Chromosome segregation errors: a double-edged sword - TI Pharma

41. McEwen, B.F., et al., CENP-E is essential for reliable bioriented spindle attachment, but chromosome alignment can be
achieved via redundant mechanisms in mammalian cells. Mol Biol Cell, 2001. 12(9): p. 2776-89.
42. Kapoor, T.M., et al., Chromosomes can congress to the metaphase plate before biorientation. Science, 2006.
311(5759): p. 388-91.
43. Cleveland, D.W., Y. Mao, and K.F. Sullivan, Centromeres and kinetochores: from epigenetics to mitotic checkpoint
signaling. Cell, 2003. 112(4): p. 407-21.
44. Dujardin, D., et al., Evidence for a role of CLIP-170 in the establishment of metaphase chromosome alignment. J Cell
Biol, 1998. 141(4): p. 849-62.
45. Tanenbaum, M.E., et al., CLIP-170 facilitates the formation of kinetochore-microtubule attachments. EMBO J, 2006.
25(1): p. 45-57.
46. Wordeman, L. and T.J. Mitchison, Identification and partial characterization of mitotic centromere-associated kinesin,
a kinesin-related protein that associates with centromeres during mitosis. J Cell Biol, 1995. 128(1-2): p. 95-104.
47. Yang, Z., et al., Kinetochore dynein is required for chromosome motion and congression independent of the spindle
checkpoint. Curr Biol, 2007. 17(11): p. 973-80.
48. Howell, B.J., et al., Cytoplasmic dynein/dynactin drives kinetochore protein transport to the spindle poles and has a
role in mitotic spindle checkpoint inactivation. J Cell Biol, 2001. 155(7): p. 1159-72.
49. Maiato, H., A. Khodjakov, and C.L. Rieder, Drosophila CLASP is required for the incorporation of microtubule subunits
into fluxing kinetochore fibres. Nat Cell Biol, 2005. 7(1): p. 42-7.
50. Arnaud, L., J. Pines, and E.A. Nigg, GFP tagging reveals human Polo-like kinase 1 at the kinetochore/centromere
region of mitotic chromosomes. Chromosoma, 1998. 107(6-7): p. 424-9.
51. Rattner, J.B., et al., CENP-F is a .ca 400 kDa kinetochore protein that exhibits a cell-cycle dependent localization. Cell
Motil Cytoskeleton, 1993. 26(3): p. 214-26.
52. Kitajima, T.S., M. Ohsugi, and J. Ellenberg, Complete kinetochore tracking reveals error-prone homologous
chromosome biorientation in mammalian oocytes. Cell, 2011. 146(4): p. 568-81.
53. Tanaka, T.U., et al., Evidence that the Ipl1-Sli15 (Aurora kinase-INCENP) complex promotes chromosome bi-orientation
by altering kinetochore-spindle pole connections. Cell, 2002. 108(3): p. 317-29.
54. Hauf, S., et al., The small molecule Hesperadin reveals a role for Aurora B in correcting kinetochore-microtubule
attachment and in maintaining the spindle assembly checkpoint. J Cell Biol, 2003. 161(2): p. 281-94.
55. Lampson, M.A., et al., Correcting improper chromosome-spindle attachments during cell division. Nat Cell Biol, 2004.
6(3): p. 232-7.
56. Cimini, D., et al., Aurora kinase promotes turnover of kinetochore microtubules to reduce chromosome segregation
errors. Curr Biol, 2006. 16(17): p. 1711-8.
57. Ruchaud, S., M. Carmena, and W.C. Earnshaw, Chromosomal passengers: conducting cell division. Nat Rev Mol Cell
Biol, 2007. 8(10): p. 798-812.
58. DeLuca, J.G., et al., Kinetochore microtubule dynamics and attachment stability are regulated by Hec1. Cell, 2006.
127(5): p. 969-82.
59. Welburn, J.P., et al., Aurora B phosphorylates spatially distinct targets to differentially regulate the kinetochore-
microtubule interface. Mol Cell, 2010. 38(3): p. 383-92.
60. Liu, D., et al., Regulated targeting of protein phosphatase 1 to the outer kinetochore by KNL1 opposes Aurora B
kinase. J Cell Biol, 2010. 188(6): p. 809-20.
61. Kim, Y., et al., Aurora kinases and protein phosphatase 1 mediate chromosome congression through regulation of
CENP-E. Cell, 2010. 142(3): p. 444-55.
62. Andrews, P.D., et al., Aurora B regulates MCAK at the mitotic centromere. Dev Cell, 2004. 6(2): p. 253-68.
63. Lan, W., et al., Aurora B phosphorylates centromeric MCAK and regulates its localization and microtubule
depolymerization activity. Curr Biol, 2004. 14(4): p. 273-86.
64. Knowlton, A.L., W. Lan, and P.T. Stukenberg, Aurora B is enriched at merotelic attachment sites, where it regulates
MCAK. Curr Biol, 2006. 16(17): p. 1705-10.
65. Zhang, X., et al., Aurora B phosphorylates multiple sites on mitotic centromere-associated kinesin to spatially and
temporally regulate its function. Mol Biol Cell, 2007. 18(9): p. 3264-76.
66. Liu, D., et al., Sensing chromosome bi-orientation by spatial separation of aurora B kinase from kinetochore
substrates. Science, 2009. 323(5919): p. 1350-3.
67. DeLuca, K.F., S.M. Lens, and J.G. DeLuca, Temporal changes in Hec1 phosphorylation control kinetochore-microtubule
attachment stability during mitosis. J Cell Sci, 2011. 124(Pt 4): p. 622-34.
68. Li, X. and R.B. Nicklas, Mitotic forces control a cell-cycle checkpoint. Nature, 1995. 373(6515): p. 630-2.
69. Rieder, C.L., et al., Anaphase onset in vertebrate somatic cells is controlled by a checkpoint that monitors sister
kinetochore attachment to the spindle. J Cell Biol, 1994. 127(5): p. 1301-10.
70. Rieder, C.L., et al., The checkpoint delaying anaphase in response to chromosome monoorientation is mediated by an
inhibitory signal produced by unattached kinetochores. J Cell Biol, 1995. 130(4): p. 941-8.
71. Hoyt, M.A., L. Totis, and B.T. Roberts, S. cerevisiae genes required for cell cycle arrest in response to loss of
microtubule function. Cell, 1991. 66(3): p. 507-17.
72. Li, R. and A.W. Murray, Feedback control of mitosis in budding yeast. Cell, 1991. 66(3): p. 519-31.
73. Li, Y. and R. Benezra, Identification of a human mitotic checkpoint gene: hsMAD2. Science, 1996. 274(5285): p. 246-8.
74. Taylor, S.S. and F. McKeon, Kinetochore localization of murine Bub1 is required for normal mitotic timing and
checkpoint response to spindle damage. Cell, 1997. 89(5): p. 727-35.
75. Campbell, M.S., G.K. Chan, and T.J. Yen, Mitotic checkpoint proteins HsMAD1 and HsMAD2 are associated with
nuclear pore complexes in interphase. J Cell Sci, 2001. 114(Pt 5): p. 953-63.
76. Taylor, S.S., E. Ha, and F. McKeon, The human homologue of Bub3 is required for kinetochore localization of Bub1 and
a Mad3/Bub1-related protein kinase. J Cell Biol, 1998. 142(1): p. 1-11.
77. Peters, J.M., The anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome: a machine designed to destroy. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol,
2006. 7(9): p. 644-56.
78. Yu, H., et al., Identification of a novel ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme involved in mitotic cyclin degradation. Curr Biol,
1996. 6(4): p. 455-66.
79. Aristarkhov, A., et al., E2-C, a cyclin-selective ubiquitin carrier protein required for the destruction of mitotic cyclins.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1996. 93(9): p. 4294-9.
80. Williamson, A., et al., Identification of a physiological E2 module for the human anaphase-promoting complex. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2009. 106(43): p. 18213-8.
81. Garnett, M.J., et al., UBE2S elongates ubiquitin chains on APC/C substrates to promote mitotic exit. Nat Cell Biol,
2009. 11(11): p. 1363-9.
82. Kulukian, A., J.S. Han, and D.W. Cleveland, Unattached kinetochores catalyze production of an anaphase inhibitor that
requires a Mad2 template to prime Cdc20 for BubR1 binding. Dev Cell, 2009. 16(1): p. 105-17.
83. Suijkerbuijk, S.J., et al., The Vertebrate Mitotic Checkpoint Protein BUBR1 Is an Unusual Pseudokinase. Dev Cell, 2012.
161
Addendum
&