DNA damage discrimination at stalled replication forks by the Rad5 homologs HLTF and SHPRH

In this issue of Molecular Cell, Lin et al. (2011) describe how HLTF and SHPRH, the human homologs of yeast Rad5, can discriminate between MMS-induced versus UV-induced DNA damage. The results have important implications for the suppression of damage-specific mutagenesis and for the maintenance of genomic stability.     

Concerted and differential actions of two enzymatic domains underlie Rad5 contributions to DNA damage tolerance

Many genome maintenance factors have multiple enzymatic activities. In most cases, how their distinct activities functionally relate with each other is unclear. Here we examined the conserved budding yeast Rad5 protein that has both ubiquitin ligase and DNA helicase activities. The Rad5 ubiquitin ligase activity mediates PCNA poly-ubiquitination and subsequently recombination-based DNA lesion tolerance. Interestingly, the ligase domain is embedded in a larger helicase domain comprising seven consensus motifs. How features of the helicase domain influence ligase function is controversial. To clarify this issue, we use genetic, 2D gel and biochemical analyses and show that a Rad5 helicase motif important for ATP binding is also required for PCNA poly-ubiquitination and recombination-based lesion tolerance. We determine that this requirement is due to a previously unrecognized contribution of the motif to the PCNA and ubiquitination enzyme interaction, and not due to its canonical role in supporting helicase activity. We further show that Rad5′s helicase-mediated contribution to replication stress survival is separable from recombination. These findings delineate how two Rad5 enzymatic domains concertedly influence PCNA modification, and unveil their discrete contributions to stress tolerance.     

Rad51 replication fork recruitment is required for DNA damage tolerance

Homologous recombination (HR) is essential for genome integrity. Recombination proteins participate in tolerating DNA lesions that interfere with DNA replication, but can also generate toxic recombination intermediates and genetic instability when they are not properly regulated. Here, we have studied the role of the recombination proteins Rad51 and Rad52 at replication forks and replicative DNA lesions. We show that Rad52 loads Rad51 onto unperturbed replication forks, where they facilitate replication of alkylated DNA by non‐repair functions. The recruitment of Rad52 and Rad51 to chromatin during DNA replication is a prerequisite for the repair of the non‐DSB DNA lesions, presumably single‐stranded DNA gaps, which are generated during the replication of alkylated DNA. We also show that the repair of these lesions requires CDK1 and is not coupled to the fork but rather restricted to G2/M by the replicative checkpoint. We propose a new scenario for HR where Rad52 and Rad51 are recruited to the fork to promote DNA damage tolerance by distinct and cell cycle‐regulated replicative and repair functions.     

Cell cycle stage-specific roles of Rad18 in tolerance and repair of oxidative DNA damage

The E3 ubiquitin ligase Rad18 mediates tolerance of replication fork-stalling bulky DNA lesions, but whether Rad18 mediates tolerance of bulky DNA lesions acquired outside S-phase is unclear. Using synchronized cultures of primary human cells, we defined cell cycle stage-specific contributions of Rad18 to genome maintenance in response to ultraviolet C (UVC) and H₂O₂-induced DNA damage. UVC and H₂O₂ treatments both induced Rad18-mediated proliferating cell nuclear antigen mono-ubiquitination during G₀, G₁ and S-phase. Rad18 was important for repressing H₂O₂-induced (but not ultraviolet-induced) double strand break (DSB) accumulation and ATM S1981 phosphorylation only during G₁, indicating a specific role for Rad18 in processing of oxidative DNA lesions outside S-phase. However, H₂O₂-induced DSB formation in Rad18-depleted G1 cells was not associated with increased genotoxin sensitivity, indicating that back-up DSB repair mechanisms compensate for Rad18 deficiency. Indeed, in DNA LigIV-deficient cells Rad18-depletion conferred H₂O₂-sensitivity, demonstrating functional redundancy between Rad18 and non-homologous end joining for tolerance of oxidative DNA damage acquired during G₁. In contrast with G₁-synchronized cultures, S-phase cells were H₂O₂-sensitive following Rad18-depletion. We conclude that although Rad18 pathway activation by oxidative lesions is not restricted to S-phase, Rad18-mediated trans-lesion synthesis by Polη is dispensable for damage-tolerance in G₁ (because of back-up non-homologous end joining-mediated DSB repair), yet Rad18 is necessary for damage tolerance during S-phase.     

Regulation of tolerance to DNA alkylating damage by Dot1 and Rad53 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

To maintain genomic integrity cells have to respond properly to a variety of exogenous and endogenous factors that produce genome injuries and interfere with DNA replication. DNA integrity checkpoints coordinate this response by slowing cell cycle progression to provide time for the cell to repair the damage, stabilizing replication forks and stimulating DNA repair to restore the original DNA sequence and structure. In addition, there are also mechanisms of damage tolerance, such as translesion synthesis (TLS), which are important for survival after DNA damage. TLS allows replication to continue without removing the damage, but results in a higher frequency of mutagenesis. Here, we investigate the functional contribution of the Dot1 histone methyltransferase and the Rad53 checkpoint kinase to TLS regulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We demonstrate that the Dot1-dependent status of H3K79 methylation modulates the resistance to the alkylating agent MMS, which depends on PCNA ubiquitylation at lysine 164. Strikingkly, either the absence of DOT1, which prevents full activation of Rad53, or the expression of an HA-tagged version of RAD53, which produces low amounts of the kinase, confer increased MMS resistance. However, the dot1Δ rad53-HA double mutant is hypersensitive to MMS and shows barely detectable amounts of activated kinase. Furthermore, moderate overexpression of RAD53 partially suppresses the MMS resistance of dot1Δ. In addition, we show that MMS-treated dot1Δ and rad53-HA cells display increased number of chromosome-associated Rev1 foci. We propose that threshold levels of Rad53 activity exquisitely modulate the tolerance to alkylating damage at least by controlling the abundance of the key TLS factor Rev1 bound to chromatin.     

泛素载体蛋白Rad6在基因表达调控及DNA损伤修复中的作用

泛素化修饰是蛋白质的一种重要的翻译后水平修饰,而且有着多种不同的生物学功能,对蛋白质的结构与功能、基因表达调控以及蛋白质-蛋白质/其它分子相互作用等多个方面有着重要的调控作用。Rad6即是酵母中的一种重要的泛素载体蛋白。Rad6通过泛素化修饰多种靶蛋白在DNA的损伤修复中发挥着重要作用。文章重点讨论了Rad6在DNA损伤修复方面的功能以及在正常情况下对染色质结构和基因表达调控的影响。     

Role for caspase-mediated cleavage of Rad51 in induction of apoptosis by DNA damage

We report here that the Rad51 recombinase is cleaved in mammalian cells during the induction of apoptosis by ionizing radiation (IR) exposure. The results demonstrate that IR induces Rad51 cleavage by a caspase-dependent mechanism. Further support for involvement of caspases is provided by the finding that IR-induced proteolysis of Rad51 is inhibited by Ac-DEVD-CHO. In vitro studies show that Rad51 is cleaved by caspase 3 at a DVLD/N site. Stable expression of a Rad51 mutant in which the aspartic acid residues were mutated to alanines (AVLA/N) confirmed that the DVLD/N site is responsible for the cleavage of Rad51 in IR-induced apoptosis. The functional significance of Rad51 proteolysis is supported by the finding that, unlike intact Rad51, the N- and C-terminal cleavage products fail to exhibit recombinase activity. In cells, overexpression of the Rad51(D-A) mutant had no effect on activation of caspase 3 but did abrogate in part the apoptotic response to IR exposure. We conclude that proteolytic inactivation of Rad51 by a caspase-mediated mechanism contributes to the cell death response induced by DNA damage.     

The mitotic DNA damage checkpoint proteins Rad17 and Rad24 are required for repair of double-strand breaks during meiosis in yeast

We show here that deletion of the DNA damage checkpoint genes RAD17 and RAD24 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae delays repair of meiotic double-strand breaks (DSBs) and results in an altered ratio of crossover-to-noncrossover products. These mutations also decrease the colocalization of immunostaining foci of the RecA homologs Rad51 and Dmc1 and cause a delay in the disappearance of Rad51 foci, but not of Dmc1. These observations imply that RAD17 and RAD24 promote efficient repair of meiotic DSBs by facilitating proper assembly of the meiotic recombination complex containing Rad51. Consistent with this proposal, extra copies of RAD51 and RAD54 substantially suppress not only the spore inviability of the rad24 mutant, but also the gamma-ray sensitivity of the mutant. Unexpectedly, the entry into meiosis I (metaphase I) is delayed in the checkpoint single mutants compared to wild type. The control of the cell cycle in response to meiotic DSBs is also discussed.     

SHPRH and HLTF act in a damage-specific manner to coordinate different forms of postreplication repair and prevent mutagenesis

Postreplication repair (PRR) pathways play important roles in restarting stalled replication forks and regulating mutagenesis. In yeast, Rad5-mediated damage avoidance and Rad18-mediated translesion synthesis (TLS) are two forms of PRR. Two Rad5-related proteins, SHPRH and HLTF, have been identified in mammalian cells, but their specific roles in PRR are unclear. Here, we show that HLTF and SHPRH suppress mutagenesis in a damage-specific manner, preventing mutations induced by UV and MMS, respectively. Following UV, HLTF enhances PCNA monoubiquitination and recruitment of TLS polymerase η, while also inhibiting SHPRH function. In contrast, MMS promotes the degradation of HLTF and the interactions of SHPRH with Rad18 and polymerase κ. Our data suggest not only that cells differentially utilize HLTF and SHPRH for different forms of DNA damage, but also, surprisingly, that HLTF and SHPRH may coordinate the two main branches of PRR to choose the proper bypass mechanism for minimizing mutagenesis.     

Non‐recombinogenic roles for Rad52 in translesion synthesis during DNA damage tolerance

DNA damage tolerance relies on homologous recombination (HR) and translesion synthesis (TLS) mechanisms to fill in the ssDNA gaps generated during passing of the replication fork over DNA lesions in the template. Whereas TLS requires specialized polymerases able to incorporate a dNTP opposite the lesion and is error‐prone, HR uses the sister chromatid and is mostly error‐free. We report that the HR protein Rad52—but not Rad51 and Rad57—acts in concert with the TLS machinery (Rad6/Rad18‐mediated PCNA ubiquitylation and polymerases Rev1/Pol ζ) to repair MMS and UV light‐induced ssDNA gaps through a non‐recombinogenic mechanism, as inferred from the different phenotypes displayed in the absence of Rad52 and Rad54 (essential for MMS‐ and UV‐induced HR); accordingly, Rad52 is required for efficient DNA damage‐induced mutagenesis. In addition, Rad52, Rad51, and Rad57, but not Rad54, facilitate Rad6/Rad18 binding to chromatin and subsequent DNA damage‐induced PCNA ubiquitylation. Therefore, Rad52 facilitates the tolerance process not only by HR but also by TLS through Rad51/Rad57‐dependent and ‐independent processes, providing a novel role for the recombination proteins in maintaining genome integrity.     

Coordinated response of mammalian Rad51 and Rad52 to DNA damage

Biochemical analysis has shown that mammalian Rad51 and Rad52 interact and synergize in DNA recombination reactions in vitro, but these proteins have not been shown to function together in response to DNA damage in vivo. By analysis of murine cells expressing murine Rad52 tagged with green fluorescent protein (GFP)–Rad52, we now show that DNA damage causes Rad51 and GFP–Rad52 to colocalize in distinct nuclear foci. Cells expressing GFP–Rad52 show both increased survival and an increased number of Rad51 foci, raising the possibility that Rad52 is limiting for repair. These observations provide evidence of coordinated function of Rad51 and Rad52 in vivo and support the hypothesis that Rad52 plays an important role in the DNA damage response in mammalian cells.     

Superhelicity-driven homologous DNA pairing by yeast recombination factors Rad51 and Rad54

Yeast Rad51 recombinase has only minimal ability to form D loop. Addition of Rad54 renders D loop formation by Rad51 efficient, even when topologically relaxed DNA is used as substrate. Treatment of the nucleoprotein complex of Rad54 and relaxed DNA with topoisomerases reveals dynamic DNA remodeling to generate unconstrained negative and positive supercoils. DNA remodeling requires ATP hydrolysis by Rad54 and is stimulated by Rad51-DNA nucleoprotein complex. A marked sensitivity of DNA undergoing remodeling to P1 nuclease indicates that the negative supercoils produced lead to transient DNA strand separation. Thus, a specific interaction of Rad54 with the Rad51-ssDNA complex enhances the ability of the former to remodel DNA and allows the latter to harvest the negative supercoils generated for DNA joint formation.     

Coordination of DNA damage tolerance mechanisms with cell cycle progression in fission yeast

DNA damage tolerance (DDT) mechanisms allow cells to synthesize a new DNA strand when the template is damaged. Many mutations resulting from DNA damage in eukaryotes are generated during DDT when cells use the mutagenic translesion polymerases, Rev1 and Polζ, rather than mechanisms with higher fidelity. The coordination among DDT mechanisms is not well understood. We used live-cell imaging to study the function of DDT mechanisms throughout the cell cycle of the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. We report that checkpoint-dependent mitotic delay provides a cellular mechanism to ensure the completion of high fidelity DDT, largely by homology-directed repair (HDR). DDT by mutagenic polymerases is suppressed during the checkpoint delay by a mechanism dependent on Rad51 recombinase. When cells pass the G2/M checkpoint and can no longer delay mitosis, they completely lose the capacity for HDR and simultaneously exhibit a requirement for Rev1 and Polζ. Thus, DDT is coordinated with the checkpoint response so that the activity of mutagenic polymerases is confined to a vulnerable period of the cell cycle when checkpoint delay and HDR are not possible.     

The human Rad9/Rad1/Hus1 damage sensor clamp interacts with DNA polymerase beta and increases its DNA substrate utilisation efficiency: implications for DNA repair

In eukaryotic cells, checkpoints are activated in response to DNA damage. This requires the action of DNA damage sensors such as the Rad family proteins. The three human proteins Rad9, Rad1 and Hus1 form a heterotrimeric complex (called the 9-1-1 complex) that is recruited onto DNA upon damage. DNA damage also triggers the recruitment of DNA repair proteins at the lesion, including specialized DNA polymerases. In this work, we showed that the 9-1-1 complex can physically interact with DNA polymerase β in vitro. Functional analysis revealed that the 9-1-1 complex had a stimulatory effect on DNA polymerase β activity. However, the presence of 9-1-1 complex neither affected DNA polymerase λ, another X family DNA polymerase, nor the two replicative DNA polymerases α and δ. DNA polymerase β stimulation resulted from an increase in its affinity for the primer–template and the interaction with the 9-1-1 complex stimulated deoxyribonucleotides misincorporation by DNA polymerase β. In addition, the 9-1-1 complex enhanced DNA strand displacement synthesis by DNA polymerase β on a 1 nt gap DNA substrate. Our data raise the possibility that the 9-1-1 complex might attract DNA polymerase β to DNA damage sites, thus connecting directly checkpoints and DNA repair.     

Role of oxidative stress and DNA damage in human carcinogenesis

Cells in tissues and organs are continuously subjected to oxidative stress and free radicals on a daily basis. This free radical attack has exogenous or endogenous (intracellular) origin. The cells withstand and counteract this occurrence by the use of several and different defense mechanisms ranging from free radical scavengers like glutathione (GSH), vitamins C and E and antioxidant enzymes like catalase, superoxide dismutase and various peroxidases to sophisticated and elaborate DNA repair mechanisms. The outcome of this dynamic equilibrium is usually the induction of oxidatively induced DNA damage and a variety of lesions of small to high importance and dangerous for the cell i.e. isolated base lesions or single strand breaks (SSBs) to complex lesions like double strand breaks (DSBs) and other non-DSB oxidatively generated clustered DNA lesions (OCDLs). The accumulation of DNA damage through misrepair or incomplete repair may lead to mutagenesis and consequently transformation particularly if combined with a deficient apoptotic pathway. In this review, we present the current status of knowledge and evidence on the mechanisms and involvement of intracellular oxidative stress and DNA damage in human malignancy evolution and possible use of these parameters as cancer biomarkers. At the same time, we discuss controversies related to potential artifacts inherent to specific methodologies used for the measurement of oxidatively induced DNA lesions in human cells or tissues.     

Functional interactions among yeast Rad51 recombinase, Rad52 mediator, and replication protein A in DNA strand exchange

Rad51-catalyzed DNA strand exchange is greatly enhanced by the single-stranded (ss) DNA binding factor RPA if the latter is introduced after Rad51 has already nucleated onto the initiating ssDNA substrate. Paradoxically, co-addition of RPA with Rad51 to the ssDNA to mimic the in vivo situation diminishes the level of strand exchange, revealing competition between RPA and Rad51 for binding sites on ssDNA. Rad52 promotes strand exchange but only when there is a need for Rad51 to compete with RPA for loading onto ssDNA. Rad52 is multimeric, binds ssDNA, and targets Rad51 to ssDNA. Maximal restoration of pairing and strand exchange requires amounts of Rad52 substoichiometric to Rad51 and involves a stable, equimolar complex between Rad51 and Rad52. The Rad51-Rad52 complex efficiently utilizes a ssDNA template saturated with RPA for homologous pairing but does not appear to be more active than Rad51 when an RPA-free ssDNA template is used. Rad52 does not substitute for RPA in the pairing and strand exchange reaction nor does it lower the dependence of the reaction on Rad51 or RPA.