|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vol. 13, Issue 9, 3029-3041, September 2002


*McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine,
Predoctoral Training Program in Human Genetics and
Molecular Biology, and
Department of Molecular Biology
and Genetics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore,
Maryland 21205; and §Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell
Biology, Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of
Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The spindle checkpoint plays a central role in the fidelity of chromosome transmission by ensuring that anaphase is initiated only after kinetochore-microtubule associations of all sister chromatid pairs are complete. In this study, we find that known spindle checkpoint proteins do not contribute equally to chromosome segregation fidelity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Loss of Bub1 or Bub3 protein elicits the largest effect. Analysis of Bub1p reveals the presence of two molecular functions. An N-terminal 608-amino acid (nonkinase) portion of the protein supports robust checkpoint activity, and, as expected, contributes to chromosome segregation. A C-terminal kinase-encoding segment independently contributes to chromosome segregation through an unknown mechanism. Both molecular functions depend on association with Bub3p. A 156-amino acid fragment of Bub1p functions in Bub3p binding and in kinetochore localization by one-hybrid assay. An adjacent segment is required for Mad1p binding, detected by deletion analysis and coimmunoprecipitation. Finally, overexpression of wild-type BUB1 or MAD3 genes leads to chromosome instability. Analysis of this activity indicates that the Bub3p-binding domain of Bub1p contributes to this phenotype through disruption of checkpoint activity as well as through introduction of kinetochore or spindle damage.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Protein components of the spindle checkpoint were
first defined genetically through studies in the budding yeast
Saccharomyces cerevisiae by analysis of mutants that lack
the ability to arrest in the presence of spindle damage introduced by
antimicrotubule drug exposure or by manipulation of temperature
conditional spindle proteins (Hoyt et al., 1991
; Li and
Murray, 1991
; Weiss and Winey, 1996
). The spindle checkpoint thus
defined has been shown to control at least two functionally distinct
steps within mitosis. First, at metaphase, the checkpoint acts to
detect a lack of bipolar attachment or tension for any sister chromatid
pair. This condition delays anaphase in the presence of even a single
unattached kinetochore or a lack of tension on a single
chromatid pair (Spencer and Hieter, 1992
; Rieder et al.,
1994
; Li and Nicklas, 1995
). Second, entry into G1 (mitotic exit) is
prevented in cells that have suffered spindle damage sufficient to
preclude the delivery of a daughter nucleus into the bud (for review,
see Taylor, 1999
; Gardner and Burke, 2000
).
Metaphase arrest due to activation of the spindle checkpoint depends
upon a well-conserved pathway that regulates the degradation of the
anaphase inhibitor protein Securin (budding yeast Pds1p; for review,
see Amon, 1999
; Zachariae and Nasmyth, 1999
). Anaphase is normally
initiated as Separin (Esp1p) is liberated from its binding partner
Securin (Pds1p) after Securin is targeted for degradation by the
Cdc20-associated form of the anaphase promoting complex. Cdc20p is a
target of the metaphase checkpoint arrest pathway and physically
interacts with other checkpoint proteins during metaphase arrest (for
review, see Shah and Cleveland, 2000
; Hoyt, 2001
; Sorger, 2001
).
Maintenance of the arrest induced by kinetochore damage
also requires arrest of the mitotic exit pathway (Krishnan et
al., 2000
), indicating a functional connection between the
distinct control pathways that operate at anaphase initiation and
mitotic exit. In budding yeast, both of these steps are inhibited by
the presence of Pds1 protein (Cohen-Fix and Koshland, 1999
; Tinker-Kulberg and Morgan, 1999
), and thus anaphase and exit control may be related to one another by a key role played by Pds1p or Esp1p at
both cell cycle positions (Fraschini et al., 2001
; Sullivan et al., 2001
; Jensen et al., 2001
; Stegmeier
et al., 2002
).
Initiation of metaphase arrest in response to a lack of bipolar
attachment requires at least six proteins in S. cerevisiae: Mad1p, Mad2p, Mad3p, Bub1p, Bub3p, and Mps1p (Hoyt et al.,
1991
; Li and Murray, 1991
; Wang and Burke, 1995
; Pangilinan and
Spencer, 1996
; Hardwick et al., 1999
). These proteins
function together in kinetochore surveillance, activating a
checkpoint-governed arrest in response to microtubule defects,
kinetochore protein defects, or centromere DNA mutations
(Hoyt et al., 1991
; Li and Murray, 1991
; Wang and Burke,
1995
; Pangilinan and Spencer, 1996
; Hardwick et al., 1999
).
The proteins involved in kinetochore surveillance are
remarkably conserved in eukaryotes, and homologs have been found in
fission yeast, flies, maize, frog, mouse, and human (for review, see
Amon, 1999
). In systems with robust cytology, homologus of Mad1p,
Mad2p, Bub1p, Bub3p, and Mps1p have been observed to concentrate at
unattached kinetochores in prometaphase. Thus, these
proteins behave as expected components of a molecular structure that
broadcasts an inhibitory signal that will be extinguished upon
achievement of bipolar attachment and/or associated tension from
spindle forces exerted in opposite directions (for review, see Gillett
and Sorger, 2001
; Hoyt, 2001
; Nasmyth, 2001
).
Physical association studies have shown that the metaphase arrest
proteins reside in several complexes that contain overlapping components, and that these complexes exhibit alterations in a cell
cycle-regulated manner. In budding yeast, Mad1p/Mad2p, Bub1p/Bub3p, and
Mad3p/Bub3p complexes are detected in interphase, whereas cells in
damage-induced metaphase arrest contain a Bub1p/Bub3p/Mad1p complex, as
well as a Cdc20p/Mad2p/Mad3p/Bub3p complex (Hardwick and Murray, 1995
;
Farr and Hoyt, 1998
; Brady and Hardwick, 2000
; Hardwick et
al., 2000
). Moreover, at metaphase arrest, both Bub1p and Mad1p
exhibit shifts in gel migration consistent with hyperphosphorylated states (Hardwick and Murray, 1995
; Farr and Hoyt, 1998
; Brady and
Hardwick, 2000
). Movement of constituents among protein complexes may
represent the spatial communication from an activated (unattached) kinetochore to site(s) where the Cdc20-associated form of
the anaphase promoting complex is poised to initiate the degradation of
Pds1p. Although biochemical characterization of protein complexes has
provided insight into features of checkpoint activation, the nature of
the spatial regulation imposed at metaphase by the presence of
unattached kinetochores has not been precisely elucidated. Indeed, it is possible that different kinetochore states,
such as kinetochore-microtubule attachment or the presence
of tension, may be handled at metaphase by either overlapping or
distinct signaling pathways (Waters et al., 1998
; Skoufias
et al., 2001
; Stern and Murray, 2001
).
Chromosome missegregation associated with loss of
kinetochore surveillance by the spindle checkpoint has been
observed. In budding yeast, Li and Murray (1991)
observed an increase
in chromosome missegregation in mad1, mad2, and
mad3 mutants upon recovery from aberrant mitoses induced by
exposure to the antimicrotubule drug nocodazole. In the absence of
intentional spindle damage, chromosome missegregation has been detected
in budding yeast bub1 and mad2 mutants
(Pangilinan and Spencer, 1996
) as well as in Drosophila melanogaster bub1 (Basu et al., 1999
),
Schizosaccharomyces pombe
bub1 (Bernard et
al., 1998
), and Caenorhabditis elegans mdf-1 and
mdf-2 mutants (Kitagawa and Rose, 1999
). The chromosome
missegregation phenotypes observed suggest that the spindle checkpoint
plays a role in many cell cycles (even in the absence of induced
damage), or that Bub1 and Mad2 checkpoint proteins have additional
roles in kinetochore function.
In this report, we present a quantitative survey of the segregation roles of five nonessential metaphase checkpoint proteins that govern kinetochore surveillance (Mad1, Mad2, Mad3, Bub1, and Bub3) in cells without additional spindle damage. We find that these spindle checkpoint proteins differ in their contributions, and that the absence of Bub1p or Bub3p has the greatest impact on segregation. Further analysis of the role of Bub1p leads to a model in which Bub1 protein provides chromosome stability through two separate mechanisms.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Yeast Media
All yeast media are as described in Rose et al.
(1990)
.
Yeast Strains
Strains used in this study are listed in Table
1. Except where noted, experiments were
conducted in an S288c laboratory background and are related by
DNA-mediated transformation or isogenic mating and sporulation. Figure
1B, C, and E show data for strains that are derivatives of W303-1a. The one-hybrid assay was carried out in
YJL128 (Ortiz et al., 1999
) and transformants derived from it.
|
|
Chromosome Loss Rate
This assay was performed as previously described (Hieter
et al., 1985b
; Spencer et al., 1990
). Strains
containing a nonessential SUP11-marked test chromosome and plasmids
were grown in selective media and were plated at a density of ~200
colonies per plate on minimal (SD) medium, including 20 µg/ml uracil,
40 µg/ml L-lysine, 6 µg/ml adenine sulfate,
20 µg/ml L-histidine, 30 µg/ml
L-tryptophan, and 220 µg/ml
L-leucine when required to cover auxotrophies.
The limiting adenine supplementation was used to facilitate red pigment development in ade2-101 cells. Chromosome loss events during
the first cell division were visualized as colonies that were at least one-half red. The loss rate for the SUP11-marked chromosome is expressed as loss per chromosome per cell division, and is calculated by dividing the number of half-sectored colonies by the total number of
colonies scored.
Determination of the bub1-1 Mutation
The bub1-1 allele was captured on a yeast-bacterial
shuttle vector by gap repair from MAY1726 (Roberts et al.,
1994
), and the entire open reading frame was sequenced from two
independent transformants. The sole change observed was G to A at
position 997, which substitutes a conserved glutamic acid with lysine
in the putative Bub3p binding region. Therefore, bub1-1 is
referred to as bub1-E333K.
Introduction of bub1 Mutations at the Genomic Locus
Plasmid-borne mutant alleles were created adjacent to a HIS3 marker, amplified in a single DNA fragment with the selectable marker by high-fidelity polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and integrated by homologous recombination into the native BUB1 locus. The resulting genomic structure contained the native BUB1 promoter, a mutant bub1 allele, an HIS3 downstream marker gene, and finally, natural BUB1 3'-flanking sequence. Details of the constructions are available upon request.
One-Hybrid Assay
The one-hybrid assay was performed essentially as described
(Ortiz et al., 1999
). YJL128 was transformed with activation
domain fusion constructs, and multiple independent transformants were plated on SD-LEU supplemented with 5 mM 3-amino-triazole (3-AT). Plates
were incubated at 30°C for up to 2 wk.
MPS1 Overexpression
A GAL-MPS1 allele (Hardwick et al. 1996
) was created
by integration of pAFS120 at the MPS1 locus of YFS589
yielding yeast strain YML101. BUB1 overexpression plasmids were
introduced into YML101, and two independent transformants were picked.
Cultures were grown overnight in selective media lacking histidine and uracil supplemented with 2% raffinose, diluted into selective media
lacking histidine, uracil, and methionine (to derepress the MET25
promoter) supplemented with 2% raffinose and were grown to early log
phase. To induce MPS1 overexpression, galactose was added to
a final concentration of 3%. Samples taken at t = 0 and t = 4 h were fixed in1 M sorbitol, 50 mM KPO4,
pH 7.5, and 3.7% formaldehyde, 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI)
stained, and scored for bud and nuclear morphology. A minimum of 200 cells was scored for each sample.
Plasmids
All overexpression constructs were made in either p423MET (2µ
HIS3) or p415MET (CEN/ARS/LEU2) vectors
containing the methionine-repressible MET25 promoter and the CYC1
terminator sequence flanking the multiple cloning site (Mumberg
et al., 1994
). For one-hybrid analysis, GAL4-AD fusions were
constructed by cloning each PCR-generated open reading frame into
pGADT7 (Clontech, Palo Alto, CA). All plasmids generated by PCR were
verified by sequence analysis. Details are available upon request.
Immunoblotting and Coimmunoprecipitation
Immunoblotting and coimmunoprecipitation were
carried out as described previously (Hardwick and Murray, 1995
; Brady
and Hardwick, 2000
). The lysis buffer for coimmunoprecipitation was 50 mM HEPES, pH 7.6, 75 mM KCl, 50 mM NaF, 1 mM Na vanadate, 1 mM
MgCl2, 1 mM EGTA, 0.1% Na Deoxycholate, 1 mM
phenyl methyl sulfoxide, "complete EDTA-free protease inhibitor
cocktail" (Roche, Indianapolis, IN), and 1 mM dithiothreitol. Rabbit
-Mad1, Mad2, Mad3, Bub1, and Bub3 antibodies have been previously
described (Hardwick and Murray, 1995
; Brady and Hardwick, 2000
;
Hardwick et al., 2000
).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Spindle Checkpoint Mutants Exhibit Different Rates of Chromosome Loss
In previous work, it was apparent that
chromosome loss of bub1 and mad2 mutants differed
from one another (Pangilinan and Spencer, 1996
). To determine the
requirement for spindle checkpoint proteins in accurate chromosome
segregation during normal unperturbed mitosis, null mutants of six
checkpoint genes (BUB1, BUB2, BUB3, MAD1, MAD2, and MAD3) were
generated in an otherwise isogenic background. To follow chromosome
segregation fidelity, the loss of a nonessential test chromosome
(Spencer et al., 1990
) was ascertained by a colony color
assay (Hieter et al., 1985a
). In this assay, haploid
colonies containing the test chromosome bearing a SUP11 (ochre-suppressing tRNA) gene are white, whereas cells that have lost
the test chromosome accumulate a red pigment due to the host ade2-101 (ochre) mutation. Thus, loss events give rise to
red sectors during colony growth.
The checkpoint mutant strains were plated on color indicator plates and
chromosome loss rates were evaluated visually by colony sectoring
morphology and by half-sector analysis (Hieter et al., 1985a
). In half-sector analysis, the rate of first division
missegregation events is directly measured by observing the number of
colonies that are at least one-half red, and dividing by the total
number of colonies that were established by cells with a test
chromosome. In an S288c background, bub1
and
bub3
cells exhibited the highest rates of chromosome
loss, 50-fold higher than the wild-type rate of 0.8 loss events per
1000 divisions (Figure 1, A and B). mad1
and
mad2
strains also showed an increased chromosome loss
rate, but at a level two- to threefold lower than bub1
and bub3
. mad3
exhibited a slight increase above wild
type, whereas bub2
was indistinguishable from control. To
test the generality of this result, the null mutants were characterized
in a different laboratory strain background, W303-1a. The strong
phenotypes for bub1
and bub3
were again
observed, but the smaller differences among the mad null
mutants were less apparent in W303-1a strains. At a minimum, the
chromosome loss phenotypes indicate that Bub1 and Bub3 proteins have an
additional role that is important to chromosome segregation during
culture in the absence of intentional spindle damage.
Kinetochore surveillance checkpoint proteins perform their
functions in the context of multiprotein complexes. To test whether cells are sensitive to protein dosage, each full-length open reading frame was placed under the control of the MET25 promoter (MET25p), whose transcriptional strength is controlled by altering the
environmental methionine concentration (Mumberg et al.,
1994
). MET25p-controlled expression of the five checkpoint proteins led
to steady-state protein levels in excess of wild type (Figure 1C).
The MET25p-controlled alleles were introduced into a wild-type yeast strain containing the test chromosome for monitoring chromosome segregation. Cultures grown in the presence of methionine were diluted in water and plated at ~200 cells/plate on media lacking methionine. Half-sector analysis indicated that overexpression of Bub1p and Mad3p led to a 15-fold increase in test chromosome missegregation over the wild-type rate (0.7 loss events per 1000 divisions; Figure 1D). High-level expression of Mad1p and Mad2p caused a smaller increase in chromosome missegregation (three- and sevenfold), whereas high level expression of Bub3p had no effect.
Commonly used assays for the presence of checkpoint deficiency measure cell survival in the presence of antimicrotubule drugs such as Benomyl. The Benomyl sensitivity elicited by the absence of each kinetochore surveillance checkpoint protein was determined using the panel of null alleles. Strain viability was tested in the presence of a concentration of drug that delays but does not arrest wild-type cell growth. Cells containing bub1 and bub3 mutations were more Benomyl sensitive than mad1, mad2, or mad3 mutants by an order of magnitude (Figure 1E). Thus, checkpoint proteins differ in their contribution to the maintenance of cell viability in response to mild spindle damage. Note that the order of Benomyl sensitivity correlates with the relative intrinsic chromosome loss rates observed (Figure 1A). In principle, Benomyl sensitivity of mutants in this assay may reflect a sum of defective mechanisms contributing to cell death, including drug-induced hindrance of microtubule dynamics, null mutant kinetochore structural defects, and inappropriate cell cycle progression.
BUB1 and BUB3 Cooperate in a Chromosome Segregation Role
To determine whether the overexpression phenotype of Bub1 was due
to discrete domain(s), a series of BUB1 truncation alleles was
constructed capable of expressing the N-terminal 210, 367, or 608 amino
acids as well as amino acid segments 211-1021 and 211-367 (Figure
2A). Western analysis using a
Bub1p-specific antibody raised to the N-terminal 216 amino acids
indicated that MET25-promoted expression led to significant protein
accumulation in cells grown in the absence of methionine (Figure 2B). A
serial dilution analysis indicated that the full-length overexpression
product reached ~50-fold that of wild type.
|
Each of the truncation constructs was introduced into wild-type cells
on high-methionine medium, where expression is suppressed. Chromosome
loss was quantitated for several independent transformants by
half-sector analysis after plating on low-methionine medium (Figure 2C,
left). Under these conditions, the full-length construct exhibits a
15-fold increase in loss (from Figure 1D). Overexpression of the
N-terminal 367 or 608 amino acids of Bub1p from plasmids (p[1-367]
and p[1-608], respectively) caused a 30- and 20-fold increase in
chromosome loss. Overexpression of the N-terminal 210 amino acids had
little effect (2.4-fold, Figure 2C). The segment common to p[1-367]
and p[1-608], but absent from p[1-210], contains a well-conserved
homology box predicted to mediate association between Bub1p and Bub3p
(Taylor et al., 1998
). This result suggested that
overexpression of a Bub3-binding region of Bub1p might cause the
chromosome loss. To test this hypothesis, a construct expressing only
amino acids 211-367 under the control of the MET25 promoter was
created. It too was found to induce chromosome loss at high expression
levels (26-fold greater than the vector control).
Several additional lines of in vivo evidence now strongly support the
interpretation that the overexpression phenotype is mediated through
disruption of a Bub1p/Bub3p interaction. First, the bub1-1
point mutation (Hoyt et al., 1991
), which is suppressed by a
low-level increase in BUB3 gene dosage, was cloned and identified as
E333K (see "Materials and Methods"). This mutation is located within the 211-367 segment. Second, when the E333K mutation was introduced into the p[211-367] plasmid, this allele failed to induce
chromosome instability (Figure 2C, left panel). Third, expression of
additional BUB3 from a MET25-controlled allele (from plasmid pBUB3) on
a centromere vector (p415MET) reversed the chromosome instability
phenotype of p[211-367] (Figure 2C, right). Fourth, a BUB1/BUB3
cooperative role in chromosome segregation implied by this
interpretation was tested by analyzing the chromosome loss rate of a
bub1
bub3
mutant (Figure 2D, left). The rate observed in the
double mutant (48 events in 1000 divisions) is consistent with a shared
role for Bub1p and Bub3p. Finally, if the presence of excessive
bub1[211-367]p interferes with a Bub1p-Bub3p association, then this
protein fragment should not elicit additional missegregation in the
absence of the complex. Indeed, its overexpression does not augment
chromosome loss in a bub3
null mutant (Figure 2D, right). We
conclude that an interaction between Bub1 and Bub3 proteins is likely
to be mediated by amino acids 211-367 of Bub1p in vivo, and disruption
of this interaction contributes significantly to the overexpression
phenotype associated with excessive Bub1p.
Yeast Bub1p Can Associate with Kinetochores in a One-Hybrid Assay
Previous experiments have demonstrated kinetochore
localization of Bub1 protein in experimental systems where these
structures are cytologically visible (Taylor and McKeon, 1997
; Bernard
et al., 1998
; Jablonski et al., 1998
; Basu
et al., 1999
; Sharp-Baker and Chen, 2001
). To date,
localization of checkpoint proteins to budding yeast
kinetochore structures has not been achieved. In a
one-hybrid assay (Ortiz et al., 1999
),
kinetochore protein components can activate a HIS3
reporter gene located immediately adjacent to the
centromere of chromosome III. This reporter system depends on the
presence of an active centromere, reveals association of known
kinetochore components, and has been successfully used to
identify new kinetochore proteins (Ortiz et al.,
1999
). We used this assay to ask whether kinetochore
association of full-length Bub1p or truncation alleles can be detected
in budding yeast.
Independent transformants containing Gal4-activation domain fusions of
Bub1 and Bub1 fragments were spotted onto minimal medium lacking
leucine and histidine supplemented with 5 mM 3-AT. Figure 3 shows that fusions of BUB1[1-367],
BUB1[1-608], and BUB1[211-367] can activate transcription of the
centromere reporter, indicating that these proteins can localize to
kinetochores. Reporter activation with the full-length BUB1
fusion protein is not observed, likely due to a lower level of fusion
protein accumulation or the presence of a nonfunctional conformation.
|
Activation domain fusions of other kinetochore surveillance proteins were also tested. MAD1 and MAD3 fusions activated the reporter (Figure 3), whereas BUB3 and MAD2 fusions did not. CTF13-AD is shown as a control: it activates the HIS3 reporter and supports growth on 3-AT within 3-4 d at 30°C, whereas the checkpoint fusion proteins tested require up to 14 d to show evidence of activation over vector background. This weak signal is consistent with a transient association, as would be expected for proteins that associate with a subset of kinetochores for a subset of the cell cycle. An unequal transcriptional activation efficiency for different fusion proteins may also be a contributing factor. We conclude from these experiments that the budding yeast kinetochore surveillance proteins Bub1, Mad1, and Mad3 can associate with yeast kinetochores, as is predicted from localizations of their studied orthologs.
The BUB1 Overexpression Phenotype Includes Disruption of Both Checkpoint and Segregation Functions
High-level expression of Bub1p (and fragments of this protein) may disrupt kinetochore checkpoint signaling, a segregation function, or both. To address whether checkpoint signaling was disrupted, strains overexpressing full-length Bub1p or protein fragments were tested for checkpoint competence in two different assays.
The first took advantage of the spindle checkpoint-dependent delay
exhibited by ctf18
cells, which is associated with a partial defect
in sister chromatid cohesion (Hanna et al., 2001
).
This delay is detected as an accumulation of G2/M phase cells during early log phase using flow cytometry (Figure
4A, left column). MET25-controlled
alleles were introduced into ctf18
cells and transformants were
selected on high-methionine medium. Four independent transformants were
then grown in medium without methionine for 18-24 h (O.D. ~0.4) and
were analyzed for DNA content using flow cytometry (Figure 4A).
Diminution of the G2/M phase peak indicated that the delay can be
disrupted by overexpression of full-length Bub1p, Bub1[1-367]p,
Bub1[1-608]p, and Bub1p[211-367]p. The G2/M reduction is
consistent with an observed decrease in the proportion of budded cells
(Figure 4A), as well as a reduction in viability determined by growth
on solid medium with or without methionine (Figure 4B). The degree of
delay diminution and reduced viability correlates with the amount of
chromosome loss induced by the overexpression alleles (see Figure 2B).
We observed similar loss of delay and viability in cells lacking CTF19
(C.D. Warren, unpublished data), a gene that encodes a nonessential
kinetochore protein (Hyland et al., 1999
). We
conclude from these experiments that overexpression of Bub1p, and Bub1p
fragments that cause chromosome loss, does have the capacity to disrupt
a spindle checkpoint-dependent delay.
|
In a second system, we obtained evidence that the checkpoint arrest
pathway is not completely dysfunctional. In this experiment, checkpoint
activation by overexpression of the MPS1 protein kinase was used to
cause cell cycle arrest (Hardwick et al., 1996
; Weiss and
Winey, 1996
). MPS1-induced arrest is dependent on each of the known BUB
and MAD checkpoint genes (Hardwick et al., 1996
). If
overexpression of Bub1p or Bub1p fragments completely disrupts the
checkpoint pathway, similar to a null mutant, then MPS1 overexpression will not cause cell cycle arrest. Wild-type strains containing integrated GAL1-MPS1 as well as MET-controlled BUB1 overexpression plasmids were grown in medium lacking methionine to induce high-level expression of the BUB1 truncation alleles. Samples were taken before
and 4 h after addition of galactose (for overexpression of MPS1).
Formaldehyde-fixed cells were stained with DAPI and were scored for
morphological evidence of metaphase arrest. Strains overexpressing the
full-length Bub1p, Bub1[1-367]p, or Bub1[1-608]p arrested in
response to MPS1 overexpression, whereas control bub1
cells did not (Figure 4C). The presence of an MPS1-induced arrest indicates that the overexpression of Bub1 full-length protein or the
truncation alleles does not fully abrogate spindle checkpoint function.
We speculate that even a single remaining active
kinetochore may be sufficient to arrest cells in response
to MPS1 overexpression.
Both of the experiments above address the checkpoint competence of
strains containing extra Bub1p or Bub1p fragments. Neither addresses
whether disruption of checkpoint control is responsible for the
chromosome loss introduced by overexpression of Bub1p, or whether a
separate mechanism causes missegregation (e.g., competition for a
kinetochore structural component). Note that
mad3
null cells have a quite modest chromosome
instability phenotype (Figure 1, A and B), although they are markedly
defective in preanaphase arrest (Straight et al., 1996
;
Hardwick et al., 2000
; our unpublished data). To explore the
cause of chromosome loss, overexpression interference of BUB1 alleles
was tested in a mad3
yeast host (Figure 4D). The
chromosome loss rates observed closely parallel those induced by the
Bub1 overexpression alleles in wild-type cells. This result
indicates that the mechanism responsible for chromosome loss incorporates a defect distinct from loss of a functional checkpoint pathway.
Two Domains of Bub1p Play Distinct Roles in Chromosome Segregation
Because the molecular defects engendered by overexpression
may be complex, genomic loss-of-function alleles have also been characterized. Chromosome loss rates of two bub1 missense
mutants were measured by half-sector analysis (Figure
5, A and B). The bub1-1 allele
(i.e., bub1-E333K) has apparent partial function because its
checkpoint defect is suppressible by additional copies of the
BUB3 gene on a centromere plasmid, whereas that of a
bub1 null mutation is not (Hoyt et al., 1991
;
Roberts et al., 1994
). However, the chromosome
missegregation rate measured for bub1-1 (Figure 5, A and B)
is similar to that of bub1
(Figure 1, A and B). Like the
bub1-1 checkpoint defect, the bub1-1 chromosome
missegregation phenotype is suppressible by extra copies of the
BUB3 gene introduced on a centromere plasmid (Figure 5B).
|
The bub1-K733R allele, which alters a conserved lysine
residue in the Bub1 protein kinase domain, has been previously
characterized as deficient in checkpoint competence and protein kinase
activity (Roberts et al., 1994
). The chromosome stability
defect of bub1-K733R is less severe than that of
bub1-E333K (Figure 5, A and B). The addition of extra
BUB3 gene copies to bub1-K733R does not markedly alter its chromosome segregation phenotype.
BUB1 truncation alleles were tested at single copy in the native genomic locus under the control of the BUB1 promoter in haploid cells. Although the genomic bub1[1-367] allele exhibits a phenotype similar to the null mutant, the bub1[1-608] allele supports a chromosome loss rate that is intermediate (16 events per 1000 divisions, Figure 5B). This rate is similar to that observed for the kinase region missense mutant bub1-K733R (13 events per 1000). Thus, an intermediate level of chromosome stability is observed for two alleles of BUB1, with defective or absent protein kinase activity, indicating a role for the N-terminal portion of Bub1p in segregation.
Note that the chromosome segregation competence conferred by the
N-terminus of Bub1p does not account for the very high fidelity of
segregation in wild-type cells. To test if chromosome stability can be
provided by a Bub1p C-terminal protein fragment, a deletion allele
expressing amino acids 211-1021 was constructed at the genomic locus.
This mutant has a chromosome stability phenotype that is between
wild-type and bub1
, at 24 events per 1000 (Figure 5B). We
conclude that the C-terminal portion of Bub1p also contributes to
chromosome stability.
In summary, the bub1-E333K allele appears to be virtually null for both checkpoint and chromosome segregation activities, although it encodes a protein whose functions are rescued by additional expression of its binding partner Bub3p. This argues that an association with Bub3p is required for both checkpoint and segregation activities. Separate N-terminal (bub1[1-608]) and C-terminal (bub1[211-1021]) protein fragments contribute to chromosome stability, each providing an intermediate level of segregation fidelity. We note that the loss rates of these two partial protein alleles sum to a value that is the same as the loss rate observed in the null mutant (40 per 1000, Figure 1B).
An N-Terminal Segment of Bub1p Is Necessary and Sufficient for Its Checkpoint Function
Genomic loss-of-function alleles were tested for checkpoint
competence by evaluating arrest after spindle damage. An arresting concentration of the antimicrotubule drug nocodazole (15 µg/ml) was
added to asynchronous cultures grown in rich medium at t = 0. Samples at 4, 6, and 8 h were fixed in formaldehyde, DAPI
stained, and scored for the frequency of uninuclear large-budded
(arrested) or multibudded (inappropriately progressing) cellular
phenotypes (Figure 6, A and B). The
bub1[1-367] and bub1-E333K mutants behaved like
bub1
, consistent with their null chromosome instability phenotypes. However, bub1[1-608] gave results similar to
wild type for both arrest and inappropriate progression tests. This indicates that the kinase domain can be deleted without loss of the
checkpoint arrest function of Bub1p.
|
The previous report that bub1-K733R is checkpoint deficient
(Roberts et al., 1994
) led to the hypothesis that the
kinase-encoding portion of BUB1 is the checkpoint-functional moiety of
the protein. We observe that although bub1-K733R cells are
indeed checkpoint deficient, the timing of arrest failure indicates the
presence of partial function (Figure 6A). Moreover, the
bub1-[211-1021] allele failed to exhibit a checkpoint
arrest in nocodazole. These results, taken together with the arrest
competence of bub1-[1-608], indicate that the protein
kinase activity of Bub1p is not responsible for nocodazole-induced arrest.
The proteins encoded by bub1-E333K and bub1-K733R alleles were further investigated. Western blot analysis of anti-Bub1p immunoprecipitates reveals the presence of a stable protein pool in bub1-E333K mutant cells (Figure 6C). The bub1-E333K protein is significantly underphosphorylated, strongly suggesting that function of the wild-type Bub1 protein depends upon its phosphorylation. In contrast, bub1-K733Rp appears to be less abundant, and modified forms are readily detected (Figure 6C). The low steady-state abundance of bub1-K733Rp may reflect a high protein turnover rate. This prediction suggests an hypothesis in which the inability of bub1-K733Rp to maintain a checkpoint arrest is in part due to a gradual loss of the mutant protein in arrested cells.
Formation of a Mad1p-Bub1p-Bub3p complex is crucial for spindle
checkpoint function (Brady and Hardwick, 2000
). Therefore, we tested
whether the Bub1 protein fragment alleles could form such a complex by
assaying for coimmunoprecipitation with Mad1p or myc-tagged Bub3p
(Figure 7). First, immunoprecipitates
prepared with an
-Bub1p antibody were characterized for the presence
of Bub1p and Mad1p (Figure 7A). Full-length Bub1p and bub1[1-608]p expressed from the genomic locus were found to coprecipitate Mad1p in
nocodazole-arrested cells, whereas bub1[1-367]p did not. Second, immunoprecipitation was carried out to test for association between a
genomic myc-tagged BUB3 allele and Bub1 truncation proteins expressed
from the MET25 promoter on a 2-µm plasmid (Figure 7B). Anti-myc
precipitates containing equivalent amounts of Bub3-myc protein (Figure
7B, bottom) also contained appreciable amounts of full-length Bub1p,
bub1[1-367]p, and bub1[1-608]p, but not bub1[1-210]p.
|
In summary, bub1[1-608]p exhibits biochemical characteristics of a functional Bub1 protein capable of coprecipitation with both Mad1p and Bub3p. Moreover, bub1[1-608]p is heavily phosphorylated in all of our Western blots (Figures 2B and 7; confirmed by lambda protein phosphatase treatment; K.G. Hardwick, unpublished data), whereas bub1[1-367]p and bub1[1-210]p are not. In a functional assay, a genomic allele of bub1[1-608] supports a robust checkpoint arrest in the presence of nocodazole. Thus, we conclude that the bub1[1-608] protein is sufficient for BUB1 checkpoint arrest function, and exhibits biochemical properties expected for this activity.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Nonessential spindle checkpoint proteins from budding yeast differ
in their importance to chromosome stability in cells where spindle
assembly dynamics are not challenged by intentional introduction of
damage. The disparity in chromosome loss rates observed among the
checkpoint null mutants indicates the presence of functional differentiation. bub2
cells exhibit a wild-type
chromosome loss rate, in agreement with BUB2's primary role in mitotic
exit rather than in kinetochore surveillance at metaphase.
Each of the other mutants conferred a chromosome loss rate higher than
wild type, indicating one or more roles important for high-fidelity
chromosome transmission. BUB1 and BUB3 genes in particular appear to
influence chromosome segregation more strongly than MAD1, MAD2, and
MAD3 genes. We speculate that differential roles among these genes may
include distinct kinetochore structural contributions that influence segregation, detection of different types of
kinetochore status in the context of checkpoint signaling
(e.g., tension vs. attachment), or communication of checkpoint
signaling to diverse target molecules that mediate different aspects of
checkpoint delay or recovery. It was recently argued that although
mammalian Mad2p responds to the lack of microtubule attachment, the Bub proteins respond to both microtubule attachment and a lack of tension
(Waters et al., 1998
; Skoufias et al., 2001
).
However, evidence from budding yeast suggests that the spindle
checkpoint in this organism responds to the lack of tension in a
mitotic spindle, and that this checkpoint-associated delay is Mad2
dependent (Stern and Murray, 2001
). Further work is needed to clarify
roles of the checkpoint proteins.
In this work, we have endeavored to explain the relatively high rate of
loss exhibited by bub1
cells and to find evidence for the
presence of two distinct contributions to chromosome segregation. One
is encoded within the first 608 amino acids in a protein segment that
is both necessary and sufficient for a nocodazole-induced checkpoint
arrest. The other is encoded in the kinase domain, which is not
required for checkpoint arrest and whose function is unknown. Previous
work in budding yeast has indicated that a missense allele predicted to
disrupt kinase activity (bub1-K733R) was also defective in
checkpoint arrest (Roberts et al., 1994
). In apparent
contradiction, an in vitro experiment using a Xenopus extract system has provided evidence that a kinase-defective missense allele can support an active checkpoint (Sharp-Baker and Chen, 2001
).
Here, we find that the genomic bub1-[1-608] allele,
entirely lacking the conserved kinase domain, exhibits checkpoint
competence after spindle disruption, whereas bub1-K733R
exhibits a transient arrest that decays rapidly. Examination of the
steady-state abundance of bub1-K733R encoded protein
indicates a decreased accumulation. Taken together, these studies
indicate that the checkpoint defect associated with
bub1-K733R is more likely due to insufficient gene product
than to a dysfunctional kinase activity.
The protein encoded by bub1-[1-608] exhibits several interesting properties relevant to its checkpoint function. The immunoprecipitation experiments reveal association of this truncation product with both Bub3p and Mad1p. The BUB1 partial protein allele series indicates the involvement of specific amino acid segments of Bub1p in complex formation. The segment from amino acid 211 to 367 is required for complex formation with Bub3p. Similarly, the segment from 367 to 608 is required for Mad1p association. In our analysis of the partial protein alleles, the presence of both Bub1p and Mad1p binding correlates with the accumulation of phosphorylated forms of Bub1p, as well as the presence of checkpoint arrest competence. These observations strongly support the current model that a Bub1-Bub3-Mad1 protein complex is required for checkpoint arrest, and they suggest that the phosphorylation in the N-terminal one-half of Bub1p may also be a requirement.
The 211-367-amino acid segment can localize a GAL4 transcriptional
activation domain to the yeast kinetochore in the
one-hybrid assay. This activity, as well as Bub3p binding, is
consistent with previous work on murine Bub1p, which defined a
conserved homology (Taylor et al., 1998
) with similar
functions in an overexpression assay. In general, our overexpression
results in budding yeast parallel studies in mammalian cells where
overexpression of Bub1p mutant alleles from an ectopic promoter leads
to disruption of checkpoint function (Taylor and McKeon, 1997
; Cahill
et al., 1998
). However, the mammalian studies have been
controversial (see Tighe et al., 2001
) due to differing
outcomes from similar experiments. In budding yeast, under partial
induction of the checkpoint (e.g., in ctf18
or
ctf19
cycling populations), overexpression of Bub1p or
fragments was sufficient to "silence" checkpoint signaling. We
assume that in ctf18
or ctf19
mutants, many
cells experience a delay due to the failure of one
kinetochore (or a few) to achieve stable bipolar attachment
with normal timing. In contrast, under the same Bub1-overexpression
conditions, checkpoint activation by extra Mps1p was sufficient for
cell cycle arrest. We speculate that because the checkpoint is strongly
induced with overexpression of Mps1p, even a single remaining active
checkpoint-signaling complex may cause cell cycle arrest. Comparison of
the results from these two tests for checkpoint function in yeast
highlights a cautionary note where partial induction or disruption of
checkpoint activity is involved. For example, in vertebrate cell
culture systems, seemingly subtle variation (e.g., in genotype or
culture conditions) may contribute to quantitative aspects of
checkpoint competence and may affect the outcome.
In the overexpression survey of checkpoint proteins, extra Mad3p
caused a chromosome loss rate similar to that conferred by extra Bub1p.
Although Mad3p exhibits similarity in protein alignment to the Bub1p
N-terminal segment, each gene is independently required for checkpoint
activity and, therefore, they are not functionally equivalent. The
mad3 null chromosome loss rate is notably subtle in
comparison with the MAD3 overexpression phenotype, indicating that
compromise of Mad3p's overexpression binding partners is more
important to segregation than Mad3 protein itself. Because the
interaction between Bub1p and Bub3p contributes to the BUB1 overexpression phenotype, and because Mad3p associates with Bub3p (Hardwick et al., 2000
), it is likely that interference with
Bub3p function is causal for the chromosome missegregation induced by Mad3p overexpression. Interestingly, the amounts of Bub3p at a single
human kinetochore have been estimated to be around 1000 copies (Martinez-Exposito et al., 1999
), an abundance that
is suggestive of its having a structural role as well as a signaling one.
In conclusion, a quantitative study of the roles played by spindle checkpoint genes in chromosome segregation indicates the presence of functional differentiation beyond their essential contributions to the spindle checkpoint. Further studies of loss-of-function alleles that define distinct functional contributions, and overexpression alleles that disrupt in vivo relationships, hold promise for elucidating the in vivo importance of biochemical properties of checkpoint components.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank A. Hoyt and C. Dougherty for helpful discussions as well as for sharing the original bub1-1 strain and bub1-K733R plasmid; M. Winey for the GAL-MPS1 construct; J. Lechner for one-hybrid yeast strains and constructs; and M. Lee and F. Pangilinan for plasmids and strains. We also thank A. Hoyt, J. Boeke, F. Pangilinan, D. Warren, and our reviewers for comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by GM50842 from the National Institutes of Health to F.S.; the Program in Human Genetics and Molecular Biology (to C.D.W.); The Wellcome Trust (to K.G.H. and D.M.B.), of which K.G.H. is a Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellow; and the Medical Research Council (to R.C.J.).
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Corresponding author. E-mail address:
fspencer{at}jhmi.edu.
Article published online ahead of print. Mol. Biol. Cell 10.1091/mbc.E02-04-0203. Article and publication date are at www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1091/mbc.E02-04-0203.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|