scholarly journals Breakage of CRISPR/Cas9-Induced Chromosome Bridges in Mitotic Cells

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Rodriguez-Muñoz ◽  
Martina Serrat ◽  
David Soler ◽  
Anna Genescà ◽  
Teresa Anglada
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Mechanical Stress ◽  
Genome Instability ◽  
Spindle Pole ◽  
Experimental Models ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Histone H2ax ◽  
Chromosome Bridge ◽  
Chromosome Bridges ◽  
Dna Ends

Chromosomal instability, the most frequent form of plasticity in cancer cells, often proceeds through the formation of chromosome bridges. Despite the importance of these bridges in tumor initiation and progression, debate remains over how and when they are resolved. In this study, we investigated the behavior and properties of chromosome bridges to gain insight into the potential mechanisms underlying bridge-induced genome instability. We report that bridges may break during mitosis or may remain unbroken until the next interphase. During mitosis, we frequently observed discontinuities in the bridging chromatin, and our results strongly suggest that a substantial fraction of chromosome bridges are broken during this stage of the cell cycle. This notion is supported by the observation that the chromatin flanking mitotic bridge discontinuities is often decorated with the phosphorylated form of the histone H2AX, a marker of DNA breaks, and by MDC1, an early mediator of the cell response to DNA breaks. Also, free 3′OH DNA ends were detected in more than half of the bridges during the final stages of cell division. However, even if detected, the DNA ends of broken bridges are not repaired in mitosis. To investigate whether mitotic bridge breakage depends on mechanical stress, we used experimental models in which chromosome bridges with defined geometry are formed. Although there was no association between spindle pole separation or the distance among non-bridge kinetochores and bridge breakage, we found a direct correlation between the distance between bridge kinetochores and bridge breakage. Altogether, we conclude that the discontinuities observed in bridges during mitosis frequently reflect a real breakage of the chromatin and that the mechanisms responsible for chromosome bridge breakage during mitosis may depend on the separation between the bridge kinetochores. Considering that previous studies identified mechanical stress or biochemical digestion as possible causes of bridge breakage in interphase cells, a multifactorial model emerges for the breakage of chromosome bridges that, according to our results, can occur at different stages of the cell cycle and can obey different mechanisms.

scholarly journals Increased Common Fragile Site Expression, Cell Proliferation Defects, and Apoptosis following Conditional Inactivation of Mouse Hus1 in Primary Cultured Cells

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 1044-1055 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Zhu ◽  
Robert S. Weiss
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cultured Cells ◽  
Chromosomal Abnormalities ◽  
Fragile Site ◽  
Loxp Site ◽  
Fragile Sites ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Common Fragile Sites ◽  
Histone H2ax

Targeted disruption of the mouse Hus1 cell cycle checkpoint gene results in embryonic lethality and proliferative arrest in cultured cells. To investigate the essential functions of Hus1, we developed a system for the regulated inactivation of mouse Hus1 in primary fibroblasts. Inactivation of a loxP site-flanked conditional Hus1 allele by using a cre-expressing adenovirus resulted in reduced cell doubling, cell cycle alterations, and increased apoptosis. These phenotypes were associated with a significantly increased frequency of gross chromosomal abnormalities and an S-phase–specific accumulation of phosphorylated histone H2AX, an indicator of double-stranded DNA breaks. To determine whether these chromosomal abnormalities occurred randomly or at specific genomic regions, we assessed the stability of common fragile sites, chromosomal loci that are prone to breakage in cells undergoing replication stress. Hus1 was found to be essential for fragile site stability, because spontaneous chromosomal abnormalities occurred preferentially at common fragile sites upon conditional Hus1 inactivation. Although p53 levels increased after Hus1 loss, deletion of p53 failed to rescue the cell-doubling defect or increased apoptosis in conditional Hus1 knockout cells. In summary, we propose that Hus1 loss leads to chromosomal instability during DNA replication, triggering increased apoptosis and impaired proliferation through p53-independent mechanisms.

scholarly journals DNA Damage and L1 Retrotransposition

2006 ◽  
Vol 2006 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan A. Farkash ◽  
Eline T. Luning Prak
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Genome Instability ◽  
Genotoxic Stress ◽  
Severe Form ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoints ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Double Stranded Dna ◽  
Barbara Mcclintock ◽  
L1 Element

Barbara McClintock was the first to suggest that transposons are a source of genome instability and that genotoxic stress assisted in their mobilization. The generation of double-stranded DNA breaks (DSBs) is a severe form of genotoxic stress that threatens the integrity of the genome, activates cell cycle checkpoints, and, in some cases, causes cell death. Applying McClintock's stress hypothesis to humans, are L1 retrotransposons, the most active autonomous mobile elements in the modern day human genome, mobilized by DSBs? Here, evidence that transposable elements, particularly retrotransposons, are mobilized by genotoxic stress is reviewed. In the setting of DSB formation, L1 mobility may be affected by changes in the substrate for L1 integration, the DNA repair machinery, or the L1 element itself. The review concludes with a discussion of the potential consequences of L1 mobilization in the setting of genotoxic stress.

scholarly journals Regulation of Cell Division in Bacteria by Monitoring Genome Integrity and DNA Replication Status

2019 ◽  
Vol 202 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter E. Burby ◽  
Lyle A. Simmons
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cell Division ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Genome Instability ◽  
Sos Response ◽  
Bacterial Cells ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Content Type

ABSTRACT All organisms regulate cell cycle progression by coordinating cell division with DNA replication status. In eukaryotes, DNA damage or problems with replication fork progression induce the DNA damage response (DDR), causing cyclin-dependent kinases to remain active, preventing further cell cycle progression until replication and repair are complete. In bacteria, cell division is coordinated with chromosome segregation, preventing cell division ring formation over the nucleoid in a process termed nucleoid occlusion. In addition to nucleoid occlusion, bacteria induce the SOS response after replication forks encounter DNA damage or impediments that slow or block their progression. During SOS induction, Escherichia coli expresses a cytoplasmic protein, SulA, that inhibits cell division by directly binding FtsZ. After the SOS response is turned off, SulA is degraded by Lon protease, allowing for cell division to resume. Recently, it has become clear that SulA is restricted to bacteria closely related to E. coli and that most bacteria enforce the DNA damage checkpoint by expressing a small integral membrane protein. Resumption of cell division is then mediated by membrane-bound proteases that cleave the cell division inhibitor. Further, many bacterial cells have mechanisms to inhibit cell division that are regulated independently from the canonical LexA-mediated SOS response. In this review, we discuss several pathways used by bacteria to prevent cell division from occurring when genome instability is detected or before the chromosome has been fully replicated and segregated.

Signaling pathways involved in cell cycle arrest during the DNA breaks

DNA Repair ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 98 ◽  
pp. 103047
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Sadoughi ◽  
Jamal Hallajzadeh ◽  
Zatollah Asemi ◽  
Mohammad Ali Mansournia ◽  
Forough Alemi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Cycle Arrest ◽  
Signaling Pathways ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Cycle Arrest

scholarly journals OASIS/CREB3L1 is a factor that responds to nuclear envelope stress

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasunao Kamikawa ◽  
Atsushi Saito ◽  
Koji Matsuhisa ◽  
Masayuki Kaneko ◽  
Rie Asada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Endoplasmic Reticulum ◽  
Nuclear Envelope ◽  
Genome Instability ◽  
Nuclear Lamina ◽  
Nuclear Deformation ◽  
Membrane Domain ◽  
Stress Response Pathway ◽  
Envelope Stress ◽  
Genome Activity

AbstractThe nuclear envelope (NE) safeguards the genome and is pivotal for regulating genome activity as the structural scaffold of higher-order chromatin organization. NE had been thought as the stable during the interphase of cell cycle. However, recent studies have revealed that the NE can be damaged by various stresses such as mechanical stress and cellular senescence. These types of stresses are called NE stress. It has been proposed that NE stress is closely related to cellular dysfunctions such as genome instability and cell death. Here, we found that an endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-resident transmembrane transcription factor, OASIS, accumulates at damaged NE. Notably, the major components of nuclear lamina, Lamin proteins were depleted at the NE where OASIS accumulates. We previously demonstrated that OASIS is cleaved at the membrane domain in response to ER stress. In contrast, OASIS accumulates as the full-length form to damaged NE in response to NE stress. The accumulation to damaged NE is specific for OASIS among OASIS family members. Intriguingly, OASIS colocalizes with the components of linker of nucleoskeleton and cytoskeleton complexes, SUN2 and Nesprin-2 at the damaged NE. OASIS partially colocalizes with BAF, LEM domain proteins, and a component of ESCRT III, which are involved in the repair of ruptured NE. Furthermore, OASIS suppresses DNA damage induced by NE stress and restores nuclear deformation under NE stress conditions. Our findings reveal a novel NE stress response pathway mediated by OASIS.

scholarly journals The Meiosis-Specific Crs1 Cyclin Is Required for Efficient S-Phase Progression and Stable Nuclear Architecture

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 5483
Author(s):  
Luisa F. Bustamante-Jaramillo ◽  
Celia Ramos ◽  
Cristina Martín-Castellanos
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Translational Control ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Nuclear Architecture ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Spindle Pole ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Single Wave ◽  
Phase Progression

Cyclins and CDKs (Cyclin Dependent Kinases) are key players in the biology of eukaryotic cells, representing hubs for the orchestration of physiological conditions with cell cycle progression. Furthermore, as in the case of meiosis, cyclins and CDKs have acquired novel functions unrelated to this primal role in driving the division cycle. Meiosis is a specialized developmental program that ensures proper propagation of the genetic information to the next generation by the production of gametes with accurate chromosome content, and meiosis-specific cyclins are widespread in evolution. We have explored the diversification of CDK functions studying the meiosis-specific Crs1 cyclin in fission yeast. In addition to the reported role in DSB (Double Strand Break) formation, this cyclin is required for meiotic S-phase progression, a canonical role, and to maintain the architecture of the meiotic chromosomes. Crs1 localizes at the SPB (Spindle Pole Body) and is required to stabilize the cluster of telomeres at this location (bouquet configuration), as well as for normal SPB motion. In addition, Crs1 exhibits CDK(Cdc2)-dependent kinase activity in a biphasic manner during meiosis, in contrast to a single wave of protein expression, suggesting a post-translational control of its activity. Thus, Crs1 displays multiple functions, acting both in cell cycle progression and in several key meiosis-specific events.

scholarly journals A Genetic Screen for Suppressors and Enhancers of the Drosophila Cdk1-Cyclin B Identifies Maternal Factors That Regulate Microtubule and Microfilament Stability

Genetics ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 162 (3) ◽  
pp. 1179-1195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun-Yuan Ji ◽  
Marjan Haghnia ◽  
Cory Trusty ◽  
Lawrence S B Goldstein ◽  
Gerold Schubiger
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Genetic Screen ◽  
Cyclin B ◽  
Gene Products ◽  
Nuclear Movement ◽  
Cell Cycles ◽  
Major Mechanism ◽  
Cytoskeletal Dynamics ◽  
Chromosome Bridges

Abstract Coordination between cell-cycle progression and cytoskeletal dynamics is important for faithful transmission of genetic information. In early Drosophila embryos, increasing maternal cyclin B leads to higher Cdk1-CycB activity, shorter microtubules, and slower nuclear movement during cycles 5-7 and delays in nuclear migration to the cortex at cycle 10. Later during cycle 14 interphase of six cycB embryos, we observed patches of mitotic nuclei, chromosome bridges, abnormal nuclear distribution, and small and large nuclei. These phenotypes indicate disrupted coordination between the cell-cycle machinery and cytoskeletal function. Using these sensitized phenotypes, we performed a dosage-sensitive genetic screen to identify maternal proteins involved in this process. We identified 10 suppressors classified into three groups: (1) gene products regulating Cdk1 activities, cdk1 and cyclin A; (2) gene products interacting with both microtubules and microfilaments, Actin-related protein 87C; and (3) gene products interacting with microfilaments, chickadee, diaphanous, Cdc42, quail, spaghetti-squash, zipper, and scrambled. Interestingly, most of the suppressors that rescue the astral microtubule phenotype also reduce Cdk1-CycB activities and are microfilament-related genes. This suggests that the major mechanism of suppression relies on the interactions among Cdk1-CycB, microtubule, and microfilament networks. Our results indicate that the balance among these different components is vital for normal early cell cycles and for embryonic development. Our observations also indicate that microtubules and cortical microfilaments antagonize each other during the preblastoderm stage.

Asymmetry of the spindle pole bodies and spg1p GAP segregation during mitosis in fission yeast

1999 ◽  
Vol 112 (14) ◽  
pp. 2313-2321 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Cerutti ◽  
V. Simanis
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Fission Yeast ◽  
Spindle Pole Body ◽  
Mitotic Cell ◽  
Spindle Pole ◽  
The Other ◽  
Septum Formation ◽  
Spindle Pole Bodies ◽  
Interphase Cells ◽  
Early Mitosis

In the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe, the onset of septum formation is induced by a signal transduction network involving several protein kinases and a GTPase switch. One of the roles of the spg1p GTPase is to localise the cdc7p protein kinase to the poles of the mitotic spindle, from where the onset of septation is thought to be signalled at the end of mitosis. Immunofluorescence studies have shown that cdc7p is located on both spindle pole bodies early in mitosis, but only on one during the later stages of anaphase. This is mediated by inactivation of spg1p on one pole before the other. The GAP for spg1p is a complex of two proteins, cdc16p and byr4p. Localisation of cdc16p and byr4p by indirect immunofluorescence during the mitotic cell cycle showed that both proteins are present on the spindle pole body in interphase cells. During mitosis, byr4p is seen first on both poles of the spindle, then on only one. This occurs prior to cdc7p becoming asymmetric. In contrast, the signal due to cdc16p decreases to a low level during early mitosis, before being seen strongly on the same pole as byr4p. Double staining indicates that this is the opposite pole to that which retains cdc7p in late anaphase. Examination of the effect of inactivating cdc16p at various stages of the cell cycle suggests that cdc16p, together with cdc2p plays a role in restraining septum formation during interphase. The asymmetric inactivation of spg1p is mediated by recruitment of the cdc16p-byr4p GAP to one of the poles of the spindle before the other, and the asymmetry of the spindle pole bodies may be established early during mitosis. Moreover, the spindle pole bodies appear to be non-equivalent even after division has been completed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document