Replication protein A large subunit (RPA1a) limits chiasma formation during rice meiosis

Replication protein A (RPA), a single-stranded DNA-binding protein, plays essential role in homologous recombination. However, because deletion of RPA causes embryonic lethality in mammals, the exact function of RPA in meiosis remains unclear. In this study, we generated an rpa1a mutant using CRISPR/Cas9 technology and explored its function in rice (Oryza sativa) meiosis. In rpa1a, 12 bivalents were formed at metaphase I, just like in wild-type, but chromosome fragmentations were consistently observed at anaphase I. Fluorescence in situ hybridization assays indicated that these fragmentations were due to the failure of the recombination intermediates to resolve. Importantly, the mutant had a highly elevated chiasma number, and loss of RPA1a could completely restore the 12 bivalent formations in the zmm (for ZIP1-4, MSH4/5, and MER3) mutant background. Protein–protein interaction assays showed that RPA1a formed a complex with the methyl methansulfonate and UV sensitive 81 (and the Fanconi anemia complementation group M–Bloom syndrome protein homologs (RECQ4A)–Topoisomerase3α–RecQ-mediated genome instability 1 complex to regulate chiasma formation and processing of the recombination intermediates. Thus, our data establish a pivotal role for RPA1a in promoting the accurate resolution of recombination intermediates and in limiting redundant chiasma formation during rice meiosis.

RPA1a guarantees accurate meiotic recombination during rice gametogenesis, and acts as a guard to prevent excessive meiotic crossovers.     

Crossover Formation During Rice Meiosis Relies on Interaction of OsMSH4 and OsMSH5

MSH4 encodes a MutS protein that plays a specialized role in meiosis. In eukaryotic species, such as budding yeast, mice, Caenorhabditis elegans, and Arabidopsis, msh4 mutants display meiotic defects with a reduced number of chiasmata. Here, we characterized rice MSH4 by map-based cloning. In Osmsh4 mutants, the chiasma frequency was dramatically decreased to ∼10% of the wild type, but the synaptonemal complex was normally installed. The double mutant analysis showed that in the Osmsh4 Osmsh5 mutant, the reduction of chiasmata was greater than other zmm mutants. This was consistent with the absence of localization for OsZIP4 and OsMER3 in Osmsh4 and suggests an earlier role for OsMSH4 and OsMSH5 than other ZMM proteins where they may be required to stabilize progenitor Holliday junctions. Using yeast two-hybrid and pull-down assays, we verified the direct physical association between OsMSH4 and OsMSH5 and OsMSH5 and HEI10 in plants for the first time. The MSH4–MSH5 heterodimer has been demonstrated in mammals to stabilize the formation of progenitor and double Holliday junctions that may be resolved as crossovers (COs). We propose that OsMSH4 interacts with OsMSH5 to promote formation of the majority of COs in rice.     

The Synaptonemal Complex Protein ZYP1 Is Required for Imposition of Meiotic Crossovers in Barley

In many cereal crops, meiotic crossovers predominantly occur toward the ends of chromosomes and 30 to 50% of genes rarely recombine. This limits the exploitation of genetic variation by plant breeding. Previous reports demonstrate that chiasma frequency can be manipulated in plants by depletion of the synaptonemal complex protein ZIPPER1 (ZYP1) but conflict as to the direction of change, with fewer chiasmata reported in Arabidopsis thaliana and more crossovers reported for rice (Oryza sativa). Here, we use RNA interference (RNAi) to reduce the amount of ZYP1 in barley (Hordeum vulgare) to only 2 to 17% of normal zygotene levels. In the ZYP1^RNAi lines, fewer than half of the chromosome pairs formed bivalents at metaphase and many univalents were observed, leading to chromosome nondisjunction and semisterility. The number of chiasmata per cell was reduced from 14 in control plants to three to four in the ZYP1-depleted lines, although the localization of residual chiasmata was not affected. DNA double-strand break formation appeared normal, but the recombination pathway was defective at later stages. A meiotic time course revealed a 12-h delay in prophase I progression to the first labeled tetrads. Barley ZYP1 appears to function similarly to ZIP1/ZYP1 in yeast and Arabidopsis, with an opposite effect on crossover number to ZEP1 in rice, another member of the Poaceae.     

An Alternative Form of Replication Protein A Expressed in Normal Human Tissues Supports DNA Repair

Replication protein A (RPA) is a heterotrimeric protein complex required for a large number of DNA metabolic processes, including DNA replication and repair. An alternative form of RPA (aRPA) has been described in which the RPA2 subunit (the 32-kDa subunit of RPA and product of the RPA2 gene) of canonical RPA is replaced by a homologous subunit, RPA4. The normal function of aRPA is not known; however, previous studies have shown that it does not support DNA replication in vitro or S-phase progression in vivo. In this work, we show that the RPA4 gene is expressed in normal human tissues and that its expression is decreased in cancerous tissues. To determine whether aRPA plays a role in cellular physiology, we investigated its role in DNA repair. aRPA interacted with both Rad52 and Rad51 and stimulated Rad51 strand exchange. We also showed that, by using a reconstituted reaction, aRPA can support the dual incision/excision reaction of nucleotide excision repair. aRPA is less efficient in nucleotide excision repair than canonical RPA, showing reduced interactions with the repair factor XPA and no stimulation of XPF-ERCC1 endonuclease activity. In contrast, aRPA exhibits higher affinity for damaged DNA than canonical RPA, which may explain its ability to substitute for RPA in the excision step of nucleotide excision repair. Our findings provide the first direct evidence for the function of aRPA in human DNA metabolism and support a model for aRPA functioning in chromosome maintenance functions in nonproliferating cells.     

An analysis of frequencies of chromosome configurations in wheat and wheat hybrids

Presynaptic association of homologous chromosomes is a prerequisite to the sequence of events that lead to chiasma formation. This association of homologous chromosomes, as entire units, occurs with probability a, and chiasma formation occurs independently in opposite chromosome arms with probability c. a and c have been estimated from frequencies of different chromosome configurations at metaphase I of euhexaploid wheat and several derived lines. In the euploid, a is essentially unity and c is of the order of 95%. All changes in the aneuploidy studied involved c rather than a, whereas the change induced by colchicine application primarily involved a.—Observed and expected frequencies of configurations were compared in wheat hybrids in which only homoeologues were present. The expected frequencies of configurations were estimated from the data, based on a being unity for entire groups of homoeologues and c being the probability of chiasma formation between random homoeologous arms. Observed and expected frequences of configurations were in general agreement; however, an excess of observed closed bivalents at the expense of multivalents is interpreted to mean that not all homoeologues are effectively associated in all cells.—In euhexaploid wheat, we suggest that homologues associate with almost certainty, whereas homoeologous pairs of chromosomes associate less efficiently. The aneuploidy examined in this study does not appear to affect the association of chromosomes, but rather the number of chiasmata that eventuate and, in the case of deficiency of chromosome 5B, the distribution of chiasmata within homoelogues, perhaps by way of rendering sites for chiasma formation of homoelogues more similar.     

Pch2 Links Chromosome Axis Remodeling at Future Crossover Sites and Crossover Distribution during Yeast Meiosis

Segregation of homologous chromosomes during meiosis I depends on appropriately positioned crossovers/chiasmata. Crossover assurance ensures at least one crossover per homolog pair, while interference reduces double crossovers. Here, we have investigated the interplay between chromosome axis morphogenesis and non-random crossover placement. We demonstrate that chromosome axes are structurally modified at future crossover sites as indicated by correspondence between crossover designation marker Zip3 and domains enriched for axis ensemble Hop1/Red1. This association is first detected at the zygotene stage, persists until double Holliday junction resolution, and is controlled by the conserved AAA+ ATPase Pch2. Pch2 further mediates crossover interference, although it is dispensable for crossover formation at normal levels. Thus, interference appears to be superimposed on underlying mechanisms of crossover formation. When recombination-initiating DSBs are reduced, Pch2 is also required for viable spore formation, consistent with further functions in chiasma formation. pch2Δ mutant defects in crossover interference and spore viability at reduced DSB levels are oppositely modulated by temperature, suggesting contributions of two separable pathways to crossover control. Roles of Pch2 in controlling both chromosome axis morphogenesis and crossover placement suggest linkage between these processes. Pch2 is proposed to reorganize chromosome axes into a tiling array of long-range crossover control modules, resulting in chiasma formation at minimum levels and with maximum spacing.     

Identification and Characterization of the Fourth Single-Stranded-DNA Binding Domain of Replication Protein A

Replication protein A (RPA), the heterotrimeric single-stranded-DNA (ssDNA) binding protein (SSB) of eukaryotes, contains two homologous ssDNA binding domains (A and B) in its largest subunit, RPA1, and a third domain in its second-largest subunit, RPA2. Here we report that Saccharomyces cerevisiae RPA1 contains a previously undetected ssDNA binding domain (domain C) lying in tandem with domains A and B. The carboxy-terminal portion of domain C shows sequence similarity to domains A and B and to the region of RPA2 that binds ssDNA (domain D). The aromatic residues in domains A and B that are known to stack with the ssDNA bases are conserved in domain C, and as in domain A, one of these is required for viability in yeast. Interestingly, the amino-terminal portion of domain C contains a putative Cys₄-type zinc-binding motif similar to that of another prokaryotic SSB, T4 gp32. We demonstrate that the ssDNA binding activity of domain C is uniquely sensitive to cysteine modification but that, as with gp32, ssDNA binding is not strictly dependent on zinc. The RPA heterotrimer is thus composed of at least four ssDNA binding domains and exhibits features of both bacterial and phage SSBs.     

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.     

An Alternative Form of Replication Protein A Prevents Viral Replication in Vitro

Replication protein A (RPA), the eukaryotic single-stranded DNA-binding complex, is essential for multiple processes in cellular DNA metabolism. The “canonical” RPA is composed of three subunits (RPA1, RPA2, and RPA3); however, there is a human homolog to the RPA2 subunit, called RPA4, that can substitute for RPA2 in complex formation. We demonstrate that the resulting “alternative” RPA (aRPA) complex has solution and DNA binding properties indistinguishable from the canonical RPA complex; however, aRPA is unable to support DNA replication and inhibits canonical RPA function. Two regions of RPA4, the putative L34 loop and the C terminus, are responsible for inhibiting SV40 DNA replication. Given that aRPA inhibits canonical RPA function in vitro and is found in nonproliferative tissues, these studies indicate that RPA4 expression may prevent cellular proliferation via replication inhibition while playing a role in maintaining the viability of quiescent cells.Replication protein A (RPA)³ is a stable complex composed of three subunits (RPA1, RPA2, and RPA3) that binds single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) nonspecifically. RPA (also referred to as canonical RPA) is essential for cell viability (1), and viable missense mutations in RPA subunits can lead to defects in DNA repair pathways or show increased chromosome instability. For example, a missense change in a high affinity DNA-binding domain (DBD) was demonstrated to cause a high rate of chromosome rearrangement and lymphoid tumor development in heterozygous mice (2). RPA has also been shown to have increased expression in colon and breast cancers (3, 4). High RPA1 and RPA2 levels in cancer cells are also correlated with poor overall survival (3, 4), which is consistent with RPA having a role in efficient cell proliferation.RPA is a highly conserved complex as all eukaryotes contain homologs of each of the three RPA subunits (1). At least some plants (e.g. rice) and some protists (e.g. Cryptosporidium parvum) contain multiple genes encoding for subunits of RPA (5, 6). In rice, there is evidence for multiple RPA complexes that are thought to perform different cellular functions (5). In contrast, only a single alternative form of RPA2, called RPA4, has been identified in humans (7). RPA4 was originally identified as a protein that interacts with RPA1 in a yeast two-hybrid screen (7). The RPA4 subunit is 63% identical/similar to RPA2. Comparison of the sequences of RPA4 and RPA2 suggests that the two proteins have a similar domain organization.⁴ RPA4 appears to contain a putative core DNA-binding domain (DBD G) flanked by a putative N-terminal phosphorylation domain and a C terminus containing a putative winged-helix domain (Fig. 1A). The RPA4 gene is located on the X chromosome, intronless, and found mainly in primates.⁴ Initial characterization of RPA4 by Keshav et al. (7) indicated that either RPA2 or RPA4, but not both simultaneously, interacts with RPA1 and RPA3 to form a complex. This analysis also showed that RPA4 is expressed in placenta and colon tissue but was either not detected or expressed at low levels in most established cell lines examined (7).Open in a separate windowFIGURE 1.Properties of aRPA complex. A, schematic diagram of the structural and functional domains of the three subunits of RPA and (proposed for) RPA4: DNA-binding domains (DBD A-G), the phosphorylation domain (PD), winged-helix domain (WH), and linker regions (lines). The sequence similarity between RPA2 and RPA4 is indicated for each domain of the subunit. B, gel analysis of 2 μg of RPA4/3, RPA. or aRPA separated on 8-14% SDS-PAGE gels and visualized by Coomassie Blue staining. The position of each RPA subunit is indicated. C, hydrodynamic properties of aRPA and RPA complexes. The sedimentation coefficient and Stokes'' radius were determined as described previously by sedimentation on a 15-35% glycerol gradient and chromatography on a Superose 6 10/300 GL column (GE Healthcare), respectively (13). Mass and frictional coefficients were calculated using the method of Siegal and Monty (8). The predicted mass was based upon the amino acid sequence derived from the DNA sequence.These studies describe the purification and functional analysis of an alternative RPA (aRPA) complex containing RPA1, RPA3, and RPA4. The aRPA complex is a stable heterotrimeric complex similar in size and stability to the canonical RPA complex (RPA1, RPA3, and RPA2). aRPA interacts with ssDNA in a manner indistinguishable from canonical RPA; however, it does not support DNA replication in vitro. Mixing experiments demonstrate that aRPA also inhibits canonical RPA from functioning in DNA replication. Hybrid protein studies paired with structural modeling have allowed for the identification of two regions of RPA4 responsible for this inhibitory activity. Data presented here are consistent with recent analyses of RPA4 function in human cells,⁴ and we conclude that RPA4 has anti-proliferative properties and has the potential to play a regulatory role in human cell proliferation through the control of DNA replication.     

Isolation and characterization of the fission yeast gene rpa42 +, which encodes a subunit shared by RNA polymerases I and III

Eukaryotic RNA polymerases I and III share two distinct α-related subunits that show limited homology to the α subunit of Escherichia coli RNA polymerase, which forms a homodimer to nucleate the assembly of prokaryotic RNA polymerase. To gain insight into the functions of α-related subunits in eukaryotes, we have previously identified the α-related small subunit RPA17 of RNA polymerase I (and III) in Schizosaccharomyces pombe, and have shown that it is a functional homolog of Saccharomyces cerevisiae AC19. In an extension of that study, we have now isolated and characterized rpa42 ⁺, which encodes the α-related large subunit RPA42 of S. pombe RNA polymerase I, by virtue of the fact that its product interacts with RPA17 in the yeast two-hybrid system. We have found that rpa42 ⁺ encodes a polypeptide with an apparent molecular mass of 42?kDa, which shows 58% identity to the AC40 subunit shared by RNA polymerases I and III in S. cerevisiae. Furthermore, we have shown that rpa42 ⁺ complements a temperature-sensitive mutation in RPC40 the gene that encodes AC40 in S. cerevisiae and which is essential for cell growth. Finally, we have shown that neither RPA42 nor RPA17 can self-associate. These results provide evidence that the two distinct α-related subunits, RPA42 and RPA17, of RNA polymerases I and III are functionally conserved between S. pombe and S. cerevisiae, and suggest that heterodimer formation between them is essential for the assembly of RNA polymerases I and III in eukaryotes.     

Genetic Analysis of Baker's Yeast Msh4-Msh5 Reveals a Threshold Crossover Level for Meiotic Viability

During meiosis, the Msh4-Msh5 complex is thought to stabilize single-end invasion intermediates that form during early stages of recombination and subsequently bind to Holliday junctions to facilitate crossover formation. To analyze Msh4-Msh5 function, we mutagenized 57 residues in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Msh4 and Msh5 that are either conserved across all Msh4/5 family members or are specific to Msh4 and Msh5. The Msh5 subunit appeared more sensitive to mutagenesis. We identified msh4 and msh5 threshold (msh4/5-t) mutants that showed wild-type spore viability and crossover interference but displayed, compared to wild-type, up to a two-fold decrease in crossing over on large and medium sized chromosomes (XV, VII, VIII). Crossing over on a small chromosome, however, approached wild-type levels. The msh4/5-t mutants also displayed synaptonemal complex assembly defects. A triple mutant containing a msh4/5-t allele and mutations that decreased meiotic double-strand break levels (spo11-HA) and crossover interference (pch2Δ) showed synergistic defects in spore viability. Together these results indicate that the baker''s yeast meiotic cell does not require the ∼90 crossovers maintained by crossover homeostasis to form viable spores. They also show that Pch2-mediated crossover interference is important to maintain meiotic viability when crossovers become limiting.     

The role of rice HEI10 in the formation of meiotic crossovers

HEI10 was first described in human as a RING domain-containing protein that regulates cell cycle and cell invasion. Mice HEI10(mei4) mutant displays no obvious defect other than meiotic failure from an absence of chiasmata. In this study, we characterize rice HEI10 by map-based cloning and explore its function during meiotic recombination. In the rice hei10 mutant, chiasma frequency is markedly reduced, and those remaining chiasmata exhibit a random distribution among cells, suggesting possible involvement of HEI10 in the formation of interference-sensitive crossovers (COs). However, mutation of HEI10 does not affect early recombination events and synaptonemal complex (SC) formation. HEI10 protein displays a highly dynamic localization on the meiotic chromosomes. It initially appears as distinct foci and co-localizes with MER3. Thereafter, HEI10 signals elongate along the chromosomes and finally restrict to prominent foci that specially localize to chiasma sites. The linear HEI10 signals always localize on ZEP1 signals, indicating that HEI10 extends along the chromosome in the wake of synapsis. Together our results suggest that HEI10 is the homolog of budding yeast Zip3 and Caenorhabditis elegans ZHP-3, and may specifically promote class I CO formation through modification of various meiotic components.     

Replication protein A (AtRPA1a) is required for class I crossover formation but is dispensable for meiotic DNA break repair

Replication protein A (RPA) is involved in many aspects of DNA metabolism including meiotic recombination. Many species possess a single RPA1 gene but Arabidopsis possesses five RPA1 paralogues. This feature has enabled us to gain further insight into the meiotic role of RPA1. Proteomic analysis implicated one of the AtRPA1 family (AtRPA1a) in meiosis. Immunofluorescence studies confirmed that AtRPA1a is associated with meiotic chromosomes from leptotene through to early pachytene. Analysis of an Atrpa1a mutant revealed that AtRPA1a is not essential at early stages in the recombination pathway. DNA double‐strand breaks are repaired in Atrpa1a, but the mutant is defective in the formation of crossovers, exhibiting a 60% reduction in chiasma frequency. Consistent with this, localization of recombination proteins AtRAD51 and AtMSH4 appears normal, whereas the numbers of AtMLH1 and AtMLH3 foci at pachytene are significantly reduced. This suggests that the defect in Atrpa1a is manifested at the stage of second‐end capture. Analysis of Atrpa1a/Atmsh4 and Atrpa1a/Atmlh3 double mutants indicates that loss of AtRPA1a predominantly affects the formation of class I, interference‐dependent crossovers.     

A Relationship Between Replication Protein A and Occurrence and Prognosis of Esophageal Carcinoma

Esophageal carcinoma (EC) is an aggressive and the third most common cancer of the digestive tract with poor prognosis. Replication protein A (RPA) is critically required for DNA replication and its elevated expression has been observed in many malignant tumors. In this study, we investigated the expression of RPA1 and RPA2, subunits of RPA, and assessed their prognostic value in EC patients. We analyzed immunohistochemically the expression of RPA1 and RPA2 proteins in 48 EC resection specimens in relation with clinicopathological parameters and survival. We observed a significant elevated (P < 0.001) RPA1 and RPA2 expressions (labeling index) in the tumor than adjacent non-tumor tissues. In addition, both RPA1 and RPA2 labeling index in lymph node metastasis patients was significantly higher (both P = 0.000) than patients without lymph node metastasis. However, RPA1 and RPA2 labeling index in early stage was significantly lower (P = 0.000 and P = 0.002, respectively) than that of late stage EC patients. Importantly, patient’s survival at early stage was significantly higher (P = 0.016) than late stage EC and lymph node metastasis and RPA1 expression was associated with adverse patient’s outcome in multivariate analysis (P < 0.05 and P < 0.00, respectively). In conclusion, RPA1 could be a useful prognostic indicator in patients with esophageal carcinoma and might be a future attractive therapeutic target for regulation by tumor suppressors.     

ZHP-3 acts at crossovers to couple meiotic recombination with synaptonemal complex disassembly and bivalent formation in C. elegans

Crossover recombination and the formation of chiasmata normally ensure the proper segregation of homologous chromosomes during the first meiotic division. zhp-3, the Caenorhabditis elegans ortholog of the budding yeast ZIP3 gene, is required for crossover recombination. We show that ZHP-3 protein localization is highly dynamic. At a key transition point in meiotic prophase, the protein shifts from along the length of the synaptonemal complex (SC) to an asymmetric localization on the SC and eventually becomes restricted to foci that mark crossover recombination events. A zhp-3::gfp transgene partially complements a null mutation and reveals a separation of function; although the fusion protein can promote nearly wild-type levels of recombination, aneuploidy among the progeny is high, indicating defects in meiotic chromosome segregation. The structure of bivalents is perturbed in this mutant, suggesting that the chromosome segregation defect results from an inability to properly remodel chromosomes in response to crossovers. smo-1 mutants exhibit phenotypes similar to zhp-3::gfp mutants at higher temperatures, and smo-1; zhp-3::gfp double mutants exhibit more severe meiotic defects than either single mutant, consistent with a role for SUMO in the process of SC disassembly and bivalent differentiation. We propose that coordination of crossover recombination with SC disassembly and bivalent formation reflects a conserved role of Zip3/ZHP-3 in coupling recombination with SC morphogenesis.     

Spatiotemporal Asymmetry of the Meiotic Program Underlies the Predominantly Distal Distribution of Meiotic Crossovers in Barley

Meiosis involves reciprocal exchange of genetic information between homologous chromosomes to generate new allelic combinations. In cereals, the distribution of genetic crossovers, cytologically visible as chiasmata, is skewed toward the distal regions of the chromosomes. However, many genes are known to lie within interstitial/proximal regions of low recombination, creating a limitation for breeders. We investigated the factors underlying the pattern of chiasma formation in barley (Hordeum vulgare) and show that chiasma distribution reflects polarization in the spatiotemporal initiation of recombination, chromosome pairing, and synapsis. Consequently, meiotic progression in distal chromosomal regions occurs in coordination with the chromatin cycles that are a conserved feature of the meiotic program. Recombination initiation in interstitial and proximal regions occurs later than distal events, is not coordinated with the cycles, and rarely progresses to form chiasmata. Early recombination initiation is spatially associated with early replicating, euchromatic DNA, which is predominately found in distal regions. We demonstrate that a modest temperature shift is sufficient to alter meiotic progression in relation to the chromosome cycles. The polarization of the meiotic processes is reduced and is accompanied by a shift in chiasma distribution with an increase in interstitial and proximal chiasmata, suggesting a potential route to modify recombination in cereals.     

REC, Drosophila MCM8, drives formation of meiotic crossovers

Crossovers ensure the accurate segregation of homologous chromosomes from one another during meiosis. Here, we describe the identity and function of the Drosophila melanogaster gene recombination defective (rec), which is required for most meiotic crossing over. We show that rec encodes a member of the mini-chromosome maintenance (MCM) protein family. Six MCM proteins (MCM2–7) are essential for DNA replication and are found in all eukaryotes. REC is the Drosophila ortholog of the recently identified seventh member of this family, MCM8. Our phylogenetic analysis reveals the existence of yet another family member, MCM9, and shows that MCM8 and MCM9 arose early in eukaryotic evolution, though one or both have been lost in multiple eukaryotic lineages. Drosophila has lost MCM9 but retained MCM8, represented by REC. We used genetic and molecular methods to study the function of REC in meiotic recombination. Epistasis experiments suggest that REC acts after the Rad51 ortholog SPN-A but before the endonuclease MEI-9. Although crossovers are reduced by 95% in rec mutants, the frequency of noncrossover gene conversion is significantly increased. Interestingly, gene conversion tracts in rec mutants are about half the length of tracts in wild-type flies. To account for these phenotypes, we propose that REC facilitates repair synthesis during meiotic recombination. In the absence of REC, synthesis does not proceed far enough to allow formation of an intermediate that can give rise to crossovers, and recombination proceeds via synthesis-dependent strand annealing to generate only noncrossover products.     

Drosophila PCH2 is required for a pachytene checkpoint that monitors double-strand-break-independent events leading to meiotic crossover formation

During meiosis, programmed DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are repaired to create at least one crossover per chromosome arm. Crossovers mature into chiasmata, which hold and orient the homologous chromosomes on the meiotic spindle to ensure proper segregation at meiosis I. This process is usually monitored by one or more checkpoints that ensure that DSBs are repaired prior to the meiotic divisions. We show here that mutations in Drosophila genes required to process DSBs into crossovers delay two important steps in meiotic progression: a chromatin-remodeling process associated with DSB formation and the final steps of oocyte selection. Consistent with the hypothesis that a checkpoint has been activated, the delays in meiotic progression are suppressed by a mutation in the Drosophila homolog of pch2. The PCH2-dependent delays also require proteins thought to regulate the number and distribution of crossovers, suggesting that this checkpoint monitors events leading to crossover formation. Surprisingly, two lines of evidence suggest that the PCH2-dependent checkpoint does not reflect the accumulation of unprocessed recombination intermediates: the delays in meiotic progression do not depend on DSB formation or on mei-41, the Drosophila ATR homolog, which is required for the checkpoint response to unrepaired DSBs. We propose that the sites and/or conditions required to promote crossovers are established independently of DSB formation early in meiotic prophase. Furthermore, the PCH2-dependent checkpoint is activated by these events and pachytene progression is delayed until the DSB repair complexes required to generate crossovers are assembled. Interestingly, PCH2-dependent delays in prophase may allow additional crossovers to form.