» Articles » PMID: 21477279

Anaphase B Spindle Dynamics in Drosophila S2 Cells: Comparison with Embryo Spindles

Overview
Journal Cell Div
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2011 Apr 12
PMID 21477279
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In the Drosophila melanogaster syncytial blastoderm stage embryo anaphase B is initiated by a cell cycle switch in which the suppression of microtubule minus end depolymerization and spatial reorganization of the plus ends of outwardly sliding interpolar microtubules triggers spindle elongation. RNA interference in Drosophila cultured S2 cells may present a useful tool for identifying novel components of this switch, but given the diversity of spindle design, it is important to first determine the extent of conservation of the mechanism of anaphase B in the two systems.

Results: The basic mechanism, involving an inverse correlation between poleward flux and spindle elongation is qualitatively similar in these systems, but quantitative differences exist. In S2 cells, poleward flux is only partially suppressed and the rate of anaphase B spindle elongation increases with the extent of suppression. Also, EB1-labelled microtubule plus ends redistribute away from the poles and towards the interpolar microtubule overlap zone, but this is less pronounced in S2 cells than in embryos. Finally, as in embryos, tubulin FRAP experiments revealed a reduction in the percentage recovery after photobleaching at regions proximal to the pole.

Conclusions: The basic features of the anaphase B switch, involving the suppression of poleward flux and reorganization of growing microtubule plus ends, is conserved in these systems. Thus S2 cells may be useful for rapidly identifying novel components of this switch. The quantitative differences likely reflect the adaptation of embryonic spindles for rapid, streamlined mitoses.

Citing Articles

Gradual compaction of the central spindle decreases its dynamicity in PRC1 and EB1 gene-edited cells.

Asthana J, Cade N, Normanno D, Lim W, Surrey T Life Sci Alliance. 2021; 4(12).

PMID: 34580180 PMC: 8500333. DOI: 10.26508/lsa.202101222.


Attenuated Chromosome Oscillation as a Cause of Chromosomal Instability in Cancer Cells.

Iemura K, Yoshizaki Y, Kuniyasu K, Tanaka K Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(18).

PMID: 34572757 PMC: 8470601. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13184531.


Mms19 promotes spindle microtubule assembly in Drosophila neural stem cells.

Chippalkatti R, Egger B, Suter B PLoS Genet. 2020; 16(11):e1008913.

PMID: 33211700 PMC: 7714366. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008913.


ESCRT-III-mediated membrane fusion drives chromosome fragments through nuclear envelope channels.

Warecki B, Ling X, Bast I, Sullivan W J Cell Biol. 2020; 219(3).

PMID: 32032426 PMC: 7054997. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.201905091.


Anaphase B.

Scholey J, Civelekoglu-Scholey G, Brust-Mascher I Biology (Basel). 2016; 5(4).

PMID: 27941648 PMC: 5192431. DOI: 10.3390/biology5040051.


References
1.
Hayashi T, Sano T, Kutsuna N, Kumagai-Sano F, Hasezawa S . Contribution of anaphase B to chromosome separation in higher plant cells estimated by image processing. Plant Cell Physiol. 2007; 48(10):1509-13. DOI: 10.1093/pcp/pcm117. View

2.
Tirnauer J, Canman J, Salmon E, Mitchison T . EB1 targets to kinetochores with attached, polymerizing microtubules. Mol Biol Cell. 2002; 13(12):4308-16. PMC: 138635. DOI: 10.1091/mbc.e02-04-0236. View

3.
Matos I, Pereira A, Lince-Faria M, Cameron L, Salmon E, Maiato H . Synchronizing chromosome segregation by flux-dependent force equalization at kinetochores. J Cell Biol. 2009; 186(1):11-26. PMC: 2712998. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200904153. View

4.
Maiato H, Rieder C, Khodjakov A . Kinetochore-driven formation of kinetochore fibers contributes to spindle assembly during animal mitosis. J Cell Biol. 2004; 167(5):831-40. PMC: 2172442. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200407090. View

5.
Mitchison T, Salmon E . Mitosis: a history of division. Nat Cell Biol. 2001; 3(1):E17-21. DOI: 10.1038/35050656. View