| Literature DB >> 9817759 |
C Hofmann1, I M Cheeseman, B L Goode, K L McDonald, G Barnes, D G Drubin.
Abstract
In this paper, we describe the identification and characterization of two novel and essential mitotic spindle proteins, Duo1p and Dam1p. Duo1p was isolated because its overexpression caused defects in mitosis and a mitotic arrest. Duo1p was localized by immunofluorescence, by immunoelectron microscopy, and by tagging with green fluorescent protein (GFP), to intranuclear spindle microtubules and spindle pole bodies. Temperature-sensitive duo1 mutants arrest with short spindles. This arrest is dependent on the mitotic checkpoint. Dam1p was identified by two-hybrid analysis as a protein that binds to Duo1p. By expressing a GFP-Dam1p fusion protein in yeast, Dam1p was also shown to be associated with intranuclear spindle microtubules and spindle pole bodies in vivo. As with Duo1p, overproduction of Dam1p caused mitotic defects. Biochemical experiments demonstrated that Dam1p binds directly to microtubules with micromolar affinity. We suggest that Dam1p might localize Duo1p to intranuclear microtubules and spindle pole bodies to provide a previously unrecognized function (or functions) required for mitosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 1998 PMID: 9817759 PMCID: PMC2132964 DOI: 10.1083/jcb.143.4.1029
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cell Biol ISSN: 0021-9525 Impact factor: 10.539
Strains Used
| Name |
| Genotype | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDY757 |
|
| ||
| DDY759 |
|
| ||
|
| ||||
| DDY898 |
|
| ||
| DDY1102 |
|
| ||
| DDY1445 |
|
| ||
| DDY1446 |
|
| ||
|
| ||||
| DDY1447 |
|
| ||
|
| ||||
| DDY1522 |
|
| ||
|
| ||||
| DDY1523 | α |
| ||
| DDY1524 | α |
| ||
| DDY1525 | α |
| ||
| DDY1526 | α |
| ||
| MAY4425 |
|
| ||
| (M.A. Hoyt) |
Figure 1DUO1 overexpression phenotypes. (A) a–c are phase micrographs, d–f are fluorescence micrographs showing microtubule staining, and g–i are fluorescence micrographs showing DNA (DAPI) staining. The first column shows wild-type cells (a, d, and g), the second column shows cells after 8 h of DUO1 overexpression (b, e, and h), and the third column shows cells after 16 h of overexpression (c, f, and i). For overexpression studies, cells were grown in glucose medium until log phase, washed, and grown in raffinose medium for 12 h, and then galactose was added to the raffinose-containing medium. (B) The effect of DUO1 overexpression on spindle pole bodies. a and c show Tub4p staining, and b and d show nuclear (DAPI) staining. a and b show wild-type cells, and c and d show cells overexpressing DUO1 for 16 h. (C) FACS® analysis of nuclear DNA. a shows FACS® data for a wild-type control strain. b shows FACS® data before DUO1 overexpression. c shows FACS® data for the same cell line in b 8 h after overexpression of DUO1 was initiated. Bars, 5 μm.
Figure 2Subcellular localization of Duo1p. To demonstrate antibody specificity, a shows an immunoblot in which a yeast whole cell extract was probed with the Duo1p antiserum. A log phase culture of wild-type strain DDY898 was fixed and stained with antibodies against tubulin (b), Duo1p (c), and with DAPI to visualize DNA (d). The Duo1p localization by immunofluorescence was confirmed by localization of GFP–Duo1p (not shown). (e) A longitudinal EM section through a mitotic spindle, passing through one of the spindle pole bodies (S) and showing numerous spindle microtubules. Duo1p localization is shown by the 10-nm gold particles that appear to associate primarily with microtubules. Bars: (b–d) 5 μm; (e) 0.2 μm.
Analysis of duo1 Mutant Arrest Phenotypes
| Strain | Time after temperature shift |
| No microtubule structures | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||||
| wild type | 0 | 31 | 35 | 34 | ||||||||||
| 3 | 30 | 37 | 33 | |||||||||||
| 6 | 28 | 40 | 32 | |||||||||||
| 9 | 31 | 39 | 30 | |||||||||||
| 12 | 36 | 37 | 27 | |||||||||||
|
| 0 | 24 | 31 | 31 | 14 | |||||||||
| 3 | 20 | 18 | 21 | 41 | ||||||||||
| 6 | 21 | 10 | 14 | 55 | ||||||||||
| 9 | 17 | 8 | 8 | 62 | 5 | 2 | ||||||||
| 12 | 11 | 2 | 4 | 65 | 9 | 9 | ||||||||
|
| 0 | 25 | 27 | 31 | 13 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 25 | 5 | 10 | 57 | 3 | |||||||||
| 6 | 21 | 5 | 8 | 58 | 5 | 3 | ||||||||
| 9 | 14 | 2 | 4 | 43 | 3 | 35 | ||||||||
| 12 | 13 | 2 | 1 | 30 | 3 | 52 | ||||||||
Wild-type and temperature-sensitive duo1-1 and duo1-2 cells were grown at the permissive temperature and then shifted to the nonpermissive temperature for the indicated times. Spindles were examined by immunofluorescence every 3 h after temperature shift.
Figure 3Immunofluorescence analysis of microtubules in temperature-sensitive duo1 mutants. Wild-type cells, chromosomally integrated duo1-2 mutant cells, and duo-1 mad2Δ double mutant cells were grown to log phase at 25°C, shifted to 37°C for 90 min, and fixed for immunofluorescence microscopy. a–c show microtubule fluorescence for wild-type and duo1-2 and duo1-2 mad2Δ double mutant cells, respectively. d–f show DNA (DAPI) staining for the same cells shown in a–c. Bar, 10 μm.
Figure 4Binding of Dam1p to Duo1p. GST alone and GST– Duo1p fusion proteins were purified from yeast using glutathione beads (see Materials and Methods). Beads containing these proteins were then incubated with in vitro–translated three-repeat Tau (a negative control, see text) and with Dam1p (full-length Dam1p at 39 kD, with early termination product at ∼29 kD). After incubation, the beads were pelleted, and proteins present in the supernatants (S) and pellets (P) were examined on SDS-PAGE gels. The top panel shows an autoradiograph of the negative control, three-repeat Tau, which did not pellet with the beads. The bottom panel shows that Dam1p appears to bind specifically to GST–Duo1p beads but not to GST beads.
Figure 5Localization of Dam1p. DDY759 was transformed with a plasmid expressing a galactose-inducible GFP–Dam1p fusion protein. Cells were grown to early log phase in minimal medium containing glucose, and then the cells were washed and shifted to and maintained in minimal medium containing 2% glycerol for 10 h. The cells were then washed and shifted to medium containing 2% galactose. After 5–6 h of induction, cells were fixed and stained with an antitubulin antibody (middle column) and DAPI for DNA staining (right column). The GFP fluorescence from GFP–Dam1p (left column) colocalizes with the intranuclear spindle microtubules and spindle pole bodies. Bar, 10 μm.
Figure 6Overexpression of Dam1p results in spindle abnormalities. Dam1p was overexpressed in DDY759 as a GFP–Dam1p construct. Cells are shown after 8 h of overproduction. Fluorescence analysis of microtubule organization in cells overexpressing GFP– Dam1p is shown in the middle panels. Right panels show DNA staining by DAPI. Left panels show GFP–Dam1p fluorescence. Approximately 90% of cells overexpressing Dam1p or GFP–Dam1p arrested at the large-budded stage and displayed abnormal spindles or apparently monopolar spindles. Bar, 10 μm.
Figure 7Dam1p cosediments with microtubules. Different concentrations of taxol-stabilized microtubules were mixed with radio- labeled Dam1p or tau in vitro–translation products. The reactions were then centrifuged at high speeds to pellet the microtubules. The percentage of Dam1p and tau that copelleted with the microtubules in each reaction was determined by fractionating the pellets and supernatants on SDS-PAGE gels and quantitating levels by autoradiography and densitometry. (See text for discussion of three bands resulting when Dam1p is produced by translation in vitro.)