- THIS ARTICLE
- Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Argueso, J. L.
- Articles by Alani, E.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Argueso, J. L.
- Articles by Alani, E.
Genetics, Vol. 168, 1805-1816, December 2004, Copyright © 2004
doi:10.1534/genetics.104.032912
Competing Crossover Pathways Act During Meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Juan Lucas Argueso, Jennifer Wanat, Zekeriyya Gemici and Eric Alani1
Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853
1 Corresponding author: Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, 459 Biotechnology Bldg., Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-2703.
E-mail: eea3{at}cornell.edu
In Saccharomyces cerevisiae the MSH4-MSH5, MLH1-MLH3, and MUS81-MMS4 complexes act to promote crossing over during meiosis. MSH4-MSH5, but not MUS81-MMS4, promotes crossovers that display interference. A role for MLH1-MLH3 in crossover control is less clear partly because mlh1
mutants retain crossover interference yet display a decrease in crossing over that is only slightly less severe than that seen in msh4 and msh5 mutants. We analyzed the effects of msh5, mlh1, and mms4 single, double, and triple mutants on meiotic crossing over at four consecutive genetic intervals on chromosome XV using newly developed computer software. mlh1 mms4 double mutants displayed the largest decrease in crossing over (13- to 15-fold) of all mutant combinations, yet these strains displayed relatively high spore viability (42%). In contrast, msh5 mms4 and msh5 mms4 mlh1 mutants displayed smaller decreases in crossing over (4- to 6-fold); however, spore viability (18–19%) was lower in these strains than in mlh1 mms4 strains. These data suggest that meiotic crossing over can occur in yeast through three distinct crossover pathways. In one pathway, MUS81-MMS4 promotes interference-independent crossing over; in a second pathway, both MSH4-MSH5 and MLH1-MLH3 promote interference-dependent crossovers. A third pathway, which appears to be repressed by MSH4-MSH5, yields deleterious crossovers.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  K. T. Nishant, A. J. Plys, and E. Alani A Mutation in the Putative MLH3 Endonuclease Domain Confers a Defect in Both Mismatch Repair and Meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, June 1, 2008; 179(2): 747 - 755. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Svetlanov, F. Baudat, P. E. Cohen, and B. de Massy Distinct Functions of MLH3 at Recombination Hot Spots in the Mouse Genetics, April 1, 2008; 178(4): 1937 - 1945. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Trowbridge, K. McKim, S. J. Brill, and J. Sekelsky Synthetic Lethality of Drosophila in the Absence of the MUS81 Endonuclease and the DmBlm Helicase Is Associated With Elevated Apoptosis Genetics, August 1, 2007; 176(4): 1993 - 2001. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Falque, R. Mercier, C. Mezard, D. de Vienne, and O. C. Martin Patterns of Recombination and MLH1 Foci Density Along Mouse Chromosomes: Modeling Effects of Interference and Obligate Chiasma Genetics, July 1, 2007; 176(3): 1453 - 1467. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. G.P. Lhuissier, H. H. Offenberg, P. E. Wittich, N. O.E. Vischer, and C. Heyting The Mismatch Repair Protein MLH1 Marks a Subset of Strongly Interfering Crossovers in Tomato PLANT CELL, March 1, 2007; 19(3): 862 - 876. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. E. Stone and T. D. Petes Analysis of the Proteins Involved in the in Vivo Repair of Base-Base Mismatches and Four-Base Loops Formed During Meiotic Recombination in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, July 1, 2006; 173(3): 1223 - 1239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. de Boer, P. Stam, A. J. J. Dietrich, A. Pastink, and C. Heyting Two levels of interference in mouse meiotic recombination PNAS, June 20, 2006; 103(25): 9607 - 9612. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. E. Cohen, S. E. Pollack, and J. W. Pollard Genetic Analysis of Chromosome Pairing, Recombination, and Cell Cycle Control during First Meiotic Prophase in Mammals Endocr. Rev., June 1, 2006; 27(4): 398 - 426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. J. Wijeratne, C. Chen, W. Zhang, L. Timofejeva, and H. Ma The Arabidopsis thaliana PARTING DANCERS Gene Encoding a Novel Protein Is Required for Normal Meiotic Homologous Recombination Mol. Biol. Cell, March 1, 2006; 17(3): 1331 - 1343. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. Bartrand, D. Iyasu, S. M. Marinco, and G. S. Brush Evidence of Meiotic Crossover Control in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Through Mec1-Mediated Phosphorylation of Replication Protein A Genetics, January 1, 2006; 172(1): 27 - 39. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Hammarlund, M. W. Davis, H. Nguyen, D. Dayton, and E. M. Jorgensen Heterozygous Insertions Alter Crossover Distribution but Allow Crossover Interference in Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics, November 1, 2005; 171(3): 1047 - 1056. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. L. Peoples-Holst and S. M. Burgess Multiple branches of the meiotic recombination pathway contribute independently to homolog pairing and stable juxtaposition during meiosis in budding yeast Genes & Dev., April 1, 2005; 19(7): 863 - 874. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|