Recovery of Arrested Replication Forks by Homologous Recombination Is Error-Prone

Homologous recombination is a universal mechanism that allows repair of DNA and provides support for DNA replication. Homologous recombination is therefore a major pathway that suppresses non-homology-mediated genome instability. Here, we report that recovery of impeded replication forks by homologous recombination is error-prone. Using a fork-arrest-based assay in fission yeast, we demonstrate that a single collapsed fork can cause mutations and large-scale genomic changes, including deletions and translocations. Fork-arrest-induced gross chromosomal rearrangements are mediated by inappropriate ectopic recombination events at the site of collapsed forks. Inverted repeats near the site of fork collapse stimulate large-scale genomic changes up to 1,500 times over spontaneous events. We also show that the high accuracy of DNA replication during S-phase is impaired by impediments to fork progression, since fork-arrest-induced mutation is due to erroneous DNA synthesis during recovery of replication forks. The mutations caused are small insertions/duplications between short tandem repeats (micro-homology) indicative of replication slippage. Our data establish that collapsed forks, but not stalled forks, recovered by homologous recombination are prone to replication slippage. The inaccuracy of DNA synthesis does not rely on PCNA ubiquitination or trans-lesion-synthesis DNA polymerases, and it is not counteracted by mismatch repair. We propose that deletions/insertions, mediated by micro-homology, leading to copy number variations during replication stress may arise by progression of error-prone replication forks restarted by homologous recombination.     

Replication Stress-Induced Genome Instability: The Dark Side of Replication Maintenance by Homologous Recombination

Homologous recombination (HR) is an evolutionary-conserved mechanism involved in a subtle balance between genome stability and diversity. HR is a faithful DNA repair pathway and has been largely characterized in the context of double-strand break (DSB) repair. Recently, multiple functions for the HR machinery have been identified at arrested forks. These are evident across different organisms and include replication fork-stabilization and fork-restart functions. Interestingly, a DSB appears not to be a prerequisite for HR-mediated replication maintenance. HR has the ability to rebuild a replisome at inactivated forks, but perhaps surprisingly, the resulting replisome is liable to intrastrand and interstrand switches leading to replication errors. Here, we review our current understanding of the replication maintenance function of HR. The error proneness of these pathways leads us to suggest that the origin of replication-associated genome instability should be re-evaluated.     

Structural Studies of DNA End Detection and Resection in Homologous Recombination

DNA double-strand breaks are repaired by two major pathways, homologous recombination or nonhomologous end joining. The commitment to one or the other pathway proceeds via different steps of resection of the DNA ends, which is controlled and executed by a set of DNA double-strand break sensors, endo- and exonucleases, helicases, and DNA damage response factors. The molecular choreography of the underlying protein machinery is beginning to emerge. In this review, we discuss the early steps of genetic recombination and double-strand break sensing with an emphasis on structural and molecular studies.All domains of life maintain genomes and ensure genetic diversity through homologous recombination (HR) or homology directed repair. HR is initiated by single unprotected DNA ends, which arise at collapsed replication forks and unprotected telomeres, or by DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), which are products of ionizing radiation, reactive oxygen species, genotoxic chemicals, or abortive topoisomerase reactions (Sutherland et al. 2000; Aguilera and Gomez-Gonzalez 2008; Cadet et al. 2012; Mehta and Haber 2014). In special cellular states, programmed DSBs are introduced by endonucleases to initiate the generation of genetic variability by processes such as meiotic recombination of homologous chromosomes (Lam and Keeney 2014; Zickler and Kleckner 2014), V(D)J and class switch recombination to generate antibody diversity and yeast-mating-type switching (Gapud and Sleckman 2011; Haber 2012; Xu et al. 2012b). Failure to repair DSBs can lead to cell death or gross chromosomal aberrations, which in humans are a hallmark of cancer (Myung et al. 2001a,b; Hanahan and Weinberg 2011).Beside HR, DSBs can also be repaired by nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ). Although HR requires a template such as a sister chromatid or a homologous chromosome and is limited to S and G₂ phases of the cell cycle, NHEJ is template-independent and can occur in all cell cycle states. Indeed, the choice of pathways is to a significant extent not stochastic but a function of the cell cycle (Ferretti et al. 2013), with NHEJ being the predominant pathway in mammals outside of S phase. NHEJ is basically a ligation reaction of two DNA ends that are only minimally processed. Derivatives of NHEJ such as microhomology-mediated end joining (MMEJ) or alternative NHEJ (alt-NHEJ) require more substantial processing and may lead to the loss of genetic information. For recent reviews of NHEJ, which is not covered in detail here, please refer to, for example, Thompson (2012) and Chiruvella et al. (2013).HR has multiple steps and requires extensive processing of DNA ends (Symington 2014). First, the free DNA ends are recognized by DSB sensors, followed by 5′-3′ resection of the DNA ends. In eukaryotes and archaea, this step may be divided into initial short-range resection, after which MMEJ/alt-NHEJ can still occur, followed by processive long-range resection that commits the pathway to HR. The 3′ single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) filament, bound by the DNA strand exchange protein RecA/Rad51, pairs with the homologous sequence on the template and thus forms a D-loop. The 3′ tail serves as a primer for a repair polymerase and is extended by using the homologous strand as template, a process that “restores” the disrupted genetic information. Various pathways involve the displacement of the free strand, the capture of the second strand to form Holliday junctions, or the cleavage of the D-loop (Mehta and Haber 2014).In this review, we focus on structural aspects of the early steps in homologous recombination. Of particular interest is the Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN) complex, which recognizes DSBs, performs initial resection, and sets off a DNA damage response (DDR) signaling network. We further discuss the nucleases and helicases that are involved in long-range resection. Recent reviews of later steps in HR, which are not covered here, have been published elsewhere (Amunugama and Fishel 2012; Chiruvella et al. 2013; Jasin and Rothstein 2013).     

Minimal Resection Takes Place during Break-Induced Replication Repair of Collapsed Replication Forks and Is Controlled by Strand Invasion

1. Download high-res image (177KB)
2. Download full-size image

     

Sen1 Is Recruited to Replication Forks via Ctf4 and Mrc1 and Promotes Genome Stability

1. Download : Download high-res image (161KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

DNA ADP-Ribosylation Stalls Replication and Is Reversed by RecF-Mediated Homologous Recombination and Nucleotide Excision Repair

1. Download : Download high-res image (144KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Substrate-Selective Repair and Restart of Replication Forks by DNA Translocases

1. Download : Download full-size image

     

Involvement of Caveolin-1 in Repair of DNA Damage through Both Homologous Recombination and Non-Homologous End Joining

Background

Caveolin-1 (Cav-1), the major component of caveolae, is a 21–24 kDa integral membrane protein that interacts with a number of signaling molecules. By acting as a scaffolding protein, Cav-1 plays crucial roles in the regulation of various physiologic and patho-physiologic processes including oncogenic transformation and tumorigenesis, and tumor invasion and metastasis.

Methodology/Principal Findings

In the present study we sought to explore the role of Cav-1 in response to DNA damage and the mechanism involved. We found that the level of Cav-1 was up-regulated rapidly in cells treated with ionizing radiation. The up-regulation of Cav-1 following DNA damage occurred only in cells expressing endogenous Cav-1, and was associated with the activation of DNA damage response pathways. Furthermore, we demonstrated that the expression of Cav-1 protected cells against DNA damage through modulating the activities of both the homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) repair systems, as evidenced by the inhibitory effects of the Cav-1-targeted siRNA on cell survival, HR frequency, phosphorylation of DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK), and nuclear translocation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) following DNA damage, and by the stimulatory effect of the forced expression of Cav-1 on NHEJ frequency.

Conclusion/Significance

Our results indicate that Cav-1 may play a critical role in sensing genotoxic stress and in orchestrating the response of cells to DNA damage through regulating the important molecules involved in maintaining genomic integrity.     

Ubiquitin-specific Peptidase 20 Regulates Rad17 Stability,Checkpoint Kinase 1 Phosphorylation and DNA Repair by Homologous Recombination

Rad17 is a subunit of the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 clamp loader complex, which is required for Chk1 activation after DNA damage. Rad17 has been shown to be regulated by the ubiquitin-proteasome system. We have identified a deubiquitylase, USP20 that is required for Rad17 protein stability in the steady-state and post DNA damage. We demonstrate that USP20 and Rad17 interact, and that this interaction is enhanced by UV exposure. We show that USP20 regulation of Rad17 is at the protein level in a proteasome-dependent manner. USP20 depletion results in poor activation of Chk1 protein by phosphorylation, consistent with Rad17 role in ATR-mediated phosphorylation of Chk1. Similar to other DNA repair proteins, USP20 is phosphorylated post DNA damage, and its depletion sensitizes cancer cells to damaging agents that form blocks ahead of the replication forks. Similar to Chk1 and Rad17, which enhance recombinational repair of collapsed replication forks, we demonstrate that USP20 depletion impairs DNA double strand break repair by homologous recombination. Together, our data establish a new function of USP20 in genome maintenance and DNA repair.     

DNA End Resection: Nucleases Team Up with the Right Partners to Initiate Homologous Recombination

The repair of DNA double-strand breaks by homologous recombination commences by nucleolytic degradation of the 5′-terminated strand of the DNA break. This leads to the formation of 3′-tailed DNA, which serves as a substrate for the strand exchange protein Rad51. The nucleoprotein filament then invades homologous DNA to drive template-directed repair. In this review, I discuss mainly the mechanisms of DNA end resection in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which includes short-range resection by Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 and Sae2, as well as processive long-range resection by Sgs1-Dna2 or Exo1 pathways. Resection mechanisms are highly conserved between yeast and humans, and analogous machineries are found in prokaryotes as well.     

Histone Acetyltransferase 1 Promotes Homologous Recombination in DNA Repair by Facilitating Histone Turnover

Faithful repair of DNA double-strand breaks is vital to the maintenance of genome integrity and proper cell functions. Histone modifications, such as reversible acetylation, phosphorylation, methylation, and ubiquitination, which collectively contribute to the establishment of distinct chromatin states, play important roles in the recruitment of repair factors to the sites of double-strand breaks. Here we report that histone acetyltransferase 1 (HAT1), a classical B type histone acetyltransferase responsible for acetylating the N-terminal tail of newly synthesized histone H4 in the cytoplasm, is a key regulator of DNA repair by homologous recombination in the nucleus. We found that HAT1 is required for the incorporation of H4K5/K12-acetylated H3.3 at sites of double-strand breaks through its HIRA-dependent histone turnover activity. Incorporated histones with specific chemical modifications facilitate subsequent recruitment of RAD51, a key repair factor in mammalian cells, to promote efficient homologous recombination. Significantly, depletion of HAT1 sensitized cells to DNA damage compromised the global chromatin structure, inhibited cell proliferation, and induced cell apoptosis. Our experiments uncovered a role for HAT1 in DNA repair in higher eukaryotic organisms and provide a mechanistic insight into the regulation of histone dynamics by HAT1.     

Processing of DNA Polymerase-Blocking Lesions during Genome Replication Is Spatially and Temporally Segregated from Replication Forks

1. Download : Download high-res image (181KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Replication Protein A (RPA1a) Is Required for Meiotic and Somatic DNA Repair But Is Dispensable for DNA Replication and Homologous Recombination in Rice

Replication protein A (RPA), a highly conserved single-stranded DNA-binding protein in eukaryotes, is a stable complex comprising three subunits termed RPA1, RPA2, and RPA3. RPA is required for multiple processes in DNA metabolism such as replication, repair, and homologous recombination in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and human. Most eukaryotic organisms, including fungi, insects, and vertebrates, have only a single RPA gene that encodes each RPA subunit. Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) and rice (Oryza sativa), however, possess multiple copies of an RPA gene. Rice has three paralogs each of RPA1 and RPA2, and one for RPA3. Previous studies have established their biochemical interactions in vitro and in vivo, but little is known about their exact function in rice. We examined the function of OsRPA1a in rice using a T-DNA insertional mutant. The osrpa1a mutants had a normal phenotype during vegetative growth but were sterile at the reproductive stage. Cytological examination confirmed that no embryo sac formed in female meiocytes and that abnormal chromosomal fragmentation occurred in male meiocytes after anaphase I. Compared with wild type, the osrpa1a mutant showed no visible defects in mitosis and chromosome pairing and synapsis during meiosis. In addition, the osrpa1a mutant was hypersensitive to ultraviolet-C irradiation and the DNA-damaging agents mitomycin C and methyl methanesulfonate. Thus, our data suggest that OsRPA1a plays an essential role in DNA repair but may not participate in, or at least is dispensable for, DNA replication and homologous recombination in rice.In a population of organisms, it is crucial to maintain the integrity of genome among individuals as well as shuffle genetic information at the population level. To maintain such genetic integrity, cells have evolved elaborate mechanisms such as base excision repair (BER; Hegde et al., 2008), nucleotide excision repair (NER; Shuck et al., 2008), homologous recombination (HR; Li and Heyer, 2008) repair, and nonhomologous end joining (Weterings and Chen, 2008) pathways to repair diverse types of DNA damage. To allow for variation, however, organisms utilize meiosis to shuffle genetic material so as to increase genetic diversity in populations and in the species.DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair is particularly important in maintaining the integrity of genome among individuals and shuffling genetic information among population, because DSBs are generated not only in meiotic cells but also from the action of certain endogenous or exogenous DNA-damaging agents and during repair of other kinds of DNA lesions by NER or BER (West et al., 2004; Bleuyard et al., 2006). The past decade has witnessed an explosion in understanding of this complex process by using yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) as a model organism (Aylon and Kupiec, 2004). Cells can repair DSBs by the relatively inaccurate process of rejoining the two broken ends directly (i.e. nonhomologous end joining) or much more accurately by HR (Bleuyard et al., 2006; Wyman and Kanaar, 2006). These two pathways appear to compete for DSBs, but the balance between them differs widely among species, between different cell types of a single species, and during different cell cycle phases of a single cell type (Shrivastav et al., 2008). According to the current general model for meiotic DSB repair (Bishop and Zickler, 2004; Ma, 2006; San Filippo et al., 2008), when DSBs occur the MRN complex (composed of Mre11, Rad50, and NBS1) resects the DSBs to generate 5′→3′ single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) ends. Subsequently, the replication protein A (RPA) protein complex binds to the ssDNA ends to protect them from attack by endogenous exonucleases; then, in concert with catalysis by Rad52, Rad55, and Rad57, the recombinase Rad51 displaces RPA, resulting in the generation of a Rad51 nucleoprotein filament that in turn catalyzes the search and invasion into the recombination partner with the help of proteins belonging to the RAD52 epistasis group to form a D loop that accompanies DNA synthesis. Thereafter, at least two competing mechanisms may come into play. One is the DSB repair pathway, in which the capture of the second DSB end and additional DNA synthesis result in an intermediate that harbors two Holliday junctions. The subsequent resolution of Holliday junctions results in the formation of crossovers. Alternatively, in the synthesis-dependent strand annealing pathway, the D loop dissociates and the invading single strand with newly synthesized DNA reanneals with the other DSB end, followed by gap-filling DNA synthesis and ligation, forming only noncrossover products (Ma, 2006; San Filippo et al., 2008).RPA is comprised of three subunits of RPA1, 2, and 3, alternatively termed as RPA70, 32, and 14, respectively, according to their apparent M_rs (Wold, 1997; Iftode et al., 1999). RPA is an essential protein in various DNA metabolism pathways such as DNA replication, repair, and HR (Wold, 1997; Iftode et al., 1999). In these pathways, the most basic function of RPA is binding to ssDNA to protect it from exonucleases, and its general roles in DNA metabolism depend on its interactions with other proteins in various pathways (Wold, 1997; Iftode et al., 1999). For example, in human NER pathway, RPA binds to damaged DNA and interacts with xeroderma pigmentosum damage-recognition protein, XPA, in the damage recognition step, and then the endonucleases XPG and ERCC1/XPF are recruited to the RPA-XPA-damaged DNA complex in the excision step (He et al., 1995). Interactions of RPA with those proteins are critical in this process (Wold, 1997; Iftode et al., 1999). A great deal of protein dynamics research has indicated that the interactions between RPA and other DNA-metabolism proteins are choreographed on the ssDNA to recruit the required protein present at the proper time (Fanning et al., 2006).Human, animals, and fungi have single copy for each subunit of RPA (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sutils/genom_table.cgi). Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) and rice (Oryza sativa), however, have multiple genes for most RPA subunits (Ishibashi et al., 2006; Shultz et al., 2007). Most of them have not unveiled exact function up to now. To elucidate the molecular basis of meiosis in rice, we performed a large-scale screen for sterile mutants using our T-DNA insertion mutant library (Wu et al., 2003). Previously, we reported the cloning of OsPAIR3, a novel gene required for homologous chromosome pairing and synapsis in rice (Yuan et al., 2009). Here we report the characterization of another sterile mutant with a T-DNA insertion in OsRPA1a. Our results indicate that OsRPA1a is essential for DNA repair but may play redundant roles in DNA replication and recombination in rice.     

DNA-Pairing and Annealing Processes in Homologous Recombination and Homology-Directed Repair

The formation of heteroduplex DNA is a central step in the exchange of DNA sequences via homologous recombination, and in the accurate repair of broken chromosomes via homology-directed repair pathways. In cells, heteroduplex DNA largely arises through the activities of recombination proteins that promote DNA-pairing and annealing reactions. Classes of proteins involved in pairing and annealing include RecA-family DNA-pairing proteins, single-stranded DNA (ssDNA)-binding proteins, recombination mediator proteins, annealing proteins, and nucleases. This review explores the properties of these pairing and annealing proteins, and highlights their roles in complex recombination processes including the double Holliday junction (DhJ) formation, synthesis-dependent strand annealing, and single-strand annealing pathways—DNA transactions that are critical both for genome stability in individual organisms and for the evolution of species.A central step in the process of homologous recombination is the formation of heteroduplex DNA. In this article, heteroduplex DNA is defined as double-stranded DNA that arose from recombination, in which the two strands are derived from different parental DNA molecules or regions. The two strands of the heteroduplex may be fully complementary in sequence, or may contain small regions of noncomplementarity embedded within their otherwise complementary sequences. In either case, Watson-Crick base pairs must stabilize the heteroduplex to the extent that it can exist as free DNA following the dissociation of the recombination proteins that promoted its formation.The ability to form heteroduplex DNA using strands from two different parental DNA molecules lies at the heart of fundamental biological processes that control genome stability in individual organisms, inheritance of genetic information by their progeny, and genetic diversity within the resulting populations (Amunugama and Fishel 2012). During meiosis, the formation of heteroduplex DNA facilitates crossing-over and allelic exchange between homologous chromosomes; this process ensures that progeny are not identical clones of their parents and that sexual reproduction between individuals will result in a genetically diverse population (see Lam and Keeney 2015; Zickler and Kleckner 2015). Heteroduplex DNA generated by meiotic COs also ensures proper segregation of homologous chromosomes, so that each gamete receives a complete but genetically distinct set of chromosomes (Bascom-Slack et al. 1997; Gerton and Hawley 2005). In mitotic cells, heteroduplex DNA formation between sister chromatids is essential for homology-directed repair (HR) of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), stalled replication forks, and other lesions (Maher et al. 2011; Amunugama and Fishel 2012; Mehta and Haber 2014). Prokaryotic organisms also generate heteroduplex DNA to perform HR transactions, and to promote genetic exchanges, such as occur during bacterial conjugation (Cox 1999; Thomas and Nielsen 2005).Fundamentally, heteroduplex DNA generation involves the formation of tracts of Watson-Crick base pairs between strands of DNA derived from two different progenitor (parental) DNA molecules. Mechanistically, the DNA transactions giving rise to heteroduplex may involve two, three, or four strands of DNA (Fig. 1). DNA annealing refers to heteroduplex formation from two complementary (or nearly complementary) molecules or regions of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) (Fig. 1A). DNA annealing may occur spontaneously, but it is promoted in vivo by certain classes of annealing proteins. Three-stranded reactions yielding heteroduplex DNA proceed by a different mechanism referred to as DNA pairing, strand invasion, or strand exchange. These reactions involve the invasion of a duplex DNA molecule by homologous (or nearly homologous) ssDNA. The invading DNA may be completely single stranded, as is often the case in in vitro assays for DNA-pairing activity (Fig. 1B) (Cox and Lehman 1981). Under physiological conditions, however, the invading ssDNA is contained as a single-stranded tail or gap within a duplex (Fig. 1C,D). DNA-pairing reactions are promoted by DNA-pairing proteins of the RecA family (Bianco et al. 1998), and proceed via the formation of D-loop or joint molecule intermediates that contain the heteroduplex DNA (Fig. 1B–D). Three-stranded reactions may also be promoted by exonuclease/annealing protein complexes found in certain viruses. Four-stranded reactions generating heteroduplex DNA involve branch migration of a Holliday junction (Fig. 1D). In practice, a four-stranded reaction must be initiated by a three-stranded pairing reaction catalyzed by a DNA-pairing protein, after which the heteroduplex is extended into duplex regions through the action of the DNA-pairing protein or of an associated DNA helicase/translocase (Das Gupta et al. 1981; Kim et al. 1992; Tsaneva et al. 1992).Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Common DNA annealing and pairing reactions. (A) Simple annealing between two complementary molecules of single-stranded DNA to form a heteroduplex. (B) Three-stranded DNA-pairing reaction of the type used for in vitro assays of RecA-family DNA-pairing proteins. The single-stranded circle is homologous to the linear duplex. Formation of heteroduplex (red strand base-paired to black) requires protein-promoted invasion of the duplex by the ssDNA to form a joint molecule or D-loop (i). The length of the heteroduplex may be extended by branch migration (ii). (C) Three-stranded DNA-pairing reaction of the type used for high-fidelity repair of DNA DSBs in vivo. The invading strand is the ssDNA tail of a resected DSB. The 3′ end of the invading strand is incorporated into the heteroduplex within the D-loop intermediate. (D) Example of a four-stranded DNA-pairing transaction that is initiated by a three-stranded pairing event and extended by branch migration. The ssDNA in a gapped duplex serves as the invading strand to generate a joint molecule (i), reminiscent of the reaction shown in panel B. Protein-directed branch migration may proceed into the duplex region adjacent to the original gap, generating α-structure intermediates (ii), or eventually a complete exchange of strands (iii).