Previous Article | Next Article 
Mol Cell Biol, August 1998, p. 4548-4555, Vol. 18, No. 8
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Snf1 Kinase Connects Nutritional Pathways
Controlling Meiosis in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae
Saul M.
Honigberg* and
Rita H.
Lee
Department of Biology, Syracuse University,
Syracuse, New York 13244-1270
Received 4 February 1998/Returned for modification 3 March
1998/Accepted 4 May 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
Glucose inhibits meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae at
three different steps (IME1 transcription, IME2
transcription, and entry into late stages of meiosis). Because many of
the regulatory effects of glucose in yeast are mediated through the
inhibition of Snf1 kinase, a component of the glucose repression
pathway, we determined the role of SNF1 in regulating
meiosis. Deleting SNF1 repressed meiosis at the same three
steps that were inhibited by glucose, suggesting that glucose blocks
meiosis by inhibiting Snf1. For example, the snf1
mutant
completely failed to induce IME1 transcripts in sporulation
medium. Furthermore, even when this block was bypassed by expression of
IME1 from a multicopy plasmid, IME2
transcription and meiotic initiation occurred at only 10 to 20% of the
levels seen in wild-type cells. The addition of glucose did not further
inhibit IME2 transcription, suggesting that Snf1 is the
primary mediator of glucose controls on IME2 expression.
Finally, in snf1
cells in which both blocks on meiotic initiation were bypassed, early stages of meiosis (DNA replication and
commitment to recombination) occurred, but later stages (chromosome segregation and spore formation) did not, suggesting that Snf1 controls
later stages of meiosis independently from the two controls on meiotic
initiation. Because Snf1 is known to activate the expression of genes
required for acetate metabolism, it may also serve to connect glucose
and acetate controls on meiotic differentiation.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Diploid Saccharomyces
cerevisiae may undergo either vegetative growth or meiosis and
spore formation; the choice depends on the nutritional environment.
Three criteria determine which path is taken (reviewed in reference
14). First, meiosis requires that cells be starved
for at least one essential growth nutrient (16, 17). Second,
meiosis depends on the presence of a nonfermentable carbon source, such
as acetate (12, 20). Third, meiosis is blocked by the
presence of a fermentable carbon source, such as glucose
(36). The choice between meiosis and growth depends on each
of these criteria. For example, acetate does not promote meiosis unless
cells are also starved for an essential growth nutrient and glucose is
absent.
One way in which these nutritional conditions regulate meiosis is by
controlling the expression of the IME1 gene. The
product of this gene is a transcription factor that is expressed
very early in the meiotic program and that is required for initiation of this program; the Ime1 protein binds to and activates the expression of the IME2 gene (reviewed in reference
37). Nutritional controls on IME1
expression are mediated in part through the Ras-cyclic AMP pathway
(34, 51); IME1 is also regulated by cell type such that only diploid cells may enter meiosis (8). A number of other genes involved in meiotic initiation have been
identified
e.g., IME2, IME4, MCK1,
RIM1, and UME6 (15, 31, 38, 40, 45, 53)
but it is not yet known which signal transduction pathways connect different nutrient signals to the choice between growth and
meiosis or how these different signals are integrated.
Meiosis is characterized by two sequential phases of global genomic
change (reviewed in reference 2). The first
phase involves recombination between homologous chromosomes; the
second involves two rounds of chromosome segregation to yield haploid
products. The necessity for coordinating these two phases is revealed
by yeast mutants that are defective in meiotic recombination
(Rec
mutants) (reviewed in references
29 and 41). Many mutants with
early defects in synapsis and/or recombination can still undergo
chromosome segregation (e.g., spo11
, hop1
,
mei4
, and rec104
), and this process
invariably leads to high levels of chromosome nondisjunction,
indicating that synapsis and/or recombination are required for proper
meiotic segregation (1, 7, 22, 35). A second class of
mutants (e.g., dmc1
, rad51
, and
zip1
) begins but does not complete recombination (3,
47, 54). As a result, these cells arrest (or delay) meiosis
before chromosome segregation. This arrest is thought to result from
checkpoint functions that recognize specific recombination
intermediates and delay the onset of meiotic segregation until
replication and recombination are complete (18, 33, 58, 59).
By this argument, the first class of Rec
mutants does not
arrest in meiosis because these intermediates are not yet generated. In
further support of the idea of meiotic checkpoints, meiotic arrest in
dmc1
and zip1
mutants was found to be
dependent on several genes (RAD17, RAD24, and
MEC1) that are also required for a mitotic checkpoint
function (33).
Despite the coordination between recombination and segregation, recent
evidence suggests that nutrients control the two corresponding phases
of meiosis separately (30). For example, cells expressing IME1 from a multicopy plasmid can initiate meiosis even when
acetate is absent, but these cells still fail to complete the meiotic program. Specifically, these cells undergo chromosome replication, commitment to recombination, and the formation and dissolution of
synaptonemal complexes; however, they arrest in meiosis before chromosome segregation and spore formation. Transfer of these arrested
cells to sporulation medium (which contains acetate) releases the
arrest, allowing the completion of meiosis. These results suggest that
nutrients control the late phase of meiosis through a pathway distinct
from their controls on IME1 expression and the early phase.
This report focuses on the repression of meiosis by glucose. Many
of the responses to glucose in yeast are mediated through a
signal transduction network referred to as the glucose repression pathway (reviewed in references 27 and
42); a central component of this pathway is
Snf1 kinase. Glucose represses the transcription of a variety of genes
(e.g., GAL1 and SUC2) by inactivating Snf1 kinase
(25, 26). Previously, it was shown that snf1
mutants fail to form spores (6); here we extend this result
to show that SNF1 is required for the induction of high
levels of IME1 and IME2 transcripts under
sporulation conditions. In addition, there is a separate requirement
for Snf1 kinase in controlling the late stages of meiosis, suggesting
that SNF1 may coordinately activate early and late phases of
the meiotic program. Because SNF1 is required for the
expression of genes involved in acetate metabolism, our results also
suggest a link between glucose and acetate controls on meiosis.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Yeast strains and plasmids.
All strains used in this study
were isogenic relative to SH777, a W303 derivative with the following
genotype: MATa/MAT
ade2-1/ade2-1
can1R::ADE2::CAN1S/can1R::ADE2::CAN1S
his3-11,13/his3-11,13
lys2(3'
)::HIS3::/lys2(5'
)/LYS2
trp1-1/trp1-3'
ura3-1/ura3-1 (30). The
snf1
::URA3 strains were constructed by a
one-step disruption with a KpnI-HindIII
fragment of pST70 (provided by K. Tatchell, Louisiana State University
Medical Center [55]); the disruption was verified by
Southern blotting. YEp351-IME1 was constructed by inserting the
BglII-BamHI fragment of the IME1 gene
into the BamHI site of YEp351. The IME1 fragment
used in this plasmid contains the complete open reading frame (ORF) but lacks negative regulatory regions present in the genomic copy (21). pS405 was constructed by inserting a 1.7-kb
BglII-EcoRI fragment containing the
IME2 ORF into the BamHI and EcoRI
sites of pRS304 (48).
Media.
Synthetic complete (SC) medium, minimal (MIN) medium,
and presporulation medium (YPA, a rich growth medium containing acetate as a carbon source) were described elsewhere (24, 43).
Sporulation medium contained 2% potassium acetate and 0.17% yeast
nitrogen base without amino acids and ammonium sulfate (YNB). Yeast
cells do not require YNB for sporulation, but these components do not inhibit meiosis, and they are necessary to maintain viability in
snf1
strains. Media lacking glucose, nitrogen, or both
nutrients retained all other components of MIN medium. All growth and
sporulation media were supplemented with leucine (100 mg/ml),
tryptophan (50 mg/ml), and uracil (20 mg/ml) as necessary to complement
auxotrophies. For strains bearing the YEp351-IME1 plasmid or the
control plasmid (YEp351), the media used to assay recombination and
commitment lacked leucine; thus, these measurements included only cells
that retained the plasmid.
Growth and sporulation conditions.
Except as noted, growth
and sporulation conditions were as follows. Cells were inoculated at a
concentration of 2 × 105 cells/ml in 10 to 50 ml of
growth medium. When the strains contained a plasmid bearing the
LEU2 marker (YEp351 or YEp351-IME1), the growth medium was
SC medium lacking leucine; when no plasmid was present, growth was in
SC medium. Cells were grown for 36 h at 30°C with constant
aeration, harvested, washed, transferred to an equal volume of YPA
medium, and incubated for 4 h. Growth in YPA medium increases the
efficiency and synchrony of the subsequent sporulation. Cells were
harvested from YPA medium, washed, and transferred to sporulation
medium or other media.
Assays for meiotic landmarks.
DNA replication was
monitored by flow cytometry after cells had been
sonicated, fixed in ethanol, and stained with propidium iodide
(44). Flow cytometry was done with a Becton-Dickinson FACSCAN 4 apparatus, and the data were analyzed with CellFIT 2.0 software.
The frequency of intragenic recombination was measured as
Trp+ prototrophs/CFU. These prototrophs result from
recombination between trp1-1 and trp1-3'
heteroalleles. In addition, since LYS2 is disrupted with
HIS3 on one copy of chromosome II, diploid recombinants can
be specifically selected by plating on His
Lys
Trp
medium.
Intergenic recombination in the intervals from CEN3 to
MATa/MAT
and CEN2 to
HIS3/LYS2 was determined by detecting loss of heterozygosity
as described previously (23). In brief, recombination
followed by mitotic segregation leads to cosegregation of recombinant
and nonrecombinant chromatids (and loss of heterozygosity) 50% of the
time. Thus, the expected frequency of loss of heterozygosity when cells
undergo meiotic recombination and then return to the growth cycle is
estimated as (0.5 · map distance)/100 cM.
Commitment to meiotic chromosome segregation was measured as described
previously (30). In brief, the parent strain (SH777) contains a tandem duplication of a CAN1S allele
and a can1R allele on each copy of chromosome V. Because the CAN1S allele confers sensitivity to
the drug canavanine, efficient generation of CanR isolates
requires two events: (i) recombination between the duplicated alleles
on one copy of chromosome V, leading to a loss of the CAN1S allele on one chromatid, and (ii) meiotic
chromosome segregation, leading to four haploid products, one of which
will be CanR. Thus, the frequency of cells committed to
meiotic segregation is directly proportional to the fraction that is
resistant to canavanine. Spore formation was assayed by light
microscopy. The meiotic divisions were monitored by staining nuclei
with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) and visualizing mononucleate,
binucleate, and tetranucleate cells with fluorescence microscopy
(23). For both light microscopy and fluorescence microscopy,
at least 300 cells were counted for each determination. All values for
commitment to recombination, commitment to meiotic chromosome
segregation, meiotic divisions, and spore formation given in this study
are the averages of three experiments and are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean.
Transcript measurement.
RNA was isolated by vortexing 2 × 108 yeast cells with glass beads and phenol as described
previously (10). S1 nuclease protection was used to measure
levels of the IME1, IME2, and DED1
transcripts. The DED1 transcript is found at constant levels
throughout meiosis and growth and serves as a loading control. Both
32P-labeled probes were present in a 5 to 10-fold excess
over the maximum level of the protected transcript. The probe for
IME1 expression protected a 0.23-kb
PstI-SacI region of the IME1 ORF, the
IME2 probe protected a 0.3-kb
EcoRI-BamHI region of the IME2 ORF,
and the control probe protected a 0.25-kb
BamHI-AflII region of the DED1 ORF.
The probes were prepared by SP6 in vitro transcription of
EcoRI-linearized pPL136 or AflII-linearized
pDED1 (30) or by T3 in vitro transcription of
BamHI-linearized pS405.
 |
RESULTS |
Both spore formation and meiotic recombination are inhibited by
glucose.
Glucose is known to repress meiosis and sporulation in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. To separate this regulation from
other nutritional controls on the meiotic program, we examined the
effect of adding glucose to otherwise optimal sporulation medium
(sporulation medium contains acetate and lacks nitrogen). Our results
showed that even a relatively low concentration of glucose (0.4%)
could dramatically inhibit the meiosis and sporulation pathway (Table
1, compare rows 2 and 3). Furthermore,
when glucose was absent, spore formation was complete by 24 h;
however, when glucose was present, spore formation was minimal even
after 4 days (6% ± 3% of total cells were asci).
Glucose might prevent spore formation, the final step in the meiotic
pathway in yeast, by blocking any previous stage in the program. To
define where this block was occurring, a relatively early event in
meiosis, commitment to DNA recombination, was monitored; this event can
be detected even if later stages of meiosis are blocked (see Materials
and Methods). As expected, high levels of commitment to intragenic
recombination at the trp1 locus occurred in sporulation
medium. In contrast, only background levels of recombination were
evident when 0.4% glucose was added to sporulation medium (Table 1,
compare rows 2 and 3). These results suggest that glucose blocks
meiosis at an early stage, before commitment to recombination.
Full induction of the IME1 transcript is prevented by
glucose.
Since IME1 is required for the initiation of
meiosis and induction of the IME1 transcript is the first
detectable event in the meiotic program, the effect of glucose and
other nutrients on IME1 transcript levels was examined (Fig.
1A). Diploid cells from a mid-log-phase
culture were transferred to sporulation medium or to various other
media and incubated with constant shaking. Samples were removed at
various times, and IME1 transcript levels were determined.
As reported previously (28), the IME1 transcript was undetectable in cells from mid-log-phase cultures (Fig. 1A, lane 2)
but were induced to high levels several hours after transfer to
sporulation medium (lanes 3 to 5). As a negative control, samples transferred instead to growth medium for the same amounts of time did not show a detectable level of the IME1 transcript (Fig.
1A, lanes 6 to 8).

View larger version (75K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Effect of nutritional conditions and the
snf1 mutation on IME1 transcript levels. Cells
were assayed for the presence of IME1 and control
(DED1) RNAs by S1 nuclease protection. (A) Log-phase
wild-type yeast cells were transferred to different media for the
indicated times. Lane 1, undigested probe at 10% of the amount used in
the protection assays; lane 2, log-phase cells; lanes 3 to 5, sporulation medium; lanes 6 to 8, SC medium; lanes 9 to 11, YNB; lanes
12 to 14, 2% glucose; lanes 15 to 17, 0.5% ammonium sulfate; lanes 18 to 20, sporulation medium with 1% glucose. (B) Cells were transferred
to sporulation medium (Sp) for the indicated times. Lanes 1 to 6, wild
type; lanes 7 to 12, snf1 ; lanes 13 to 18, snf1 plus YEp351-IME1. (C) Same as panel B, except that
cells were transferred to medium containing only YNB (i.e, lacking a
carbon source [ Carbon]) and the first lane contained undigested
probe at 10% of the amount used in protection assays.
|
|
Although the IME1 transcript accumulated to high levels when
cells were exposed to acetate alone (Fig. 1A, lanes 3 to 5), IME1 was only expressed to moderate levels when glucose and
acetate were both present (lanes 18 to 20). This result suggests that glucose blocks the ability of acetate to induce the IME1
transcript. Interestingly, moderate levels of the IME1
transcript were also observed in cells exposed to any medium that
promoted neither growth nor sporulation. Specifically, these
media lacked a nonfermentable carbon source (e.g., acetate), which is
essential for meiosis, and a second nutrient (e.g., nitrogen), which is
essential for growth. For example, cells placed in medium containing
only glucose (Fig. 1A, lanes 12 to 14) or medium containing only
nitrogen (lanes 15 to 17) displayed moderate levels of the
IME1 transcript, and the same was true for cells placed in
medium containing neither a carbon nor a nitrogen source (lanes 9 to
11). As expected, none of these conditions promoted either growth or
sporulation. A comparison of different autoradiograph exposures
indicated that the moderate level of the IME1 transcript was
approximately 5 to 10% of the level seen under sporulation conditions.
These results are consistent with earlier studies suggesting that
IME1 transcription is promoted by both respiration, which is
induced by nonfermentable carbon sources, and cell cycle arrest, which
is induced by starvation for nutrients (46, 52, 56). Our
experiments do not yet distinguish whether the moderate levels of the
IME1 transcript that we observed reflected equal expression
in all cells or higher expression in a subpopulation.
In summary, there may be two different controls of IME1
transcript levels: in growing cells, the IME1 transcript is
completely repressed, whereas in nongrowing cells, glucose and/or
acetate determine whether moderate or high levels of the transcript
accumulate.
Snf1 kinase is required for the initiation of meiosis.
Snf1
kinase is repressed by glucose (25, 26) and is required for
spore formation (6), suggesting the possibility that glucose
prevents the accumulation of high levels of the IME1
transcript by repressing Snf1 activity. We confirmed that a
snf1
::URA3/snfl
::URA3 mutant (referred to in this paper as snf1
) is defective
in spore formation (Table 1, row 4). In addition, we
determined that the snf1
mutant does not undergo
either meiotic DNA replication (Fig. 2A)
or recombination in sporulation medium (Table 1, row 4). Thus, the
effect of deleting the SNF1 gene is similar to the effect of
adding glucose to wild-type cells; this correlation suggests that
glucose may repress meiosis by inhibiting Snf1. Consistent with this
idea, the snf1
mutant does not initiate meiosis any better when glucose is absent than when it is present (Table 1, compare
rows 4 and 5).

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Effect of IME1 overexpression on DNA content
in a snf1 mutant. To ensure that most cells started in
G1, cultures were grown in SC medium lacking leucine for
36 h, sonicated, and incubated in the spent medium for a further
12 h. Cells were transferred to sporulation medium, and DNA
content was analyzed by flow cytometry after 0 h (upper panels) or
24 h (lower panels). Peaks represent unreplicated (2C) or fully
replicated (4C) DNA. (A) snf1 cells containing YEp351
(control plasmid); (B) snf1 cells containing
YEp351-IME1.
|
|
Since early and late meiotic events do not occur in the
snf1
strain, we examined whether the IME1
transcript can be induced in this mutant. In contrast to the induction
of the IME1 transcript seen in wild-type cells (Fig. 1B,
lanes 1 to 6), the IME1 transcript did not accumulate to
high levels in the snf1
mutant (lanes 7 to 12). A
moderate level of IME1 transcript was detected reproducibly in the mutant after 2 h in sporulation medium (Fig. 1B, lane 8) and then disappeared at later times (lanes 9 to 12). The moderate level
of IME1 transcript expressed under these conditions was similar to the levels seen for wild-type cells that were neither growing nor sporulating (Fig. 1A, lanes 9 to 20).
Because moderate levels of the IME1 transcript were also
observed in wild-type cells in the absence of any carbon source (Fig. 1A, lanes 9 to 11), we examined IME1 expression in the
snf1
mutant under the same conditions (Fig. 1C, lanes 7 to 12). We found that IME1 transcripts were present at
moderate but stable levels in the snf1
mutant. These
levels of IME1 transcript were similar to the levels
observed in wild-type cells under the same conditions (Fig. 1C, lanes 1 to 6). Thus, neither the deletion of SNF1 (Fig. 1C) nor the
addition of glucose (Fig. 1A, lanes 12 to 14) affected the moderate
IME1 expression that occurred in the absence of carbon. Interestingly, IME1 transcript levels in the
snf1
mutant were actually more stable in the absence of
any carbon source than in sporulation medium (compare Fig. 1B and C).
Thus, when SNF1 is deleted such that IME1 cannot
be induced, sporulation conditions may actually destabilize
IME1 transcript levels.
Snf1 kinase has a second and nonessential role in meiotic
initiation.
Is the regulation of IME1 transcript levels
the only target for Snf1 kinase in meiosis? To examine the effect of
snf1
on later aspects of meiosis, a multicopy plasmid
bearing the IME1 gene, YEp351-IME1, was placed in the
snf1
mutant (see Materials and Methods). The plasmid
caused high levels of IME1 transcript to be expressed in
both growth and sporulation cultures of this mutant (Fig. 1B, lanes 13 to 18). These high levels of IME1 transcript allowed 15 to
20% of snf1
cells to undergo DNA replication in sporulation medium (Fig. 2B). In addition, recombination frequency was
increased 10-fold relative to that of the snf1
mutant not containing the plasmid (Table 1, compare rows 4 and 8) or containing only the vector (data not shown). The frequency of recombination observed in snf1
(YEp351-IME1) cells was approximately 10 to 20% that observed in wild-type cells. Thus, when the requirement
for Snf1 to induce the IME1 transcript was bypassed, the
initiation of meiosis occurred in 10 to 20% of snf1
cells.
Because the levels of replication and recombination achieved
in snf1
(YEp351-IME1) cells were only 10 to 20% of
those obtained in wild-type cells, we compared the timing of
recombination in these two types of cells (Fig.
3A). Recombination was delayed in the
snf1
strain by 10 to 15 h relative to the
SNF1+ control, and the maximum level of
recombination achieved was again approximately 10-fold lower in the
snf1
mutant than in the wild type. The delayed timing and
diminished frequency of recombination in the snf1
mutant,
which occurred even when high levels of IME1 transcript were
present, suggested that in addition to being required for the induction
of the IME1 transcript, Snf1 is required for some subsequent
step in meiotic initiation. As described later, this subsequent step is
required for induction of the IME2 transcript. Furthermore,
this second role for Snf1 in meiotic initiation is not absolutely
required, since some cells can initiate meiosis even though
SNF1 is deleted.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Effect of the YEp351-IME1 plasmid on recombination
(Trp+ Recomb.) and meiosis I chromosome segregation (MI
Segreg.) in the snf1 strain. At various times in
sporulation medium, the wild-type (WT) ( ) or the snf1
( ) strain was assayed for recombination at the trp1 locus
as the frequency of the Trp+ prototrophs in the culture (A)
or for meiosis I chromosome segregation as the percentage of cells in
binucleate or later stages of meiosis (B). The data shown are the means
of three determinations, and the error bars represent the standard
errors of the means.
|
|
Crossover recombination is rare during vegetative growth and very
common during meiosis. To verify that the increase in the number of
Trp+ recombinants in the snf1
(YEp351-IME1)
strain indeed resulted from commitment to meiotic recombination,
we examined these Trp+ colonies for evidence of crossover
recombination at two different intervals (CEN2 to
HIS3/LYS2 and CEN3 to
MATa/MAT
); both of these intervals are
unlinked to TRP1. Recombination in the interval from
CEN2 to HIS3/LYS2 was detected in 10% of the
Trp+ colonies tested (26 of 259), and recombination in the
interval from CEN3 to
MATa/MAT
was detected in 6.3% of the
colonies (17 to 270). As a control, Trp+ colonies from a
stationary-phase wild-type culture were also examined. As expected,
since crossover recombination occurs relatively infrequently in
vegetative cells, no crossover recombination was detected at either
interval among 341 Trp+ colonies tested. Furthermore,
crossover recombination depended on IME1 expression; a
snf1
mutant containing only the YEp351 vector yielded no
evidence of recombination in either interval among 120 Trp+
colonies tested. Since the frequency of crossover recombination was
much higher in the snf1
(YEp351-IME1) strain than in
either control culture, this recombination likely derived from
the meiotic pathway. Unexpectedly, crossover recombination in the
snf1
(YEp351-IME1) strain occurred two to three times less
often than predicted (25% recombination for CEN2 to
HIS3/LYS2 and 14% recombination for CEN3 to
MATa/MAT
) based on known map distances
(see Materials and Methods). It is possible that even in the
snf1
(YEp351-IME1) cells that initiate meiosis
(i.e., that give rise to Trp+ colonies), crossover
recombination occurs two to three times less efficiently than it does
in wild-type cells.
Effects of glucose and Snf1 on the expression of the
IME2 gene.
The above results suggest the possibility
that glucose can repress meiotic initiation even after the
IME1 transcript has accumulated. One potential
candidate for this later control is transcriptional activation of the
IME2 gene. As described above, Ime1 is a transcription factor that directly activates IME2 transcription (5,
50). To test whether Snf1 controls IME2 transcription
separately from its effect on IME1 expression, we first
measured IME2 transcript accumulation in wild-type and
snf1
cells under different conditions. As expected from
previous studies (51, 60), the IME2 transcript was not expressed at detectable levels during growth (Fig.
4, lane 2) and was strongly induced
after transfer to sporulation conditions (lanes 3 and 4). Furthermore,
like IME1, IME2 was expressed at moderate levels
when no carbon source was present (Fig. 4, lanes 5 and 6, bottom).
However, the addition of glucose repressed IME2 transcript
levels (unlike IME1 transcript levels) below the levels
observed in the absence of a carbon source (compare Fig. 1A, lanes 9 to
14, to Fig. 4, lanes 5 to 8). Consistent with this experiment, deletion
of SNF1 did not affect IME1 transcript levels when acetate was absent (Fig. 1C, lanes 1 to 12), whereas this deletion
did affect IME2 transcript levels, whether acetate was present or not (Fig. 4, lanes 13 to 14, and data not shown). These results suggest that Snf1 is involved in IME2 transcription
separately from its role in activating accumulation of the
IME1 transcript.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Effect of nutritional conditions, IME1
overexpression, and the snf1 mutation on IME2
transcript levels. RNA was extracted from various cultures, and the
amounts of IME2 and control (DED1) transcripts
were measured by S1 nuclease protection. (Top) 1-day exposure. (Bottom)
7-day exposure. Lane 1, control reaction in which RNA was omitted;
lanes 2 to 8, wild-type cells containing the YEp351 vector in the log
phase (lane 2) and 3 or 6 h after transfer to sporulation medium
(lanes 3 and 4), to medium lacking carbon and nitrogen (lanes 5 and 6),
or to sporulation medium containing 0.4% glucose (lanes 7 and 8);
lanes 9 to 12, wild-type cells containing the YEp351-IME1 plasmid 3 or
6 h after transfer to medium lacking both carbon and nitrogen
(lanes 9 and 10) or to medium containing 2% glucose (lanes 11 and 12);
lanes 13 and 14, snf1 mutant cells containing the YEp351
vector 3 or 6 h after transfer to sporulation medium; lanes 15 to
18, snf1 mutant cells containing the YEp351-IME1 plasmid
3 or 6 h after transfer to sporulation medium (lanes 15 and 16) or
to medium containing 2% glucose (lanes 17 and 18); lane 19, undigested
probe at 5% of the concentration used in the protection assays.
|
|
We also measured IME2 expression in the snf1
mutant when the normal controls on IME1 transcript levels
were bypassed. As mentioned above, expression of IME1 from a
plasmid activated maximum levels of the IME1 transcript in
the snf1
mutant, even in the absence of a carbon source
(Fig. 1C, lanes 13 to 18). In the snf1
mutant under
sporulation conditions, the IME2 transcript was also induced
by the YEp351-IME1 plasmid (Fig. 4, compare lanes 13 and 14 to lanes 15 and 16); nevertheless, IME2 transcript levels in these
cells were approximately 10-fold lower than those observed in
SNF1+ cells (lanes 3 and 4). These results
support the idea of glucose repression operating not only at the
level of IME1 transcript accumulation but also between
induction of the IME1 transcript and induction of the
IME2 transcript.
When IME1 was expressed from the multicopy plasmid, glucose
inhibited IME2 transcript levels to approximately the same
degree as the deletion of SNF1 inhibited this transcript
(Fig. 4, lanes 11, 12, 15, and 16) and, importantly, these effects were
not additive (lanes 17 and 18). This latter result strongly suggests
that the primary effect of glucose on IME2 transcript
accumulation is through the repression of Snf1 activity.
As described above, when glucose was added to sporulation medium or
when the SNF1 gene was deleted, IME1 and
IME2 transcripts were expressed at moderate levels.
Interestingly, these moderate levels of expression were equal to the
levels expressed in cells deprived of acetate. Thus, the inactivation
of Snf1 by glucose may block meiotic initiation primarily by preventing
acetate from inducing IME1 and IME2
transcription.
Snf1 kinase is required independently for the initiation and the
completion of meiosis.
Although the YEp351-IME1 plasmid can
partially suppress the requirement for Snf1 in meiotic replication and
recombination, we found that this plasmid was not sufficient to allow
snf1
cells to form spores. In the control strain,
approximately half of the cells formed asci by 24 h in sporulation
medium; however, in the snf1
(YEp351-IME1) strain, no asci
were observed by 24 h (Table 1, compare rows 6 and 8) or 5 days
(data not shown). In addition, the IME1 plasmid was not
sufficient to allow detectable levels of chromosome segregation in the
snf1
mutant, as measured by observation of the number of
nuclear masses per cell (Fig. 3B).
Two additional genetic tests confirmed that the snf1
mutant did not induce late stages of meiosis. First, we used an assay for commitment to the completion of meiosis (see Materials and Methods). This test revealed that, after 24 h in sporulation
medium, the frequency of committed cells in the snf1
mutant was only 0.01% of the frequency in the
SNF1+ control [(4.4 ± 0.1) × 10
6 and (4.8 ± 0.3) × 10
2
CanR cells/CFU for the snf1
mutant and
the wild type, respectively)]. Second, we measured the decline in the
number of diploid recombinants which occurs as cells undergo meiotic
chromosome segregation to form haploids. In the
SNF1+ control, by 24 h the frequency of
diploid Trp+ recombinants/CFU [(5.4 ± 0.7) × 10
6] had declined to only approximately 1% of the total
Trp+ recombination frequency (Table 1, row 6). Conversely,
in the snf1
mutant, the frequency of diploid
Trp+ recombinants/CFU [(3.4 ± 0.8) × 10
5] at this time was approximately the same as the
total Trp+ recombinants/CFU (Table 1, row 8), indicating
that little or no formation of haploids had occurred.
Roles of glucose and Snf1 in late controls on meiosis.
Because
glucose acts through Snf1 in repressing IME1 transcript
accumulation, we examined whether it also acts through Snf1 in later
controls on meiosis. Glucose controls on IME1 transcript accumulation were bypassed when IME1 was expressed from the
multicopy plasmid (Fig. 1B, lane 13) (30). Nevertheless, the
addition of glucose to wild-type cells bearing this plasmid decreased
the levels of both recombination and spore formation (Table 1, compare rows 6 and 7). That is, the addition of glucose to a strain bearing the
YEp351-IME1 plasmid inhibited meiosis in the same way as the deletion
of SNF1 (row 8).
Because glucose and the snf1
mutation were equally
effective in repressing the IME1 transcript, it was
surprising that later controls on meiosis were inhibited much more
strongly by snf1
than by glucose (Table 1, compare rows 7 and 8). An explanation is suggested by comparing the effects of
glucose and sporulation medium on commitment to recombination in the
snf1
(YEp351-IME1) mutant; strikingly, this strain
initiated meiosis twice as efficiently in the presence of glucose as it
did in sporulation medium (Table 1, compare rows 8 and 9). These
results can be explained if glucose has two opposing roles in later
controls on meiosis. As discussed above, its major role is to repress
Snf1 activity. Deleting the SNF1 gene obviates this role,
revealing a second effect of glucose on meiosis, which is stimulatory.
For example, the snf1
mutant metabolizes glucose more
efficiently than acetate (11), so it is possible that the
energy derived from glucose metabolism stimulates meiosis (at least
weakly) in this mutant. In wild-type cells, the strong inhibitory
effect of glucose on meiosis would outweigh its relatively modest
stimulatory effect.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Glucose inhibits the initiation of meiosis by repressing Snf1.
Glucose has two independent roles in blocking the initiation of
meiosis: first, it blocks induction of the IME1 transcript, and second, it inhibits induction of the IME2 transcript.
Strikingly, both roles are paralleled by the phenotype of the
snf1
mutation. These results, together with the recent
finding that glucose blocks the activity of Snf1 kinase
(26), strongly suggest that glucose prevents the initiation
of meiosis primarily through inactivating Snf1. A direct test of
this idea was possible for glucose control on IME2
transcription. This control was separated from the earlier control by
overexpression of IME1 from a plasmid, thus bypassing the
first control. Under these conditions, either the addition of glucose
or the deletion of SNF1 partially inhibited both induction of the IME2 transcript and initiation of meiosis.
Significantly, a snf1
mutant exposed to glucose was no
more repressed than the same mutant under optimal sporulation
conditions. This result strongly suggests that glucose acts primarily
through the repression of Snf1 activity, at least with respect to the
control of IME2 expression. Earlier studies
demonstrated that IME1 is regulated not only
transcriptionally but also through posttranslational modification
(4, 46), and recent evidence suggests that glucose blocks
the interaction of Ime1 and another transcription factor, Ume6
(57). Thus, it is possible that Snf1 kinase regulates
IME2 transcription by directly or indirectly controlling the
posttranslational activation of Ime1.
Snf1 kinase links glucose control and acetate control on
meiosis.
How are different controls on the same differentiation
program coordinated? In budding yeast, three separate criteria
determine the choice between growth and meiosis (Fig.
5): growth conditions repress meiosis,
the presence of glucose represses meiosis, and nonfermentable
carbon sources (such as acetate) stimulate meiosis. These criteria
converge on at least three different targets
IME1 transcription, IME2 transcription, and an unknown regulator
that controls entry into the late phase of meiosis.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Model for the role of Snf1 kinase in coordinating
glucose and acetate controls on early and late phases of meiotic
differentiation. Negative regulation is represented by perpendicular
lines, and positive regulation is indicated by arrows; broken arrows
indicate that activation is not fully dependent on the upstream signal.
X, unidentified regulatory gene(s). Meiosis is controlled by at least
three different signaling pathways: (i) growth in growing cells,
IME1 transcript levels are fully repressed; (ii)
acetate acetate or other nonfermentable carbon sources increase
IME1 and IME2 transcript levels, leading to early
meiotic events, such as DNA replication and recombination; acetate
separately activates late meiotic events (chromosome segregation and
spore formation); and both early regulation and late regulation
by acetate requires Snf1 kinase; (iii) glucose glucose
represses meiosis at both early and late stages by repressing Snf1
kinase activity. Other nutritional controls on meiosis, in addition to
the ones shown on the diagram, are also possible. Chrom. Seg.,
chromosome segregation; Form., formation.
|
|
Snf1 is required for the transcription of a large number of genes, in
particular, the genes needed for gluconeogenesis and respiratory growth
(reviewed in references 27 and
42). These metabolic pathways are essential for the
utilization of nonfermentable carbon sources such as acetate, and it
has also been shown that the genes in these pathways are required for
sporulation. Indeed, respiration is required for IME1
expression (56). Thus, a simple model for the interaction of
glucose control and acetate control on meiosis is that glucose
represses meiosis by inactivating Snf1 kinase, hence blocking acetate
metabolism (Fig. 5). That is, the glucose repression pathway serves as
a gate for the signaling pathway by which acetate induces the
meiotic program. Our results do not address whether other carbon
sources (e.g., galactose or glycerol) may regulate meiosis through
additional signaling pathways.
Snf1 kinase may connect the regulation of early stages of meiosis
to the regulation of the late stages.
In theory, differentiation
programs could be regulated by extracellular signals entirely at the
initiation of the program. That is, initiation could trigger an
obligatory progression of different cellular events which follow one
another until differentiation is complete. However, the control of
meiosis in S. cerevisiae clearly does not follow this simple
paradigm: if cells are placed in sporulation medium long enough to
progress through the early stages of meiosis (DNA replication and
meiotic recombination) and then transferred back into growth medium,
they reenter the growth cycle without undergoing the later stages
(meiotic chromosome segregation and spore formation) (19).
The completion of meiosis only becomes obligatory (termed commitment to
meiosis) at approximately the same time as the initiation of chromosome
segregation (13, 30, 49). The reversibility of meiotic
differentiation throughout the early stages results, in part, from
separate nutritional controls on early and late stages (30).
Here we suggest that both of these phases are controlled independently
by the same signal transduction component
Snf1 kinase (Fig. 5).
Once meiotic replication and recombination have initiated, checkpoint
functions ensure that segregation and spore formation are not induced
until these earlier events are completed. However, as described above,
entry into the late stages of meiosis also requires the continued
presence of appropriate nutritional signals. As a result, early and
late meiotic events are coordinately regulated but are not
interdependent. The dual requirement for Snf1 at both early and late
phases of meiosis may allow nutritional signals to coordinately control
both phases.
Snf1 mediates many different cellular responses to glucose, and the
different targets of these responses are controlled by different
effectors. For example, Mig1 is a transcriptional repressor which is
inactivated by Snf1 and which acts on some but not all genes repressed
by glucose. As a result, a snf1
mig1
double mutant is able to grow almost normally on galactose but is still unable
to grow on gluconeogenic sources such as raffinose (42). It
is possible that different effectors of Snf1 kinase act at each of the
different stages of meiosis. In this regard, it is interesting to note
that the regulatory region of IME1 contains a putative
binding site for Mig1, whereas the upstream region of IME2
does not. The Mig1 site in the IME1 gene is 1.7 kb upstream of the start codon and has the sequence ATTTACGCGGGG, which
matches the consensus sequence
[(A/T)5N(G/C)PyG4] defined by homology, DNA
footprints, and mutational analysis (32). This site is
within a 2.2-kb region that has been identified as being involved in the nutritional regulation of IME1 (21).
During development in complex organisms, cross talk between different
signal transduction pathways allows specialized cell fates to be chosen
from among multiple possibilities (e.g., 9, 39). In
S. cerevisiae, a related situation exists; a single binary
choice between meiosis and growth is precisely regulated under a wide
range of extracellular conditions. The work presented in this paper
suggests that this precise regulation may be accomplished by
combinatorial interactions among relatively few signaling pathways.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We are grateful to K. Tatchell for plasmids, N. Gonchoroff for
flow cytometry, E. Maine and N. Kleckner for comments on the manuscript
and helpful suggestions, T. Schedl for stimulating this study, and C. Raymond and P. Dominguez for technical support.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Biology/Lyman Hall, 108 College Pl., Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244-1270. Phone: (315) 443-1299. Fax: (315) 443-1405. E-mail: shonigbe{at}mailbox.syr.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Atcheson, C. L.,
B. DiDomenico,
S. Frackman,
R. E. Esposito, and R. T. Elder.
1987.
Isolation, DNA sequence, and regulation of a meiosis-specific eukaryotic recombination gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
84:8035-8039[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Baker, B. S.,
A. T. Carpenter,
M. S. Esposito,
R. E. Esposito, and L. Sandler.
1976.
The genetic control of meiosis.
Annu. Rev. Genet.
10:53-134[Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Bishop, D. K.,
D. Park,
L. Xu, and N. Kleckner.
1992.
DMC1: a meiosis-specific yeast homolog of E. coli recA required for recombination, synaptonemal complex formation, and cell cycle progression.
Cell
69:439-456[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Bowdish, K. S.,
H. E. Yuan, and A. P. Mitchell.
1994.
Analysis of RIM11, a yeast protein kinase that phosphorylates the meiotic activator IME1.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:7909-7919[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Bowdish, K. S.,
H. E. Yuan, and A. P. Mitchell.
1995.
Positive control of yeast meiotic genes by the negative regulator UME6.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:2955-2961[Abstract].
|
| 6.
|
Carlson, M.,
B. C. Osmond, and D. Botstein.
1981.
Mutants of yeast defective in sucrose utilization.
Genetics
98:25-40[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Cool, M., and R. E. Malone.
1992.
Molecular and genetic analysis of the yeast early meiotic recombination genes REC102 and REC107/MER2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:1248-1256[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Covitz, P. A., and A. P. Mitchell.
1993.
Repression by the yeast meiotic inhibitor RME1.
Genes Dev.
7:1598-1608[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Duffy, J. B., and N. Perrimon.
1996.
Recent advances in understanding signal transduction pathways in worms and flies.
Curr. Opin. Cell. Biol.
8:231-238[Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Elder, R. T.,
E. Y. Loh, and R. W. Davis.
1983.
RNA from yeast transposable element Ty1 has both ends in the direct repeats, a structure similar to retrovirus RNA.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
80:2432-2436[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Entian, K. D., and F. K. Zimmermann.
1982.
New genes involved in carbon catabolite repression and derepression in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
J. Bacteriol.
151:1123-1128[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Esposito, M. S.,
R. E. Esposito,
M. Arnaud, and H. O. Halvorson.
1969.
Acetate utilization and macromolecular synthesis during sporulation of yeast.
J. Bacteriol.
100:180-186[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Esposito, R. E., and M. S. Esposito.
1974.
Genetic recombination and commitment to meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
71:3172-3176[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Esposito, R. E., and S. Klapholz.
1981.
Meiosis and ascospore development, p. 211-287.
In
J. N. Strathern, E. W. Jones, and J. R. Broach (ed.), Molecular biology of the yeast Saccharomyces: life cycle and inheritance. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 15.
|
Foiani, M.,
E. Nadjar-Boger,
R. Capone,
S. Sagee,
T. Hashimshoni, and Y. Kassir.
1996.
A meiosis-specific protein kinase, Ime2, is required for the correct timing of DNA replication and for spore formation in yeast meiosis.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
253:278-288[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Freese, E. B.,
M. I. Chu, and E. Freese.
1982.
Initiation of yeast sporulation by partial carbon, nitrogen, or phosphate deprivation.
J. Bacteriol.
149:840-851[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Freese, E. B.,
B. Z. Olempska,
A. Hartig, and E. Freese.
1984.
Initiation of meiosis and sporulation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae by sulfur or guanine deprivation.
Dev. Biol.
102:438-451[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Galbraith, A. M.,
S. A. Bullard,
K. Jiao,
J. J. Nau, and R. E. Malone.
1997.
Recombination and the progression of meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Genetics
146:481-489[Abstract].
|
| 19.
|
Ganesan, A. T.,
H. Holter, and C. Roberts.
1958.
Some observations on sporulation in Saccharomyces.
C. R. Trav. Lab. Carlsberg.
13:1-6.
|
| 20.
|
Gorts, C. P.
1975.
Role of acetate metabolism in sporulation of Saccharomyces carlsbergensis.
Antonie Leeuwenhoek
41:265-271.
|
| 21.
|
Granot, D.,
J. P. Margolskee, and G. Simchen.
1989.
A long region upstream of the IME1 gene regulates meiosis in yeast.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
218:308-314[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Hollingsworth, N. M., and B. Byers.
1989.
HOP1: a yeast meiotic pairing gene.
Genetics
121:445-462[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Honigberg, S., and R. E. Esposito.
1994.
Reversal of cell determination in yeast meiosis: post-commitment arrest allows return to mitotic growth.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:6559-6563[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Honigberg, S. M.,
C. Conicella, and R. E. Esposito.
1992.
Commitment to meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: involvement of the SPO14 gene.
Genetics
130:703-716[Abstract].
|
| 25.
|
Jiang, R., and M. Carlson.
1996.
Glucose regulates protein interactions within the yeast Snf1 protein kinase complex.
Genes Dev.
10:3105-3115[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Jiang, R., and M. Carlson.
1997.
The Snf1 protein kinase and its activating subunit, Snf4, interact with distinct domains of the Sip1/Sip2/Gal83 component in the kinase complex.
Mol. Cell Biol.
17:2099-2106[Abstract].
|
| 27.
|
Johnston, H. M., and M. Carlson.
1992.
Regulation of carbon and phosphate utilization, p. 193-282.
In
E. W. Jones, J. R. Pringle, and J. R. Broach (ed.), The molecular and cellular biology of the yeast Saccharomyces: gene expression. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 28.
|
Kassir, Y.,
D. Granot, and G. Simchen.
1988.
IME1, a positive regulator of meiosis in S. cerevisiae.
Cell
52:853-862[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Kupiec, M.,
B. Byers,
R. E. Esposito, and A. P. Mitchell.
1997.
Meiosis and sporulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, p. 889-1036.
In
J. R. Pringle, J. R. Broach, and E. W. Jones (ed.), The molecular and cellular biology of the yeast Saccharomyces: cell cycle and cell biology. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 30.
|
Lee, R. H., and S. M. Honigberg.
1996.
Nutritional regulation of late meiotic events in Saccharomyces cerevisiae through a pathway distinct from initiation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:3222-3232[Abstract].
|
| 31.
|
Li, W., and A. P. Mitchell.
1997.
Proteolytic activation of Rim1p, a positive regulator of yeast sporulation and invasive growth.
Genetics
145:63-73[Abstract].
|
| 32.
|
Lundin, M.,
J. O. Nehlin, and H. Ronne.
1994.
Importance of a flanking AT-rich region in target site recognition by the GC box-binding zinc finger protein Mig1.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:1979-1985[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Lydall, D.,
Y. Nikolsky,
D. K. Bishop, and T. Weinert.
1996.
A meiotic recombination checkpoint controlled by mitotic checkpoint genes.
Nature
383:840-843[Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Matsuura, A.,
M. Treinin,
H. Mitsuzawa,
Y. Kassir,
I. Uno, and G. Simchen.
1990.
The adenylate cyclase/protein kinase cascade regulates entry into meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae through the gene IME1.
EMBO J.
9:3225-3232[Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Menees, T. M., and G. S. Roeder.
1989.
MEI4, a yeast gene required for meiotic recombination.
Genetics
123:675-682[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Miller, J. J.
1989.
Sporulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, p. 489-550.
In
A. H. Rose, and J. S. Harrison (ed.), The yeasts. Academic Press Ltd., San Diego, Calif.
|
| 37.
|
Mitchell, A. P.
1994.
Control of meiotic gene expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Microbiol. Rev.
58:56-70[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Mitchell, A. P.,
S. E. Driscoll, and H. E. Smith.
1990.
Positive control of sporulation-specific genes by the IME1 and IME2 products in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:2104-2110[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Moon, R. T.,
J. D. Brown, and M. Torres.
1997.
WNTs modulate cell fate and behavior during vertebrate development.
Trends Genet.
13:157-162[Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Neigeborn, L., and A. P. Mitchell.
1991.
The yeast MCK1 gene encodes a protein kinase homolog that activates early meiotic gene expression.
Genes Dev.
5:533-548[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Roeder, G. S.
1997.
Meiotic chromosomes: it takes two to tango.
Genes Dev.
11:2600-2621[Free Full Text].
|
| 42.
|
Ronne, H.
1995.
Glucose repression in fungi.
Trends Genet.
11:12-17[Medline].
|
| 43.
|
Rose, M. D.,
F. Winston, and P. Hieter.
1990.
Methods in yeast genetics: a laboratory course manual.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 44.
|
Sazer, S., and S. W. Sherwood.
1990.
Mitochondrial growth and DNA synthesis occur in the absence of nuclear DNA replication in fission yeast.
J. Cell Sci.
97:509-516[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Shah, J. C., and M. J. Clancy.
1992.
IME4, a gene that mediates MAT and nutritional control of meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:1078-1086[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Sherman, A.,
M. Shefer,
S. Sagee, and Y. Kassir.
1993.
Post-transcriptional regulation of IME1 determines initiation of meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
237:375-384[Medline].
|
| 47.
|
Shinohara, A.,
H. Ogawa, and T. Ogawa.
1992.
Rad51 protein involved in repair and recombination in S. cerevisiae is a RecA-like protein.
Cell
69:457-470[Medline].
|
| 48.
|
Sikorski, R. S., and P. Hieter.
1989.
A system of shuttle vectors and yeast host strains designed for efficient manipulation of DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Genetics
122:19-27[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 49.
|
Simchen, G.,
R. Pinon, and Y. Salts.
1972.
Sporulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: premeiotic DNA synthesis, readiness and commitment.
Exp. Cell Res.
75:207-218[Medline].
|
| 50.
|
Smith, H. E.,
S. E. Driscoll,
R. A. Sia,
H. E. Yuan, and A. P. Mitchell.
1993.
Genetic evidence for transcriptional activation by the yeast IME1 gene product.
Genetics
133:775-784[Abstract].
|
| 51.
|
Smith, H. E., and A. P. Mitchell.
1989.
A transcriptional cascade governs entry into meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:2142-2152[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 52.
|
Smith, H. E.,
S. S. Su,
L. Neigeborn,
S. E. Driscoll, and A. P. Mitchell.
1990.
Role of IME1 expression in regulation of meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:6103-6113[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 53.
|
Strich, R.,
R. T. Surosky,
C. Steber,
E. Dubois,
F. Messenguy, and R. E. Esposito.
1994.
UME6 is a key regulator of nitrogen repression and meiotic development.
Genes Dev.
8:796-810[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Sym, M.,
J. Engebrecht, and G. S. Roeder.
1993.
ZIP1 is a synaptonemal complex protein required for meiotic chromosome synapsis.
Cell
72:365-378[Medline].
|
| 55.
|
Thompson-Jaeger, S.,
J. Francois,
J. P. Gaughran, and K. Tatchell.
1991.
Deletion of SNF1 affects the nutrient response of yeast and resembles mutations which activate the adenylate cyclase pathway.
Genetics
129:697-706[Abstract].
|
| 56.
|
Treinin, M., and G. Simchen.
1993.
Mitochondrial activity is required for the expression of IME1, a regulator of meiosis in yeast.
Curr. Genet.
23:223-227[Medline].
|
| 57.
|
Vidan, S., and A. P. Mitchell.
1997.
Stimulation of yeast meiotic gene expression by the glucose-repressible protein kinase Rim15p.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:2688-2697[Abstract].
|
| 58.
|
Weber, L., and B. Byers.
1992.
A RAD9-dependent checkpoint blocks meiosis of cdc13 yeast cells.
Genetics
131:55-63[Abstract].
|
| 59.
|
Xu, L.,
B. M. Weiner, and N. Kleckner.
1997.
Meiotic cells monitor the status of the interhomolog recombination complex.
Genes Dev.
11:106-118[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 60.
|
Yoshida, M.,
H. Kawaguchi,
Y. Sakata,
K. Kominami,
M. Hirano,
H. Shima,
R. Akada, and I. Yamashita.
1990.
Initiation of meiosis and sporulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae requires a novel protein kinase homologue.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
221:176-186[Medline].
|
Mol Cell Biol, August 1998, p. 4548-4555, Vol. 18, No. 8
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Alkhalfioui, F., Renard, M., Vensel, W. H., Wong, J., Tanaka, C. K., Hurkman, W. J., Buchanan, B. B., Montrichard, F.
(2007). Thioredoxin-Linked Proteins Are Reduced during Germination of Medicago truncatula Seeds. Plant Physiol.
144: 1559-1579
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hong, S.-P., Carlson, M.
(2007). Regulation of Snf1 Protein Kinase in Response to Environmental Stress. J. Biol. Chem.
282: 16838-16845
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Shin, R., Alvarez, S., Burch, A. Y., Jez, J. M., Schachtman, D. P.
(2007). Phosphoproteomic identification of targets of the Arabidopsis sucrose nonfermenting-like kinase SnRK2.8 reveals a connection to metabolic processes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
104: 6460-6465
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Gissot, L., Polge, C., Jossier, M., Girin, T., Bouly, J.-P., Kreis, M., Thomas, M.
(2006). AKINbeta{gamma} Contributes to SnRK1 Heterotrimeric Complexes and Interacts with Two Proteins Implicated in Plant Pathogen Resistance through Its KIS/GBD Sequence. Plant Physiol.
142: 931-944
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
McDonald, C. M., Cooper, K. F., Winter, E.
(2005). The Ama1-Directed Anaphase-Promoting Complex Regulates the Smk1 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase During Meiosis in Yeast. Genetics
171: 901-911
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Purnapatre, K., Gray, M., Piccirillo, S., Honigberg, S. M.
(2005). Glucose Inhibits Meiotic DNA Replication through SCFGrr1p-Dependent Destruction of Ime2p Kinase. Mol. Cell. Biol.
25: 440-450
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Rice, L. M., Plakas, C., Nickels, J. T. Jr.
(2005). Loss of Meiotic Rereplication Block in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Cells Defective in Cdc28p Regulation. Eukaryot Cell
4: 55-62
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Dubacq, C., Chevalier, A., Mann, C.
(2004). The Protein Kinase Snf1 Is Required for Tolerance to the Ribonucleotide Reductase Inhibitor Hydroxyurea. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 2560-2572
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Colomina, N., Liu, Y., Aldea, M., Gari, E.
(2003). TOR Regulates the Subcellular Localization of Ime1, a Transcriptional Activator of Meiotic Development in Budding Yeast. Mol. Cell. Biol.
23: 7415-7424
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Honigberg, S. M., Purnapatre, K.
(2003). Signal pathway integration in the switch from the mitotic cell cycle to meiosis in yeast. J. Cell Sci.
116: 2137-2147
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Halford, N. G., Hey, S., Jhurreea, D., Laurie, S., McKibbin, R. S., Paul, M., Zhang, Y.
(2003). Metabolic signalling and carbon partitioning: role of Snf1-related (SnRK1) protein kinase. J Exp Bot
54: 467-475
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Nath, N., McCartney, R. R., Schmidt, M. C.
(2002). Purification and Characterization of Snf1 Kinase Complexes Containing a Defined beta Subunit Composition. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 50403-50408
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Schaber, M., Lindgren, A., Schindler, K., Bungard, D., Kaldis, P., Winter, E.
(2002). CAK1 Promotes Meiosis and Spore Formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a CDC28-Independent Fashion. Mol. Cell. Biol.
22: 57-68
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Vyas, V. K., Kuchin, S., Carlson, M.
(2001). Interaction of the Repressors Nrg1 and Nrg2 With the Snf1 Protein Kinase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics
158: 563-572
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Vincent, O., Townley, R., Kuchin, S., Carlson, M.
(2001). Subcellular localization of the Snf1 kinase is regulated by specific {beta} subunits and a novel glucose signaling mechanism. Genes Dev.
15: 1104-1114
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Tzung, K.-W., Williams, R. M., Scherer, S., Federspiel, N., Jones, T., Hansen, N., Bivolarevic, V., Huizar, L., Komp, C., Surzycki, R., Tamse, R., Davis, R. W., Agabian, N.
(2001). Genomic evidence for a complete sexual cycle in Candida albicans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
98: 3249-3253
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Burgess, S. M., Ajimura, M., Kleckner, N.
(1999). GCN5-dependent histone H3 acetylation and RPD3-dependent histone H4 deacetylation have distinct, opposing effects on IME2 transcription, during meiosis and during vegetative growth, in budding yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96: 6835-6840
[Abstract]
[Full Text]