Functional analysis of DNA replication fork reversal catalyzed by Mycobacterium tuberculosis RuvAB proteins

Initially discovered in Escherichia coli, RuvAB proteins are ubiquitous in bacteria and play a dual role as molecular motor proteins responsible for branch migration of the Holliday junction(s) and reversal of stalled replication forks. Despite mounting genetic evidence for a crucial role of RuvA and RuvB proteins in reversal of stalled replication forks, the mechanistic aspects of this process are still not fully understood. Here, we elucidate the ability of Mycobacterium tuberculosis RuvAB (MtRuvAB) complex to catalyze the reversal of replication forks using a range of DNA replication fork substrates. Our studies show that MtRuvAB, unlike E. coli RuvAB, is able to drive replication fork reversal via the formation of Holliday junction intermediates, suggesting that RuvAB-catalyzed fork reversal involves concerted unwinding and annealing of nascent leading and lagging strands. We also demonstrate the reversal of replication forks carrying hemi-replicated DNA, indicating that MtRuvAB complex-catalyzed fork reversal is independent of symmetry at the fork junction. The fork reversal reaction catalyzed by MtRuvAB is coupled to ATP hydrolysis, is processive, and culminates in the formation of an extended reverse DNA arm. Notably, we found that sequence heterology failed to impede the fork reversal activity of MtRuvAB. We discuss the implications of these results in the context of recognition and processing of varied types of replication fork structures by RuvAB proteins.     

ruvA and ruvB mutants specifically impaired for replication fork reversal

Replication fork reversal (RFR) is a reaction that takes place in Escherichia coli at replication forks arrested by the inactivation of a replication protein. Fork reversal involves the annealing of the leading and lagging strand ends; it results in the formation of a Holliday junction adjacent to DNA double-strand end, both of which are processed by recombination enzymes. In several replication mutants, replication fork reversal is catalysed by the RuvAB complex, originally characterized for its role in the last steps of homologous recombination, branch migration and resolution of Holliday junctions. We present here the isolation and characterization of ruvA and ruvB single mutants that are impaired for RFR at forks arrested by the inactivation of polymerase III, while they remain capable of homologous recombination. The positions of the mutations in the proteins and the genetic properties of the mutants suggest that the mutations affect DNA binding, RuvA-RuvB interaction and/or RuvB-helicase activity. These results show that a partial RuvA or RuvB defect affects primarily RFR, implying that RFR is a more demanding reaction than Holliday junction resolution.     

ruvA Mutants that resolve Holliday junctions but do not reverse replication forks

RuvAB and RuvABC complexes catalyze branch migration and resolution of Holliday junctions (HJs) respectively. In addition to their action in the last steps of homologous recombination, they process HJs made by replication fork reversal, a reaction which occurs at inactivated replication forks by the annealing of blocked leading and lagging strand ends. RuvAB was recently proposed to bind replication forks and directly catalyze their conversion into HJs. We report here the isolation and characterization of two separation-of-function ruvA mutants that resolve HJs, based on their capacity to promote conjugational recombination and recombinational repair of UV and mitomycin C lesions, but have lost the capacity to reverse forks. In vivo and in vitro evidence indicate that the ruvA mutations affect DNA binding and the stimulation of RuvB helicase activity. This work shows that RuvA's actions at forks and at HJs can be genetically separated, and that RuvA mutants compromised for fork reversal remain fully capable of homologous recombination.     

RuvA is a sliding collar that protects Holliday junctions from unwinding while promoting branch migration

The RuvAB proteins catalyze branch migration of Holliday junctions during DNA recombination in Escherichia coli. RuvA binds tightly to the Holliday junction, and then recruits two RuvB pumps to power branch migration. Previous investigations have studied RuvA in conjunction with its cellular partner RuvB. The replication fork helicase DnaB catalyzes branch migration like RuvB but, unlike RuvB, is not dependent on RuvA for activity. In this study, we specifically analyze the function of RuvA by studying RuvA in conjunction with DnaB, a DNA pump that does not work with RuvA in the cell. Thus, we use DnaB as a tool to dissect RuvA function from RuvB. We find that RuvA does not inhibit DnaB-catalyzed branch migration of a homologous junction, even at high concentrations of RuvA. Hence, specific protein-protein interaction is not required for RuvA mobilization during branch migration, in contrast to previous proposals. However, low concentrations of RuvA block DnaB unwinding at a Holliday junction. RuvA even blocks DnaB-catalyzed unwinding when two DnaB rings are acting in concert on opposite sides of the junction. These findings indicate that RuvA is intrinsically mobile at a Holliday junction when the DNA is undergoing branch migration, but RuvA is immobile at the same junction during DNA unwinding. We present evidence that suggests that RuvA can slide along a Holliday junction structure during DnaB-catalyzed branch migration, but not during unwinding. Thus, RuvA may act as a sliding collar at Holliday junctions, promoting DNA branch migration activity while blocking other DNA remodeling activities. Finally, we show that RuvA is less mobile at a heterologous junction compared to a homologous junction, as two opposing DnaB pumps are required to mobilize RuvA over heterologous DNA.     

Recombination proteins and rescue of arrested replication forks

Recombination proteins play crucial roles in the rescue of inactivated replication forks in Escherichia coli. The enzymes that catalyze the repair of DNA double-strand breaks by a classical strand-exchange reaction (RecBCD, RecA) act in two well-characterized fork repair pathways. They repair the DNA double-strand end made when a replication fork runs into a single-strand interruption. They reset the DNA double-strand end generated by replication fork reversal when a component of the replication machinery is inactivated. In addition, recombination proteins also act at replication forks in ways other than the classical strand-exchange reaction. For example, the RuvAB enzyme that catalyzes Holliday junction branch-migration during homologous recombination is also able to catalyze replication fork reversal in certain replication mutants, i.e. to convert certain blocked replication forks into Holliday junctions. Finally, some of the actions of recombination proteins after replication impairment are still unclear, as for example in UV-irradiated cells, where RecFOR and RecA catalyze gap repair but also participate, in a yet undefined way, in "replisome reactivation".     

Formation of a stable RuvA protein double tetramer is required for efficient branch migration in vitro and for replication fork reversal in vivo

In bacteria, RuvABC is required for the resolution of Holliday junctions (HJ) made during homologous recombination. The RuvAB complex catalyzes HJ branch migration and replication fork reversal (RFR). During RFR, a stalled fork is reversed to form a HJ adjacent to a DNA double strand end, a reaction that requires RuvAB in certain Escherichia coli replication mutants. The exact structure of active RuvAB complexes remains elusive as it is still unknown whether one or two tetramers of RuvA support RuvB during branch migration and during RFR. We designed an E. coli RuvA mutant, RuvA2(KaP), specifically impaired for RuvA tetramer-tetramer interactions. As expected, the mutant protein is impaired for complex II (two tetramers) formation on HJs, although the binding efficiency of complex I (a single tetramer) is as wild type. We show that although RuvA complex II formation is required for efficient HJ branch migration in vitro, RuvA2(KaP) is fully active for homologous recombination in vivo. RuvA2(KaP) is also deficient at forming complex II on synthetic replication forks, and the binding affinity of RuvA2(KaP) for forks is decreased compared with wild type. Accordingly, RuvA2(KaP) is inefficient at processing forks in vitro and in vivo. These data indicate that RuvA2(KaP) is a separation-of-function mutant, capable of homologous recombination but impaired for RFR. RuvA2(KaP) is defective for stimulation of RuvB activity and stability of HJ·RuvA·RuvB tripartite complexes. This work demonstrates that the need for RuvA tetramer-tetramer interactions for full RuvAB activity in vitro causes specifically an RFR defect in vivo.     

RuvAB is essential for replication forks reversal in certain replication mutants

Inactivated replication forks may be reversed by the annealing of leading- and lagging-strand ends, resulting in the formation of a Holliday junction (HJ) adjacent to a DNA double-strand end. In Escherichia coli mutants deficient for double-strand end processing, resolution of the HJ by RuvABC leads to fork breakage, a reaction that we can directly quantify. Here we used the HJ-specific resolvase RusA to test a putative role of the RuvAB helicase in replication fork reversal (RFR). We show that the RuvAB complex is required for the formation of a RusA substrate in the polymerase III mutants dnaEts and holD, affected for the Pol III catalytic subunit and clamp loader, and in the helicase mutant rep. This finding reveals that the recombination enzyme RuvAB targets forks in vivo and we propose that it directly converts forks into HJs. In contrast, RFR occurs in the absence of RuvAB in the dnaNts mutant, affected for the processivity clamp of Pol III, and in the priA mutant, defective for replication restart. This suggests alternative pathways of RFR.     

sbcB sbcC null mutations allow RecF-mediated repair of arrested replication forks in rep recBC mutants

We have proposed previously that, in Escherichia coli, blockage of replication forks can lead to the reversal of the fork. Annealing of the newly synthesized strands creates a double-stranded end adjacent to a Holliday junction. The junction is migrated away from the DNA end by RuvAB and can be cleaved by RuvC, while RecBCD is required for the repair of the double-stranded tail. Consequently, the rep mutant, in which replication arrests are frequent and fork reversal occurs, requires RecBCD for growth. We show here that the combination of sbcB sbcCD null mutations restores the viability to rep recBC mutants by activation of the RecF pathway of recombination. This shows that the proteins belonging to the RecF pathway are able to process the DNA ends made by the replication fork reversal into a structure that allows recombination-dependent replication restart. However, we confirm that, unlike sbcB null mutations, sbcB15, which suppresses all other recBC mutant defects, does not restore the viability of rep recBC sbcCD strains. We also show that ruvAB inactivation suppresses the lethality and the formation of double-stranded breaks (DSBs) in a rep recBC recF strain, totally deficient for homologous recombination, as well as in rep recBC mutants. This confirms that RuvAB processing of arrested replication forks is independent of the presence of recombination intermediates.     

Structure and mechanism of the RuvB Holliday junction branch migration motor

The RuvB hexamer is the chemomechanical motor of the RuvAB complex that migrates Holliday junction branch-points in DNA recombination and the rescue of stalled DNA replication forks. The 1.6 A crystal structure of Thermotoga maritima RuvB together with five mutant structures reveal that RuvB is an ATPase-associated with diverse cellular activities (AAA+-class ATPase) with a winged-helix DNA-binding domain. The RuvB-ADP complex structure and mutagenesis suggest how AAA+-class ATPases couple nucleotide binding and hydrolysis to interdomain conformational changes and asymmetry within the RuvB hexamer implied by the crystallographic packing and small-angle X-ray scattering in solution. ATP-driven domain motion is positioned to move double-stranded DNA through the hexamer and drive conformational changes between subunits by altering the complementary hydrophilic protein- protein interfaces. Structural and biochemical analysis of five motifs in the protein suggest that ATP binding is a strained conformation recognized both by sensors and the Walker motifs and that intersubunit activation occurs by an arginine finger motif reminiscent of the GTPase-activating proteins. Taken together, these results provide insights into how RuvB functions as a motor for branch migration of Holliday junctions.     

Structure-function analysis of the three domains of RuvB DNA motor protein

RuvB protein forms two hexameric rings that bind to the RuvA tetramer at DNA Holliday junctions. The RuvAB complex utilizes the energy of ATP hydrolysis to promote branch migration of Holliday junctions. The crystal structure of RuvB from Thermus thermophilus (Tth) HB8 showed that each RuvB monomer has three domains (N, M, and C). This study is a structure-function analysis of the three domains of RuvB. The results show that domain N is involved in RuvA-RuvB and RuvB-RuvB subunit interactions, domains N and M are required for ATP hydrolysis and ATP binding-induced hexamer formation, and domain C plays an essential role in DNA binding. The side chain of Arg-318 is essential for DNA binding and may directly interact with DNA. The data also provide evidence that coordinated ATP-dependent interactions between domains N, M, and C play an essential role during formation of the RuvAB Holliday junction ternary complex.     

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.     

Substrate specificity of RusA resolvase reveals the DNA structures targeted by RuvAB and RecG in vivo

RusA endonuclease cleaves Holliday junctions by introducing paired strand incisions 5' to CC dinucleotides. Coordinated catalysis is achieved when both subunits of the homodimer interact simultaneously with cleavage sites located symmetrically. This requirement confers Holliday junction specificity. Uncoupled catalysis occurs when binding interactions are disturbed. Genetic studies indicate that uncoupling occurs rarely in vivo, and DNA cleavage is therefore restricted to Holliday junctions. We exploited the specificity of RusA to identify the DNA substrates targeted by the RuvAB and RecG branch-migration proteins in vivo. We present evidence that replication restart in UV-irradiated cells relies on the processing of stalled replication forks by RecG helicase and of Holliday junctions by the RuvABC resolvasome, and that RuvAB alone may not promote repair.     

Mus81-Eme1 and Rqh1 involvement in processing stalled and collapsed replication forks

The processing of stalled replication forks and the repair of collapsed replication forks are essential functions in all organisms. In fission yeast DNA junctions at stalled replication forks appear to be processed by either the Rqh1 DNA helicase or Mus81-Eme1 endonuclease. Accordingly, we show that the hypersensitivity to agents that cause replication fork stalling of mus81, eme1, and rqh1 mutants is suppressed by a Holliday junction resolvase (RusA), as is the synthetic lethality of a mus81(-) rqh1(-) double mutant. Recombinant Mus81-Eme1, purified from Escherichia coli, readily cleaves replication fork structures but cleaves synthetic Holliday junctions relatively poorly in vitro. From these data we propose that Mus81-Eme1 can process stalled replication forks before they have regressed to form a Holliday junction. We also implicate Mus81-Eme1 and Rqh1 in the repair of collapsed replication forks. Here Mus81-Eme1 and Rqh1 seem to function on different substrates because RusA can substitute for Mus81-Eme1 but not Rqh1.     

Twin DNA pumps of a hexameric helicase provide power to simultaneously melt two duplexes

DnaB is the primary replicative helicase in Escherichia coli. We show here that DnaB can unwind two duplex arms simultaneously for an extended distance provided that two protein rings are positioned on opposite sides of the duplex arms. A putative eukaryotic replication fork helicase, Mcm4,6,7, performs a similar activity. Double-ringed melting of duplexes may function at a replication fork in vivo. This mechanism may apply to RuvB, since the proteins share mechanistic similarities. Thus, two RuvB hexamers may function in coordination at a Holliday junction to overcome regions of DNA heterology and DNA lesions. Furthermore, DnaB can actively translocate along DNA while encircling three DNA strands. Therefore, if DnaB encounters a D loop during fork progression, it will encircle the invading strand and may convert the recombinative invading strand to a daughter lagging strand. Finally, we present evidence that the DNA binding site of DnaB is buried inside its central channel.     

The acidic pin of RuvA modulates Holliday junction binding and processing by the RuvABC resolvasome

Holliday junctions are four-way branched DNA structures formed during recombination, replication and repair. They are processed in Escherichia coli by the RuvA, RuvB and RuvC proteins. RuvA targets the junction and facilitates loading of RuvB helicase and RuvC endonuclease to form complexes that catalyse junction branch migration (RuvAB) and resolution (RuvABC). We investigated the role of RuvA in these reactions and in particular the part played by the acidic pin located on its DNA-binding surface. By making appropriate substitutions of two key amino acids (Glu55 and Asp56), we altered the charge on the pin and investigated how this affected junction binding and processing. We show that two negative charges on each subunit of the pin are crucial. They facilitate junction targeting by preventing binding to duplex DNA and also constrain branch migration by RuvAB in a manner critical for junction processing. These findings provide the first direct evidence that RuvA has a mechanistic role in branch migration. They also provide insight into the coupling of branch migration and resolution by the RuvABC resolvasome.     

The Werner and Bloom syndrome proteins help resolve replication blockage by converting (regressed) holliday junctions to functional replication forks

Cells cope with blockage of replication fork progression in a manner that allows DNA synthesis to be completed and genomic instability minimized. Models for resolution of blocked replication involve fork regression to form Holliday junction structures. The human RecQ helicases WRN and BLM (deficient in Werner and Bloom syndromes, respectively) are critical for maintaining genomic stability and thought to function in accurate resolution of replication blockage. Consistent with this notion, WRN and BLM localize to sites of blocked replication after certain DNA-damaging treatments and exhibit enhanced activity on replication and recombination intermediates. Here we examine the actions of WRN and BLM on a special Holliday junction substrate reflective of a regressed replication fork. Our results demonstrate that, in reactions requiring ATP hydrolysis, both WRN and BLM convert this Holliday junction substrate primarily to a four-stranded replication fork structure, suggesting they target the Holliday junction to initiate branch migration. In agreement, the Holliday junction binding protein RuvA inhibits the WRN- and BLM-mediated conversion reactions. Importantly, this conversion product is suitable for replication with its leading daughter strand readily extended by DNA polymerases. Furthermore, binding to and conversion of this Holliday junction are optimal at low MgCl(2) concentrations, suggesting that WRN and BLM preferentially act on the square planar (open) conformation of Holliday junctions. Our findings suggest that, subsequent to fork regression events, WRN and/or BLM could re-establish functional replication forks to help overcome fork blockage. Such a function is highly consistent with phenotypes associated with WRN- and BLM-deficient cells.     

RuvAB and RecG are not essential for the recovery of DNA synthesis following UV-induced DNA damage in Escherichia coli

Ultraviolet light induces DNA lesions that block the progression of the replication machinery. Several models speculate that the resumption of replication following disruption by UV-induced DNA damage requires regression of the nascent DNA or migration of the replication machinery away from the blocking lesion to allow repair or bypass of the lesion to occur. Both RuvAB and RecG catalyze branch migration of three- and four-stranded DNA junctions in vitro and are proposed to catalyze fork regression in vivo. To examine this possibility, we characterized the recovery of DNA synthesis in ruvAB and recG mutants. We found that in the absence of either RecG or RuvAB, arrested replication forks are maintained and DNA synthesis is resumed with kinetics that are similar to those in wild-type cells. The data presented here indicate that RecG- or RuvAB-catalyzed fork regression is not essential for DNA synthesis to resume following arrest by UV-induced DNA damage in vivo.     

RuvAB-mediated branch migration does not involve extensive DNA opening within the RuvB hexamer

The Escherichia coli RuvA and RuvB proteins promote the branch migration of Holliday junctions during the late stages of homologous recombination and DNA repair (reviewed in [1]). Biochemical and structural studies of the RuvAB-Holliday junction complex have shown that RuvA binds directly to the Holliday junction [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] and acts as a specificity factor that promotes the targeting of RuvB [7] [8], a hexameric ring protein that drives branch migration [9] [10] [11]. Electron microscopic visualisation of the RuvAB complex revealed that RuvA is flanked by two RuvB hexamers, which bind DNA arms that lie diametrically opposed across the junction [8]. ATP-dependent branch migration occurs as duplex DNA is pumped out through the centre of each ring. Because RuvB possesses well-conserved helicase motifs and RuvAB exhibits a 5'-3' DNA helicase activity in vitro [12], the mechanism of branch migration is thought to involve DNA opening within the RuvB ring, which provides a single strand for the unidirectional translocation of the protein along DNA. We have investigated whether the RuvB ring can translocate along duplex DNA containing a site-directed interstrand psoralen crosslink. Surprisingly, we found that the crosslink failed to inhibit branch migration. We interpret these data as evidence against a base-by-base tracking model and suggest that extensive DNA opening within the RuvB ring is not required for DNA translocation by RuvB.     

Dissociation of synthetic Holliday junctions by E. coli RecG protein.

The RecG protein of Escherichia coli is needed for normal levels of recombination and for repair of DNA damaged by ultraviolet light, mitomycin C and ionizing radiation. The true extent of its involvement in these processes is masked to a large degree by what appears to be a functional overlap with the products of the three ruv genes. RuvA and RuvB act together to promote branch migration of Holliday junctions, while RuvC catalyses the resolution of these recombination intermediates into viable products by endonuclease cleavage. In this paper, we describe the overproduction and purification of RecG and demonstrate that the overlap extends to the biochemistry. We show that the 76 kDa RecG protein is a DNA-dependent ATPase, like RuvB. Using gel retardation assays we demonstrate that it binds specifically to a synthetic Holliday junction, like RuvA and RuvC. Finally, we show that in the presence of ATP and Mg2+, RecG dissociates these junctions to duplex products, like RuvAB. We suggest that RecG and RuvAB provide alternative activities than can promote branch migration of Holliday junctions in recombination and DNA repair.     

Bacillus subtilis DisA helps to circumvent replicative stress during spore revival

The mechanisms that allow to circumvent replicative stress, and to resume DNA synthesis are poorly understood in Bacillus subtilis. To study the role of the diadenylate cyclase DisA and branch migration translocase (BMT) RadA/Sms in restarting a stalled replication fork, we nicked and broke the circular chromosome of an inert mature haploid spore, damaged the bases, and measured survival of reviving spores. During undisturbed ripening, nicks and breaks should be repaired by pathways that do not invoke long-range end resection or genetic exchange by homologous recombination, after which DNA replication might be initiated. We found that DNA damage reduced the viability of spores that lacked DisA, BMT (RadA/Sms, RuvAB or RecG), the Holliday junction resolvase RecU, or the translesion synthesis DNA polymerases (PolY1 or PolY2). DisA and RadA/Sms, in concert with RuvAB, RecG, RecU, PolY1 or PolY2, are needed to bypass replication-blocking lesions. DisA, which binds to stalled or reversed forks, did not apparently affect initiation of PriA-dependent DNA replication in vitro. We propose that DisA is necessary to coordinate responses to replicative stress; it could help to circumvent damaged template bases that otherwise impede fork progression.