|
|
|
|
Vol. 18, Issue 8, 2924-2934, August 2007
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, and Program in Cell Dynamics, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01605
Submitted September 22, 2006;
Accepted May 17, 2007
Monitoring Editor: Kerry Bloom
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Regulation of Clp1 in fission yeast has similarities as well as important differences from Cdc14 regulation in budding yeast (Cueille et al., 2001
; Trautmann et al., 2001
). As with budding yeast Cdc14, Clp1 localizes to the nucleolus throughout interphase. However unlike budding yeast, but similar to mammalian Cdc14B (Cho et al., 2005
), Clp1 is released from the nucleolus upon mitotic entry. Then, in anaphase, much like the MEN in budding yeast, the SIN acts to keep Clp1 out of the nucleolus until cytokinesis is complete. The mechanism governing release of Clp1 from the nucleolus in early mitosis is not known, but it does not require homologues of the budding yeast FEAR pathway components (Chen et al., 2006
). How Clp1 is inhibited in the nucleolus is not known. An S. pombe homologue of Net1/Cfi1 has not been identified.
In fission yeast, Clp1 and the SIN each promote the others activity as part of a positive feedback loop that stays active until completion of cytokinesis (Cueille et al., 2001
; Trautmann et al., 2001
). Clp1 keeps the SIN active, and the SIN keeps Clp1 out of the nucleolus. This positive feedback loop functions as part of a surveillance mechanism, termed the cytokinesis checkpoint, that halts further cell cycle progression until cytokinesis is complete (Liu et al., 2000
; Mishra et al., 2004
). Under normal growth conditions, the checkpoint is not essential for viability. However, when cytokinesis is slowed, for example by perturbation of the actomyosin ring, the checkpoint becomes essential for viability (Mishra et al., 2004
). The checkpoint blocks further rounds of nuclear division, and it maintains the cytokinetic apparatus, so the cells can eventually divide and retain normal ploidy. Cells with weakened SIN signaling, or a deletion of Clp1, are defective for the checkpoint, and they are unable to deal with defects in cytokinesis and become multinucleate and die when cytokinesis is delayed.
Here, we describe a genetic screen for suppressors of the cytokinesis checkpoint defect in a weakened SIN mutant. As described below, our screen identified a protein similar to Net1/Cfi1 as well as several other nucleolar proteins. Unlike Net1/Cfi1, which regulates mitotic exit and MEN signaling through the Cdc14 phosphatase, Dnt1 affects the SIN independently of Clp1, suggesting a new and unexpected link between the nucleolus and the SIN signaling pathway.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
, because, although the dnt1
strain was generated as part of a separate study, we suspected dnt1 might be identified in our screen, and we knew that dnt1
could rescue cdc14-118 myo2-E1. Group I mutations were all tightly linked to dnt1+, with no double mutants with dnt1
::ura4+ isolated out of >20 complete tetrads dissected. This suggested that group I mutations might be alleles of dnt+. Subsequently, we amplified the dnt1+ gene from the group I mutants by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and we sequenced the PCR products, confirming that three of the group I mutants carried mutations in the open reading frame (ORF) of the dnt1+ gene: in suppressor 14, it had a 17-nucleotide insertion between nucleotides 230 and 231 in the coding region, which introduced a premature stop codon TAA; in sup16, one nucleotide is deleted at base 1503, causing a frameshift and a stop codon 20 amino acids before the C-terminal end of the protein; in suppressor 4–3, nucleotide 492 is deleted, causing a premature stop codon at nucleotide 500. For the other three group I mutants (2-12, 2-13, and 3-8) obtained from our screen, sequencing of the ORF of the dnt1+ gene did not reveal any mutations, suggesting that they may carry mutations outside the coding region that affect gene expression or RNA stability. Suppressor 6 was cloned by complementation of its temperature-sensitive phenotype by using an S. pombe genomic library (Clontech, Mountain View, CA). Several plasmids were identified, and one gene called rrn5+ was determined to be responsible for the rescuing activity. Therefore, we renamed suppressor 6 as rrn5-S6.
Epitope Tagging, Gene Deletion, and Cloning
Carboxy-terminal green fluorescent protein (GFP) and 13-myc epitope tagging of Dnt1 was done by PCR-based gene targeting (Bahler et al., 1998
). To construct the dnt1 deletion strains, the entire dnt1 coding region was replaced with the ura4+ gene or kanR cassette by homologous recombination.
For complementation experiment of budding yeast NET1/CFI1, NET1/CFI1 gene was amplified by PCR from wild-type budding yeast genomic DNA. The full-length NET1/CFI1 open reading frame was first cloned into the entry vector of the Gateway System (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), and then it was cloned into destination vectors based on pREP41X and pREP3X, which were designed for expression in S. pombe (Choi and McCollum, unpublished data).
Microscopy
GFP-fusion proteins were observed in cells after fixation with –20°C methanol or in live cells. DNA was visualized with 4', 6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; Sigma-Aldrich) at 2 µg/ml. Immunofluorescence microscopy of Gar2-GFP and Dnt1–13myc was done as described previously (Balasubramanian et al., 1997
). Briefly, cells expressing Gar2-GFP and Dnt1–13myc fusions were fixed with methanol and digested with lysing enzymes (Sigma-Aldrich), followed by indirect immunofluorescence with polyclonal rabbit anti-GFP (Invitrogen) and monoclonal mouse anti-myc (a gift from Dr. Kathy Gould, Vanderbilt University). Secondary anti-mouse Texas Red and Alexa 594-immunoglobulin (Ig)G (Invitrogen) were used. Photomicrographs were obtained using a Nikon Eclipse E600 fluorescence microscope coupled to a cooled charge-coupled device camera (ORCA-ER; Hamamatsu, Bridgewater, NJ), and image processing and analysis were carried out using IPLab Spectrum software (Signal Analytics, Vienna, VA).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The cdc14-118 myo2-E1 strain was screened for spontaneous suppressing mutants at 30°C. From this screen, we identified many spontaneous suppressors, and we picked different-sized colonies, which were backcrossed to wild type. The weaker suppressors only poorly suppressed one of the single mutants, and the stronger suppressors suppressed both cdc14-118 and myo2-E1 (Figure 1A; data not shown). The best suppressors we identified fell into three complementation groups: group I (6 members: 14, 16, 2-12, 2-13, 3-8, and 4-3), group II (2 members: 6 and 3-3), and group III (1 member: 4-12 called sdc4 for suppressor of defective checkpoint). The first two groups are later referred to as dnt1 and rrn5, respectively (for reasons, see Materials and Methods). Outcrossing revealed that although the dnt1 mutant cells showed no obvious growth defect, the two alleles of rrn5 were temperature sensitive on their own, and the sdc4-12 strain grew slowly at all temperatures (Figure 1A).
|
|
|
The group I suppressors turned out to be in the dnt1 gene that had been identified in our laboratory as part of an unrelated proteomics screen by using mass spectrometry (see Materials and Methods; Jin and McCollum, unpublished observations). dnt1
deletion mutants were viable, and they grew at rates similar to wild-type cells. The dnt1
mutation also rescued the growth defect of cdc14-118 myo2-E1 cells at 30°C (Figure 1A). Interestingly, Dnt1 is also a nucleolar protein, because Dnt1-GFP is localized in the nucleolus as two or more punctate dots throughout the cell cycle (Figure 3, B and D). Dnt1-GFP signals can also be observed faintly in the rest of the nucleoplasm. In late anaphase, Dnt1 localizes to the ends of the mitotic spindle (Figure 3C).
Functional Interdependence of Dnt1 and Suppressors Involved in rDNA Transcription
Three of our suppressors, rrn5-S6, nuc1-632, and sdc4-12, showed a characteristic ring-shaped DNA phenotype, and they all grew slowly even at permissive temperature, probably due to reduced rDNA transcription. Although dnt1
mutants did not have a reduced growth rate or defects in nucleolar positioning, genetic analysis suggested that they may also have a role in RNA Pol I transcription. Double mutant analysis revealed that all combinations of double mutants between nuc1-632, rrn5-S6, sdc4-12, and dnt1
resulted in either synthetic lethality or very sick and slow-growing cells (Table 2). These data suggest that Dnt1 and Sdc4 might function in rDNA transcription like Rrn5 and Nuc1.
|
cells showed signals not only in nucleolus but also in nucleoplasm (Figure 4B). This localization pattern is distinct from wild-type cells, in which Nuc1-GFP is almost exclusively found in nucleolus (Figure 4B). We noticed that Nuc1-GFP dnt1
cells grew very poorly, although strains carrying either individual allele grew well. This might be because GFP-tagged Nuc1 is not completely functional; thus, nuc1-GFP dnt1
cells demonstrate a negative genetic interaction (data not shown). Consistent with the genetic interactions we observed between all suppressors, we also found that nucleolar Nuc1-GFP localization is slightly disrupted in rrn5-S6 and sdc4-12 mutants. Like in dnt1
cells, strong Nuc1-GFP signals were found at the periphery of the nucleolus and weaker signals in the nucleoplasm (Figure 4B).
|
|
rescues not only the cdc14-118 myo2-E1 double mutant but also either single mutant (Table 3). Further study showed that dnt1
can weakly suppress other SIN mutants (Table 3), consistent with Dnt1 being an inhibitor of the SIN. To examine functional conservation between Net1/Cfi1 and Dnt1, we tested whether Net1/Cfi1 could reverse the effects of dnt1
on the SIN. We had found that dnt1
partially rescues the growth defect of the cdc14-118 mutant, allowing it to grow at 33°C (Table 3). We expressed Net1/Cfi1 from plasmids (pREP41X-NET1-GFP, pREP3X-NET1-GFP) under the control of inducible nmt1 promoter in dnt1
cdc14-118 cells, and we observed that these cells are dead at 33°C, whereas cells with control plasmid grow well, showing that Net1/Cfi1 expression reversed the rescue phenotype of dnt1
at this temperature (Figure 5B). It is possible that this simply reflects toxicity associated with expression of NET1/CFI1 in S. pombe. However, Net1/Cfi1 expressed from either strong (pREP3X) or intermediate (pREP41X) nmt1 promoters gives a similar reversion phenotype; also, the reversion of suppression occurred even in the presence of thiamine when only low levels of Net1/Cfi1 are expressed. Furthermore, Net1/Cfi1 expression did not inhibit growth at lower temperatures, showing that at these expression levels it was not acting as a general growth inhibitor.
|
cells showed an almost 100-fold increase in minichromosome loss rate compared with wild-type cells: with loss rate of 1.78 x 10–2 in dnt1
cells versus 2 x 10–4 in wild-type cells.
Although the genetic interactions we observe between dnt1
and mutants in the RNA polymerase I machinery suggest that Dnt1 may participate in Pol I transcription like Net1/Cfi1, we do not think that it plays a direct role, because unlike the net1
/cfi1
mutant, dnt1
cells do not have reduced growth rates compared with wild-type cells. Additionally, we did not observe cross-complementation between Dnt1 and Net1/Cfi1 for their putative roles in Pol I transcription. Specifically, we found that Net1/Cfi1 could not rescue the synthetic growth defects we observed in dnt1
rrn5-S6 strains (data not shown). We also tested whether Dnt1 could rescue the growth defects of net1
/cfi1
cells at high temperatures, which are thought to be due to defects in Pol I activity, because they can be rescued by overexpression by Pol I transcription factors (Shou et al., 2001
). However, Dnt1 was not able to rescue the growth defects of net1
/cfi1
cells at high temperatures (data not shown). In summary, although we found some interesting similarities between Dnt1 and Net1/Cfi1, the proteins do not seem to be functionally interchangeable.
Does Dnt1 Act by Antagonizing Clp1?
We next tested whether Dnt1 and Net1/Cfi1 inhibit the SIN and MEN signaling pathways, respectively, through a common mechanism. It is known that Net1/Cfi1 inhibits MEN signaling by binding to the Cdc14 phosphatase, and both sequestering it in the nucleolus and inhibiting its phosphatase activity (Traverso et al., 2001
). Although we were able to detect a modest interaction between Dnt1 and Clp1 in the yeast two-hybrid assay (Figure 5D), we have been unable to detect an interaction between endogenous or bacterially expressed Dnt1 and Clp1 by coimmunoprecipitation or in vitro binding assays (data not shown). In addition, bacterially expressed Dnt1 does not seem to inhibit Clp1 phosphatase activity in vitro (Ray and McCollum, unpublished data).
dnt1
and the Other Suppressors Do Not Cause Premature Release of Clp1 from Nucleolus
Because dnt1+ and the other suppressors we identified encode nucleolar proteins like Clp1, we thought that the suppressors might act by causing release of Clp1 from the nucleolus and allowing it to remain active and promote cytokinesis checkpoint signaling. To address whether the suppressors we isolated have effects on nucleolar localization of Clp1, we examined the localization of Clp1-GFP in dnt1
, rrn5-S6, sdc4-12, and nuc1-632 mutant strains (Figure 6A). All cells were first grown at 25°C, and then they were shifted to 30°C for 4 h, the temperature at which they showed suppression of cdc14-118 myo2-E1. Except for dnt1
mutant, all the other mutants show a characteristic ring-shaped DNA phenotype at permissive or restrictive temperature, with the nucleolus in the center of the nucleus. However, we did not find Clp1 to be released prematurely in interphase cells in any of the suppressor mutants, even at fully restrictive temperature (Figure 6A; data not shown). We also compared Clp1-GFP localization in cdc14-118 myo2-E1 and cdc14-118 myo2-E1 dnt1
cells to myo2-E1 cells after shift to 30°C. By comparing the ratio of the mean intensity of nucleolar verses cytoplasmic fluorescence in telophase cells we found, as expected, that Clp1 remains out of the nucleolus in myo2-E1 cells (Figure 6B) as normally occurs when cytokinesis is perturbed and the cytokinesis checkpoint is activated. However, Clp1-GFP returned to the nucleolus prematurely in both cdc14-118 myo2-E1 and cdc14-118 myo2-E1 dnt1
cells (Figure 6B). Together, these data indicate that the suppressors of the cdc14-118 myo2-E1 double mutant do not rescue by simply keeping Clp1 out of nucleolus.
|
rescues not only the cdc14-118 myo2-E1 double mutant but also either single mutant as well as other SIN mutants. If the rescue of SIN mutants by dnt1
was through Clp1, then it should depend on clp1+. To test this, we compared the phenotypes of different combinations of single, double, and triple mutants between cdc14-118, clp1
, and dnt1
(Figure 7). We found that cdc14-118 cells can grow up to 30°C but that they die at the restrictive temperature of 33°C. As expected, deletion of Clp1 and Dnt1 have opposite effects on the cdc14-118 mutant, with clp1
reducing the restrictive temperature of cdc14-118 cells to 30°C and dnt1
raising the restrictive temperature of cdc14-118 cells to 36°C. Interestingly, deletion of dnt1+ raises the restrictive temperature of the cdc14-118 clp1
double mutant from 30 to 33°C, showing that Dnt1 can affect the SIN even in the absence of clp1+. We also found that dnt1
could promote growth of the myo2-E1 mutant in the absence of Clp1 (data not shown). Together, these results clearly show that dnt1
can promote SIN function independent of Clp1, and the simplest interpretation of our results is that Clp1 and Dnt1 act on the SIN independently.
|
and clp1
single and double mutant cells. These cells also expressed Cdc7-GFP whose localization to the SPB can serve as a marker for SIN activation (for review, see McCollum and Gould, 2001
, clp1
, and clp1
dnt1
cells upon treatment with 4 µM latrunculin B in liquid cultures (Figure 8A). Wild-type and dnt
cells, which have an intact checkpoint, remained binucleate with the SIN activated, and they slowly formed a septum (Figure 8, A and B). In contrast, clp1
cells, which lack the checkpoint, are unable to maintain SIN signaling, and they become multinucleate and are unable to form complete septa (Figure 8, A and B) (Mishra et al., 2004
single mutants, clp1
dnt1
cells maintain SIN signaling and remain blocked as binucleate cells for an extended period, although not as long as wild-type or dnt1
cells (Figure 8A). These data suggest that dnt1
allows cells to maintain SIN signaling and keep the cytokinesis checkpoint active even in the total absence of Clp1. Therefore, Dnt1 must be able to affect SIN signaling through an alternative pathway.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
. However, this could be explained if both proteins inhibit the SIN through different mechanisms. The simplest model to explain our data on the relationship between Dnt1 and Clp1 is that the two proteins independently regulate the SIN.
The mechanism by which the suppressors we identified promote SIN signaling is unclear. We do not think that the suppression is due to loss of rDNA silencing, because deletion of Sir2, which is required for rDNA silencing (Shankaranarayana et al., 2003
), does not rescue cdc14-118 myo2-E1 mutants (data not shown). In principle, perturbation of RNA Pol I activity could rescue cdc14-118 myo2-E1 mutants through an indirect mechanism such as reduction of protein synthesis rates caused by Pol I inhibition, or changes in general transcription rates leading to increased levels of Cdc14 or Myo2 protein. We think this unlikely, primarily because dnt1
cells grow at wild-type growth rates, thus they are unlikely to be significantly impaired for Pol I activity; and second, graded reduction in overall protein synthesis rates by using tetracycline did not promote rescue of cdc14-118 myo2-E1 mutants, nor does deletion of dnt1 have a significant effect on Cdc14, Sid1, or Myo2 protein levels (data not shown). The other mutations in RNA Pol I factors might then rescue SIN signaling, because they all disrupt nucleolar localization of Dnt1, but the exact function of Dnt1 in SIN signaling remains to be determined.
What is the link between nucleolar proteins and SIN regulation? Definition of the nucleolus as the site of rDNA transcription and ribosome biogenesis is well established in both yeast and higher eukaryotes. Recent studies have expanded the functions of nucleolus to include roles in recruitment and exclusion of regulatory complexes (Garcia and Pillus, 1999
; San-Segundo and Roeder, 1999
; Shou et al., 1999
; Straight et al., 1999
; Visintin et al., 1999
). The synthesis of ribosomes consumes a vast amount of the resources in rapidly growing cells, and the nucleolus is emerging as a key control point for the regulation of cell growth and division, both in yeast and human cells (for review, see Dez and Tollervey, 2004
). More generally, the high metabolic cost of ribosome synthesis may have selected for its close integration with cell growth and division. Together, these results suggest that the nucleolus may serve as a site to integrate signals governing cell growth and cell cycle progression, and this will serve as an exciting avenue for further research.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
The online version of this article contains supplemental material at MBC Online (http://www.molbiolcell.org). ![]()
* These authors contributed equally to this work. ![]()
Present address: Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Life Sciences, Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian, China 361005. ![]()
Address correspondence to: Dannel McCollum (dannel.mccollum{at}umassmed.edu).
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Ayscough, K. R., Stryker, J., Pokala, N., Sanders, M., Crews, P., and Drubin, D. G. (1997). High rates of actin filament turnover in budding yeast and roles for actin in establishment and maintenance of cell polarity revealed using the actin inhibitor latrunculin-A. J. Cell Biol 137, 399–416.
Azzam, R., Chen, S. L., Shou, W., Mah, A. S., Alexandru, G., Nasmyth, K., Annan, R. S., Carr, S. A., and Deshaies, R. J. (2004). Phosphorylation by cyclin B-Cdk underlies release of mitotic exit activator Cdc14 from the nucleolus. Science 305, 516–519.
Bahler, J., Wu, J. Q., Longtine, M. S., Shah, N. G., McKenzie, A., 3rd, Steever, A. B., Wach, A., Philippsen, P., and Pringle, J. R. (1998). Heterologous modules for efficient and versatile PCR-based gene targeting in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Yeast 14, 943–951.[CrossRef][Medline]
Balasubramanian, M. K., McCollum, D., and Gould, K. L. (1997). Cytokinesis in fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Methods Enzymol 283, 494–506.[Medline]
Chen, C.-T., Peli-Gulli, M.-P., Simanis, V., and McCollum, D. (2006). S.pombe orthologues of the FEAR proteins are not required for release of CDC14-family phosphatase Clp1/Flp1 from the nucleolus during mitosis. J. Cell Sci 119, 4462–4466.
Cho, H. P., Liu, Y., Gomez, M., Dunlap, J., Tyers, M., and Wang, Y. (2005). The dual-specificity phosphatase CDC14B bundles and stabilizes microtubules. Mol. Cell Biol 25, 4541–4551.
Cueille, N., Salimova, E., Esteban, V., Blanco, M., Moreno, S., Bueno, A., and Simanis, V. (2001). Flp1, a fission yeast orthologue of the S. cerevisiae CDC14 gene, is not required for cyclin degradation or rum1p stabilisation at the end of mitosis. J. Cell Sci 114, 2649–2664.[Medline]
Dez, C., and Tollervey, D. (2004). Ribosome synthesis meets the cell cycle. Curr. Opin. Microbiol 7, 631–637.[CrossRef][Medline]
Garcia, S. N., and Pillus, L. (1999). Net results of nucleolar dynamics. Cell 97, 825–828.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gietz, R. D., Schiestl, R. H., Willems, A. R., and Woods, R. A. (1995). Studies on the transformation of intact yeast cells by the LiAc/SS-DNA/PEG procedure. Yeast 11, 355–360.[CrossRef][Medline]
Guertin, D. A., Trautmann, S., and McCollum, D. (2002). Cytokinesis in eukaryotes. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev 66, 155–178.
Hirano, T., Funahashi, S. I., Uemura, T., and Yanagida, M. (1986). Isolation and characterization of Schizosaccharomyces pombe cutmutants that block nuclear division but not cytokinesis. EMBO J 5, 2973–2979.[Medline]
Hirano, T., Konoha, G., Toda, T., and Yanagida, M. (1989). Essential roles of the RNA polymerase I largest subunit and DNA topoisomerases in the formation of fission yeast nucleolus. J. Cell Biol 108, 243–253.
Huang, J., Brito, I. L., Villen, J., Gygi, S. P., Amon, A., and Moazed, D. (2006). Inhibition of homologous recombination by a cohesin-associated clamp complex recruited to the rDNA recombination enhancer. Genes Dev 20, 2887–2901.
Huang, J., and Moazed, D. (2003). Association of the RENT complex with nontranscribed and coding regions of rDNA and a regional requirement for the replication fork block protein Fob1 in rDNA silencing. Genes Dev 17, 2162–2176.
James, P., Halladay, J., and Craig, E. A. (1996). Genomic libraries and a host strain designed for highly efficient two-hybrid selection in yeast. Genetics 144, 1425–1436.[Abstract]
Kaiser, B. K., Zimmerman, Z. A., Charbonneau, H., and Jackson, P. K. (2002). Disruption of centrosome structure, chromosome segregation, and cytokinesis by misexpression of human Cdc14A phosphatase. Mol. Biol. Cell 13, 2289–2300.
Liu, J., Wang, H., and Balasubramanian, M. K. (2000). A checkpoint that monitors cytokinesis in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. J. Cell Sci 113, 1223–1230.[Abstract]
Liu, M., Guo, A., Boukhgalter, B., Van Den Heuvel, K., Tripp, M., and Pape, L. (2002). Characterization of the fission yeast ribosomal DNA binding factor: components share homology with Upstream Activating Factor and with SWI/SNF subunits. Nucleic Acids Res 30, 5347–5359.
McCollum, D., and Gould, K. L. (2001). Timing is everything: regulation of mitotic exit and cytokinesis by the MEN and SIN. Trends Cell Biol 11, 89–95.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mishra, M., Karagiannis, J., Trautmann, S., Wang, H., McCollum, D., and Balasubramanian, M. K. (2004). The Clp1p/Flp1p phosphatase ensures completion of cytokinesis in response to minor perturbation of the cell division machinery in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. J. Cell Sci 117, 3897–3910.
Moreno, S., Klar, A., and Nurse, P. (1991). Molecular genetic analysis of fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Methods Enzymol 194, 795–823.[Medline]
San-Segundo, P. A., and Roeder, G. S. (1999). Pch2 links chromatin silencing to meiotic checkpoint control. Cell 97, 313–324.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shankaranarayana, G. D., Motamedi, M. R., Moazed, D., and Grewal, S. I. (2003). Sir2 regulates histone H3 lysine 9 methylation and heterochromatin assembly in fission yeast. Curr. Biol 13, 1240–1246.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shou, W., and Deshaies, R. J. (2002). Multiple telophase arrest bypassed (tab) mutants alleviate the essential requirement for Cdc15 in exit from mitosis in S. cerevisiae. BMC Genet 3, 4.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shou, W. et al. (2001). Net1 stimulates RNA polymerase I transcription and regulates nucleolar structure independently of controlling mitotic exit. Mol. Cell 8, 45–55.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shou, W., Seol, J. H., Shevchenko, A., Baskerville, C., Moazed, D., Chen, Z. W., Jang, J., Shevchenko, A., Charbonneau, H., and Deshaies, R. J. (1999). Exit from mitosis is triggered by Tem1-dependent release of the protein phosphatase Cdc14 from nucleolar RENT complex. Cell 97, 233–244.[CrossRef][Medline]
Simanis, V. (2003). Events at the end of mitosis in the budding and fission yeasts. J. Cell Sci 116, 4263–4275.
Stegmeier, F., and Amon, A. (2004). Closing mitosis: the functions of the Cdc14 phosphatase and its regulation. Annu. Rev. Genet 38, 203–232.[CrossRef][Medline]
Stegmeier, F., Huang, J., Rahal, R., Zmolik, J., Moazed, D., and Amon, A. (2004). The replication fork block protein Fob1 functions as a negative regulator of the FEAR network. Curr. Biol 14, 467–480.[CrossRef][Medline]
Stegmeier, F., Visintin, R., and Amon, A. (2002). Separase, polo kinase, the kinetochore protein Slk19, and Spo12 function in a network that controls Cdc14 localization during early anaphase. Cell 108, 207–220.[CrossRef][Medline]
Straight, A. F., Shou, W., Dowd, G. J., Turck, C. W., Deshaies, R. J., Johnson, A. D., and Moazed, D. (1999). Net1, a Sir2-associated nucleolar protein required for rDNA silencing and nucleolar integrity. Cell 97, 245–256.[CrossRef][Medline]
Thon, G., and Verhein-Hansen, J. (2000). Four chromo-domain proteins of Schizosaccharomyces pombe differentially repress transcription at various chromosomal locations. Genetics 155, 551–568.
Trautmann, S., Wolfe, B. A., Jorgensen, P., Tyers, M., Gould, K. L., and McCollum, D. (2001). Fission yeast Clp1p phosphatase regulates G2/M transition and coordination of cytokinesis with cell cycle progression. Curr. Biol 11, 931–940.[CrossRef][Medline]
Traverso, E. E., Baskerville, C., Liu, Y., Shou, W., James, P., Deshaies, R. J., and Charbonneau, H. (2001). Characterization of the Net1 cell cycle-dependent regulator of the Cdc14 phosphatase from budding yeast. J. Biol. Chem 276, 21924–21931.
Visintin, R., Craig, K., Hwang, E. S., Prinz, S., Tyers, M., and Amon, A. (1998). The phosphatase Cdc14 triggers mitotic exit by reversal of Cdk-dependent phosphorylation. Mol. Cell 2, 709–718.[CrossRef][Medline]
Visintin, R., Hwang, E. S., and Amon, A. (1999). Cfi1 prevents premature exit from mitosis by anchoring Cdc14 phosphatase in the nucleolus. Nature 398, 818–823.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wolfe, B. A., and Gould, K. L. (2004). Fission yeast Clp1p phosphatase affects G2/M transition and mitotic exit through Cdc25p inactivation. EMBO J 23, 919–929.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wolfe, B. A., McDonald, W. H., Yates, J. R., 3rd, and Gould, K. L. (2006). Phospho-regulation of the Cdc14/Clp1 phosphatase delays late mitotic events in S. pombe. Dev. Cell 11, 423–430.[CrossRef][Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||