Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Sister chromatid resolution is an intrinsic part of chromosome organization in prophase

Nature Cell Biology volume 18, pages 692–699 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 12 February 2018

This article has been updated

Abstract

The formation of mitotic chromosomes requires both compaction of chromatin and the resolution of replicated sister chromatids. Compaction occurs during mitotic prophase and prometaphase, and in prophase relies on the activity of condensin II complexes1,2. Exactly when and how sister chromatid resolution occurs has been largely unknown, as has its molecular requirements. Here, we established a method to visualize sister resolution by sequential replication labelling with two distinct nucleotide derivatives. Quantitative three-dimensional imaging then allowed us to measure the resolution of sister chromatids throughout mitosis by calculating their non-overlapping volume within the whole chromosome. Unexpectedly, we found that sister chromatid resolution starts already at the beginning of prophase, proceeds concomitantly with chromatin compaction and is largely completed by the end of prophase. Sister chromatid resolution was abolished by inhibition of topoisomerase IIα and by depleting or preventing mitotic activation of condensin II, whereas blocking cohesin dissociation from chromosomes had little effect. Mitotic sister chromatid resolution is thus an intrinsic part of mitotic chromosome formation in prophase that relies largely on DNA decatenation and shares the molecular requirement for condensin II with prophase compaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Quantification of sister chromatid resolution on differentially labelled chromosomes.
Figure 2: Sister chromatid resolution largely completes in prophase.
Figure 3: Retention of cohesin has a modest effect on sister chromatid resolution.
Figure 4: Sister resolution in prophase requires the activity of Topo IIα.
Figure 5: Mitotic activity of condensin II is required for sister chromatid resolution.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 12 February 2018

    In the version of this Letter originally published, the authors omitted a citation of an early study demonstrating topoisomerase-II-dependent sister chromatid resolution. This reference has now been added to the reference list as reference number 28, and the relevant text has been amended as follows to include its citation: 'Resolution must reflect the removal of sister–sister contacts, and we show here that Topo-IIα -mediated release of DNA catenation plays a major role (Fig. 4), in agreement with previous findings28, whereas, surprisingly, cohesin dissociation is not strictly required (Fig. 3).' Subsequent references have been renumbered. All online versions of the Letter have been updated to reflect this change. 28. Giménez-Abián, J. F., Clarke, D. J., Mullinger, A. M., Downes, C. S. & Johnson, R. T. A postprophase topoisomerase II-dependent chromatid core separation step in the formation of metaphase chromosomes. J. Cell Biol. 131, 7–17 (1995).

References

  1. Ono, T., Fang, Y., Spector, D. L. & Hirano, T. Spatial and temporal regulation of Condensins I and II in mitotic chromosome assembly in human cells. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 3296–3308 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hirota, T., Gerlich, D., Koch, B., Ellenberg, J. & Peters, J. M. Distinct functions of condensin I and II in mitotic chromosome assembly. J. Cell Sci. 117, 6435–6445 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Nasmyth, K. Cohesin: a catenase with separate entry and exit gates? Nat. Cell Biol. 13, 1170–1177 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Haering, C. H., Farcas, A. M., Arumugam, P., Metson, J. & Nasmyth, K. The cohesin ring concatenates sister DNA molecules. Nature 454, 297–301 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sundin, O. & Varshavsky, A. Arrest of segregation leads to accumulation of highly intertwined catenated dimers: dissection of the final stages of SV40 DNA replication. Cell 25, 659–669 (1981).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Murray, A. W. & Szostak, J. W. Chromosome segregation in mitosis and meiosis. Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 1, 289–315 (1985).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Farcas, A. M., Uluocak, P., Helmhart, W. & Nasmyth, K. Cohesin’s concatenation of sister DNAs maintains their intertwining. Mol. Cell 44, 97–107 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Uhlmann, F., Lottspeich, F. & Nasmyth, K. Sister-chromatid separation at anaphase onset is promoted by cleavage of the cohesin subunit Scc1. Nature 400, 37–42 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Uhlmann, F., Wernic, D., Poupart, M. A., Koonin, E. V. & Nasmyth, K. Cleavage of cohesin by the CD clan protease separin triggers anaphase in yeast. Cell 103, 375–386 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Waizenegger, I. C., Hauf, S., Meinke, A. & Peters, J. M. Two distinct pathways remove mammalian cohesin from chromosome arms in prophase and from centromeres in anaphase. Cell 103, 399–410 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kueng, S. et al. Wapl controls the dynamic association of cohesin with chromatin. Cell 127, 955–967 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gandhi, R., Gillespie, P. J. & Hirano, T. Human Wapl is a cohesin-binding protein that promotes sister-chromatid resolution in mitotic prophase. Curr. Biol. 16, 2406–2417 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hirano, T. Condensins: universal organizers of chromosomes with diverse functions. Genes Dev. 26, 1659–1678 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Houlard, M. et al. Condensin confers the longitudinal rigidity of chromosomes. Nat. Cell Biol. 17, 771–781 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sumner, A. T. Scanning electron microscopy of mammalian chromosomes from prophase to telophase. Chromosoma 100, 410–418 (1991).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Liang, Z. et al. Chromosomes progress to metaphase in multiple discrete steps via global compaction/expansion cycles. Cell 161, 1124–1137 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Salic, A. & Mitchison, T. J. A chemical method for fast and sensitive detection of DNA synthesis in vivo. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 2415–2420 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Neef, A. B. & Luedtke, N. W. Dynamic metabolic labeling of DNA in vivo with arabinosyl nucleosides. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 20404–20409 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gratzner, H. G. Monoclonal antibody to 5-bromo- and 5-iododeoxyuridine: a new reagent for detection of DNA replication. Science 218, 474–475 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mora-Bermudez, F., Gerlich, D. & Ellenberg, J. Maximal chromosome compaction occurs by axial shortening in anaphase and depends on Aurora kinase. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 822–831 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tedeschi, A. et al. Wapl is an essential regulator of chromatin structure and chromosome segregation. Nature 501, 564–568 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang, J. C. Cellular roles of DNA topoisomerases: a molecular perspective. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 3, 430–440 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Roca, J., Ishida, R., Berger, J. M., Andoh, T. & Wang, J. C. Antitumor bisdioxopiperazines inhibit yeast DNA topoisomerase II by trapping the enzyme in the form of a closed protein clamp. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91, 1781–1785 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Abe, S. et al. The initial phase of chromosome condensation requires Cdk1-mediated phosphorylation of the CAP-D3 subunit of condensin II. Genes Dev. 25, 863–874 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Green, L. C. et al. Contrasting roles of condensin I and condensin II in mitotic chromosome formation. J. Cell Sci. 125, 1591–1604 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Heriche, J. K. et al. Integration of biological data by kernels on graph nodes allows prediction of new genes involved in mitotic chromosome condensation. Mol. Biol. Cell 25, 2522–2536 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bakhrebah, M., Zhang, T., Mann, J. R., Kalitsis, P. & Hudson, D. F. Disruption of a conserved CAP-D3 threonine alters condensin loading on mitotic chromosomes leading to chromosome hyper-condensation. J. Biol. Chem. 290, 6156–6167 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Giménez-Abián, J. F., Clarke, D. J., Mullinger, A. M., Downes, C. S. & Johnson, R. T. A postprophase topoisomerase II-dependent chromatid core separation step in the formation of metaphase chromosomes. J. Cell Biol. 131, 7–17 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wang, L. H., Mayer, B., Stemmann, O. & Nigg, E. A. Centromere DNA decatenation depends on cohesin removal and is required for mammalian cell division. J. Cell Sci. 123, 806–813 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Baxter, J. et al. Positive supercoiling of mitotic DNA drives decatenation by topoisomerase II in eukaryotes. Science 331, 1328–1332 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Charbin, A., Bouchoux, C. & Uhlmann, F. Condensin aids sister chromatid decatenation by topoisomerase II. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, 340–348 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Minamino, M. et al. Esco1 acetylates cohesin via a mechanism different from that of Esco2. Curr. Biol. 25, 1–13 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nakajima, M. et al. The complete removal of cohesin from chromosome arms depends on separase. J. Cell Sci. 120, 4188–4196 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Spencer, S. L. et al. The proliferation-quiescence decision is controlled by a bifurcation in CDK1 activity at mitotic exit. Cell 155, 369–383 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank N. Daigle and S. Alexander for their technical support; F. Uhlmann and S. Gruber for comments on the manuscript; S. Spencer (Stanford University, USA) for the DHB–mVenus construct; S. Mori and O. Gotoh for statistical analyses; and all members of the T.H. and J.E. laboratories for discussions. K.N. acknowledges a fellowship from the Japanese Society for the Promotion of the Science (JSPS). M.J.R. was supported by a Humboldt Foundation postdoctoral fellowship. The EMBL Advanced Light Microscopy Facility is acknowledged for support in image acquisition and analysis. This work was supported by research grants from JSPS and the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports and Technology of Japan (MEXT) to T.H., from EU-FP7-Systems Microscopy NoE (Grant Agreement 258068) and EU-FP7-MitoSys (Grant Agreement 241548) to J.E., and by the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (M.J.H., M.J.R., J.E.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Experimental Pathology, Cancer Institute of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo 135-8550, Japan

    Kota Nagasaka & Toru Hirota

  2. Department of Biological Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 4259 Nagatsuta-cho, Midori-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 226-8501, Japan

    Kota Nagasaka

  3. European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Cell Biology and Biophysics Unit, Meyerhofstraße 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany

    M. Julius Hossain, M. Julia Roberti & Jan Ellenberg

Authors
  1. Kota Nagasaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Julius Hossain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Julia Roberti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan Ellenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Toru Hirota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

K.N. designed and performed the experiments. M.J.H. generated the fully automated pipeline for resolution analysis. M.J.R. provided technical advice for imaging and generating the pipeline. J.E. designed and supervised quantitative imaging analyses. T.H. directed and coordinated the study.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jan Ellenberg or Toru Hirota.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Chromosome segmentation with constraints.

(a) An overview of image processing pipeline for volumetric analyses of sister chromatids. Single labeled chromosomes that were stained for BrdU, F-ara-EdU and DAPI are shown in slices from raw image stacks (first row) and corresponding Gaussian filtered stacks (second row). Based on these filtered images, segmented chromosome masses were acquired through a computational pipeline, and superimposed on the filtered image (third row). Note that these segmented chromosome masses are largely comparable with the chromosomes in filtered image in the second row, with minor exceptions (for example, arrowhead indicates a small chromatid mass undetected by the computational pipeline). Chromosome segmentation with the constraints (+ cons.) using DAPI-positive volume as a reference (see text) allowed to detect theses undetected masses, and a superimposed image shows that segmented chromosome masses now principally overlap with the filtered images of chromatids. (fourth row). Isosurface rendering images of 3D reconstructed chromosomes based on segmented masses with the constraint are shown (fifth row). (b–g) Data sets in Fig. 2 were validated for the use of constraints in chromosome segmentation. (b,c) Comparison of chromosome volumes quantified from segmented chromosome or DAPI-positive masses, in the absence (b) or presence (c) of constraints (mean ± s.d.). Note that constrains were applied in a way that compensate the slight differences of chromosome volumes, as indicated by 1:1 ratio. (c,d) Comparison of EdU- and BrdU-positive chromosome masses, in the absence (d) or presence (e) of constraints (mean ± s.d.). Note that constrains were applied in a way that compensate the slight differences between the two, as indicated by 1:1 ratio. (f,g) Analysis of total chromosome volume (f) and non-overlapping rate (g) through mitosis as in Fig. 2c, d, but based on segmented chromosome value without constraints. Note that similar if not identical results were obtained from data sets without constraints, validating the image processing pipeline developed to analyze differentially labeled chromosomes.

Supplementary Figure 2 Chromosome volumetric analysis is little affected by the fixation.

(a) Representative microscopic images for RPE1 cells that stably express EGFP-H2B at indicated mitotic phases before (Living) and after (Fixed) the fixation are shown. Gird size, 2 μm. (b) Quantification of chromosome volumes shown in (a) were normalized and summarized in the histogram (8 cells in prophase, 7 in prometphase, and 8 in metaphase were analyzed; mean ± s.d.).

Supplementary Figure 3 Inactivation of Wapl and Topo IIα do not detectably affect chromosome compaction.

(a) HT-1080 and HeLa cells transfected with a control or a Wapl targeting siRNA were analyzed by immunoblotting. HT1080 cells were used in the sister labeling experiment because Wapl can be efficiently depleted more than other cell lines tested and differential labeling of sister chromatids can be effectively processed. We used HeLa cells to biochemically estimate the amount of cohesin on chromosomes, because they are advantageous to obtain highly synchronized cell populations. The asterisk indicates nonspecific signals. (b) Wapl depleted HT-1080 cells were processed for immunofluorescence microscopy, and representative segmented images of single labeled chromosomes in G2 phase, prophase and prometaphase cells are shown. (c) Total volume of chromosomes analyzed in Fig. 3c are summarized in the histogram (mean ± s.d.). (d) Control or Topo IIα depleted RPE1 cells were analyzed by immunoblotting after 36 h later. (e) Control or Topo IIα depleted cells were processed for immunofluorescence microscopy, and representative segmented images of single labeled chromosomes in G2 phase, prophase and prometaphase cells are shown. (f,g) The total volume of chromosomes (μm3) analyzed in Fig. 4b, c and were summarized in (f) and (g) respectively. (mean ± s.d.). (h) Analysis of chromosome compaction during prophase in control-, CAP-D3 depleted- and ICRF-193 treated-HeLa Kyoto cell lines that stably express EGFP-H2B and DHB-mKO2 by live cell imaging. The image sequences before the NEBD, which was defined by complete loss of nuclear periphery were aligned. The scale bar represents 5 μm. (i) Chromatin volumes during prophase were quantified by using a slightly modified pipeline previously reported26, normalized to the G2 chromatin volume and plotted over time (n = 8 from control-, 11 from CAP-D3 depleted- and 12 from ICRF-193 treated-cells). Note that live cell imaging analysis also revealed no delay in the reduction rate of total chromosomal volume in Topo IIα inactivated cells, unlike in CAP-D3 depleted cells, indicating that ICRF193-induced chromosome condensation defect is not reflected as a change in total chromosomal mass.

Supplementary Figure 4 Condensin I does not essentially contribute to the increase of resolution after the NEBD occurs in Condensin II depleted cells.

(a) RPE1 cells were depleted of condensin I or II by transfecting siRNA targeting CAP-H or CAP-D3, respectively. After 36 h later, knockdown efficiency was analyzed by immunoblotting. (b) Immunofluorescence microscopy reveals that chromosome compaction before the NEBD is delayed in condensin II depleted cells. Cells in G2 phase, early- and late- prophase were indicated by discrete pH3S10 staining, clear pH3S10 staining without nuclear cyclin B1 and nuclear influx of cyclin B1, respectively. Scale bar, 5 μm. (c) The total volume of chromosomes analyzed in Fig. 5b were summarized in the histogram (mean ± s.d.). (d) RPE1 cells transfected with CAP-H and CAP-D3 targeting siRNAs simultaneously were analyzed by immunoblotting after 36 h. (e,f) Following RNAi-mediated knockdown cells were processed for immunofluorescence microscopy. The ratio of Non-OLs (%) (e) and total volume of chromosomes (μm3) (f) in control, CAP-D3, and both of CAP-H and CAP-D3 depleted cells in G2, pro- and prometa- phases were analyzed and summarized in the histogram (±s.d.; n indicates the total number of cells pooled across three independent experiments). Cells arrested in metaphase by MG132 treatment for 30 min were also analyzed.

Supplementary Figure 5 Cdk1 mediated phosphorylation of CAP-D3 T1415 is required for Condensin II mediated morphological change of chromosomes during prophase.

(a) Parental RPE1 cells or cells stably expressing EGFP-tagged CAP-D3WT or T1415A were transfected with mock or siRNA specifically targeting endogenous CAP-D3. After 36 h, the knockdown efficiency was analyzed by immunoblotting. (b) Immunofluorescence microscopy of RPE1 cells where endogenous CAP-D3 were depleted or replaced with EGFP-tagged CAP-D3, either wild type (WT) or T1415A mutant (TA). Note that chromosome morphology in prophase is impaired in both CAP-D3 depleted and T1415A-replaced cells, as described earlier24. Representative late prophase cells, defined as in Supplementary Fig. 4b, are shown. Scale bar, 5 μm. (c) Total chromosome volume (μm3) analyzed in Fig. 5c were measured and summarized in box plots as in Fig. 5c.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 3805 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nagasaka, K., Hossain, M., Roberti, M. et al. Sister chromatid resolution is an intrinsic part of chromosome organization in prophase. Nat Cell Biol 18, 692–699 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb3353

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb3353

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing