Abstract
In meiosis, sister-chromatids move to the same spindle pole during the first division (MI) and to opposite poles during the second division (MII). This requires that MI sister kinetochores are co-orientated and form an apparent single functional unit that only interacts with microtubules from one pole, and that sister-chromatids remain associated through their centromeres until anaphase II. Here we investigate the function of Bub1 and Mad2, which are components of the mitotic-spindle checkpoint, on chromosome segregation during meiosis. Both proteins are required to prevent the occurrence of non-disjunction events in MI, which is consistent with recent findings that components of the mitotic-spindle checkpoint also operate during meiosis1. However, Bub1 has several functions that are not shared with Mad2. When the bub1 gene is deleted, sister chromatids often move to opposite spindle poles during MI, indicating that sister kinetochores are disunited. Furthermore, the cohesin Rec8 is never retained at centromeres at anaphase I and sister-chromatid cohesion is lost. Our results show that Bub1, besides its functions in monitoring chromosome attachment, is essential for two other significant aspects of MI — unification of sister kinetochores and retention of centromeric cohesion.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Shonn, M. A., McCarroll, R. & Murray, A. W. Science 289, 300–303 (2000).
Dobie, K. W., Hari, K. L., Maggert, K. A. & Karpen, G. H. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 9, 206–217 (1999).
Moreno, S., Klar, A. & Nurse, P. Methods Enzymol. 194, 795–823 (1991).
Chikashige, Y. et al. Science 264, 270–273 (1994).
Bernard, P., Hardwick, K. & Javerzat, J. P. J. Cell Biol. 143, 1775–1787 (1998).
Nicklas, R. B. Science 275, 632–637 (1997).
Nabeshima, K. et al. Mol. Biol. Cell 9, 3211–3225 (1998).
Klein, F. et al. Cell 98, 91–103 (1999).
Shimoda, C., Hirata, A., Kishida, M., Hashida, T. & Tanaka, K. Mol. Gen. Genet. 200, 252–257 (1985).
Watanabe, Y. & Nurse, P. Nature 400, 461–464 (1999).
Molnar, M., Bahler, J., Sipiczki, M. & Kohli, J. Genetics 141, 61–73 (1995).
Paliulis, L. V. & Nicklas, R. B. J. Cell Biol. 150, 1223–1232 (2000).
Hugerat, Y. & Simchen, G. Genetics 135, 297–308 (1993).
Kamieniecki, R. J., Shanks, R. M. & Dawson, D. S. Curr. Biol. 10, 1182–1190 (2000).
Muller, W. Chromosoma 38, 139–172 (1972).
Goldstein, L. S. Cell 25, 591–602 (1981).
Lin, H. P. & Church, K. Genetics 102, 751–770 (1982).
Basu, J. et al. J. Cell Biol. 146, 13–28 (1999).
Toth, A. et al. Cell 103, 1155–1168 (2000).
Kerrebrock, A. W., Miyazaki, W. Y., Birnby, D. & Orr-Weaver, T. L. Genetics 130, 827–841 (1992).
Kerrebrock, A. W., Moore, D. P., Wu, J. S. & Orr-Weaver, T. L. Cell 83, 247–256 (1995).
Kim, S. H., Lin, D. P., Matsumoto, S., Kitazono, A. & Matsumoto, T. Science 279, 1045–1047 (1998).
Woods, A. et al. J. Cell Sci. 93, 491–500 (1989).
Uzawa, S. & Yanagida, M. J. Cell Sci. 101, 267–275 (1992).
Hagan, I. & Yanagida, M. J. Cell Biol. 129, 1033–1047 (1995).
Ekwall, K. et al. J. Cell Sci. 109, 2637–2648 (1996).
Takahashi, K. et al. Mol. Biol. Cell 3, 819–835 (1992).
Acknowledgements
We thank K. Gull, I. Hagan, T. Matsumoto, M. Yanagida, Y. Watanabe and P. Nurse for antibodies, strains and FISH probes, and R. Allshire for advice. This work was supported by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and l'Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer and by a fellowship from the Ministère de la Recherche et de l'Enseignement Supérieur (to P.B. and J-F.M.).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bernard, P., Maure, JF. & Javerzat, JP. Fission yeast Bub1 is essential in setting up the meiotic pattern of chromosome segregation. Nat Cell Biol 3, 522–526 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/35074598
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35074598
This article is cited by
-
Making an effective switch at the kinetochore by phosphorylation and dephosphorylation
Chromosoma (2013)
-
Complex regulation of sister kinetochore orientation in meiosis-I
Journal of Biosciences (2010)
-
Studies of meiosis disclose distinct roles of cohesion in the core centromere and pericentromeric regions
Chromosome Research (2009)
-
Cell-cycle regulation of cohesin stability along fission yeast chromosomes
The EMBO Journal (2008)
-
Aurora controls sister kinetochore mono-orientation and homolog bi-orientation in meiosis-I
The EMBO Journal (2007)