Comparative analysis of avian influenza virus diversity in poultry and humans during a highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H7N7) virus outbreak

Although increasing data have become available that link human adaptation with specific molecular changes in nonhuman influenza viruses, the molecular changes of these viruses during a large highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAI) outbreak in poultry along with avian-to-human transmission have never been documented. By comprehensive virologic analysis of combined veterinary and human samples obtained during a large HPAI A (H7N7) outbreak in the Netherlands in 2003, we mapped the acquisition of human adaptation markers to identify the public health risk associated with an HPAI outbreak in poultry. Full-length hemagglutinin (HA), neuraminidase (NA), and PB2 sequencing of A (H7N7) viruses obtained from 45 human cases showed amino acid variations at different codons in HA (n=20), NA (n=23), and PB2 (n=23). Identification of the avian sources of human virus infections based on 232 farm sequences demonstrated that for each gene about 50% of the variation was already present in poultry. Polygenic accumulation and farm-to-farm spread of known virulence and human adaptation markers in A (H7N7) virus-infected poultry occurred prior to farm-to-human transmission. These include the independent emergence of HA A143T mutants, accumulation of four NA mutations, and farm-to-farm spread of virus variants harboring mammalian host determinants D701N and S714I in PB2. This implies that HPAI viruses with pandemic potential can emerge directly from poultry. Since the public health risk of an avian influenza virus outbreak in poultry can rapidly change, we recommend virologic monitoring for human adaptation markers among poultry as well as among humans during the course of an outbreak in poultry.     

Checkpoint proteins control morphogenetic events during DNA replication stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In response to DNA replication stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the DNA replication checkpoint maintains replication fork stability, prevents precocious chromosome segregation, and causes cells to arrest as large-budded cells. The checkpoint kinases Mec1 and Rad53 act in this checkpoint. Treatment of mec1 or rad53Delta mutants with replication inhibitors results in replication fork collapse and inappropriate partitioning of partially replicated chromosomes, leading to cell death. We describe a previously unappreciated function of various replication stress checkpoint proteins, including Rad53, in the control of cell morphology. Checkpoint mutants have aberrant cell morphology and cell walls, and show defective bud site selection. Rad53 shows genetic interactions with septin ring pathway components, and, along with other checkpoint proteins, controls the timely degradation of Swe1 during replication stress, thereby facilitating proper bud growth. Thus, checkpoint proteins play an important role in coordinating morphogenetic events with DNA replication during replication stress.     

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rad6 Postreplication Repair and Siz1/Srs2 Homologous Recombination-Inhibiting Pathways Process DNA Damage That Arises in asf1 Mutants

The Asf1 and Rad6 pathways have been implicated in a number of common processes such as suppression of gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs), DNA repair, modification of chromatin, and proper checkpoint functions. We examined the relationship between Asf1 and different gene products implicated in postreplication repair (PRR) pathways in the suppression of GCRs, checkpoint function, sensitivity to hydroxyurea (HU) and methyl methanesulfonate (MMS), and ubiquitination of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA). We found that defects in Rad6 PRR pathway and Siz1/Srs2 homologous recombination suppression (HRS) pathway genes suppressed the increased GCR rates seen in asf1 mutants, which was independent of translesion bypass polymerases but showed an increased dependency on Dun1. Combining an asf1 deletion with different PRR mutations resulted in a synergistic increase in sensitivity to chronic HU and MMS treatment; however, these double mutants were not checkpoint defective, since they were capable of recovering from acute treatment with HU. Interestingly, we found that Asf1 and Rad6 cooperate in ubiquitination of PCNA, indicating that Rad6 and Asf1 function in parallel pathways that ubiquitinate PCNA. Our results show that ASF1 probably contributes to the maintenance of genome stability through multiple mechanisms, some of which involve the PRR and HRS pathways.DNA replication must be highly coordinated with chromatin assembly and cell division for correct propagation of genetic information and cell survival. Errors arising during DNA replication are corrected through the functions of numerous pathways including checkpoints and a diversity of DNA repair mechanisms (32, 33, 35). However, in the absence of these critical cellular responses, replication errors can lead to the accumulation of mutations and gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs) as well as chromosome loss, a condition generally termed genomic instability (33). Genome instability is a hallmark of many cancers as well as other human diseases (24). There are many mechanisms by which GCRs can arise, and over the last few years numerous genes and pathways have been implicated in playing a role in the suppression of GCRs in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and in some cases in the etiology of cancer (27, 28, 33, 39-47, 51, 53, 56, 58, 60), including S. cerevisiae ASF1, which encodes the main subunit of the replication coupling assembly factor (37, 62).Asf1 is involved in the deposition of histones H3 and H4 onto newly synthesized DNA during DNA replication and repair (62), and correspondingly, asf1 mutants are sensitive to chronic treatment with DNA-damaging agents (2, 30, 62). However, asf1 mutants do not appear to be repair defective and can recover from acute treatment with at least some DNA-damaging agents (2, 8, 30, 31, 54), properties similar to those described for rad9 mutants (68). In the absence of Asf1, both the DNA damage and replication checkpoints become activated during normal cell growth, and in the absence of checkpoint execution, there is a further increase in checkpoint activation in asf1 mutants (30, 46, 54). It has been suggested that asf1 mutants are defective for checkpoint shutoff and that this might account for the increased steady-state levels of checkpoint activation seen in asf1 mutants (8); however, another study has shown that asf1 mutants are not defective for checkpoint shutoff and that in fact Asf1 and the chromatin assembly factor I (CAF-I) complex act redundantly or cooperate in checkpoint shutoff (31). Furthermore, Asf1 might be involved in proper activation of the Rad53 checkpoint protein, as Asf1 physically interacts with Rad53 and this interaction is abrogated in response to exogenous DNA damage (15, 26); however, the physiological relevance of this interaction is unclear. Asf1 is also required for K56 acetylation of histone H3 by Rtt109, and both rtt109 mutants and histone H3 variants that cannot be acetylated (38) share many of the properties of asf1 mutants, suggesting that at least some of the requirement for Asf1 in response to DNA damage is mediated through Rtt109 (11, 14, 22, 61). Subsequent studies of checkpoint activation in asf1 mutants have led to the hypothesis that replication coupling assembly factor defects result in destabilization of replication forks which are then recognized by the replication checkpoint and stabilized, suggesting that the destabilized replication forks account for both the increased GCRs and increased checkpoint activation seen in asf1 mutants (30). This hypothesis is supported by other recent studies implicating Asf1 in the processing of stalled replication forks (16, 57). This role appears to be independent of CAF-I, which can cooperate with Asf1 in chromatin assembly (63). Asf1 has also been shown to function in disassembly of chromatin, suggesting other possibilities for the mechanism of action of Asf1 at the replication fork (1, 2, 34). Thus, while Asf1 is thought to be involved in progression of the replication fork, both the mechanism of action and the factors that cooperate with Asf1 in this process remain obscure.Stalled replication forks, particularly those that stall at sites of DNA damage, can be processed by homologous recombination (HR) (6) or by a mechanism known as postreplication repair (PRR) (reviewed in reference 67). There are two PRR pathways, an error-prone pathway involving translesion synthesis (TLS) by lower-fidelity polymerases and an error-free pathway thought to involve template switching (TS) (67). In S. cerevisiae, the PRR pathways are under the control of the RAD6 epistasis group (64). The error-prone pathway depends on monoubiquitination of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) on K164 by Rad6 (an E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme) by Rad18 (E3 ubiquitin ligase) (23). This results in replacement of the replicative DNA polymerase with nonessential TLS DNA polymerases, such as REV3/REV7-encoded DNA polymerase ζ (polζ) and RAD30-encoded DNA polη, which can bypass different types of replication-blocking damage (67). The error-free pathway is controlled by Rad5 (E3) and a complex consisting of Ubc13 and Mms2 (E2 and E2 variant, respectively), which add a K63-linked polyubiquitin chain to monoubiquitinated PCNA, leading to TS to the undamaged nascent sister chromatid (4, 25, 65). Furthermore, in addition to modification with ubiquitin, K164 of PCNA can also be sumoylated by Siz1, resulting in subsequent recruitment of the Srs2 helicase and inhibition of deleterious Rad51-dependent recombination events (50, 52, 55), although it is currently unclear if these are competing PCNA modifications or if both can exist on different subunits in the same PCNA trimer. A separate branch of the Rad6 pathway involving the E3 ligase Bre1 monoubiquitinates the histone H2B (29, 69) as well as Swd2 (66), which stimulates Set1-dependent methylation of K4 and Dot1-dependent methylation of K79 of histone H3 (48, 49, 66). Subsequently, K79-methylated H3 recruits Rad9 and activates the Rad53 checkpoint (19, 70). Activation of Rad53 is also bolstered by Rad6-Rad18-dependent ubiquitination of Rad17, which is part of the 9-1-1 complex that functions upstream in the checkpoint pathway (17). Finally, Rad6 complexes with the E3 Ubr1, which mediates protein degradation by the N-end rule pathway (13).Due to the role of the PRR pathways at stalled replication forks and a recent study implicating the Rad6 pathway in the suppression of GCRs (39), we examined the relationship between these ubiquitination and sumoylation pathways and the Asf1 pathway in order to gain additional insights into the function of Asf1 during DNA replication and repair. Our findings suggest that Asf1 has multiple functions that prevent replication damage or act in the cellular responses to replication damage and that these functions are modified by and interact with the PRR pathways. The TLS PRR pathway does not appear to be involved, and both a Dun1-dependent replication checkpoint and HR are important for preventing the deleterious effects of PRR and Asf1 pathway defects. We hypothesize that this newly observed cooperation between Asf1 and the PRR pathways may be required for resolving stalled replication forks, leading to suppression of GCRs and successful DNA replication.     

A novel Epac-specific cAMP analogue demonstrates independent regulation of Rap1 and ERK

cAMP is involved in a wide variety of cellular processes that were thought to be mediated by protein kinase A (PKA). However, cAMP also directly regulates Epac1 and Epac2, guanine nucleotide-exchange factors (GEFs) for the small GTPases Rap1 and Rap2 (refs 2,3). Unfortunately, there is an absence of tools to discriminate between PKA- and Epac-mediated effects. Therefore, through rational drug design we have developed a novel cAMP analogue, 8-(4-chloro-phenylthio)-2'-O-methyladenosine-3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (8CPT-2Me-cAMP), which activates Epac, but not PKA, both in vitro and in vivo. Using this analogue, we tested the widespread model that Rap1 mediates cAMP-induced regulation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK). However, both in cell lines in which cAMP inhibits growth-factor-induced ERK activation and in which cAMP activates ERK, 8CPT-2Me-cAMP did not affect ERK activity. Moreover, in cell lines in which cAMP activates ERK, inhibition of PKA and Ras, but not Rap1, abolished cAMP-mediated ERK activation. We conclude that cAMP-induced regulation of ERK and activation of Rap1 are independent processes.     

Cyclic AMP induces integrin-mediated cell adhesion through Epac and Rap1 upon stimulation of the beta 2-adrenergic receptor

cAMP controls many cellular processes mainly through the activation of protein kinase A (PKA). However, more recently PKA-independent pathways have been established through the exchange protein directly activated by cAMP (Epac), a guanine nucleotide exchange factor for the small GTPases Rap1 and Rap2. In this report, we show that cAMP can induce integrin-mediated cell adhesion through Epac and Rap1. Indeed, when Ovcar3 cells were treated with cAMP, cells adhered more rapidly to fibronectin. This cAMP effect was insensitive to the PKA inhibitor H-89. A similar increase was observed when the cells were transfected with Epac. Both the cAMP effect and the Epac effect on cell adhesion were abolished by the expression of Rap1-GTPase-activating protein, indicating the involvement of Rap1 in the signaling pathway. Importantly, a recently characterized cAMP analogue, 8-(4-chloro-phenylthio)-2'-O-methyladenosine-3',5'-cyclic monophosphate, which specifically activates Epac but not PKA, induced Rap-dependent cell adhesion. Finally, we demonstrate that external stimuli of cAMP signaling, i.e., isoproterenol, which activates the G alpha s-coupled beta 2-adrenergic receptor can induce integrin-mediated cell adhesion through the Epac-Rap1 pathway. From these results we conclude that cAMP mediates receptor-induced integrin-mediated cell adhesion to fibronectin through the Epac-Rap1 signaling pathway.     

Identification and Characterization of a Novel Evolutionarily Conserved Lysine-specific Methyltransferase Targeting Eukaryotic Translation Elongation Factor 2 (eEF2)

The components of the cellular protein translation machinery, such as ribosomal proteins and translation factors, are subject to numerous post-translational modifications. In particular, this group of proteins is frequently methylated. However, for the majority of these methylations, the responsible methyltransferases (MTases) remain unknown. The human FAM86A (family with sequence similarity 86) protein belongs to a recently identified family of protein MTases, and we here show that FAM86A catalyzes the trimethylation of eukaryotic elongation factor 2 (eEF2) on Lys-525. Moreover, we demonstrate that the Saccharomyces cerevisiae MTase Yjr129c, which displays sequence homology to FAM86A, is a functional FAM86A orthologue, modifying the corresponding residue (Lys-509) in yeast eEF2, both in vitro and in vivo. Finally, Yjr129c-deficient yeast cells displayed phenotypes related to eEF2 function (i.e. increased frameshifting during protein translation and hypersensitivity toward the eEF2-specific drug sordarin). In summary, the present study establishes the function of the previously uncharacterized MTases FAM86A and Yjr129c, demonstrating that these enzymes introduce a functionally important lysine methylation in eEF2. Based on the previous naming of similar enzymes, we have redubbed FAM86A and Yjr129c as eEF2-KMT and Efm3, respectively.