Whether and how human tumours are genetically unstable has been debated for decades. There is now evidence that most cancers may indeed be genetically unstable, but that the instability exists at two distinct levels. In a small subset of tumours, the instability is observed at the nucleotide level and results in base substitutions or deletions or insertions of a few nucleotides. In most other cancers, the instability is observed at the chromosome level, resulting in losses and gains of whole chromosomes or large portions thereof. Recognition and comparison of these instabilities are leading to new insights into tumour pathogenesis.

Genetic instabilities in human cancers

Microtubule nucleation is regulated by the γ-tubulin ring complex (γTuRC) and related γ-tubulin complexes, providing spatial and temporal control over the initiation of microtubule growth. Recent structural work has shed light on the mechanism of γTuRC-based microtubule nucleation, confirming the long-standing hypothesis that the γTuRC functions as a microtubule template. The first crystallographic analysis of a non-γ-tubulin γTuRC component (γ-tubulin complex protein 4 (GCP4)) has resulted in a new appreciation of the relationships among all γTuRC proteins, leading to a refined model of their organization and function. The structures have also suggested an unexpected mechanism for regulating γTuRC activity via conformational modulation of the complex component GCP3. New experiments on γTuRC localization extend these insights, suggesting a direct link between its attachment at specific cellular sites and its activation.

Microtubule nucleation by γ-tubulin complexes

GTPases are conserved molecular switches, built according to a common structural design. Rapidly accruing knowledge of individual GTPases--crystal structures, biochemical properties, or results of molecular genetic experiments--support and generate hypotheses relating structure to function in other members of the diverse family of GTPases.

The GTPase superfamily: conserved structure and molecular mechanism

We have constructed and tested a dominant resistance module, for selection of S. cerevisiae transformants, which entirely consists of heterologous DNA. This kanMX module contains the known kanr open reading-frame of the E. coli transposon Tn903 fused to transcriptional and translational control sequences of the TEF gene of the filamentous fungus Ashbya gossypii. This hybrid module permits efficient selection of transformants resistant against geneticin (G418). We also constructed a lacZMT reporter module in which the open reading-frame of the E. coli lacZ gene (lacking the first 9 codons) is fused at its 3' end to the S. cerevisiae ADH1 terminator. KanMX and the lacZMT module, or both modules together, were cloned in the center of a new multiple cloning sequence comprising 18 unique restriction sites flanked by Not I sites. Using the double module for constructions of in-frame substitutions of genes, only one transformation experiment is necessary to test the activity of the promotor and to search for phenotypes due to inactivation of this gene. To allow for repeated use of the G418 selection some kanMX modules are flanked by 470 bp direct repeats, promoting in vivo excision with frequencies of 10(-3)-10(-4). The 1.4 kb kanMX module was also shown to be very useful for PCR based gene disruptions. In an experiment in which a gene disruption was done with DNA molecules carrying PCR-added terminal sequences of only 35 bases homology to each target site, all twelve tested geneticin-resistant colonies carried the correctly integrated kanMX module.

New heterologous modules for classical or PCR‐based gene disruptions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Small GTP-binding proteins (G proteins) exist in eukaryotes from yeast to human and constitute a superfamily consisting of more than 100 members. This superfamily is structurally classified into at least five families: the Ras, Rho, Rab, Sar1/Arf, and Ran families. They regulate a wide variety of cell functions as biological timers (biotimers) that initiate and terminate specific cell functions and determine the periods of time for the continuation of the specific cell functions. They furthermore play key roles in not only temporal but also spatial determination of specific cell functions. The Ras family regulates gene expression, the Rho family regulates cytoskeletal reorganization and gene expression, the Rab and Sar1/Arf families regulate vesicle trafficking, and the Ran family regulates nucleocytoplasmic transport and microtubule organization. Many upstream regulators and downstream effectors of small G proteins have been isolated, and their modes of activation and action have gradually been elucidated. Cascades and cross-talks of small G proteins have also been clarified. In this review, functions of small G proteins and their modes of activation and action are described.

Small GTP-Binding Proteins

γ-Tubulin is a highly conserved component of the centrosome

Centrosomes are microtubule-organizing centres of animal cells. They influence the morphology of the microtubule cytoskeleton, function as the base for the primary cilium and serve as a nexus for important signalling pathways. At the core of a typical centrosome are two cylindrical microtubule-based structures termed centrioles, which recruit a matrix of associated pericentriolar material. Cells begin the cell cycle with exactly one centrosome, and the duplication of centrioles is constrained such that it occurs only once per cell cycle and at a specific site in the cell. As a result of this duplication mechanism, the two centrioles differ in age and maturity, and thus have different functions; for example, the older of the two centrioles can initiate the formation of a ciliary axoneme. We discuss spatial aspects of the centrosome duplication cycle, the mechanism of centriole assembly and the possible consequences of the inherent asymmetry of centrioles and centrosomes.

/pdf/the-centrosome-cycle-centriole-biogenesis-duplication-and-3n59nddanx.pdf

The centrosome cycle: Centriole biogenesis, duplication and inherent asymmetries

Publisher Summary This chapter reviews and provides detailed protocols for the application of immunofluorescence and other fluorescence-microscopic procedures to yeast. These procedures play a role that is separate from but equal to the role of electron microscopy. Although in some situations the greater resolving power of the electron microscope is clearly essential to obtain the needed structural information, in other situations the necessary information can be obtained more easily, more reliably, or both, by light (including fluorescence) microscopy. The potential advantages of light-microscopic approaches derive from the facts (1) that they can be applied to lightly processed or living cells, (2) that much larger numbers of cells can be examined than by electron microscopy (note especially the great labor involved in visualizing the structure of whole cells by serial-section methods), and (3) that some structures have simply been easier to see by light microscopy than by electron microscopy. The methods are also effective with other yeasts such as Schizosaccharomyces pombe and Candida albicans .

Fluorescence microscopy methods for yeast.

Proper orientation of the mitotic spindle is critical for successful cell division in budding yeast. To investigate the mechanism of spindle orientation, we used a green fluorescent protein (GFP)–tubulin fusion protein to observe microtubules in living yeast cells. GFP–tubulin is incorporated into microtubules, allowing visualization of both cytoplasmic and spindle microtubules, and does not interfere with normal microtubule function. Microtubules in yeast cells exhibit dynamic instability, although they grow and shrink more slowly than microtubules in animal cells. The dynamic properties of yeast microtubules are modulated during the cell cycle. The behavior of cytoplasmic microtubules revealed distinct interactions with the cell cortex that result in associated spindle movement and orientation. Dynein-mutant cells had defects in these cortical interactions, resulting in misoriented spindles. In addition, microtubule dynamics were altered in the absence of dynein. These results indicate that microtubules and dynein interact to produce dynamic cortical interactions, and that these interactions result in the force driving spindle orientation.

/pdf/microtubules-orient-the-mitotic-spindle-in-yeast-through-3lfw4yvnxj.pdf

Microtubules Orient the Mitotic Spindle in Yeast through Dynein-dependent Interactions with the Cell Cortex

The centrosome is duplicated just once per cell cycle so that there is one centrosome at the beginning of the cell cycle and two in mitosis. Defects in this process can cause genome instability and even cancer. An in vitro study points to a strikingly similarity between the way cells control centrosome duplication and chromosome segregation. The pair of centrioles in the centrosome disengage at the end of mitosis, a process requiring separase, a protease involved in sister chromatid separation at mitosis. The separated centrioles are a substrate for duplication in the next cell cycle. Newly duplicated centrioles are paired, so they cannot duplicate again until passage through mitosis, when they are freed to duplicate by separase-mediated disengagement. This work reveals a common mechanism behind the two cellular processes that result in exact duplication once per cycle. Centrosome duplication needs to be tightly controlled to occur once and only once per cell cycle. The regulated timing of centriole disengagement in late mitosis is shown to allow one round of centrosome duplication in the next cycle. The centrosome organizes the microtubule cytoskeleton and consists of a pair of centrioles surrounded by pericentriolar material. Cells begin the cell cycle with a single centrosome, which duplicates once before mitosis. During duplication, new centrioles grow orthogonally to existing ones and remain engaged (tightly opposed) with those centrioles until late mitosis or early G1 phase, when they become disengaged1. The relationship between centriole engagement/disengagement and centriole duplication potential is not understood, and the mechanisms that control these processes are not known. Here we show that centriole disengagement requires the protease separase2 at anaphase, and that this disengagement licences centriole duplication in the next cell cycle. We describe an in vitro system using Xenopus egg extract and purified centrioles in which both centriole disengagement and centriole growth occur. Centriole disengagement at anaphase is independent of mitotic exit and Cdk2/cyclin E activity, but requires the anaphase-promoting complex and separase. In contrast to disengagement, new centriole growth occurs in interphase, is dependent on Cdk2/cyclin E, and requires previously disengaged centrioles. This suggests that re-duplication of centrioles within a cell cycle is prevented by centriole engagement itself. We propose that the ‘once-only’ control of centrosome duplication is achieved by temporally separating licensing in anaphase from growth of new centrioles during S phase. The involvement of separase in both centriole disengagement and sister chromatid separation would prevent premature centriole disengagement before anaphase onset, which can lead to multipolar spindles and genomic instability3,4.

Tim Stearns

Papers

γ-Tubulin is a highly conserved component of the centrosome

The centrosome cycle: Centriole biogenesis, duplication and inherent asymmetries

Fluorescence microscopy methods for yeast.

Microtubules Orient the Mitotic Spindle in Yeast through Dynein-dependent Interactions with the Cell Cortex

Mechanism limiting centrosome duplication to once per cell cycle