Extranuclear structural components that mediate dynamic chromosome movements in yeast meiosis

Telomere-led rapid chromosome movements or rapid prophase movements direct fundamental meiotic processes required for successful haploidization of the genome. Critical components of the machinery that generates rapid prophase movements are unknown, and the mechanism underlying rapid prophase movements remains poorly understood. We identified S. cerevisiae Mps2 as the outer nuclear membrane protein that connects the LINC complex with the cytoskeleton. We also demonstrate that the motor Myo2 works together with Mps2 to couple the telomeres to the actin cytoskeleton. Further, we show that Csm4 interacts with Mps2 and is required for perinuclear localization of Myo2, implicating Csm4 as a regulator of the Mps2-Myo2 interaction. We propose a model in which the newly identified functions of Mps2 and Myo2 cooperate with Csm4 to drive chromosome movements in meiotic prophase by coupling telomeres to the actin cytoskeleton.Fil: Lee, Chih Ying. Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation; Estados UnidosFil: Bisig, Carlos Gaston. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Química Biológica de Córdoba. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Centro de Investigaciones en Química Biológica de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Conrad, Michael M.. Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation; Estados UnidosFil: Ditamo, Yanina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Química Biológica de Córdoba. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Centro de Investigaciones en Química Biológica de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Previato de Almeida, Luciana. Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation; Estados UnidosFil: Dresser, Michael E.. Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation; Estados UnidosFil: Pezza, Roberto J.. Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation; Estados Unido

The Role of I Region Gene Products in Macrophage - T Lymphocyte Interaction

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73965/1/j.1600-065X.1978.tb00400.x.pd

Meiotic Chromosome Pairing Is Promoted by Telomere-Led Chromosome Movements Independent of Bouquet Formation

Chromosome pairing in meiotic prophase is a prerequisite for the high fidelity of chromosome segregation that haploidizes the genome prior to gamete formation. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as in most multicellular eukaryotes, homologous pairing at the cytological level reflects the contemporaneous search for homology at the molecular level, where DNA double-strand broken ends find and interact with templates for repair on homologous chromosomes. Synapsis (synaptonemal complex formation) stabilizes pairing and supports DNA repair. The bouquet stage, where telomeres have formed a transient single cluster early in meiotic prophase, and telomere-promoted rapid meiotic prophase chromosome movements (RPMs) are prominent temporal correlates of pairing and synapsis. The bouquet has long been thought to contribute to the kinetics of pairing, but the individual roles of bouquet and RPMs are difficult to assess because of common dependencies. For example, in budding yeast RPMs and bouquet both require the broadly conserved SUN protein Mps3 as well as Ndj1 and Csm4, which link telomeres to the cytoskeleton through the intact nuclear envelope. We find that mutants in these genes provide a graded series of RPM activity: wild-type>mps3-dCC>mps3-dAR>ndj1Δ>mps3-dNT = csm4Δ. Pairing rates are directly correlated with RPM activity even though only wild-type forms a bouquet, suggesting that RPMs promote homologous pairing directly while the bouquet plays at most a minor role in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. A new collision trap assay demonstrates that RPMs generate homologous and heterologous chromosome collisions in or before the earliest stages of prophase, suggesting that RPMs contribute to pairing by stirring the nuclear contents to aid the recombination-mediated homology search

Should Research Ethics Encourage the Production of Cost-Effective Interventions?

This project considers whether and how research ethics can contribute to the provision of cost-effective medical interventions. Clinical research ethics represents an underexplored context for the promotion of cost-effectiveness. In particular, although scholars have recently argued that research on less-expensive, less-effective interventions can be ethical, there has been little or no discussion of whether ethical considerations justify curtailing research on more expensive, more effective interventions. Yet considering cost-effectiveness at the research stage can help ensure that scarce resources such as tissue samples or limited subject popula- tions are employed where they do the most good; can support parallel efforts by providers and insurers to promote cost-effectiveness; and can ensure that research has social value and benefits subjects. I discuss and rebut potential objections to the consideration of cost-effectiveness in research, including the difficulty of predicting effectiveness and cost at the research stage, concerns about limitations in cost-effectiveness analysis, and worries about overly limiting researchers’ freedom. I then consider the advantages and disadvantages of having certain participants in the research enterprise, including IRBs, advisory committees, sponsors, investigators, and subjects, consider cost-effectiveness. The project concludes by qualifiedly endorsing the consideration of cost-effectiveness at the research stage. While incorporating cost-effectiveness considerations into the ethical evaluation of human subjects research will not on its own ensure that the health care system realizes cost-effectiveness goals, doing so nonetheless represents an important part of a broader effort to control rising medical costs

Clinical Trials and Medical Care: Defining the Therapeutic Misconception

A key component of informed consent to participate in medical research includes understanding that research is not the same as treatment

Indistinguishable Landscapes of Meiotic DNA Breaks in rad50+ and rad50S Strains of Fission Yeast Revealed by a Novel rad50+ Recombination Intermediate

The fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe Rec12 protein, the homolog of Spo11 in other organisms, initiates meiotic recombination by creating DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and becoming covalently linked to the DNA ends of the break. This protein–DNA linkage has previously been detected only in mutants such as rad50S in which break repair is impeded and DSBs accumulate. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the DSB distribution in a rad50S mutant is markedly different from that in wild-type (RAD50) meiosis, and it was suggested that this might also be true for other organisms. Here, we show that we can detect Rec12-DNA linkages in Sc. pombe rad50+ cells, which are proficient for DSB repair. In contrast to the results from Sa. cerevisiae, genome-wide microarray analysis of Rec12-DNA reveals indistinguishable meiotic DSB distributions in rad50+ and rad50S strains of Sc. pombe. These results confirm our earlier findings describing the occurrence of widely spaced DSBs primarily in large intergenic regions of DNA and demonstrate the relevance and usefulness of fission yeast studies employing rad50S. We propose that the differential behavior of rad50S strains reflects a major difference in DSB regulation between the two species—specifically, the requirement for the Rad50-containing complex for DSB formation in budding yeast but not in fission yeast. Use of rad50S and related mutations may be a useful method for DSB analysis in other species

The Synaptonemal Complex Protein Zip1 Promotes Bi-Orientation of Centromeres at Meiosis I

In meiosis I, homologous chromosomes become paired and then separate from one another to opposite poles of the spindle. In humans, errors in this process are a leading cause of birth defects, mental retardation, and infertility. In most organisms, crossing-over, or exchange, between the homologous partners provides a link that promotes their proper, bipolar, attachment to the spindle. Attachment of both partners to the same pole can sometimes be corrected during a delay that is triggered by the spindle checkpoint. Studies of non-exchange chromosomes have shown that centromere pairing serves as an alternative to exchange by orienting the centromeres for proper microtubule attachment. Here, we demonstrate a new role for the synaptonemal complex protein Zip1. Zip1 localizes to the centromeres of non-exchange chromosomes in pachytene and mediates centromere pairing and segregation of the partners at meiosis I. Exchange chromosomes were also found to experience Zip1-dependent pairing at their centromeres. Zip1 was found to persist at centromeres, after synaptonemal complex disassembly, remaining there until microtubule attachment. Disruption of this centromere pairing, in spindle checkpoint mutants, randomized the segregation of exchange chromosomes. These results demonstrate that Zip1-mediated pairing of exchange chromosome centromeres promotes an initial, bipolar attachment of microtubules. This activity of Zip1 lessens the load on the spindle checkpoint, greatly reducing the chance that the cell will exit the checkpoint delay with an improperly oriented chromosome pair. Thus exchange, the spindle checkpoint, and centromere pairing are complementary mechanisms that ensure the proper segregation of homologous partners at meiosis I

The Future of Psychopharmacological Enhancements: Expectations and Policies

The hopes and fears expressed in the debate on human enhancement are not always based on a realistic assessment of the expected possibilities. Discussions about extreme scenarios may at times obscure the ethical and policy issues that are relevant today. This paper aims to contribute to an adequate and ethically sound societal response to actual current developments. After a brief outline of the ethical debate concerning neuro-enhancement, it describes the current state of the art in psychopharmacological science and current uses of psychopharmacological enhancement, as well as the prospects for the near future. It then identifies ethical issues regarding psychopharmacological enhancements that require attention from policymakers, both on the professional and on the governmental level. These concern enhancement research, the gradual expansion of medical categories, off-label prescription and responsibility of doctors, and accessibility of enhancers on the Internet. It is concluded that further discussion on the advantages and drawbacks of enhancers on a collective social level is still needed