ArticleCurrent biology : CB2024
Plasticity of the mitotic spindle in response to karyotype variation.
Article in Current biology : CB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microtubule depolymerization at kinetochores restricts anaphase spindle elongation.Nature chemical biology · 2026Article
- Artificial chromosome reorganization reveals high plasticity of the budding and fission yeast genomes.Genome biology · 2025Article
- The centromere bottlebrush requires a multi-microtubule attachment.Molecular biology of the cell · 2025Article
- <italic>Zea mays</italic> Meiotic Spindle Ultrastructure Reveals Kinetochore-Microtubule Interface and Embedded Membrane Components.Cytogenetic and genome research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Karyotypes, composed of chromosomes, must be accurately partitioned by the mitotic spindle for optimal cell health. However, it is unknown how underlying characteristics of karyotypes, such as chromosome number and size, govern the scaling of the mitotic spindle to ensure accurate chromosome segregation and cell proliferation. We utilize budding yeast strains engineered with fewer chromosomes, including just two "mega chromosomes," to study how spindle size and function are responsive to, and scaled by, karyotype. We determined that deletion and overexpression of spindle-related genes are detrimental to the growth of strains with two chromosomes, suggesting that mega chromosomes exert altered demands on the spindle. Using confocal microscopy, we demonstrate that cells with fewer but longer chromosomes have smaller spindle pole bodies, fewer microtubules, and longer spindles. Moreover, using electron tomography and confocal imaging, we observe elongated, bent anaphase spindles with fewer core microtubules in strains with mega chromosomes. Cells harboring mega chromosomes grow more slowly, are delayed in mitosis, and a subset struggle to complete chromosome segregation. We propose that the karyotype of the cell dictates the microtubule number, type, spindle pole body size, and spindle length, subsequently influencing the dynamics of mitosis, such as the rate of spindle elongation and the velocity of pole separation. Taken together, our results suggest that mitotic spindles are highly plastic ultrastructures that can accommodate and adjust to a variety of karyotypes, even within a species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.