Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, May 2000, p. 3529-3537, Vol. 20, No. 10
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Retinoblastoma Protein Enhances the Fidelity of
Chromosome Segregation Mediated by hsHec1p
Lei
Zheng,
Yumay
Chen,
Daniel J.
Riley,
Phang-Lang
Chen, and
Wen-Hwa
Lee*
Department of Molecular Medicine and
Institute of Biotechnology, University of Texas Health Science
Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas 78245
Received 22 September 1999/Returned for modification 17 November
1999/Accepted 14 February 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Retinoblastoma protein (Rb) plays important roles in cell cycle
progression and cellular differentiation. It may also participate in M
phase events, although heretofore only circumstantial evidence has
suggested such involvement. Here we show that Rb interacts, through an
IxCxE motif and specifically during G2/M phase, with hsHec1p, a protein essential for proper chromosome segregation. The
interaction between Rb and hsHec1p was reconstituted in a yeast strain
in which human hsHEC1 rescues the null mutation of scHEC1. Expression of Rb reduced chromosome segregation
errors fivefold in yeast cells sustained by a temperature-sensitive
(ts) hshec1-113 allele and enhanced the ability of
wild-type hsHec1p to suppress lethality caused by a ts smc1
mutation. The interaction between Hec1p and Smc1p was important for the
specific DNA-binding activity of Smc1p. Expression of Rb restored part
of the inactivated function of hshec1-113p and thereby increased the
DNA-binding activity of Smc1p. Rb thus increased the fidelity of
chromosome segregation mediated by hsHec1p in a heterologous yeast system.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Genetic instability is one of the
most important hallmarks of cancer. It occurs at two different levels.
On one level, increased mutation rates result from defective repair of
damaged DNA or replication errors, which leads to missense, nonsense,
or other small but functionally important mutations in several types of cancer. On another level, improper segregation of whole chromosomes or
pieces of chromosomes during mitosis leads to aneuploidy or translocations, traits commonly observed in cancers (35).
Chromosome segregation is controlled by a large group of proteins that
together coordinate M phase progression (43, 44, 48, 58).
Loss of function of key proteins important for the structure and
dynamics of mitotic chromosomes would be expected to lead to cell death and thus to prevent passage of mutations of such fundamental proteins to daughter cells. Loss of function of proteins that play subtler regulatory roles in mitosis, however, may not be immediately lethal but
instead may lead to high frequencies of chromosome abnormalities and to neoplasia.
Associations of oncoproteins or tumor suppressors with the process of
chromosome segregation provide possible links between carcinogenesis
and chromosomal instability. Recent studies suggest that both p53 and
retinoblastoma protein (Rb) play important roles in the prevention of
aneuploidy in human and rodent cells (12, 28, 34, 56). When
treated with microtubule-destabilizing agents, cells lacking functional
Rb or p53 do not finish mitosis properly but nonetheless enter a new
cell cycle, leading to hyperploidy (28, 34). p53 has been
found to be associated with centrosome duplication activity
(15) and mitotic or postmitotic checkpoint control (18,
34), loss of these functions would result in aberrant mitosis and
contribute to the observed increase in ploidy. Similarly, the
propensity of Rb-deficient cells to become hyperploid is most likely
due to the loss of a novel function of Rb in M phase of the cell cycle,
although supportive evidence remains scarce.
Study of the function of Rb has been centered on the progression of
G1 phase (17, 23, 52). However, accumulating
evidence has suggested potential functional roles for Rb during other
phases of the cell cycle (27, 31, 46), especially during M
phase. First, the functional, hypophosphorylated form of Rb is present at this phase of the cell cycle (8, 38). Second,
hypophosphorylated Rb is associated with at least three cellular
proteins that have crucial functions in M phase progression
(50). One example is the human H-nuc2 (also called hCDC27)
protein (9), a subunit of the anaphase-promoting complex
that controls the onset of sister chromatid separation and
metaphase-anaphase transition by degradation of specific substrates
(30, 32). Another Rb-associated protein, protein phosphatase
1
catalytic subunit (13), is important for kinetochore
function, chromosome segregation, and M phase progression, as
demonstrated by the abnormal phenotype resulting from the mutational
inactivation of its yeast homolog (2, 3, 49, 51). Lastly,
mitosin (also called CENP-F), a kinetochore protein (60),
also interacts specifically with Rb during M phase.
However, the mechanisms by which Rb plays a role in chromosome
segregation and M phase progression remain elusive. The current approach of counting total chromosome numbers by karyotyping or detecting a specific chromosome by fluorescent in situ hybridization can only display the status of chromosome instability, which may not
necessarily be a direct consequence of a certain gene defect in
mammalian cells. To determine whether the loss of a gene function is
responsible for improper chromosome segregation, a method for monitoring the dynamic transmission of a specific chromosome marker is
required. Any attempt to select for mammalian cells carrying an
integrated exogenous chromosome marker, however, bears the risk of
immortalizing a primary cell line or making the genetic content of a
tumor cell line even more unpredictable. Studies of chromosome
segregation in mammalian cells are therefore complicated. On the other
hand, methods for monitoring the dynamic transmission of chromosomes in
yeast cells are feasible, and the genetic manipulation of a given gene
in yeast can be accomplished without affecting the rest of the gene
population and chromosome structures. Moreover, the basic machinery for
chromosome segregation is conserved between mammals and yeast
(42).
In this study, a yeast assay system for investigating the role of Rb in
chromosome segregation was established, based on the study of hsHec1p.
hsHec1p, isolated from a screen for proteins interacting with Rb
(10, 13), is a coiled-coil protein crucial for proper
mitosis (10, 11, 59). Inactivation of hsHec1p leads to
disruption of M phase progression (10). The homolog of
hsHec1p in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, scHec1p (also called
Ndc80 or Tid3), has a similar essential function (57, 59),
and hsHEC1 is able to rescue the lethality caused by the
null mutation of scHEC1 (59). Yeast cells
carrying a mutant allele of human or yeast HEC1 segregate
their chromosomes aberrantly (57, 59). At the nonpermissive
temperature, significant mitotic delay, unequal nuclear division, and
decreased viability were observed in yeast cells carrying
hshec1-113, a temperature-sensitive mutant allele of human
HEC1 (59). Increased frequencies of chromosome
segregation errors were also detected in the hshec1-113
mutant at permissive temperatures. Hec1p has been found to interact
physically or genetically with a number of proteins important for
G2/M progression and chromosome segregation, including SMC
(structural maintenance of chromosomes) proteins and yeast centromere
protein Ctf19p (10, 26, 59). A potential role for Hec1p in
modulating chromosome segregation in part through interactions with SMC
proteins has been suggested (59). There is no protein with
sequence similarity to Rb in the entire S. cerevisiae
genome. Without interference from endogenous Rb, yeast strains in which
the null mutation of scHEC1 has been complemented by
hsHEC1 (59) therefore provide useful tools to address the consequence of the interaction between Rb and hsHec1p for
chromosome segregation.
The biological significance of the interaction between Rb and hsHec1p
is demonstrated here by reconstitution of these proteins in a
heterologous in vivo yeast system. Expression of Rb resulted in a
decrease in the rate of chromosome segregation errors in cells carrying
a mutant form of hsHec1p and an increase in the survival rate of
smc1 mutant cells with defects in chromosome segregation.
These results suggest that Rb plays a positive regulatory role in
chromosome segregation.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Strains and plasmids.
S. cerevisiae haploid and
diploid strains carrying the hshec1-113 mutant have been
described previously (59). A new yeast strain, 4bWHL273
(matx ade2 lys2 ura3 trp1 smc1-2::LEU2),
is one of the meiotic segregates of the diploid strain from the mating between 3bAS273 (a gift from D. Koshland) and YPH1015 (a gift from P. Hieter). The full-length 2.8-kb RB cDNA, or the cDNA for the
H209 mutant RB derivative (Cys706 changed to Phe), was
inserted in two sets of plasmids, p415GAL1 (41) and
pESC::TRP1 (Stratagene), by use of
BamHI and SalI. The resultant plasmids were used
to transform the above-mentioned strains. By a procedure described previously (21), cells were cultured in 2% raffinose
overnight at 25°C before Rb expression was induced in medium
containing additional 2% galactose for the indicated number of hours.
The YEp195-GC15C plasmid was generated by inserting the GAL1
promoter, hsHEC1 cDNA (59), and CYC1
terminator (41) into the YEplac195 vector
(16) for the expression of hsHec1p. The YEp195-GEKC plasmid was generated by site-directed mutagenesis for the expression of the
hshec1-EK mutant (Glu234 changed to Lys). To express myc-tagged Smc1p,
the full-length SMC1 was generated by PCR, sequenced, and fused with the c-myc tag in the pESC plasmid.
Immunoprecipitation and immunoblotting.
The preparation of
yeast cell lysates, immunoprecipitation, and immunoblotting have been
described previously (59). Human hsHec1p, S. cerevisiae Smc1p, and human Rb were precipitated or immunoblotted
with anti-hsHec1p monoclonal antibody (MAb) 9G3, mouse anti-Smc1p
antiserum (59), and anti-Rb MAb 11D7, respectively.
Human bladder carcinoma T24 cells were cultured and synchronized at
different stages of the cell cycle as described previously (8,
10). Cells were lysed and immunoprecipitated by procedures described previously (8, 10).
For immunoprecipitation and immunoblotting of human SMC1 (hSMC1) from
T24 cells, mouse anti-hSMC1 antiserum was obtained from mice immunized
with glutathione S-transferase (GST) protein fused with the
peptide region of hSMC1 isolated from a yeast two-hybrid screen
(10, 11, 59).
Colony sectoring assays.
Colony sectoring assays were used
to measure the frequencies of chromosome missegregation, as described
previously (33, 59). Five single pink colonies of each
diploid strain that contains a homozygous ade2-101 ochre
color mutation and a dispensable chromosome fragment carrying a copy of
SUP11 were picked and cultured to log phase in
histidine-free supplemented minimal medium at 25°C for 3 days. Cells
were diluted and incubated at 30°C for 4 h (one generation) in
fresh medium supplied with histidine and containing 2% galactose and
2% raffinose to induce the expression of Rb or the H209 mutant. An
aliquot of culture was then removed and plated on medium containing 6 mg of adenine per liter. The plates were incubated at 30°C for 6 days
and at 4°C overnight before observation. The remaining cultures were
used for detecting the expression of Rb or for examining the
interaction between Rb and hsHec1p as described above.
Immunoaffinity purification.
Yeast cell lysate was prepared
as described previously (59). Smc1p was partially purified
from this lysate with mouse anti-Smc1p polyclonal antibodies by
immunoaffinity chromatography, according to modification of a procedure
described previously (25, 29). Antibodies were incubated
with 50 µl of protein A-Sepharose beads for 2 h at 4°C and
washed twice with 1 ml of Tris-buffered saline (50 mM Tris [pH 8.0],
125 mM NaCl). A 1.5-ml portion of cell lysate (about 50 mg of total
protein) was added to the antibody-protein A-Sepharose beads and
incubated for another 1 h at 4°C. The mixture was then loaded on
a minicolumn and washed sequentially with 4 ml of XBE2 buffer (20 mM
potassium HEPES [pH 7.7], 0.1 M KCl, 10% glycerol, 2 mM
MgCl2, 5 mM EGTA), 0.5 ml of XBE2 with 0.4 M KCl, and 0.5 ml of XBE2. For elution, 150 µl of XBE2 containing a 4-µg/µl
concentration of a GST fusion with the C-terminal region of Smc1p
(59) was used. Fifty microliters of elution buffer was first
allowed to flow in, and then the other 100 µl was loaded. After
incubation at 4°C for 4 h, the elution buffer was allowed to
flow through and collected. The elution product was incubated with 100 µl of glutathione-Sepharose that was prewashed with XBE2 for 1 h
at 4°C three times to completely remove the GST fusion protein.
For multiple samples in the same experiment, equal numbers of yeast
cells that contained comparable amounts of total proteins were lysed.
The cell lysates were added to the antibody-protein A-Sepharose beads
for immunoaffinity purification as described above. The eluted products
from each sample were calibrated with comparable protein concentrations
for use in gel shift assays. To minimize the effect of any quantitative
variations, the amount of Smc1p in each purified product was adjusted
according to the immunoblotting results.
Gel mobility shift assay.
Approximately 2 µl of the
purified product described above was incubated with the 230-bp M13
replicative-form (RF) DNA fragment in 20 µl of XBE2 buffer with 0.5 mg of bovine serum albumin per ml. The 230-bp M13 RF DNA fragment was
digested from the same region of M13 genomic DNA described previously
(1), although HindIII was used instead of
EcoRI. The DNA fragment was end labeled with
[
-32P]dCTP by the fill-in reaction with Klenow
enzymes. DNA fragments labeled with 10,000 to 20,000 cpm were used as
substrates. For competition, unlabeled 230-bp M13 fragment, a 220-bp
pUC19 fragment digested with AvaII from a pUC19-derived
vector (1), and a 240-bp CEN3 fragment (bp, 113925 to
114168) generated by PCR amplification from yeast genomic DNA with the
primers described previously (40) were used. The DNA-protein
reaction mixtures were loaded on a 5.5% acrylamide gel and run at
4°C in a buffer containing 20 mM HEPES [pH 7.5] and 0.1 mM EDTA.
The results were quantified using a densitometer and ImageQuant v1.1
(Molecular Dynamics).
 |
RESULTS |
hsHec1p specifically interacts with Rb through the IxCxE
motif.
hsHec1p was originally identified using Rb as the bait in a
yeast two-hybrid screen (10, 13). In order to determine the specific region of Rb required for binding hsHec1p, a deletion set that
had previously been used to delineate the binding domain for protein
phosphatase 1
was employed (13). Amino acids 301 to 928 of the Rb protein and several carboxy-terminal deletion mutants, as
well as the H209 point mutant with residue 706 changed from cysteine to
phenylalanine, were fused with the yeast Gal4 DNA-binding domain.
Full-length hsHec1p protein was fused with the Gal4 transactivation
domain. The results showed that Rb uses the same T-antigen-binding
domain to interact with hsHec1p, and the H209 point mutation abolished
this binding (Fig. 1A). hsHec1p sequences
required for binding Rb were also determined in a reciprocal manner,
using a series of hsHec1p deletion mutants. These mutants showed that
the central region of hsHec1p, from amino acids 128 to 251, binds to Rb
(Fig. 1B). Two Rb-related proteins, p107 and p130 (14, 20, 36,
39), did not interact with hsHec1p (Fig. 1A).

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Specific interaction between Rb and hsHec1p. (A) hsHec1p
and T antigen bind to similar regions of the Rb protein. The Gal4
DNA-binding domain (DBD) (amino acids 1 to 147; stippled box) was fused
to various Rb mutants, p107 (amino acids 385 to 1068), or p130 (amino
acids 409 to 1139). The simian virus 40 T-antigen-binding domains A and
B are shown as shaded and hatched boxes, respectively. hsHec1p or T
antigen (13) was expressed as a Gal4 transactivation domain
fusion protein and used to test for interaction with Rb fusion proteins
in yeast two-hybrid assays. Transformants were grown in liquid cultures
and used for
o-nitrophenyl- -D-galactopyranoside
quantitation of -galactosidase activity as described previously
(13). (B) Various hsHec1p mutants were fused with the Gal4
transactivation domain (TAD) (hatched box). Rb (amino acids 301 to 928)
was expressed as the fusion with the Gal4 DNA-binding domain used for
panel A. (C) Rb was expressed as the same fusion used for panel B. Wild-type hsHec1p (15-1), an hsHec1p mutant with amino acid 234 changed
from E to K (15EK), and scHec1p were fused with the Gal4
transactivation domain. (D) Cell cycle-dependent interaction between Rb
and hsHec1p. T24 cells were density arrested at G1 (lanes 2 and 8) and then released for reentry into the cell cycle. At different
time points after release as indicated above the lanes, 5 × 106 cells were collected, lysed, and immunoprecipitated
with anti-Rb MAb 11D7 (lanes 1 to 6) or with anti-hsHec1p MAb 9G3
(lanes 7 to 12). The immune complexes were then separated by sodium
dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis followed by
immunoblotting with MAb 11D7 (upper panel) or with 9G3 (lower panel).
G11 represents 11 h after release and corresponds to
G1, G24 marks 24 h after release and corresponds to S,
and G32 marks 32 h after release and corresponds to
G2. M phase lysates (lanes 6 and 12) were obtained from
cells treated with nocodazole (0.4 µg/ml). Lanes 1 and 7, unsynchronized cells.
|
|
The region of hsHec1p that binds Rb was not conserved in yeast scHec1p.
Thus, it is likely that the interaction between Hec1p and Rb is not
conserved in yeast. To test this notion, a yeast two-hybrid assay was
performed using the above-described construct, with the Rb sequence
fused with the Gal4 DNA-binding domain and a plasmid for the expression
of yeast scHec1p sequence fused with the Gal4 transactivation domain.
As predicted, yeast scHec1p failed to bind Rb (Fig. 1C).
An examination of the hsHec1p sequence showed that it contains an IxCxE
motif, which has been implicated as the specific Rb-binding site in
many proteins (reviewed in reference 5). This motif is not found in yeast scHec1p, suggesting that the inability of Rb to
bind to scHec1p may be due to the lack of the IxCxE sequence. To verify
this possibility, a point mutant with residue 234 changed from glutamic
acid to lysine in this motif was tested in a yeast two-hybrid assay.
This mutation abolished the ability of hsHec1p to bind to Rb (Fig. 1C).
However, hshec1-EK, with this mutation, was able to rescue
the yeast schec1 null mutant (data not shown) and generate
the strain WHL101EK. This indicated that hsHec1p proteins, with or
without an Rb-binding site, are able to perform their essential
cellular function in yeast.
Rb and hsHec1p interact at G2/M phase in mammalian
cells.
The interaction between Rb and hsHec1p was also examined by
coimmunoprecipitation following cell cycle progression. As shown in
Fig. 1D, hsHec1p binds to Rb specifically at G2/M phase in human bladder carcinoma T24 cells, which were synchronized as described
previously (8). Similar to most of other Rb-associated proteins, hsHec1p binds specifically to the hypophosphorylated form of Rb that reappears during M phase.
The specific interaction between Rb and hsHec1p is reconstituted in
yeast.
Wild-type Rb and the H209 mutant Rb were expressed under
control of the GAL1 promoter through
LEU2-selectable plasmids (p415GAL1) in the same yeast strain
that carries an hshec1-113 mutant allele (59). As
a negative control, wild-type Rb was also expressed in a yeast strain
carrying the hshec1-113EK allele, which encodes a
hshec1-113p without Rb-binding activity. The hshec1-113EK
cells demonstrated no apparent difference in the temperature-sensitive (ts) phenotype compared with the hshec1-113 cells
(59).
Wild-type Rb coimmunoprecipitated with hshec1-113p but not with
hshec1-113EK. The H209 mutant of Rb failed to form a complex with
hshec1-113p (Fig. 2A, panel b).
Consistent with a previous report (21), both
hypophosphorylated and hyperphosphorylated forms of Rb were detected in
these unsynchronized cells, but the H209 mutant was deficient in
hyperphosphorylated forms. The abundance of hshec1-113p protein did not
vary significantly when either Rb or the H209 mutant was expressed
(Fig. 2A, panel c). These results suggested that the specific
interaction between hsHec1p and Rb could be reconstituted in yeast
cells.

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Reconstitution of the interaction between Rb and hsHec1p
in yeast. (A) Specific interaction between hsHec1p and Rb. Yeast cells
were diluted to an optical density at 600 nm of 0.75 in fresh medium
with 2% galactose and 2% raffinose and then cultured at 30°C for
4 h. Aliquots of cell lysate were immunoprecipitated (IP) with
nonspecific IgG (lane 1) or with anti-Rb ( -Rb) MAb 11D7 (lanes 2 to
5) and separated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis. The same blot was probed with MAb 11D7 for Rb (a) or
MAb 9G3 for hshec1-113p (b). Panel c shows the endogenous level of
hshec1-113p in the cells used in panels a and b. For each lane in panel
c, aliquots of the same lysates used in panel a were immunoprecipitated
and immunoblotted with 9G3. The yeast strains and plasmids used to
express Rb are indicated for each lane. (B) The yeast cells carrying
the hshec1-113 allele and an Rb expression vector were
treated for 5 h with 0.1 M hydroxyurea or 20 µg of nocodazole
per ml in medium containing 2% galactose and 2% raffinose. At
different time points after release (indicated under each lane [lanes
1 to 10, release from hydroxyurea; lanes 11 and 12, release from
nocodazole]), cells were collected, lysed, and immunoprecipitated with
-Rb MAb 11D7. The immunoprecipitates were then separated by sodium
dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, followed by
immunoblotting with 11D7 for Rb (a) or with 9G3 for hshec1-113p (b).
Aliquots of the same lysates were immunoprecipitated and immunoblotted
with 9G3 (c). hshec1-113p was co-precipitated by Rb specifically at 120 to 160 min after release from hydroxyurea treatment, corresponding to
G2/M phase, or metaphase arrest by nocodazole (time zero,
lane 11). (C and D) The DNA content of the same cells used for panel B
was analyzed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting as described
previously (59).
|
|
To explore whether M phase-specific binding exists in yeast cells
expressing Rb, the interaction was examined during cell cycle
progression. Cells from the strain carrying the hshec1-113 allele were induced to express Rb and then synchronized in early S
phase by treatment with hydroxyurea. After release from treatment, an
equal aliquot of cells was taken out every 20 min (Fig. 2B; lanes 1 to
10). hshec1-113p was coimmunoprecipitated by anti-Rb MAb in cells that
entered M phase, according to DNA content analysis (Fig. 2C and D), and
morphology was observed under the microscope. Similarly, hshec1-113p
and Rb were coimmunoprecipited in cells synchronized at metaphase with
nocodazole (Fig. 2B, lanes 11 and 12) but not in cells released from
nocodazole treatment for 1 h. These results indicated that the M
phase-specific interaction between Rb and hsHec1p can also be
reconstituted in yeast cells.
Rb specifically enhances the fidelity of chromosome
segregation.
The reconstitution of the specific interaction
between Rb and hsHec1p in yeast cells provided an in vivo system for
investigation of the consequence of this interaction. If hsHec1p plays
a crucial role in maintaining the fidelity of chromosome segregation as described previously (59), we surmised that Rb modulates
hsHec1p and enhances this activity. To test this hypothesis, we
examined the rate of chromosome missegregation by using the colony
sectoring assay (33) after induction of Rb expression in the
hshec1-113 diploid strain. This strain was chosen because of
its higher rate of chromosome segregation errors during mitosis
(59). The total numbers of pink colonies (representing 1:1
segregation of a single dispensable chromosome fragment carried by this
yeast strain), half-pink, half-red sectored colonies (representing 1:0
segregation), and half-white, half-red sectored colonies (representing
2:0 segregation) were counted. The rates of chromosome loss and
nondisjunction in the first division were determined by the frequencies
of half-pink, half-red colonies and half-white, half-red colonies,
respectively. As shown in Table 1, Rb
expression decreased the frequency of chromosome segregation errors due
to chromosome loss or nondisjunction by approximately fivefold. In
contrast, expression of the H209 mutant of Rb or the vector alone had
no effect. As another control, we examined the influence of Rb
expression on the strain carrying the hshec-113EK mutant; it
had no significant effect.
The observed difference in the frequencies of chromosome missegregation
is not due to the variable cell growth or cell cycle status, because
expression of Rb or H209 has no significant effects on these processes
in yeast cells carrying either wild-type HEC1 alleles
(21) or the mutant hshec1-113 allele (data not
shown). Therefore, the fidelity of chromosome segregation is enhanced specifically by interaction between Rb and hsHec1p.
Rb enhances the ability of hsHec1p to suppress lethality caused by
an smc1 mutation.
hsHec1p plays an essential role in
chromosome segregation in part through interacting with SMC1 protein,
which, in a complex with SMC3, is involved in sister chromatid cohesion
(24, 37, 54). The mutated hec1p fails to interact with Smc1p
physically in the hshec1-113 mutant cells at the
nonpermissive temperature (59). Overexpression of Hec1p
suppresses the lethal phenotype of the smc1-2 mutant strain
(1-1bAS172) at 37°C (55, 59). If Rb enhances the activity
of mutated hshec1p in the maintenance of proper chromosome segregation,
it is likely that Rb also enhances the activity of wild-type hsHec1p in
suppression of defective chromosome segregation due to the
smc1 mutation. To test this hypothesis, we employed the
yeast strain 2bAS273, which also carries the smc1-2 mutant
allele and has a lethal phenotype at temperatures above 33°C (D. Koshland, personal communication). The isogenic strain 4bWHL273,
carrying the same smc1-2 allele, was generated from 2bAS273
and transformed by plasmids expressing hsHec1p and Rb under control of
the GAL1 promoter. Cells overexpressing hsHec1p grew at
34°C, a nonpermissive temperature for this smc1 mutant strain, while cells not overexpressing hsHec1p failed to grow, whether
Rb was expressed or not (Fig. 3A).
Interestingly, if the temperature was raised further to 35 to 36°C,
cells overexpressing hsHec1p also failed to grow. Cells overexpressing
both hsHec1p and Rb, however, continued to grow, whereas cells
expressing the H209 mutant hardly survived at this higher temperature.
Overexpression of hshec1-EK suppressed the smc1-2 mutant at
34°C, but coexpression of Rb and hshec1-EK did not suppress it if the
temperature was raised further (Fig. 3B). These results suggested that
the specific interaction between Rb and wild-type hsHec1p results in
the enhancement of the fidelity of chromosome segregation, probably
mediated by the interaction between Hec1p and Smc1p.

View larger version (82K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Rb suppresses the ts phenotype of the smc1-2
mutant through hsHec1p. (A) 4bWHL273 (smc1-2) cells were
double transformed by hsHEC1 in a GAL1-inducible
and URA3-selectable vector (a YEplac195-based vector), by
RB or the H209 RB mutant cDNA in a
GAL1-inducible and TRP1-selectable vector
(pESC::TRP1), or by the vectors alone. (B)
4bWHL273 cells were double transformed by hsHEC1 or
hshec1-EK in the GAL1-inducible and
URA3-selectable vector and by Rb in the
GAL1-inducible and TRP1-selectable vector.
Different dilutions of log-phase cells grown at 25°C were inoculated
on three plates with 2% galactose in the same manner and incubated at
25, 34, or 36°C.
|
|
Specific binding of Smc1p to highly structured DNA.
SMC1
protein has been suggested to associate preferentially with highly
structured DNA regions of chromatin, such as AT-rich DNA, bent DNA, and
scaffold-associated regions (1, 22, 24, 29), and to mediate
intermolecular cross-linking in sister chromatid cohesion
(24). An in vitro binding assay for investigation of SMC1
DNA-binding activity has been established by using a 230-bp M13 RF DNA
fragment (bp 6001 to 6231), which has a very high potential to form
secondary structures, e.g., stem-loops, and therefore mimics highly
structured DNA regions (1). The carboxyl-terminal region of
SMC1 protein had been shown to mediate this specific DNA-binding
activity (1).
To partially purify the Smc1p protein complex from yeast cell lysates,
anti-Smc1p polyclonal antibodies (59) and a single-step immunoaffinity approach (25, 29) were employed. The
affinity-bound proteins were eluted by the use of a highly concentrated
GST fusion protein that had been used as the antigen to raise the
antibodies (59). Excessive GST fusion protein was
subsequently removed with glutathione-Sepharose. The affinity-purified
fraction (APF) was incubated with the 230-bp M13 RF DNA fragment.
Specific DNA-binding activity for the APF was detected by gel mobility
shift assays (Fig. 4A, lanes 1 to 3). The
abundance of the specific DNA-protein complex increased when more APF
was added. Meanwhile, the mobility of the DNA-protein complex decreased
and formed a more slowly migrating band (Fig. 4A, lane 3, bar). This
stoichiometric effect is consistent with previous observations for the
DNA-binding activity of another SMC-containing complex, the 13S
condensin in Xenopus (29). This DNA-protein
complex is not likely to be contaminated by the eluting antigen, which,
encompassing the C-terminal DNA-binding region of Smc1p (1),
formed a faster-migrating complex with the same DNA substrate (data not
shown).

View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
DNA-binding activity of Smc1p and Hec1p complexes. (A)
DNA-binding activity of Smc1p purified from equal numbers of wild-type
cells (lanes 1 to 3) and smc1-2 ts mutant cells (lanes 4 to
6) with a 230-bp M13 RF DNA fragment. The amount of concentrated
protein in each lane is shown, and the position of the DNA-protein
complex is indicated (arrow). Note that a slower-mobility complex (bar)
appeared when more protein was added. (B) Immunoblotting by mouse
anti-Smc1p polyclonal antibodies (upper panel) or by anti-scHec1p
polyclonal antibodies (lower panel) of lysates from smc1-2
ts mutant cells cultured at 25°C (lane 1) or 37°C (lane 2) for
6 h. (C) Immunoblotting of Smc1p purified from wild-type (lane 1)
or smc1-2 mutant (lane 2) cells cultured at 37°C for
6 h. (D) Competition of DNA-binding activity by unlabeled DNA
fragments. The amount of competitor DNA added in each reaction is
indicated above each lane. (E) DNA-binding activity of Smc1p purified
from wild-type hsHEC1 cells (lanes 1 to 3) or from the
hshec1-113 mutant cells (lanes 4 to 6) with the 230-bp M13
fragment. Cells were cultured at 25°C until log-phase growth and then
shifted to 37°C for 0, 3, and 6 h before harvest. (F) Comparable
amounts of Smc1p in each of the APFs were measured by immunoblotting
with anti-Smc1p antibodies and were used for panel E. (G) Antibody
supershift assay. Anti-Smc1p ( Smc1p) antibodies and anti-hsHec1p MAb
9G3 supershifted the DNA-protein complex formed by APF from hshec1-113
cells expressing Rb (lanes 1 to 12), but mouse IgG or anti-Rb MAb 11D7
did not. Anti-Smc1p also supershifted the DNA-binding complex formed by
APF from hshec1-113 cells not expressing Rb (lanes 13 to 15) and by APF
from the wild-type hsHEC1 cells (lanes 16 and 17). Lanes 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16, no antibodies; lanes 2 and 3, 0.5 and 1 µg of mouse IgG,
respectively, lanes 5 and 6, 0.5 and 1 µg anti-Smc1p antibody,
respectively; lanes 8 and 9, 0.5 and 1 µg of 9G3, respectively; lanes
11 and 12, 0.5 and 1 µg of 11D7, respectively; lanes 14 and 15, 0.5 and 1 µg of anti-Smc1p antibody, respectively; lane 17, 0.5 µg of
anti-Smc1p antibody. The original shift is indicated by an arrow, and
the antibody supershift is indicated by an arrowhead.
|
|
In order to determine the specificity of this DNA-binding activity, we
also tested the APF from the smc1-2 mutant cells cultured at
37°C, with smc1p inactivated (55). Our observation
suggested that this mutated protein is unstable and barely detectable
in these mutant cells cultured for 6 h at 37°C (Fig. 4B). No
Smc1p-containing complex was obtained from these cells using the same
purification procedure (Fig. 4C), and therefore, no DNA-binding
activity was detected (Fig. 4A, lanes 4 to 6).
To determine whether this Smc1p-associated activity is specific to the
highly structured DNA, the DNA-binding activity was competed by
unlabeled DNA fragments containing the scaffold-associated region of
S. cerevisiae CEN3. This centromere region was suggested to
be a preferential binding site of SMC proteins and was able to compete
with the M13 fragment in the in vitro DNA-binding assay of recombinant
SMC1 (1). As shown in Fig. 4D, the Smc1p-associated DNA-binding activity that we detected in the yeast cells can also be
competed by unlabeled CEN3 DNA and M13 DNA fragment but not by the
region on pUC19 DNA with the least potential to form the secondary
structures (1).
We also used a similar procedure to partially purify myc-tagged Smc1p
from yeast cells overexpressing myc-Smc1p by use of anti-c-myc MAb and
elution with the corresponding peptide. myc-Smc1p has the same
DNA-binding activity (data not shown).
Hec1p modulates specific DNA-binding activity of Smc1p.
To
test whether a deficiency in Hec1p activity affects the function of
Smc1p, we examined the activity of Smc1p in the hshec1-113 mutant yeast cells and compared it with that in cells expressing wild-type hsHec1p. Cells expressing wild-type hsHec1p or
mutant hshec1-113p were cultured at the permissive temperature (25°C) and then shifted to 37°C for different periods of time. Equal numbers
of cells were harvested and lysed. The resultant cell lysates from
different samples contained comparable amounts of total proteins and
were subjected to affinity purification of Smc1p. The DNA-binding
activity of Smc1p in the wild-type cells did not change significantly
after the cells were shifted to 37°C. In the hshec1-113
mutant cells, however, this Smc1p activity dramatically decreased, and
only less than 20% remained after 6 h at 37°C (Fig. 4E). The
amount of Smc1p expressed in the hshec1-113 cells was comparable to
that in the wild-type cells (Fig. 4F), suggesting that the functional
defect resulted specifically because of the mutated hec1p. The
mobilities of the DNA-binding complexes from the wild-type cells and
the mutant hshec1-113 cells were very similar; only if gel
electrophoresis was prolonged more than usual could they be
distinguished (data not shown). It is therefore likely that Hec1p is
present in the DNA-binding complex. As shown in Fig. 4G, anti-Hec1p
antibodies and anti-Smc1p antibodies, but not anti-Rb antibodies or
mouse immunoglobulin G (IgG), were able to supershift the DNA-binding
complex. These results suggest that Hec1p is present in the complex
with Smc1p to mediate the DNA-binding activity. Similar results were
observed with APF from yeast cells expressing the wild-type Hec1p or
cells not expressing Rb (Fig. 4G, lanes 13 to 17).
Rb, through hsHec1p, enhances the DNA-binding activity of
Smc1p.
If Rb enhances the fidelity of chromosome segregation,
which may be mediated by the DNA-binding activity of Smc1p through hsHec1p, this Smc1p activity should increase in the cells expressing Rb. To test this hypothesis, we examined the DNA-binding activity of
Smc1p in the same Rb-reconstituted yeast strains that had been tested
for frequencies of chromosome missegregation. As in the colony
sectoring assay, the cells were cultured at 30°C for 8 h while
either Rb or the H209 mutant was induced. In the hshec1-113 cells carrying only the empty vector, the DNA-binding activity of Smc1p
decreased dramatically, to 30 to 40% of the wild-type level (Fig. 5A
and C). These results are consistent with
the abnormally high frequencies of chromosome missegregation in the
same cells at the permissive temperature (Table 1). In cells expressing wild-type Rb, however, Smc1p DNA-binding activity was restored nearly
to normal levels. Expression of the H209 mutant had no such effect, nor
did wild-type Rb expression alone affect cells carrying the
hshec1-113EK allele, which encodes a protein that cannot
bind to Rb.

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Rb enhances the DNA-binding activity of Smc1p through
hsHec1p. (A) DNA-binding ability of Smc1p purified from equal numbers
of cells expressing various forms of Rb and hsHec1p. Expression of Rb
and the H209 mutant was induced by addition of 2% galactose to the
medium, and cells were cultured at 30°C in this medium for 8 h
before harvest. (B) Immunoblot showing that comparable amounts of Smc1p
were detected in each of the affinity-purified products used for panel
A. (C) Histogram showing relative binding activity of Smc1p in each
lane of panel A. (D) DNA-binding ability of Smc1p purified from
hshec1-113 cells expressing Rb (lanes 1 to 4) or the H209
mutant (lanes 5 to 8). Cells were cultured at 25°C in medium
containing 2% galactose for 8 h to induce the expression of
wild-type Rb or the H209 mutant and then shifted to 37°C for 0, 1.5, 3, or 6 h before harvest. (E) Immunoblot showing comparable
amounts of Smc1p in each of the APFs used for panel D. (F) Effect of Rb
on the DNA-binding activity of Smc1p in hshec1-113 cells.
The relative DNA-binding activity of Smc1p indicates the ratio between
the quantified density result of each lane in panel D and that of lane
1 for Rb or lane 5 for H209. Bars represent standard errors from three
separate experiments.
|
|
To further corroborate this finding, the dynamic effect of Rb on the
activity of hsHec1p was examined. hshec1-113 cells were cultured at 25°C in medium containing 2% galactose to induce the expression of Rb or the H209 mutant and then shifted to 37°C for different periods of time. As in the previous experiment (Fig. 4E), the
DNA-binding activity of Smc1p began to decrease after cells were
shifted to 37°C (Fig. 5D and F). This decrease of Smc1p activity,
however, was significantly retarded during the first 3 h at 37°C
in the cells expressing Rb compared with the cells expressing H209
mutant (Fig. 5F). By 6 h, Smc1p activity in both strains was very
low. This result suggested that Rb can restore much of the activity
impaired by mutation of hshec1p but cannot by itself complement the
complete loss of hshec1p. Interestingly, Rb was not found in the Smc1p
DNA-binding complex, since anti-Rb antibodies were not able to
supershift the complex formed by the APF from hshec1-113
cells expressing wild-type Rb (Fig. 4G). Rb thus appears to function
like a chaperone, consistent with a previous proposal (6).
The above results suggest that a potential role of Rb in the modulation
of SMC1 through hsHec1p exists and that both Hec1p and SMC1 proteins
are functionally conserved from yeast to humans (24, 54,
59). It is therefore likely that Rb, Hec1p, and SMC1 may form a
single complex in mammalian cells. To test this notion, hsHec1p and
human SMC1 protein were coimmunoprecipitated with each other in human
T24 cells (Fig. 6), consistent with our previous observation showing that the Hec1p-SMC1 interaction is conserved (59). Interestingly, the hypophosphorylated form
of Rb was also coimmunoprecipitated. As a control, anti-GST MAb 8G11 did not coimmunoprecipitate any of these proteins (Fig. 6). These results suggest that Rb is present in a complex with Hec1p and SMC1 and
support a potential role for Rb in modulating the activity of SMC1.

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Rb, hsHec1p, and hSMC1 protein form a complex in human
cells. Asynchronous fast-growing human T24 cells (6 × 106) were lysed and immunoprecipitated (IP) by mouse
anti-hSMC1 ( hSMC1) antiserum (lane 1), anti-Rb MAb 11D7 (lane 2),
anti-hsHec1p MAb 9G3 (lane 3), and anti-GST MAb 8G11 (lane 4). The
immunocomplexes were separated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis, followed by immunoblotting with anti-hSMC1
antiserum to detect human SMC1 (a), with 11D7 to detect Rb (b), and
with 9G3 to detect hsHec1p (c).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
In this study, we have employed a yeast system to address the
function of Rb in chromosome segregation. Expression of Rb reduced chromosome segregation errors in cells carrying a mutant form of
hsHec1p and enhanced the survival rate of smc1 mutant cells with defects in chromosome segregation. Complexes of Hec1p and Smc1p
play essential roles in chromosome segregation. Rb appears to chaperone
Hec1p and indirectly to enhance the DNA-binding activity of Smc1p.
These results reveal a novel biological activity of Rb intimately
linked to its role in carcinogenesis and cancer progression.
The lack of an Rb homolog in yeast allowed us to address Rb function
using yeast machinery as a powerful assay tool, without interference
from endogenous Rb. Mechanisms similar to those governing Rb
phosphorylation in mammalian cells have been demonstrated in yeast
(21). However, no significant differences in cell
morphology, growth rate, cell cycle progression, or mating pheromone
response were observed in yeast cells expressing human wild-type or
mutant Rb. These results suggest that Rb does not exert a function when yeast lacks specific cellular mediators of the antiproliferation and
differentiation functions of Rb during G1 phase.
Alternatively, potential mediators of such functions in yeast are
unable to interact with Rb; such is the case with yeast Hec1p, which
has no Rb-binding motif. In either case, the lack of both Rb and
mediators of Rb function in yeast made it possible to exploit the yeast
cell as an assay system for chromosome segregation and to reconstitute the interaction between hsHec1p and Rb in this system. This assay system ensures that the observed phenomena are direct and specific consequences of Rb expression and are specifically mediated by hsHec1p.
Expression of Rb decreased the frequency of chromosome segregation
errors fivefold but was insufficient alone to rescue the yeast cells
completely from aberrant mitosis. The fivefold enhancement is likely
reminiscent of the physiological effect from a high-level regulator on
the basic machinery for chromosome segregation. This improvement in the
fidelity of chromosome segregation, however, would be quite significant
in higher organisms, considering the millions of cells undergoing
mitosis or meiosis daily. In the case of a lack of functional Rb,
chromosome segregation errors in mammalian cells are expected to occur
at a frequency similar to that for the wild-type yeast. Apparently, a
higher fidelity of chromosome segregation is required for higher
organisms to avoid errors in the more complicated chromosome segregation.
The biochemical mechanisms by which Rb modulates the activity of Hec1p
and by which Hec1p modulates the activity of Smc1p remain to be
elucidated. Our studies of DNA-binding activity of Smc1p from cells
with different genetic backgrounds have provided some important clues
leading to the understanding of these biochemical mechanisms. The
DNA-binding activity of SMC1 is suggested to serve as a biochemical
basis for its function in the chromatin assembly essential for sister
chromatid cohesion and chromosome segregation (24). The
modulation of this activity will undoubtedly affect the biological
function of SMC1 in chromosome segregation, although other functions of
Smc1p may also be influenced. It has been suggested that SMC1 forms
complexes with various proteins, most of which, however, have not been
revealed (24, 54). Our results indicate that Hec1p is
present in the DNA-binding complex of Smc1p and also suggest that Hec1p
is important for the biochemical activity of this complex.
Consistently, the interaction between Hec1p and Smc1p is critical for
proper chromosome segregation (59). Although purified
recombinant protein containing the C-terminal region of SMC1 was shown
to have the DNA-binding activity (1), it is likely that SMC1
requires other cofactors, such as Hec1p, to enhance its activity for a
more stable binding of structured DNA. Rb appears to enhance the
DNA-binding activity of Smc1p through Hec1p. This positive regulatory
effect of Rb has also been observed in a number of transcription
factors, such as MyoD (47), the glucocorticoid receptor
(53), C/EBP
(6), NF-IL6 (7), and
c-jun (45). Our results showing that Rb is not a component of the DNA-binding complex formed by Smc1p and Hec1p suggest that Rb
may serve as a chaperone for Hec1p, presumably by stabilizing its
active conformation. Taken together, the results presented here suggest
a potential role of Rb in regulation of SMC1 through hsHec1p.
The functional analysis of Rb in the heterologous yeast system is
further supported by the in vivo interaction between Rb, Hec1p, and
SMC1 in mammalian cells. The presence of Rb in a complex with Hec1p and
Smc1p suggests the relevance of the novel Rb function revealed by the
yeast study to mammalian cells where Rb exists. The complex formed
between Rb and SMC1 indicates a biological role of Rb in the SMC1
activity, although Rb is not present in the DNA-binding complex of
SMC1. Rb thus appears to modulate the activity of SMC1 before SMC1
binds to chromatin DNA. Unlike the activities of Hec1p and SMC1, this M
phase activity of Rb does not appear to be required by either yeast or
mammalian cells for their basic machinery of chromosome segregation or
for cell survival. Nevertheless, such an activity of Rb in regulating
SMC1 could be important for higher fidelity of chromosome segregation
and higher integrity of mitotic chromosome structures in mammalian cells.
Whether loss of Rb function leads to a decrease in the fidelity of
chromosome segregation in mammalian cells remains to be explored.
Nonetheless, such an activity for Rb may explain in part the abnormal
process of mitosis observed in Rb-deficient fibroblasts and the
chromosome abnormalities observed in Rb-deficient tumor cells (12,
28). It may also provide some clues for explaining observations
that the majority of human retinoblastomas losing the wild-type allele
and reduplicating the mutant allele early in the course of
carcingenesis result from nondisjunction and misproportioning of sister
chromatids (4, 19). Interestingly, yeast or human cells
lacking functional Hec1p complete mitosis with unseparated or unequally
separated chromosomes and enter a new cell cycle, leading to
hyperploidy and aneuploidy (10, 57, 59). This is similar to
the phenomenon observed in Rb-deficient fibroblasts treated with
nocodazole (12, 28). Since neither loss of Rb function nor
loss of Hec1p function appears to affect the mitotic checkpoint control
(28, 59), microtubule-destabilizing agents probably
challenge the chromosome segregation process in Rb-deficient cells and
thereby induce a high frequency of aberrant mitosis. These results
indirectly support the role of Rb in chromosome segregation.
Taken together, the results of this study, using a heterologous yeast
system, provide a useful assay and more direct evidence for revealing
the mechanistic process of a novel function of Rb in chromosome
segregation. The study thereby contributes to explaining a new critical
role of Rb in human carcinogenesis.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
The first two authors contributed equally to this report.
We thank O. Cohen-Fix, R. D. Gietz, D. Koshland, P. Hieter, C. Holm, A. M. Hoyt, C. Mann, A. Murray, and A. Strunnikov for yeast
strains, antibodies, plasmid vectors, and assistance in yeast genetic
analysis, and we thank T. Boyer for his critical reading of the manuscript.
This work was supported by NIH grants (EY05758 and CA58318), and L.Z.
was supported by a predoctoral training grant from the U.S. Army
(DAMD17-99-1-9402).
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Molecular Medicine/Institute of Biotechnology, University of Texas
Health Science Center at San Antonio, 15355 Lambda Dr., San Antonio, TX
78245. Phone: (210) 567-7351. Fax: (210) 567-7377. E-mail: leew{at}uthscsa.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Akhmedov, A. T.,
C. Frei,
M. Tsai-Pflugfelder,
M. B. Kemper,
S. M. Gasser, and R. Jessberger.
1998.
Structural maintenance of chromosome's protein C-terminal domains bind preferentially to DNA with secondary structure.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:24088-24094[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Baker, S. H.,
D. L. Frederick,
A. Bloecher, and K. Tatchell.
1997.
Alanine-scanning mutagenesis of protein phosphatase type 1 in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Genetics
145:615-626[Abstract].
|
| 3.
|
Bloecher, A., and K. Tatchell.
1999.
Defects in Saccharomyces cerevisiae protein phosphatase type I activate the spindle/kinetochore checkpoint.
Genes Dev.
13:517-522[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Cavenee, W. K.,
T. P. Dryja,
R. A. Phillips,
W. F. Benedict,
R. Godbout,
B. L. Gallie,
A. L. Murphree,
L. C. Strong, and R. L. White.
1983.
Expression of recessive alleles by chromosomal mechanisms in retinoblastoma.
Nature
305:779-784[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Chen, P.-L.,
D. J. Riley, and W.-H. Lee.
1995.
The retinoblastoma protein as a fundamental mediator of growth and differentiation signals.
Crit. Rev. Eukaryot. Gene Express.
5:79-95[Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Chen, P.-L.,
D. J. Riley, and W.-H. Lee.
1996.
Retinoblastoma protein positively regulates terminal adipocyte differentiation through direct interaction with C/EBPs.
Genes Dev.
10:2745-2752[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Chen, P.-L.,
D. J. Riley,
S. Chen-Kiang, and W.-H. Lee.
1996.
Retinoblastoma protein directly interacts with and activates the transcription factor NF-IL6.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:465-469[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Chen, P.-L.,
P. Scully,
J.-Y. Shew,
J. Y.-J. Wang, and W.-H. Lee.
1989.
Phosphorylation of the retinoblastoma gene product is modulated during cell cycle and cellular differentiation.
Cell
58:1193-1198[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Chen, P.-L.,
Y.-C. Ueng,
T. Durfee,
K.-C. Chen,
T. Yang-Feng, and W.-H. Lee.
1995.
Identification of a human homologue of yeast nuc2 which interacts with the retinoblastoma protein in a specific manner.
Cell Growth Differ.
6:199-210[Abstract].
|
| 10.
|
Chen, Y.,
D. J. Riley,
P.-L. Chen, and W.-H. Lee.
1997.
HEC, a novel nuclear protein rich in leucine haptad repeats specifically involved in mitosis.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:6049-6056[Abstract].
|
| 11.
|
Chen, Y.,
Z. D. Sharp, and W.-H. Lee.
1997.
HEC binds to the seventh regulatory subunit of the 26 S proteasome and modulates the proteolysis of mitotic cyclins.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:24081-24087[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Di Leonardo, A. S.,
S. H. Khan,
S. P. Linke,
V. Greco,
G. Seidita, and G. M. Wahl.
1997.
DNA rereplication in the presence of mitotic spindle inhibitors in human and mouse fibroblasts lacking either p53 or pRb function.
Cancer Res.
57:1013-1019[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Durfee, T.,
K. Becherer,
P.-L. Chen,
S.-H. Yeh,
Y. Yang,
A. E. Kilburn,
W.-H. Lee, and S. J. Elledge.
1993.
The retinoblastoma protein associates with the protein phosphatase type 1 catalytic subunit.
Genes Dev.
7:555-569[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Ewen, M. E.,
Y. Xing,
J. B. Lawrence, and D. M. Livingston.
1991.
Molecular cloning, chromosomal mapping, and expression of the cDNA for p107, a retinoblastoma gene product-related protein.
Cell
66:1155-1164[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Fukasawa, K.,
T. Choi,
R. Kuriyama,
S. Rulong, and G. F. Vande Woude.
1996.
Abnormal centrosome amplification in the absence of p53.
Science
271:1744-1747[Abstract].
|
| 16.
|
Gietz, R. D., and A. Sugino.
1988.
New yeast-E. coli shuttle vectors constructed with in vitro mutagenized yeast genes lacking six-base pair restrictive sites.
Gene
74:527-534[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Goodrich, D. W.,
N. P. Wang,
Y.-W. Qian,
E. Y.-H. P. Lee, and W.-H. Lee.
1991.
The retinoblastoma gene product regulates progression through the G1 phase of the cell cycle.
Cell
67:293-302[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Gualberto, A.,
K. Aldape,
K. Kozakiewicz, and T. D. Tlsty.
1998.
An oncogenic form of p53 confers a dominant, gain-of-function phenotype that disrupts spindle checkpoint control.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:5166-5171[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Hagstrom, S. A., and T. P. Dryja.
1999.
Mitotic recombination map of 13cen-13q14 derived from an investigation of loss of heterozygosity in retinoblastomas.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96:2952-2957[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Hannon, G. J.,
D. Demetrick, and D. Beach.
1993.
Isolation of the Rb-related p130 through its interaction with CDK2 and cyclins.
Genes Dev.
7:2378-2391[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Hatakeyama, M.,
J. A. Brill,
G. R. Fink, and R. A. Weinberg.
1994.
Collaboration of G1 cyclins in the functional inactivation of the retinoblastoma protein.
Genes Dev.
8:1759-1771[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Heck, M. M. S.
1997.
Condensins, cohesins, and chromosome architecture: how to make and break a mitotic chromosome.
Cell
91:5-8[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Hinds, P. W.,
S. Mittnacht,
V. Dulic,
A. Arnold,
S. I. Reed, and R. A. Weinberg.
1992.
Regulation of retinoblastoma protein functions by ectopic expression of human cyclins.
Cell
70:993-1006[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Hirano, T.
1999.
SMC-mediated chromosome mechanics: a conserved scheme from bacteria to vertebrates?
Genes Dev.
13:11-19[Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Hirano, T.,
R. Kobayashi, and M. Hirano.
1997.
Condensins, chromosome condensation protein complexes containing XCAP-C, XCAP-E and a Xenopus homolog of the Drosophila Barren protein.
Cell
89:511-521[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Hyland, K. M.,
J. Kingsbury,
D. Koshland, and P. Hieter.
1999.
Ctf19p: a novel kinetochore protein in Saccharomyces serevisiae and potential link between the kinetochore and mitotic spindle.
J. Cell Biol.
145:15-28[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Karantza, V.,
A. Maroo,
D. Fay, and J. M. Sedivy.
1993.
Overproduction of Rb protein after the G1/S boundary causes G2 arrest.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:6640-6652[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Khan, S. H., and G. M. Wahl.
1998.
p53 and pRb prevent rereplication in response to microtubule inhibitors by mediating a reversible G1 arrest.
Cancer Res.
58:396-401[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Kimura, K., and T. Hirano.
1997.
ATP-dependent positive supercoiling of DNA by 13S condensin: a biochemical implication for chromosome condensation.
Cell
90:625-634[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
King, R. W.,
R. J. Deshaies,
J. Peters, and M. W. Kirschner.
1996.
How proteolysis drives the cell cycle.
Science
274:1652-1659[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Knudsen, E. S.,
C. Buckmaster,
T.-T. Chen,
J. R. Feramisco, and J. Y.-J. Wang.
1998.
Inhibition of DNA synthesis by RB: effects on G1/S transition and S-phase progression.
Genes Dev.
12:2278-2292[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Koepp, D. M.,
J. W. Harper, and S. J. Elledge.
1999.
How the cyclin became a cyclin: regulated proteolysis in the cell cycle.
Cell
97:431-434[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Koshland, D., and P. Hieter.
1987.
Visual assay for chromosome ploidy.
Methods Enzymol.
155:351-372[Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Lanni, J. S., and T. Jacks.
1998.
Characterization of the p53-dependent postmitotic checkpoint following spindle disruption.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:1055-1064[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Lengauer, C.,
K. W. Kinzler, and B. Vogelstein.
1998.
Genetic instability in human cancers.
Nature
396:643-649[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 36.
|
Li, Y.,
C. Graham,
S. Lacy,
M. V. Duncan, and P. Whyte.
1993.
The adenovirus E1A-associated 130-kD protein is encoded by a member of the retinoblastoma gene family and physically interacts with cyclins A and E.
Genes Dev.
7:2366-2377[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Losada, A.,
M. Hirano, and T. Hirano.
1998.
Identification of Xenopus SMC protein complexes required for sister chromatid cohesion.
Genes Dev.
12:1986-1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Ludlow, J. W.,
C. L. Glendening,
D. M. Livingston, and J. A. DeCaprio.
1993.
Specific enzymatic dephosphorylation of the retinoblastoma protein.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:367-372[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Mayol, X.,
X. Grana,
A. Baldi,
N. Sang,
Q. Hu, and A. Giordano.
1993.
Cloning of a new member of the retinoblastoma gene family (pRB2) which binds to the E1A transforming domain.
Oncogene
8:2561-2566[Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Meluh, P. B., and D. Koshland.
1997.
Budding yeast centromere composition and assembly as revealed by in vivo cross-linking.
Genes Dev.
11:3401-3412[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Mumberg, D.,
R. Muller, and M. Funk.
1994.
Regulatable promoters of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: comparison of transcriptional activity and their use for heterologous expression.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:5767-5768[Free Full Text].
|
| 42.
|
Murray, A. W., and J. W. Szostak.
1985.
Chromosome segregation in mitosis and meiosis.
Annu. Rev. Cell Biol.
1:289-315[CrossRef].
|
| 43.
|
Murray, A. W.
1995.
The genetics of cell cycle checkpoints.
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
5:5-11[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 44.
|
Nasmyth, K.
1995.
At the heart of the budding yeast cell cycle.
Trends Genet.
12:405-412.
|
| 45.
|
Nead, M. A.,
L. A. Baglia,
M. J. Antinore,
J. W. Ludlow, and D. J. McCance.
1998.
Rb binds c-Jun and activates transcription.
EMBO J.
17:2342-2352[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 46.
|
Niculescu, A. B., III,
X. Chen,
M. Smeets,
L. Hengst,
C. Prives, and S. I. Reed.
1998.
Effects of p21(Cip1/Waf1) at both the G1/S and the G2/M cell cycle transitions: pRb is a critical determinant in blocking DNA replication and in preventing endoreplication.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:629-643[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 47.
|
Novitch, B. G.,
G. J. Mulligan,
T. Jacks, and A. B. Lassar.
1996.
Skeletal muscle cells lacking the retinoblastoma protein display defects in muscle gene expression and accumulate in S and G2 phases of the cell cycle.
J. Cell Biol.
135:441-456[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 48.
|
Nurse, P.
1994.
Ordering S phase and M phase in the cell cycle.
Cell
79:547-550[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 49.
|
Ohkura, H.,
N. Kinoshita,
S. Miyatani,
T. Toda, and M. Yanagida.
1989.
The fission yeast dis2+ gene required for chromosome disjoining encodes one of two putative type 1 protein phosphatases.
Cell
57:997-1007[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 50.
|
Riley, D. J.,
E. Y.-H. P. Lee, and W.-H. Lee.
1994.
The retinoblastoma protein: more than a tumor suppressor.
Annu. Rev. Cell Biol.
10:1-29[CrossRef].
|
| 51.
|
Sassoon, I.,
F. F. Severin,
P. D. Andrews,
M.-R. Taba,
K. B. Kaplan,
A. J. Ashford,
M. J. R. Stark,
P. K. Sorger, and A. A. Hyman.
1999.
Regulation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae kinetochores by the type 1 phosphatase Glc7p.
Genes Dev.
13:545-555[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 52.
|
Sherr, C. J.
1996.
Cancer cell cycles.
Science
274:1672-1677[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 53.
|
Singh, P.,
J. Coe, and W. Hong.
1995.
A role for retinoblastoma protein in potentiating transcriptional activation by the glucocorticoid receptor.
Nature
374:562-565[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 54.
|
Strunnikov, A. V.
1998.
SMC proteins and chromosome structure.
Trends Cell Biol.
8:454-459[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 55.
|
Strunnikov, A. V.,
V. L. Larionov, and D. Koshland.
1993.
SMC1: an essential yeast gene encoding a putative head-rod-tail protein is required for nuclear division and defines a new ubiquitous protein family.
J. Cell Biol.
123:1635-1648[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 56.
|
Thomas, J. T., and L. A. Laimins.
1998.
Human papillomavirus oncoproteins E6 and E7 independently abrogate the mitotic spindle checkpoint.
J. Virol.
72:1131-1137[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 57.
|
Wigge, P. A.,
O. N. Jensen,
S. Holmes,
S. Soues,
M. Mann, and J. V. Kilmartin.
1998.
Analysis of the Saccharomyces spindle pole by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) mass spectrometry.
J. Cell Biol.
141:967-977[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 58.
|
Yanagida, M.
1998.
Fission yeast cut mutations revisited: control of anaphase.
Trends Cell Biol.
8:144-149[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 59.
|
Zheng, L.,
Y. Chen, and W.-H. Lee.
1999.
Hec1p, an evolutionarily conserved coiled-coil protein, modulates chromosome segregation through interaction with SMC proteins.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:5417-5428[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 60.
|
Zhu, X.,
M. A. Mancini,
K.-H. Chang,
C.-Y. Liu,
C.-F. Chen,
B. Shan,
D. Jones,
T. L. Yang-Feng, and W.-H. Lee.
1995.
Characterization of a novel 350-kilodalton nuclear phosphoprotein that is specifically involved in mitotic-phase progression.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:5017-5029[Abstract].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, May 2000, p. 3529-3537, Vol. 20, No. 10
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Chen, Y., Riley, D. J., Zheng, L., Chen, P.-L., Lee, W.-H.
(2002). Phosphorylation of the Mitotic Regulator Protein Hec1 by Nek2 Kinase Is Essential for Faithful Chromosome Segregation. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 49408-49416
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Nikitin, A. Y., Liu, C.-Y., Flesken-Nikitin, A., Chen, C.-F., Chen, P.-L., Lee, W.-H.
(2002). Cell Lineage-specific Effects Associated with Multiple Deficiencies of Tumor Susceptibility Genes in Msh2-/-Rb+/- Mice. Cancer Res.
62: 5134-5138
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zheng, L., Flesken-Nikitin, A., Chen, P.-L., Lee, W.-H.
(2002). Deficiency of Retinoblastoma Gene in Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells Leads to Genetic Instability. Cancer Res.
62: 2498-2502
[Abstract]
[Full Text]