The fission yeast S-phase cyclin Cig2 can drive mitosis

Core control principles of the eukaryotic cell cycle

Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) lie at the heart of eukaryotic cell cycle control, with different cyclin-CDK complexes initiating DNA replication (S-CDKs) and mitosis (M-CDKs)^1,2. However, the principles on which cyclin-CDK complexes organize the temporal order of cell cycle events are contentious³. One model proposes that S-CDKs and M-CDKs are functionally specialized, with substantially different substrate specificities to execute different cell cycle events^4-6. A second model proposes that S-CDKs and M-CDKs are redundant with each other, with both acting as sources of overall CDK activity^7,8. In this model, increasing CDK activity, rather than CDK substrate specificity, orders cell cycle events^9,10. Here we reconcile these two views of core cell cycle control. Using phosphoproteomic assays of in vivo CDK activity in fission yeast, we find that S-CDK and M-CDK substrate specificities are remarkably similar, showing that S-CDKs and M-CDKs are not completely specialized for S phase and mitosis alone. Normally, S-CDK cannot drive mitosis but can do so when protein phosphatase 1 is removed from the centrosome. Thus, increasing S-CDK activity in vivo is sufficient to overcome substrate specificity differences between S-CDK and M-CDK, and allows S-CDK to carry out M-CDK function. Therefore, we unite the two opposing views of cell cycle control, showing that the core cell cycle engine is largely based on a quantitative increase in CDK activity through the cell cycle, combined with minor and surmountable qualitative differences in catalytic specialization of S-CDKs and M-CDKs.

Explaining Redundancy in CDK-Mediated Control of the Cell Cycle: Unifying the Continuum and Quantitative Models

In eukaryotes, cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) are required for the onset of DNA replication and mitosis, and distinct CDK–cyclin complexes are activated sequentially throughout the cell cycle. It is widely thought that specific complexes are required to traverse a point of commitment to the cell cycle in G1, and to promote S-phase and mitosis, respectively. Thus, according to a popular model that has dominated the field for decades, the inherent specificity of distinct CDK–cyclin complexes for different substrates at each phase of the cell cycle generates the correct order and timing of events. However, the results from the knockouts of genes encoding cyclins and CDKs do not support this model. An alternative “quantitative” model, validated by much recent work, suggests that it is the overall level of CDK activity (with the opposing input of phosphatases) that determines the timing and order of S-phase and mitosis. We take this model further by suggesting that the subdivision of the cell cycle into discrete phases (G0, G1, S, G2, and M) is outdated and problematic. Instead, we revive the “continuum” model of the cell cycle and propose that a combination with the quantitative model better defines a conceptual framework for understanding cell cycle control.