Spindle Checkpoint
The initial observation that immunodepletion of Mad1 from egg
extracts removes only a fraction of Mad2 has prompted us to examine the
pool of Mad1-free Mad2 molecules. Gel filtration analysis reveals that
Mad1 coelutes with a fraction of Mad2 with a size >669 kDa, and most
of the Mad2 peaks at ~158 kDa (Figure 1). This result demonstrates
that there are at least two pools of Mad2 in the cytosol and that the
inability of anti-Mad1 to remove all Mad2 is not due to disruption of
the Mad1-Mad2 complex by the antibody. Instead, it reflects the
existence of Mad1-free Mad2 molecules. The mitotic and
checkpoint-active extracts give indistinguishable gel filtration
profile of Mad1 and Mad2, indicating that both pools of Mad2 exist
regardless of whether the checkpoint is active or not. In fact, these
pools of Mad2 and the interaction between Mad1 and Mad2 are
constitutive, because immunodepletion analysis with anti-Mad1 and
anti-Mad2 antibodies in interphase extract yielded the same result as
that in metaphase extracts (our unpublished data). In budding
yeast, the association between Mad1 and Mad2 is also constant during
the cell cycle, and the interaction is found to be important for Mad1
phosphorylation and the checkpoint (Chen et al., 1999
).
Interestingly, gel filtration analysis of the yeast cell lysate shows
that Mad1 cofractionates with a pool of Mad2 in a complex >670 kDa and
that the majority of Mad2 molecules elutes with a mass <67 kDa (Chen
et al., 1999
). It remains to be determined whether the large
complex contains multiple copies of Mad1 or Mad2, or additional
checkpoint molecules. The small complex may contain Mad2 multimer or
other checkpoint proteins. Despite the difference in the size of the
Mad1-free Mad2 complexes from yeast and Xenopus, the
similarity in the gel filtration profile of Mad1 and Mad2 indicates
that the action and the regulatory mechanisms of these molecules are
likely to be evolutionarily conserved.
We now provide evidence that the Mad1-free Mad2 molecules are important
for the checkpoint. Addition of excess Mad1 to extracts reduces the
level of free Mad2 and abolishes the checkpoint function. This effect
is reversed by the addition of more Mad2 molecules, indicating that the
ratio between Mad1 and Mad2 is critical and that the checkpoint
functions only when there is enough of the Mad1-free Mad2 molecules.
Interestingly, the effect of excess Mad1 on the checkpoint is opposite
from that of excess Mad2. It has been shown previously that the
addition of excess Mad2 to egg extract or overexpression of the protein
in fission yeast blocks the metaphase-to-anaphase transition without an
apparent effect on the structure of the mitotic spindle or chromosome
congression (He et al., 1997
; Chen et al., 1998
).
In egg extract, this metaphase arrest is independent of chromosomes
(Chen et al., 1998
), indicating that excess Mad2 probably
activates constitutively downstream checkpoint event. In contrast, an
excess of Mad1 inhibits, rather than activates, the checkpoint. These
findings suggest that even though Mad1 and Mad2 form a tight complex,
they probably play a very different role in the spindle checkpoint.
An excess of Mad1C that contains the Mad2-binding region also titrates out the free Mad2 molecules and inhibits the establishment and maintenance of the checkpoint. Interestingly, addition of Mad1C or full-length Mad1 during checkpoint maintenance results in a reduction of Mad2 molecules at kinetochores, indicating that Mad1-free Mad2 molecules are important for maintaining the Mad2 level at kinetochores. It also shows that Mad1C is a dominant negative for the checkpoint (Figure 8A).
Unattached Chromosomes Enhance Assembly of Mad2-Cdc20 Complex
The downstream target of Mad2 is Cdc20 that activates and directs
the APC toward Pds1. Deletion analysis of human Mad2 has shown that a
C-terminally truncated mutant that is unable to bind Mad1 also fails to
interact with Cdc20 (Sironi et al., 2001
), indicating that
the same region of Mad2 may recognize both Mad1 and Cdc20. We provide
several lines of evidence that the loss of the spindle checkpoint in
the presence of excess Mad1 or Mad1C is not simply due to a competition
between Mad1 and Cdc20 in binding to Mad2. First, we demonstrate that
Mad2-Cdc20 interaction is a regulated process. Coimmunoprecipitation
between these two proteins is detectable during M phase, but not at
interphase (Figure 9A). The interaction is further enhanced when the
spindle checkpoint is activated (Figure 9A). This result is consistent
with a recent study in a human cancer cell line (Zhang and Lees, 2001
).
Second, Mad2 in the egg extract is in ~20-fold molar excess of Cdc20, indicating that there is also a vast excess of Mad1-free Mad2 over
Cdc20. Even without competition from Mad1, Mad2 interacts only weakly
with Cdc20 when the checkpoint is not active, suggesting that the
checkpoint signal facilitates the interaction by modulating Mad2 and/or
Cdc20. Third, we show that binding of Mad2 to unattached kinetochore correlates with the assembly of Mad2-Cdc20
complex. In Mad1-depleted extract, Mad2 fails to localize to
kinetochores and to associate with Cdc20 (Figure 9C). This
result argues against the idea that Mad1 prevents Mad2 from binding to
Cdc20 until the checkpoint signal is generated. Mad1 is unlikely to
mediate the interaction between Mad2 and Cdc20, because Mad1 is not
detectable in the Cdc20 immunoprecipitate (our unpublished data). One
possible mechanism is that Mad2 needs to be recruited to
kinetochores to acquire the ability to bind Cdc20. This
notion is supported by the finding that Mad2-Cdc20 interaction is
greatly reduced in Bub1-depleted extract that also fails to recruit
Mad2 to kinetochore (our unpublished data). In addition,
the level of Mad2-Cdc20 interaction is proportionally increased at the
nuclear density of 0-8000 nuclei/µl of extract in the presence of
nocodazole (Figure 9D), indicating that unattached chromosomes
facilitate the assembly of Mad2-Cdc20. However, we cannot exclude the
possibility that unattached chromosomes may affect another target that
indirectly modulates the interaction between Mad2 and Cdc20.
Interestingly, a recent study shows that partially purified chromosomes
inhibit the APC in vitro (Sudakin et al., 2001
).
The localization of spindle checkpoint proteins Mad1 and Mad2 to
unattached kinetochores suggests that these molecules play a role in triggering and maintaining the checkpoint signal. However, it
is not clear whether kinetochore binding of these proteins is essential for their checkpoint function. We now show that the checkpoint is abolished when Mad1 and Mad2 fail to bind
kinetochores. By expressing truncated Mad1 molecules, we
identify the kinetochore-binding region within amino acids
1-445 of Mad1. A truncated protein containing this region of Mad1
(Mad1N) is recruited onto the kinetochores that have been
occupied with endogenous Mad1 and Mad2, resulting in a reduction of
wild-type Mad1 on kinetochores. As expected, the level of
Mad2 on kinetochores is also reduced, because Mad1N is
unable to bind Mad2. Addition of Mad1N during the process of checkpoint
establishment or maintenance abolishes the checkpoint, indicating that
Mad1N is a dominant negative for the checkpoint. This effect is
probably due to the ability of Mad1N to outcompete Mad1-Mad2 complex
from binding to kinetochores (Figure
10C). Even though we cannot exclude the
possibility that Mad1N may regulate other molecules, it is worth noting
that Mad1N does not affect checkpoint proteins Bub1 and Bub3 whose
kinetochore binding is independent of Mad1 (Sharp-Baker and
Chen, 2001
). Our result supports the model that Mad1 and Mad2 need to
continuously bind kinetochores to maintain the checkpoint.
It is possible that Mad2-Cdc20 complex dissociates with time and needs
to be replenished through binding to kinetochores (Figure
10A). Consistent with the decrease of Mad2 at kinetochores,
addition of excess Mad1, Mad1N, or Mad1C during checkpoint maintenance
reduces Mad2-Cdc20 interaction (our unpublished data).
|
By expressing Mad1 alone in extracts depleted for the endogenous Mad1
and Mad2, we find that Mad1 binds kinetochores in the absence of Mad2 (our unpublished data). Mad1N that lacks the
Mad2-binding region also localizes to kinetochores,
suggesting that Mad2 is dispensable for kinetochore
localization of Mad1. In combination with our previous observation that
Mad2 fails to localize to kinetochores in extracts depleted
for Mad1 (Chen et al., 1998
), these results identify Mad1 as
the protein that targets Mad1-Mad2 complex to kinetochores.
Possible Role of Mad1-free Mad2
The kinetochore is the site where spindle checkpoint
signal is generated when the kinetochore lacks a stable
microtubule attachment or tension exerted from microtubules. The
checkpoint signal must be propagated from this locus into the cytosol
to stop the anaphase. It has been hypothesized that checkpoint proteins
may become activated upon binding to unattached
kinetochores and then released into the cytosol to perform
their function. This model predicts a dynamic interaction of these
molecules with kinetochores and has been demonstrated first
for Mad2 by using FRAP analysis (Howell et al., 2000
).
Binding of Mad2 to kinetochores may induce a conformational change in Mad2, allowing its interaction with Cdc20. Alternatively, unattached kinetochore may be the site where a stable
complex containing Mad2 and Cdc20 is assembled.
Based on our findings, we hypothesize that the tight interaction between Mad1 and Mad2 is disrupted upon activation of Mad1 or Mad2 at kinetochores. The pool of Mad1-free Mad2 protein ensures that Mad1 remaining at kinetochores quickly binds new Mad2 after active Mad2 molecules or Mad2-Cdc20 complex have dissociated, thus maintaining the checkpoint signal (Figure 10A). This model predicts a reduced turnover rate of Mad2 at kinetochores upon titrating out Mad1-free Mad2 with Mad1C or Mad1 (Figure 10, B and D), which can be tested with FRAP analysis. The model also suggests a change in the size of the Mad1 and Mad2 protein complexes upon the checkpoint activation. However, our gel filtration analysis of Mad1 and Mad2 from metaphase and checkpoint-active extracts shows a similar elution profile. We think the state of active checkpoint complexes may not be captured by the gel filtration analysis due to their transient and unstable nature that may be necessary for the checkpoint signal to be silenced upon microtubule attachment to kinetochores. Alternatively, the active checkpoint complex may involve only a very small fraction of Mad1 and Mad2 and is masked by the bulk of the inactive molecules. In consistent with the latter possibility, we estimate that only <1% of Mad2 is coimmunoprecipitated with Cdc20 under checkpoint-active condition.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation (to R.-H.C.).
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: rc70{at}cornell.edu.
Article published online ahead of print. Mol. Biol. Cell 10.1091/mbc.02-01-0003. Article and publication date are at www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1091/mbc.02-01-0003.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. M. Bentley, G. Normand, J. Hoyt, and R. W. King Distinct Sequence Elements of Cyclin B1 Promote Localization to Chromatin, Centrosomes, and Kinetochores during Mitosis Mol. Biol. Cell, December 1, 2007; 18(12): 4847 - 4858. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Yu Structural activation of Mad2 in the mitotic spindle checkpoint: the two-state Mad2 model versus the Mad2 template model J. Cell Biol., April 24, 2006; 173(2): 153 - 157. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. A. Daniel, B. E. Keyes, Y. P. Y. Ng, C. O. Freeman, and D. J. Burke Diverse Functions of Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, January 1, 2006; 172(1): 53 - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. P. Kastenmayer, M. S. Lee, A. L. Hong, F. A. Spencer, and M. A. Basrai The C-Terminal Half of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mad1p Mediates Spindle Checkpoint Function, Chromosome Transmission Fidelity and CEN Association Genetics, June 1, 2005; 170(2): 509 - 517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Zhang, M. Li, W. Ma, Y. Hou, Y.-H. Li, S.-W. Li, Q.-Y. Sun, and W.-H. Wang Localization of Mitotic Arrest Deficient 1 (MAD1) in Mouse Oocytes During the First Meiosis and Its Functions as a Spindle Checkpoint Protein Biol Reprod, January 1, 2005; 72(1): 58 - 68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Pati, B. R. Haddad, A. Haegele, H. Thompson, F. S. Kittrell, A. Shepard, C. Montagna, N. Zhang, G. Ge, S. K. Otta, et al. Hormone-Induced Chromosomal Instability in p53-Null Mammary Epithelium Cancer Res., August 15, 2004; 64(16): 5608 - 5616. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Pan and R.-H. Chen Spindle checkpoint regulates Cdc20p stability in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genes & Dev., June 15, 2004; 18(12): 1439 - 1451. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. J. Tunquist, P. A. Eyers, L. G. Chen, A. L. Lewellyn, and J. L. Maller |