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.

  • NEWS AND VIEWS

Two giants of cell division in an oppressive embrace

The enzymes separase and cyclin-dependent kinase are key orchestrators of cell division. Structural data reveal the surprisingly intricate mechanism that renders them both inactive when bound to each other.
  1. Silke Hauf

    1. Silke Hauf is in the Department of Biological Sciences, Fralin Life Sciences Institute, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, USA.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

In every dividing cell, a time comes when the two copies of the genome need to be separated. The aptly named enzyme separase springs into action and gets the job done. Unleashing separase at any other time in the life of a cell would be dangerous, so the enzyme is kept well guarded. Human separase is held in check by not one but three mutually exclusive inhibitors. Writing in Nature, Yu et al.1 report structures of human separase in complex with two of these inhibitors. The structures show commonalities but also striking differences. One of the inhibitors snakes along separase to embed itself in the enzyme’s active site. The other forces separase to inhibit itself; at the same time, this inhibitor is itself inhibited by separase in an entangled embrace.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

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

Nature 596, 41-42 (2021)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01944-6

References

  1. Yu, J. et al. Nature 596, 138–142 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lehmann, R. & Peters, J.-M. Cell 184, 10–14 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Uhlmann, F., Wernic, D., Poupart, M.-A., Koonin, E. V. & Nasmyth, K. Cell 103, 375–386 (2000).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hellmuth, S. et al. J. Biol. Chem. 290, 8002–8010 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rosen, L. E. et al. Nature Commun. 10, 5189 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nagao, K. & Yanagida, M. Genes Cells 11, 247–260 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Luo, S. & Tong, L. Nature 542, 255–259 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Boland, A. et al. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 414–418 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gorr, I. H., Boos, D. & Stemmann, O. Mol. Cell 19, 135–141 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hellmuth, S., Gómez-H, L., Pendás, A. M. & Stemmann, O. Nature 580, 536–541 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Huang, X. et al. Mol. Cell Biol. 29, 1498–1505 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shindo, N., Kumada, K. & Hirota, T. Dev. Cell 23, 112–123 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hellmuth, S. et al. Mol. Cell 58, 495–506 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lin, Z., Luo, X. & Yu, H. Nature 532, 131–134 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Subjects

Latest on:

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

Search

Advanced search

Quick links