JCB logo
Accuri Cytometers
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 2447K)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gorbsky, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Borisy, G. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gorbsky, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Borisy, G. G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Journal of Cell Biology, Vol 106, 1185-1192, Copyright © 1988 by The Rockefeller University Press


ARTICLES

Microtubule dynamics and chromosome motion visualized in living anaphase cells

GJ Gorbsky, PJ Sammak and GG Borisy
Laboratory of Molecular Biology, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706.

Chromosome segregation in most animal cells is brought about through two events: the movement of the chromosomes to the poles (anaphase A) and the movement of the poles away from each other (anaphase B). Essential to an understanding of the mechanism of mitosis is information on the relative movements of components of the spindle and identification of sites of subunit loss from shortening microtubules. Through use of tubulin derivatized with X-rhodamine, photobleaching, and digital imaging microscopy of living cells, we directly determined the relative movements of poles, chromosomes, and a marked domain on kinetochore fibers during anaphase. During chromosome movement and pole- pole separation, the marked domain did not move significantly with respect to the near pole. Therefore, the kinetochore microtubules were shortened by the loss of subunits at the kinetochore, although a small amount of subunit loss elsewhere was not excluded. In anaphase A, chromosomes moved on kinetochore microtubules that remained stationary with respect to the near pole. In anaphase B, the kinetochore fiber microtubules accompanied the near pole in its movement away from the opposite pole. These results eliminate models of anaphase in which microtubules are thought to be traction elements that are drawn to and depolymerized at the pole. Our results are compatible with models of anaphase in which the kinetochore fiber microtubules remain anchored at the pole and in which microtubule dynamics are centered at the kinetochore.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:



  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents