Tin Tin Su

Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions

When students answer an in-class conceptual question individually using clickers, discuss it with their neighbors, and then revote on the same question, the percentage of correct answers typically increases. This outcome could result from gains in understanding during discussion, or simply from peer influence of knowledgeable students on their neighbors. To distinguish between these alternatives in an undergraduate genetics course, we followed the above exercise with a second, similar (isomorphic) question on the same concept that students answered individually. Our results indicate that peer discussion enhances understanding, even when none of the students in a discussion group originally knows the correct answer.

Embryonic cleavage cycles: how is a mouse like a fly?

The evolutionary advent of uterine support of embryonic growth in mammals is relatively recent. Nonetheless, striking differences in the earliest steps of embryogenesis make it difficult to draw parallels even with other chordates. We suggest that use of fertilization as a reference point misaligns the earliest stages and masks parallels that are evident when development is aligned at conserved stages surrounding gastrulation. In externally deposited eggs from representatives of all the major phyla, gastrulation is preceded by specialized extremely rapid cleavage cell cycles. Mammals also exhibit remarkably fast cell cycles in close association with gastrulation, but instead of beginning development with these rapid cycles, the mammalian egg first devotes itself to the production of extraembryonic structures. Previous attempts to identify common features of cleavage cycles focused on post-fertilization divisions of the mammalian egg. We propose that comparison to the rapid peri-gastrulation cycles is more appropriate and suggest that these cycles are related by evolutionary descent to the early cleavage stages of embryos such as those of frog and fly. The deferral of events in mammalian embryogenesis might be due to an evolutionary shift in the timing of fertilization.

Relative contribution of DNA repair, cell cycle checkpoints, and cell death to survival after DNA damage in Drosophila larvae.

BACKGROUND Components of the DNA damage checkpoint are essential for surviving exposure to DNA damaging agents. Checkpoint activation leads to cell cycle arrest, DNA repair, and apoptosis in eukaryotes. Cell cycle regulation and DNA repair appear essential for unicellular systems to survive DNA damage. The relative importance of these responses and apoptosis for surviving DNA damage in multicellular organisms remains unclear. RESULTS After exposure to ionizing radiation, wild-type Drosophila larvae regulate the cell cycle and repair DNA; grp (DmChk1) mutants cannot regulate the cell cycle but repair DNA; okra (DmRAD54) mutants regulate the cell cycle but are deficient in repair of double strand breaks (DSB); mei-41 (DmATR) mutants cannot regulate the cell cycle and are deficient in DSB repair. All undergo radiation-induced apoptosis. p53 mutants regulate the cell cycle but fail to undergo apoptosis. Of these, mutants deficient in DNA repair, mei-41 and okra, show progressive degeneration of imaginal discs and die as pupae, while other genotypes survive to adulthood after irradiation. Survival is accompanied by compensatory growth of imaginal discs via increased nutritional uptake and cell proliferation, presumably to replace dead cells. CONCLUSIONS DNA repair is essential for surviving radiation as expected; surprisingly, cell cycle regulation and p53-dependent cell death are not. We propose that processes resembling regeneration of discs act to maintain tissues and ultimately determine survival after irradiation, thus distinguishing requirements between muticellular and unicellular eukaryotes.

Size control: Cell proliferation does not equal growth

Division subdivides mass without increasing it. So one should not expect that an increase in cell division would make an organism bigger. Both classic and recent experiments confirm this simple rationale: altering proliferation produces normally sized body structures with either especially small or exceptionally large cells.

Drosophila Wee1 Kinase Regulates Cdk1 and Mitotic Entry during Embryogenesis

Cyclin-dependent kinases (Cdks) are the central regulators of the cell division cycle. Inhibitors of Cdks ensure proper coordination of cell cycle events and help regulate cell proliferation in the context of tissues and organs. Wee1 homologs phosphorylate a conserved tyrosine to inhibit the mitotic cyclin-dependent kinase Cdk1. Loss of Wee1 function in fission or budding yeast causes premature entry into mitosis. The importance of metazoan Wee1 homologs for timing mitosis, however, has been demonstrated only in Xenopus egg extracts and via ectopic Cdk1 activation . Here, we report that Drosophila Wee1 (dWee1) regulates Cdk1 via phosphorylation of tyrosine 15 and times mitotic entry during the cortical nuclear cycles of syncytial blastoderm embryos, which lack gap phases. Loss of maternal dwee1 leads to premature entry into mitosis, mitotic spindle defects, chromosome condensation problems, and a Chk2-dependent block of subsequent development, and then embryonic lethality. These findings modify previous models about cell cycle regulation in syncytial embryos and demonstrate that Wee1 kinases can regulate mitotic entry in vivo during metazoan development even in cycles that lack a G2 phase.

Qualifying for the license to replicate.

Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco,California 94143-0448A single replication fork would take more than a year to replicate the genome of Xenopus. Bydividing the task among many thousands of replicons, each replicated by forks emanating fromindividual origins, replication is instead completed in as little as 30 min. While this efficientstrategy has been adopted by all eukaryotes, it introduces a complication. To maintain theintegrity of the genome, multiple replicons must now be coordinated so that all sequences arereplicated exactly once per cell cycle. Because different replicons are often replicated atdifferent times during S phase, replicated regions must be distinguishable from unreplicatedregions to avoid problems of rereplication. We suggest that this distinction is based upon afundamental feature of replication initiation.Two things happen at origins of replication: proteins are recruited to origins to assemblemultiprotein replication machines (Figure 1, left), and these assemblies are triggered to initiatereplication forks (Figure 1, right). Replication components accompany the departing forks,leaving behind a spent origin. Consequently, reinitiation should require assembly of newcomponents at the origin. If this assembly is restricted to one part of the cell cycle and theinitiation of forks to another, then origin firing would occur only once per cell cycle (Figure1).The transition between replication-competent and replication-incompetent phases of the cellcycle has been explored in a series of early and influential cell fusion experiments (Rao andJohnson, 1970). Upon fusion with an S phase cell, nuclei from G1 cells, but not from G2 cells,replicate their DNA. Thus, even when present in cytoplasm capable of supporting S phase, theG2 nucleus is incompetent to replicate. Since G2 nuclei are converted into G1 nuclei by thepassage through mitosis, mitosis must provide replication competence to the G2 nucleus. Inthe last several years, in vitro experiments using Xenopus egg extracts as well as geneticexperiments using fission yeast have given rise to two rather different models for the basis ofthis mitotic transition. We outline each of these areas of research below and evaluate featuresof each model in an attempt to bring us closer to a unified understanding of these events.

dpa, a member of the MCM family, is required for mitotic DNA replication but not endoreplication in Drosophila.

We have isolated the Drosophila disc proliferation abnormal (dpa) gene, a member of the MCM family of DNA replication factors. Members of this family of proteins are required for DNA replication in yeast. A dpa null mutant dies during pupal stages because imaginal tissues necessary for the formation of the adult fly fail to proliferate normally. Beginning in late embryogenesis BrdU labeling reveals DNA replication defects in mitotically proliferating cells. In contrast, dpa is dispensable for endoreplication, a specialized cell cycle consisting of consecutive rounds of S phases without intervening mitosis. Our studies suggest an essential role for dpa in mitotic DNA replication but not in endoreplication. Thus, dpa is not a general replication factor but may play a specialized regulatory role in DNA replication.

Drosophila grapes/CHK1 mutants are defective in cyclin proteolysis and coordination of mitotic events

The Drosophila grapes (grp) gene, which encodes a homolog of the Schizosaccharomyces pombe Chk1 kinase, provides a cell-cycle checkpoint that delays mitosis in response to inhibition of DNA replication [1]. Grp is also required in the undisturbed early embryonic cycles: in its absence, mitotic abnormalities appear in cycle 12 and chromosomes fail to fully separate in subsequent cycles [2] [3]. In other systems, Chk1 kinase phosphorylates and suppresses the activity of Cdc25 phosphatase: the resulting failure to remove inhibitory phosphate from cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (Cdk1) prevents entry into mitosis [4] [5]. Because in Drosophila embryos Cdk1 lacks inhibitory phosphate during cycles 11-13 [6], it is not clear that known actions of Grp/Chk1 suffice in these cycles. We found that the loss of grp compromised cyclin A proteolysis and delayed mitotic disjunction of sister chromosomes. These defects occurred before previously reported grp phenotypes. We conclude that Grp activates cyclin A degradation, and functions to time the disjunction of chromosomes in the early embryo. As cyclin A destruction is required for sister chromosome separation [7], a failure in Grp-promoted cyclin destruction can also explain the mitotic phenotype. The mitotic failure described previously for cycle 12 grp embryos might be a more severe form of the phenotypes that we describe in earlier embryos and we suggest that the underlying defect is reduced degradation of cyclin A.

Drosophila ATR in Double-Strand Break Repair

The ability of a cell to sense and respond to DNA damage is essential for genome stability. An important aspect of the response is arrest of the cell cycle, presumably to allow time for repair. Ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and ATR are essential for such cell-cycle control, but some observations suggest that they also play a direct role in DNA repair. The Drosophila ortholog of ATR, MEI-41, mediates the DNA damage-dependent G2-M checkpoint. We examined the role of MEI-41 in repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs) induced by P-element excision. We found that mei-41 mutants are defective in completing the later steps of homologous recombination repair, but have no defects in end-joining repair. We hypothesized that these repair defects are the result of loss of checkpoint control. To test this, we genetically reduced mitotic cyclin levels and also examined repair in grp (DmChk1) and lok (DmChk2) mutants. Our results suggest that a significant component of the repair defects is due to loss of MEI-41-dependent cell cycle regulation. However, this does not account for all of the defects we observed. We propose a novel role for MEI-41 in DSB repair, independent of the Chk1/Chk2-mediated checkpoint response.

Cycling through development in Drosophila and other metazoa

The cell-division cycle is an orchestrated sequence of events that results in the duplication of a cell. In metazoa, cell proliferation is regulated in response to differentiation signals and body-size parameters, which either induce cell duplication or arrest the cell cycle, to ensure that organs develop to the correct size. In addition, the cell cycle may be altered to meet specialized requirements. This can be seen in the rapid cleavage cycles of vertebrates and insects that lack gap phases, in the nested S phases of Drosophila, and in the endocycles of nematodes, insects, plants and mammals that lack mitosis. Here we present the various modes of cell-cycle regulation in metazoa and discuss their possible generation by a combination of universally conserved molecules and new regulatory circuits.