The Bloom's syndrome helicase can promote the regression of a model replication fork

Homozygous inactivation of BLM gives rise to Bloom's syndrome, a disorder associated with genomic instability and cancer predisposition. BLM encodes a member of the RecQ DNA helicase family that is required for the maintenance of genome stability and the suppression of sister-chromatid exchanges. BLM has been proposed to function in the rescue of replication forks that have collapsed or stalled as a result of encountering lesions that block fork progression. One proposed mechanism of fork rescue involves regression in which the nascent leading and lagging strands anneal to create a so-called "chicken foot" structure. Here we have developed an in vitro system for analysis of fork regression and show that BLM, but not Escherichia coli RecQ, can promote the regression of a model replication fork. BLM-mediated fork regression is ATP-dependent and occurs processively, generating regressed arms of >250 bp in length. These data establish the existence of a eukaryotic protein that could promote replication fork regression in vivo and suggest a novel pathway through which BLM might suppress genetic exchanges.     

Human Primpol1: a novel guardian of stalled replication forks

Huang and colleagues identify a human primase-polymerase that is required for stalled replication fork restart and the maintenance of genome integrity.EMBO reports (2013) 14 12, 1104–1112 doi:10.1038/embor.2013.159The successful duplication of genomic DNA during S phase is essential for the proper transmission of genetic information to the next generation of cells. Perturbation of normal DNA replication by extrinsic stimuli or intrinsic stress can result in stalled replication forks, ultimately leading to abnormal chromatin structures and activation of the DNA damage response. On formation of stalled replication forks, many DNA repair and recombination pathway proteins are recruited to resolve the stalled fork and resume proper DNA synthesis. Initiation of replication at sites of stalled forks differs from traditional replication and, therefore, requires specialized proteins to reactivate DNA synthesis. In this issue of EMBO reports, Wan et al [1] introduce human primase-polymerase 1 (hPrimpol1)/CCDC111, a novel factor that is essential for the restart of stalled replication forks. This article is the first, to our knowledge, to ascertain the function of human Primpol enzymes, which were originally identified as members of the archaeao-eukaryotic primase (AEP) family [2].Single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) forms at stalled replication forks because of uncoupling of the DNA helicase from the polymerase, and is coated by replication protein A (RPA) for stabilization and recruitment of proteins involved in DNA repair and restart of replication. To identify novel factors playing important roles in the resolution of stalled replication forks, Wan and colleagues [1] used mass spectrometry to identify RPA-binding partners. Among the proteins identified were those already known to be located at replication forks, including SMARCAL1/HARP, BLM and TIMELESS. In addition they found a novel interactor, the 560aa protein CCDC111. This protein interacts with the carboxyl terminus of RPA1 through its own C-terminal region, and localizes with RPA foci in cells after hydroxyurea or DNA damage induced by ionizing irradiation. Owing to the presence of AEP and zinc-ribbon-like domains at the amino-terminal and C-terminal regions, respectively [2], CCDC111 was predicted to have both primase and polymerase enzymatic activities, which was confirmed with in vitro assays, leading to the name hPrimpol1 for this unique enzyme.The most outstanding discovery in this article is that hPrimpol1 is required for the restart of DNA synthesis from a stalled replication fork (Fig 1). With use of a single DNA fibre assay, knock down of hPrimpol1 had no effect on normal replication-fork progression or the firing of new origins in the presence of replication stress. After removal of replication stress, however, the restart of stalled forks was significantly impaired. Furthermore, the authors observed that hPrimpol1 depletion enhanced the toxicity of replication stress to human cells. Together, these data suggest that hPrimpol1 is a novel guardian protein that ensures the proper re-initiation of DNA replication by control of the repriming and repolymerization of newly synthesized DNA.Open in a separate windowFigure 1The role of hPrimpol1 in stalled replication fork restart. (A) Under normal conditions, the replicative helicase unwinds parental DNA, generating ssDNA that is coated by RPA and serves as a template for leading and lagging strand synthesis. Aside from interacting with RPA bound to the short stretches of ssDNA, the role of hPrimpol1 in normal progression of replication forks is unknown. (B) Following repair of a stalled replication fork, (1) hPrimpol1 rapidly resumes DNA synthesis of long stretches of RPA-coated ssDNA located at the stalled fork site. Later, the leading-strand polymerase (2) or lagging-strand primase and polymerase (3) replace hPrimpol1 to complete replication of genomic DNA. RPA, replication protein A; ssDNA, single-stranded DNA.Eukaryotic DNA replication is initiated at specific sites, called origins, through the help of various proteins, including ORC, CDC6, CDT1 and the MCM helicase complex [3]. On unwinding of the parental duplexed DNA, lagging strand ssDNA is coated by the RPA complex and used as a template for newly synthesized daughter DNA. DNA primase, a type of RNA polymerase, catalyses short RNA primers on the RPA-coated ssDNA that facilitate further DNA synthesis by DNA polymerase. While the use of a short RNA primer is occasionally necessary to restart leading-strand replication, such as in the case of a stalled DNA polymerase, it is primarily utilized in lagging-strand synthesis for the continuous production of Okazaki fragments. The lagging-strand DNA polymerase must efficiently coordinate its action with DNA primase and other replication factors, including DNA helicase and RPA [4]. Cooperation between DNA polymerase and primase is disturbed after DNA damage, ultimately resulting in the collapse of stalled replication forks. Until now, it was believed that DNA primase and DNA polymerase performed separate and catalytically unique functions in replication-fork progression in human cells, but this report provides the first example, to our knowledge, of a single enzyme performing both primase and polymerase functions to restart DNA synthesis at stalled replication forks after DNA damage (Fig 1).… this report provides the first example of a single enzyme performing both primase and polymerase function to restart DNA synthesis at stalled replication forksA stalled replication fork, if not properly resolved, can be extremely detrimental to a cell, causing permanent cell-cycle arrest and, ultimately, death. Therefore, eukaryotic cells have developed many pathways for the identification, repair and restart of stalled forks [5]. RPA recognizes ssDNA at stalled forks and activates the intra-S-phase checkpoint pathway, which involves various signalling proteins, including ATR, ATRIP and CHK1 [6]. This checkpoint pathway halts cell-cycle progression until the stalled forks are properly repaired and restarted. Compared with the recognition and repair of stalled forks, the mechanism of fork restart is relatively elusive. Studies have, however, begun to shed light on this process. For instance, RPA-directed SMARCAL1 has been discovered to be important for restart of DNA replication in bacteria and humans [7]. Together with the identification of hPrimpol1, these findings have helped to expand the knowledge of the mechanism of restarting DNA replication. Furthermore, both reports raise many questions regarding the cooperative mechanism of hPrimpol1 and SMARCAL1 with RPA at stalled forks to ensure genomic stability and proper fork restart [7].First, these findings raise the question of why cells need the specialized hPrimpol1 to restart DNA replication at stalled forks rather than using the already present DNA primase and polymerase. One possibility is that other DNA polymerases are functionally inhibited due to the response of the cell to DNA damage. Although the cells are ready to restart replication, the impaired polymerases might require additional time to recover after DNA damage, necessitating the use of hPrimpol1. In support of this idea, we found that the p12 subunit of DNA polymerase δ is degraded by CRL4^CDT2 E3 ligase after ultraviolet damage [8]. As a result, alternative polymerases, such as hPrimpol1, could compensate for temporarily non-functioning traditional polymerases. A second explanation is that the polymerase and helicase uncoupling after stalling of a fork results in long stretches of ssDNA that are coated with RPA. To restart DNA synthesis, cells must quickly reprime and polymerize large stretches of ssDNA to prevent renewed fork collapse. By its constant interaction with RPA1, hPrimpol1 is present on the ssDNA and can rapidly synthesize the new strand of DNA after the recovery of stalled forks. Third, the authors found that the association of hPrimpol1 with RPA1 is independent of its functional AEP and zinc-ribbon-like domains and occurs in the absence of DNA damage. These results might indicate a role for hPrimpol1 in normal replication fork progression, but further work is necessary to determine whether that is true.The discovery of hPrimpol1 is also important in an evolutionary contextSeveral questions remain. First, what is the fidelity of the polymerase activity? Other specialized polymerases that act at DNA damage sites sometimes have the ability to misincorporate a nucleotide across from a site of damage, for example pol-eta and -zeta [9]. It will be interesting to know whether hPrimpol1 is a high-fidelity polymerase or an error-prone polymerase. Second, is the polymerase only brought into action after fork stalling? If hPrimpol1 is an error-prone polymerase, one could envision other types of DNA damage that can be bypassed by hPrimpol1. Third, is the primase selective for ribonucleotides, or can it also incorporate deoxynucleotides? The requirement of the same domain—AEP—for primase and polymerase activities raises the possibility that NTPs or dNTPs could be used for primase or polymerase activities.The discovery of hPrimpol1 is also important in an evolutionary context. In 2003, an enzyme with catalytic activities like that of hPrimpol1 was discovered in a thermophilic archeaon and in Gram-positive bacteria [10]. This protein had several catalytic activities in vitro, including ATPase, primase and polymerase. In contrast to these Primpol enzymes, those capable of primase and polymerase functions had not been found in higher eukaryotes, which suggested that evolutionary pressures forced a split of these dual-function enzymes. Huang et al''s report suggests, however, that human cells do in fact retain enzymes similar to Primpol. In summary, the role of hPrimpol1 at stalled forks broadens our knowledge of the restart of DNA replication in human cells after fork stalling, allowing for proper duplication of genomic DNA, and provides insight into the evolution of primases in eukaryotes.     

Cooperation of RAD51 and RAD54 in regression of a model replication fork

DNA lesions cause stalling of DNA replication forks, which can be lethal for the cell. Homologous recombination (HR) plays an important role in DNA lesion bypass. It is thought that Rad51, a key protein of HR, contributes to the DNA lesion bypass through its DNA strand invasion activity. Here, using model stalled replication forks we found that RAD51 and RAD54 by acting together can promote DNA lesion bypass in vitro through the 'template-strand switch' mechanism. This mechanism involves replication fork regression into a Holliday junction ('chicken foot structure'), DNA synthesis using the nascent lagging DNA strand as a template and fork restoration. Our results demonstrate that RAD54 can catalyze both regression and restoration of model replication forks through its branch migration activity, but shows strong bias toward fork restoration. We find that RAD51 modulates this reaction; by inhibiting fork restoration and stimulating fork regression it promotes accumulation of the chicken foot structure, which we show is essential for DNA lesion bypass by DNA polymerase in vitro. These results indicate that RAD51 in cooperation with RAD54 may have a new role in DNA lesion bypass that is distinct from DNA strand invasion.     

A Reduction in Ribonucleotide Reductase Activity Slows Down the Chromosome Replication Fork but Does Not Change Its Localization

Background

It has been proposed that the enzymes of nucleotide biosynthesis may be compartmentalized or concentrated in a structure affecting the organization of newly replicated DNA. Here we have investigated the effect of changes in ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) activity on chromosome replication and organization of replication forks in Escherichia coli.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Reduced concentrations of deoxyribonucleotides (dNTPs) obtained by reducing the activity of wild type RNR by treatment with hydroxyurea or by mutation, resulted in a lengthening of the replication period. The replication fork speed was found to be gradually reduced proportionately to moderate reductions in nucleotide availability. Cells with highly extended C periods showed a “delay” in cell division i.e. had a higher cell mass. Visualization of SeqA structures by immunofluorescence indicated no change in organization of the new DNA upon moderate limitation of RNR activity. Severe nucleotide limitation led to replication fork stalling and reversal. Well defined SeqA structures were not found in situations of extensive replication fork repair. In cells with stalled forks obtained by UV irradiation, considerable DNA compaction was observed, possibly indicating a reorganization of the DNA into a “repair structure” during the initial phase of the SOS response.

Conclusion/Significance

The results indicate that the replication fork is slowed down in a controlled manner during moderate nucleotide depletion and that a change in the activity of RNR does not lead to a change in the organization of newly replicated DNA. Control of cell division but not control of initiation was affected by the changes in replication elongation.     

Temporal separation of replication and recombination requires the intra-S checkpoint

In response to DNA damage and replication pausing, eukaryotes activate checkpoint pathways that prevent genomic instability by coordinating cell cycle progression with DNA repair. The intra-S-phase checkpoint has been proposed to protect stalled replication forks from pathological rearrangements that could result from unscheduled recombination. On the other hand, recombination may be needed to cope with either stalled forks or double-strand breaks resulting from hydroxyurea treatment. We have exploited fission yeast to elucidate the relationship between replication fork stalling, loading of replication and recombination proteins onto DNA, and the intra-S checkpoint. Here, we show that a functional recombination machinery is not essential for recovery from replication fork arrest and instead can lead to nonfunctional fork structures. We find that Rad22-containing foci are rare in S-phase cells, but peak in G2 phase cells after a perturbed S phase. Importantly, we find that the intra-S checkpoint is necessary to avoid aberrant strand-exchange events during a hydroxyurea block.     

Replication fork reversal and the maintenance of genome stability

The progress of replication forks is often threatened in vivo, both by DNA damage and by proteins bound to the template. Blocked forks must somehow be restarted, and the original blockage cleared, in order to complete genome duplication, implying that blocked fork processing may be critical for genome stability. One possible pathway that might allow processing and restart of blocked forks, replication fork reversal, involves the unwinding of blocked forks to form four-stranded structures resembling Holliday junctions. This concept has gained increasing popularity recently based on the ability of such processing to explain many genetic observations, the detection of unwound fork structures in vivo and the identification of enzymes that have the capacity to catalyse fork regression in vitro. Here, we discuss the contexts in which fork regression might occur, the factors that may promote such a reaction and the possible roles of replication fork unwinding in normal DNA metabolism.     

Visualization of bidirectional initiation of chromosomal DNA replication in a human cell free system

Initiation of DNA replication is tightly controlled during the cell cycle to maintain genome integrity. In order to directly study this control we have previously established a cell-free system from human cells that initiates semi-conservative DNA replication. Template nuclei are isolated from cells synchronized in late G₁ phase by mimosine. We have now used DNA combing to investigate initiation and further progression of DNA replication forks in this human in vitro system at single molecule level. We obtained direct evidence for bidirectional initiation of divergently moving replication forks in vitro. We assessed quantitatively replication fork initiation patterns, fork movement rates and overall fork density. Individual replication forks progress at highly heterogeneous rates (304 ± 162 bp/min) and the two forks emanating from a single origin progress independently from each other. Fork progression rates also change at the single fork level, suggesting that replication fork stalling occurs. DNA combing provides a powerful approach to analyse dynamics of human DNA replication in vitro.     

Fork-Remodeling Helicase Rad5 Preferentially Reverses Replication Forks with Gaps in the Leading Strand

DNA damage bypass pathways promote the replication of damaged DNA when replication forks stall at sites of DNA damage. Template switching is a DNA damage bypass pathway in which fork-reversal helicases convert stalled replication forks into four-way DNA junctions called chicken foot intermediates, which are subsequently extended by replicative DNA polymerases. In yeast, fork-reversal is carried out by the Rad5 helicase using an unknown mechanism. To better understand the mechanism of Rad5 and its specificity for different fork DNA substrates, we used a FRET-based assay to observe fork reversal in real time. We examined the ability of Rad5 to bind and catalyze the reversal of various fork DNA substrates in the presence of short gaps in the leading or lagging strand as well as in the presence or absence of RPA and RNA primers in the lagging strand. We found that Rad5 preferentially reverses fork DNA substrates with short gaps (10 to 30 nt.) in the leading strand. Thus, Rad5 preferentially reverses fork DNA substrates that form chicken foot intermediates with 5′ overhangs that can be extended by replicative DNA polymerases during the subsequent steps of template switching.     

FANCM regulates DNA chain elongation and is stabilized by S‐phase checkpoint signalling

FANCM binds and remodels replication fork structures in vitro. We report that in vivo, FANCM controls DNA chain elongation in an ATPase‐dependent manner. In the presence of replication inhibitors that do not damage DNA, FANCM counteracts fork movement, possibly by remodelling fork structures. Conversely, through damaged DNA, FANCM promotes replication and recovers stalled forks. Hence, the impact of FANCM on fork progression depends on the underlying hindrance. We further report that signalling through the checkpoint effector kinase Chk1 prevents FANCM from degradation by the proteasome after exposure to DNA damage. FANCM also acts in a feedback loop to stabilize Chk1. We propose that FANCM is a ringmaster in the response to replication stress by physically altering replication fork structures and by providing a tight link to S‐phase checkpoint signalling.     

Timeless tunes: Replicating happy endings

Comment on: Leman AR, et al. Cell Cycle 2012; 11:2337-47.DNA replication is at the heart of the inheritance of genetic material. A single replication fork can progress through hundreds of kilobases of DNA, melting parental double-stranded DNA and leaving newly synthesized strands in its wake. A beautiful illustration showing how the replication machinery accomplishes this complex task is one of the triumphs of molecular biology. However, it is known that DNA replication is not always as processive as the textbooks suggest. Specifically, the rate of fork progression varies depending on the regions being replicated, and the replication fork even stalls in some circumstances, during replication of heterochromatin or damaged DNA, for example. A stalled replication fork has two fates. It may restart DNA replication, or it may collapse after prolonged stalling. A collapsed replication fork is particularly dangerous for the genome, because the DNA intermediate left by the collapsed fork may form a double-stranded break, a highly mutagenic lesion that can undergo illegitimate recombination. To circumvent replication fork collapse, cells are equipped with specialized proteins that stabilize the stalled replication fork. Timeless and Tipin are highly conserved in eukaryotes. from yeast to humans, and form a complex to protect stalled replication forks.In a paper published in Cell Cycle, Noguchi and his group investigated how Timeless plays a role in telomere replication in human cells.¹ Telomeres consist of tandem arrays of short repetitive DNA (TTAGGG/CCCTAA in mammals) at the ends of chromosomes and numerous associated proteins. Telomeres are essential for the stable maintenance of genomic DNA, because they protect the DNA termini from undergoing accidental recombination and exonuclease attack. Dysfunctional telomeres lead to genetic instability that eventually results in senescence and cancer development. Because of the heterochromatic nature of telomeres, it has been recognized that telomere DNA is one of the genomic regions that impede replication fork progression. Indeed, in vitro DNA replication experiments using SV40 DNA, and cell extracts demonstrated that telomere DNA is replicated less efficiently and incurs more fork stalling than non-telomeric DNA.² Moreover, overexpression of telomere-DNA binding protein TRF1 in HeLa cells led to an accumulation of replicating telomeres, consistent with a slower replication rate of telomeres under those circumstance. Furthermore, experiments using TRF1-deleted murine cells showed that TRF1 is essential for efficient telomere DNA replication.³ Collectively, these results confirm that the telomere is a difficult-to-replicate region.There is an apparent contradiction between two earlier studies, however, with TRF1 described as an anti-replication protein in one report² and a pro-replication protein in the other.³ One potential explanation for the inconsistency might be that TRF1 requires other protein(s) to perform its pro-replication function, and the second factor was missing in the TRF1-overexpression experiments. Noguchi and his colleagues investigated this possibility by testing whether Timeless is required for proficient telomere DNA replication.¹ They found that Timeless-knockdown cells displayed telomere length shortening and an increased frequency of dysfunctional telomeres. In vitro replication assays of SV40 DNA revealed that Timeless-depleted extracts supported non-telomere replication proficiently, while telomere replication was inefficient. They then demonstrated that addition of recombinant TRF1 to the replication system slowed telomere replication. Importantly, Timeless depletion and TRF1 addition did not produce additive effects on telomere replication, suggesting that Timeless and TRF1 function in the same pathway. These results suggest a model as described in Figure 1. A replication fork frequently stalls at telomeres because of the molecularly crowded nature of telomeric chromatin. Timeless presumably encounters TRF1 at telomeres and protects the stalled fork from undergoing collapse. In the absence of Timeless, the stalled forks easily collapse, leading to an abrupt shortening of telomeres. Several questions remain to be answered. Given that Timeless moves along the genomic DNA as a component of the replication machinery,⁴ it will be particularly interesting to see how Timeless (or the replication machinery) interacts with telomeric chromatin. In such studies, a dynamic transaction between the regional chromatin at telomeres and the replication machinery may be revealed.Open in a separate windowFigure 1. Hard life at telomeres. (A) Mammalian telomeres consist of repetitive DNA that potentially forms higher-ordered structures [G-quartet(G4)-DNA] and numerous proteins, including telomere DNA-binding protein TRF1. (B) Replication fork is frequently stalled at telomeres. Overexpressed TRF1 slows down fork progression at the telomere, while endogenous TRF1 together with Timeless protein facilitates it. Timeless protects the stalled replication fork from collapse. (C) Telomeres are unique in that the most distal replication fork is not coupled with another fork progressing inversely. (D) Prolonged fork stalling may lead to the formation of a DNA double-strand break. Because of the lack of another fork compensating the telomere replication (C), the break immediately results in the abrupt single-step shortening of telomere DNAs.     

The intra-S phase checkpoint targets Dna2 to prevent stalled replication forks from reversing

When replication forks stall at damaged bases or upon nucleotide depletion, the intra-S phase checkpoint ensures they are stabilized and can restart. In intra-S checkpoint-deficient budding yeast, stalling forks collapse, and ～10% form pathogenic chicken foot structures, contributing to incomplete replication and cell death (Lopes et al., 2001; Sogo et al., 2002; Tercero and Diffley, 2001). Using fission yeast, we report that the Cds1(Chk2) effector kinase targets Dna2 on S220 to regulate, both in vivo and in vitro, Dna2 association with stalled replication forks in chromatin. We demonstrate that Dna2-S220 phosphorylation and the nuclease activity of Dna2 are required to prevent fork reversal. Consistent with this, Dna2 can efficiently cleave obligate precursors of fork regression-regressed leading or lagging strands-on model replication forks. We propose that Dna2 cleavage of regressed nascent strands prevents fork reversal and thus stabilizes stalled forks to maintain genome stability during replication stress.     

Pyrimidine dimers block simian virus 40 replication forks.

UV light produces lesions, predominantly pyrimidine dimers, which inhibit DNA replication in mammalian cells. The mechanism of inhibition is controversial: is synthesis of a daughter strand halted at a lesion while the replication fork moves on and reinitiates downstream, or is fork progression itself blocked for some time at the site of a lesion? We directly addressed this question by using electron microscopy to examine the distances of replication forks from the origin in unirradiated and UV-irradiated simian virus 40 chromosomes. If UV lesions block replication fork progression, the forks should be asymmetrically located in a large fraction of the irradiated molecules; if replication forks move rapidly past lesions, the forks should be symmetrically located. A large fraction of the simian virus 40 replication forks in irradiated molecules were asymmetrically located, demonstrating that UV lesions present at the frequency of pyrimidine dimers block replication forks. As a mechanism for this fork blockage, we propose that polymerization of the leading strand makes a significant contribution to the energetics of fork movement, so any lesion in the template for the leading strand which blocks polymerization should also block fork movement.     

DNA replication-dependent formation of joint DNA molecules in Physarum polycephalum

Two-dimensional neutral/neutral agarose gel electrophoresis is used extensively to localize replication origins. This method resolves DNA structures containing replication forks. It also detects X-shaped recombination intermediates in meiotic cells, in the form of a typical vertical spike. Intriguingly, such a spike of joint DNA molecules is often detectable in replicating DNA from mitotic cells. Here, we used naturally synchronous DNA samples from Physarum polycephalum to demonstrate that postreplicative, DNA replication-dependent X-shaped DNA molecules are formed between sister chromatids. These molecules have physical properties reminiscent of Holliday junctions. Our results demonstrate frequent interactions between sister chromatids during a normal cell cycle and suggest a novel phase during DNA replication consisting of transient, joint DNA molecules formed on newly replicated DNA.     

Tim/Timeless,a member of the replication fork protection complex,operates with the Warsaw breakage syndrome DNA helicase DDX11 in the same fork recovery pathway

We present evidence that Tim establishes a physical and functional interaction with DDX11, a super-family 2 iron-sulfur cluster DNA helicase genetically linked to the chromosomal instability disorder Warsaw breakage syndrome. Tim stimulates DDX11 unwinding activity on forked DNA substrates up to 10-fold and on bimolecular anti-parallel G-quadruplex DNA structures and three-stranded D-loop approximately 4–5-fold. Electrophoretic mobility shift assays revealed that Tim enhances DDX11 binding to DNA, suggesting that the observed stimulation derives from an improved ability of DDX11 to interact with the nucleic acid substrate. Surface plasmon resonance measurements indicate that DDX11 directly interacts with Tim. DNA fiber track assays with HeLa cells exposed to hydroxyurea demonstrated that Tim or DDX11 depletion significantly reduced replication fork progression compared to control cells; whereas no additive effect was observed by co-depletion of both proteins. Moreover, Tim and DDX11 are epistatic in promoting efficient resumption of stalled DNA replication forks in hydroxyurea-treated cells. This is consistent with the finding that association of the two endogenous proteins in the cell extract chromatin fraction is considerably increased following hydroxyurea exposure. Overall, our studies provide evidence that Tim and DDX11 physically and functionally interact and act in concert to preserve replication fork progression in perturbed conditions.     

DNA polymerase stabilization at stalled replication forks requires Mec1 and the RecQ helicase Sgs1

To ensure proper replication and segregation of the genome, eukaryotic cells have evolved surveillance systems that monitor and react to impaired replication fork progression. In budding yeast, the intra-S phase checkpoint responds to stalled replication forks by downregulating late-firing origins, preventing spindle elongation and allowing efficient resumption of DNA synthesis after recovery from stress. Mutations in this pathway lead to high levels of genomic instability, particularly in the presence of DNA damage. Here we demonstrate by chromatin immunoprecipitation that when yeast replication forks stall due to hydroxyurea (HU) treatment, DNA polymerases alpha and epsilon are stabilized for 40-60 min. This requires the activities of Sgs1, a member of the RecQ family of DNA helicases, and the ATM-related kinase Mec1, but not Rad53 activation. A model is proposed whereby Sgs1 helicase resolves aberrantly paired structures at stalled forks to maintain single-stranded DNA that allows RP-A and Mec1 to promote DNA polymerase association.     

Genome-wide analysis of DNA replication and DNA double-strand breaks using TrAEL-seq

Faithful replication of the entire genome requires replication forks to copy large contiguous tracts of DNA, and sites of persistent replication fork stalling present a major threat to genome stability. Understanding the distribution of sites at which replication forks stall, and the ensuing fork processing events, requires genome-wide methods that profile replication fork position and the formation of recombinogenic DNA ends. Here, we describe Transferase-Activated End Ligation sequencing (TrAEL-seq), a method that captures single-stranded DNA 3′ ends genome-wide and with base pair resolution. TrAEL-seq labels both DNA breaks and replication forks, providing genome-wide maps of replication fork progression and fork stalling sites in yeast and mammalian cells. Replication maps are similar to those obtained by Okazaki fragment sequencing; however, TrAEL-seq is performed on asynchronous populations of wild-type cells without incorporation of labels, cell sorting, or biochemical purification of replication intermediates, rendering TrAEL-seq far simpler and more widely applicable than existing replication fork direction profiling methods. The specificity of TrAEL-seq for DNA 3′ ends also allows accurate detection of double-strand break sites after the initiation of DNA end resection, which we demonstrate by genome-wide mapping of meiotic double-strand break hotspots in a dmc1Δ mutant that is competent for end resection but not strand invasion. Overall, TrAEL-seq provides a flexible and robust methodology with high sensitivity and resolution for studying DNA replication and repair, which will be of significant use in determining mechanisms of genome instability.

TrAEL-seq provides genome-wide base pair resolution maps of exposed DNA 3’ ends; this reveals replication fork stalling and normal replication profiles in asynchronous, unlabelled wildtype cell populations, along with the sites of resected DNA breaks.     

Chk1 requirement for high global rates of replication fork progression during normal vertebrate S phase

Chk1 protein kinase maintains replication fork stability in metazoan cells in response to DNA damage and DNA replication inhibitors. Here, we have employed DNA fiber labeling to quantify, for the first time, the extent to which Chk1 maintains global replication fork rates during normal vertebrate S phase. We report that replication fork rates in Chk1^−/− chicken DT40 cells are on average half of those observed with wild-type cells. Similar results were observed if Chk1 was inhibited or depleted in wild-type DT40 cells or HeLa cells by incubation with Chk1 inhibitor or small interfering RNA. In addition, reduced rates of fork extension were observed with permeabilized Chk1^−/− cells in vitro. The requirement for Chk1 for high fork rates during normal S phase was not to suppress promiscuous homologous recombination at replication forks, because inhibition of Chk1 similarly slowed fork progression in XRCC3^−/− DT40 cells. Rather, we observed an increased number of replication fibers in Chk1^−/− cells in which the nascent strand is single-stranded, supporting the idea that slow global fork rates in unperturbed Chk1^−/− cells are associated with the accumulation of aberrant replication fork structures.     

Exo1 processes stalled replication forks and counteracts fork reversal in checkpoint-defective cells

The replication checkpoint coordinates the cell cycle with DNA replication and recombination, preventing genome instability and cancer. The budding yeast Rad53 checkpoint kinase stabilizes stalled forks and replisome-fork complexes, thus preventing the accumulation of ss-DNA regions and reversed forks at collapsed forks. We searched for factors involved in the processing of stalled forks in HU-treated rad53 cells. Using the neutral-neutral two-dimensional electrophoresis technique (2D gel) and psoralen crosslinking combined with electron microscopy (EM), we found that the Exo1 exonuclease is recruited to stalled forks and, in rad53 mutants, counteracts reversed fork accumulation by generating ss-DNA intermediates. Hence, Exo1-mediated fork processing resembles the action of E. coli RecJ nuclease at damaged forks. Fork stability and replication restart are influenced by both DNA polymerase-fork association and Exo1-mediated processing. We suggest that Exo1 counteracts fork reversal by resecting newly synthesized chains and resolving the sister chromatid junctions that cause regression of collapsed forks.     

Metabolism of DNA secondary structures at the eukaryotic replication fork

DNA secondary structures are largely advantageous for numerous cellular processes but can pose specific threats to the progression of the replication machinery and therefore genome duplication and cell division. A number of specialized enzymes dismantle these structures to allow replication fork progression to proceed faithfully. In this review, we discuss the in vitro and in vivo data that has lead to the identification of these enzymes in eukaryotes, and the evidence that suggests that they act specifically at replication forks to resolve secondary structures. We focus on the role of helicases, which catalyze the dissociation of nucleotide complexes, and on the role of nucleases, which cleave secondary structures to allow replication fork progression at the expense of local rearrangements. Finally, we discuss outstanding questions in terms of dismantling DNA secondary structures, as well as the interplay between diverse enzymes that act upon specific types of structures.