A Kinase-Phosphatase Network that Regulates Kinetochore-Microtubule Attachments and the SAC.

The KMN network (for KNL1, MIS12 and NDC80 complexes) is a hub for signalling at the outer kinetochore. It integrates the activities of two kinases (MPS1 and Aurora B) and two phosphatases (PP1 and PP2A-B56) to regulate kinetochore-microtubule attachments and the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC). We will first discuss each of these enzymes separately, to describe how they are regulated at kinetochores and why this is important for their primary function in controlling either microtubule attachments or the SAC. We will then discuss why inhibiting any one of them individually produces secondary effects on all the others. This cross-talk may help to explain why all enzymes have been linked to both processes, even though the direct evidence suggests they each control only one. This chapter therefore describes how a network of kinases and phosphatases work together to regulate two key mitotic processes.

Cell-scale biophysical determinants of cell competition in epithelia.

How cells with different genetic makeups compete in tissues is an outstanding question in developmental biology and cancer research. Studies in recent years have revealed that cell competition can either be driven by short-range biochemical signalling or by long-range mechanical stresses in the tissue. To date, cell competition has generally been characterised at the population scale, leaving the single-cell-level mechanisms of competition elusive. Here, we use high time-resolution experimental data to construct a multi-scale agent-based model for epithelial cell competition and use it to gain a conceptual understanding of the cellular factors that governs competition in cell populations within tissues. We find that a key determinant of mechanical competition is the difference in homeostatic density between winners and losers, while differences in growth rates and tissue organisation do not affect competition end result. In contrast, the outcome and kinetics of biochemical competition is strongly influenced by local tissue organisation. Indeed, when loser cells are homogenously mixed with winners at the onset of competition, they are eradicated; however, when they are spatially separated, winner and loser cells coexist for long times. These findings suggest distinct biophysical origins for mechanical and biochemical modes of cell competition.

Division of labour between PP2A-B56 isoforms at the centromere and kinetochore.

PP2A-B56 is a serine/threonine phosphatase complex that regulates several major mitotic processes, including sister chromatid cohesion, kinetochore-microtubule attachment and the spindle assembly checkpoint. We show here that these key functions are divided between different B56 isoforms that localise to either the centromere or kinetochore. The centromeric isoforms rely on a specific interaction with Sgo2, whereas the kinetochore isoforms bind preferentially to BubR1 and other proteins containing an LxxIxE motif. In addition to these selective binding partners, Sgo1 helps to anchor PP2A-B56 at both locations: it collaborates with BubR1 to maintain B56 at the kinetochore and it helps to preserve the Sgo2/B56 complex at the centromere. A series of chimaeras were generated to map the critical region in B56 down to a small C-terminal loop that regulates the key interactions and defines B56 localisation. Together, this study describes how different PP2A-B56 complexes utilise isoform-specific interactions to control distinct processes during mitosis.

PP1 and PP2A Use Opposite Phospho-dependencies to Control Distinct Processes at the Kinetochore.

PP1 and PP2A-B56 are major serine/threonine phosphatase families that achieve specificity by colocalizing with substrates. At the kinetochore, however, both phosphatases localize to an almost identical molecular space and yet they still manage to regulate unique pathways and processes. By switching or modulating the positions of PP1/PP2A-B56 at kinetochores, we show that their unique downstream effects are not due to either the identity of the phosphatase or its precise location. Instead, these phosphatases signal differently because their kinetochore recruitment can be either inhibited (PP1) or enhanced (PP2A) by phosphorylation inputs. Mathematical modeling explains how these inverse phospho-dependencies elicit unique forms of cross-regulation and feedback, which allows otherwise indistinguishable phosphatases to produce distinct network behaviors and control different mitotic processes. Furthermore, our genome-wide analysis suggests that these major phosphatase families may have evolved to respond to phosphorylation inputs in opposite ways because many other PP1 and PP2A-B56-binding motifs are also phospho-regulated.

Mitotic kinases and phosphatases cooperate to shape the right response.

Kinases and phosphatases, two sides of the same coin; are they opposing forces that switch signals on and off or enzymes that work together to give the right type of response at the right time? It depends on how close you stand when you view the big picture. Up close and detailed, and you'll see individual phosphorylation sites as binary switches - lights being toggled on/off by antagonistic forces. Take a step back and multiple copies of the same light are being toggled, perhaps leading to a range of intensities, or a flickering pattern, lights flashing in unison or at random. It depends what the signal requires. Stand even further back, let the story unfold, and you'll see a dazzling multicolour array of different lights. A coordinated sequence of color that appears to burst into life at different times in different places, with a pace that is both frantic and serene. This is a vision of mitosis and what a true spectacle it is.

Negative feedback at kinetochores underlies a responsive spindle checkpoint signal.

Kinetochores are specialized multi-protein complexes that play a crucial role in maintaining genome stability. They bridge attachments between chromosomes and microtubules during mitosis and they activate the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) to arrest division until all chromosomes are attached. Kinetochores are able to efficiently integrate these two processes because they can rapidly respond to changes in microtubule occupancy by switching localized SAC signalling ON or OFF. We show that this responsiveness arises because the SAC primes kinetochore phosphatases to induce negative feedback and silence its own signal. Active SAC signalling recruits PP2A-B56 to kinetochores where it antagonizes Aurora B to promote PP1 recruitment. PP1 in turn silences the SAC and delocalizes PP2A-B56. Preventing or bypassing key regulatory steps demonstrates that this spatiotemporal control of phosphatase feedback underlies rapid signal switching at the kinetochore by: allowing the SAC to quickly transition to the ON state in the absence of antagonizing phosphatase activity; and ensuring phosphatases are then primed to rapidly switch the SAC signal OFF when kinetochore kinase activities are diminished by force-producing microtubule attachments.