Law Enforcement Officer Body-Worn Camera Perceptions: Pre and Post Deployment

The 2014 fatal police shooting of Michael Brown resulted in (a) a national outcry for police departments to deploy body-worn cameras; and (b) community members and politicians demanding more transparency in the governmental administration of police work. Despite the increased media attention and deployment of body-worn cameras, there is little research on how law enforcement officers perceive body-worn cameras. The Miami-Dade Police Department implemented a mandatory body-worn camera program on April 20, 2016. The department agreed to a partnership to conduct research on their officers\u27 body-worn camera perceptions. The department internally distributed an electronic survey to 3,313 sworn officers and 1,410 were completed (a 43% response rate). Of the respondents that chose to participate in answering the demographic questions, 1,084 were male and 273 were female. 281 identified as white, 762 as Hispanic, and 243 as African-American/black, and 69 as other. Respondents averaged 3.6 years of employment at the department, averaged 2.6 years using a body-worn camera, and averaged 14.5 years of policing without a body-worn camera. The research instrument used in this study was an electronic survey with a four-point Likert Scale (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree). The 24 questions were organized into the following five categories: Influencing Citizen Behavior, Influencing Officer Behavior, Completing Paperwork, Comfort and Ease of Use, and Supervisor Use of Body-Worn Camera Data for Administrative Purposes. The \u27agree\u27 responses were reported for comparison to published study purposes. The survey results indicate that body-worn cameras (a) do not influence citizen behavior; (b) influence officer behavior; (c) officers perceive body-worn camera data positively, yet not the paperwork it generates; (d) officers generally perceive body-worn camera ease of use positively, yet the cameras are not comfortable to wear; (e) that officers negatively perceive the supervisor use of body-worn camera data for administrative purposes

Direct observation of microtubule dynamics at kinetochores in Xenopus extract spindles: implications for spindle mechanics

Microtubule plus ends dynamically attach to kinetochores on mitotic chromosomes. We directly imaged this dynamic interface using high resolution fluorescent speckle microscopy and direct labeling of kinetochores in Xenopus extract spindles. During metaphase, kinetochores were stationary and under tension while plus end polymerization and poleward microtubule flux (flux) occurred at velocities varying from 1.5–2.5 μm/min. Because kinetochore microtubules polymerize at metaphase kinetochores, the primary source of kinetochore tension must be the spindle forces that produce flux and not a kinetochore-based mechanism. We infer that the kinetochore resists translocation of kinetochore microtubules through their attachment sites, and that the polymerization state of the kinetochore acts a “slip-clutch” mechanism that prevents detachment at high tension. At anaphase onset, kinetochores switched to depolymerization of microtubule plus ends, resulting in chromosome-to-pole rates transiently greater than flux. Kinetochores switched from persistent depolymerization to persistent polymerization and back again during anaphase, bistability exhibited by kinetochores in vertebrate tissue cells. These results provide the most complete description of spindle microtubule poleward flux to date, with important implications for the microtubule–kinetochore interface and for how flux regulates kinetochore function

Anaphase Onset does not Require the Microtubule-Dependent Depletion of Kinetochore and Centromere-Binding Proteins

Spindle checkpoint proteins, such as Mad2 and BubR1, and the motors dynein/dynactin and CENP-E usually leave kinetochores prior to anaphase onset by microtubule-dependent mechanisms. Likewise, \u27chromosome passenger proteins\u27 including INCENP are depleted from the centromeres after anaphase onset and then move to the midzone complex, an event that is essential for cytokinesis. Here we test whether the cell cycle changes that occur at anaphase onset require or contribute to the depletion of kinetochore and centromere proteins independent of microtubules. This required the development of a novel non-antibody method to induce precocious anaphase onset in vivo by using a bacterially expressed fragment of the spindle checkpoint protein Mad1 capable of activating the APC/C, called GST-Mad1F10. By injecting PtK1 cells in nocodazole with GST-Mad1F10 and processing the cells for immunofluorescence microscopy after anaphase sister chromatid separation in nocodazole we found that Mad2, BubR1, cytoplasmic dynein, CENP-E and the 3F3/2 phosphoepitope remain on kinetochores. Thus depletion of these proteins (or phosphoepitope) at kinetochores is not required for anaphase onset and anaphase onset does not produce their depletion independent of microtubules. In contrast, both microtubules and anaphase onset are required for depletion of the \u27chromosome passenger\u27 protein INCENP from centromeres, as INCENP does not leave the chromosomes prior to anaphase onset in the presence or absence of microtubules, but does leave the centromeres after anaphase onset in the presence of microtubules

Genome-wide analysis reveals a cell cycle–dependent mechanism controlling centromere propagation

Centromeres are the structural and functional foundation for kinetochore formation, spindle attachment, and chromosome segregation. In this study, we isolated factors required for centromere propagation using genome-wide RNA interference screening for defects in centromere protein A (CENP-A; centromere identifier [CID]) localization in Drosophila melanogaster. We identified the proteins CAL1 and CENP-C as essential factors for CID assembly at the centromere. CID, CAL1, and CENP-C coimmunoprecipitate and are mutually dependent for centromere localization and function. We also identified the mitotic cyclin A (CYCA) and the anaphase-promoting complex (APC) inhibitor RCA1/Emi1 as regulators of centromere propagation. We show that CYCA is centromere localized and that CYCA and RCA1/Emi1 couple centromere assembly to the cell cycle through regulation of the fizzy-related/CDH1 subunit of the APC. Our findings identify essential components of the epigenetic machinery that ensures proper specification and propagation of the centromere and suggest a mechanism for coordinating centromere inheritance with cell division

CENP-C recruits M18BP1 to centromeres to promote CENP-A chromatin assembly

CENP-C provides a link between existing CENP-A chromatin and the proteins required for new CENP-A nucleosome assembly

Polo-Like Kinase Controls Vertebrate Spindle Elongation and Cytokinesis

During cell division, chromosome segregation must be coordinated with cell cleavage so that cytokinesis occurs after chromosomes have been safely distributed to each spindle pole. Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) is an essential kinase that regulates spindle assembly, mitotic entry and chromosome segregation, but because of its many mitotic roles it has been difficult to specifically study its post-anaphase functions. Here we use small molecule inhibitors to block Plk1 activity at anaphase onset, and demonstrate that Plk1 controls both spindle elongation and cytokinesis. Plk1 inhibition did not affect anaphase A chromosome to pole movement, but blocked anaphase B spindle elongation. Plk1-inhibited cells failed to assemble a contractile ring and contract the cleavage furrow due to a defect in Rho and Rho-GEF localization to the division site. Our results demonstrate that Plk1 coordinates chromosome segregation with cytokinesis through its dual control of anaphase B and contractile ring assembly

Dual recognition of CENP-A nucleosomes is required for centromere assembly

CENP-C and CENP-N recognize distinct structural elements of CENP-A nucleosomes, providing a foundation for the assembly of other centromere and kinetochore components

Cortical contraction drives the 3D patterning of epithelial cell surfaces

Cellular protrusions create complex cell surface topographies, but biomechanical mechanisms regulating their formation and arrangement are largely unknown. To study how protrusions form, we focused on the morphogenesis of microridges, elongated actin-based structures that are arranged in maze-like patterns on the apical surfaces of zebrafish skin cells. Microridges form by accreting simple finger-like precursors. Live imaging demonstrated that microridge morphogenesis is linked to apical constriction. A nonmuscle myosin II (NMII) reporter revealed pulsatile contractions of the actomyosin cortex, and inhibiting NMII blocked apical constriction and microridge formation. A biomechanical model suggested that contraction reduces surface tension to permit the fusion of precursors into microridges. Indeed, reducing surface tension with hyperosmolar media promoted microridge formation. In anisotropically stretched cells, microridges formed by precursor fusion along the stretch axis, which computational modeling explained as a consequence of stretch-induced cortical flow. Collectively, our results demonstrate how contraction within the 2D plane of the cortex can pattern 3D cell surfaces