OB Fold-containing Protein 1 (OBFC1), a Human Homolog of Yeast Stn1, Associates with TPP1 and Is Implicated in Telomere Length Regulation

The telosome/shelterin, a six-protein complex formed by TRF1, TRF2, RAP1, TIN2, POT1, and TPP1, functions as the core of the telomere interactome, acting as the molecular platform for the assembly of higher order complexes and coordinating cross-talks between various protein subcomplexes. Within the telosome, there are two oligonucleotide- or oligosaccharide-binding (OB) fold-containing proteins, TPP1 and POT1. They can form heterodimers that bind to the telomeric single-stranded DNA, an activity that is central for telomere end capping and telomerase recruitment. Through proteomic analyses, we found that in addition to POT1, TPP1 can associate with another OB fold-containing protein, OBFC1/AAF44. The yeast homolog of OBFC1 is Stn1, which plays a critical role in telomere regulation. We show here that OBFC1/AAF44 can localize to telomeres in human cells and bind to telomeric single-stranded DNA in vitro. Furthermore, overexpression of an OBFC1 mutant resulted in elongated telomeres in human cells, implicating OBFC1/AAF4 in telomere length regulation. Taken together, our studies suggest that OBFC1/AAF44 represents a new player in the telomere interactome for telomere maintenance.Telomeres are specialized linear chromosome end structures, which are regulated and protected by networks of protein complexes (1–4). Telomere length, structure, and integrity are critical for the cells and the organism as a whole. Telomere dysregulation can lead to DNA damage response, cell cycle checkpoint, genome instability, and predisposition to cancer (5–9). Mammalian telomeres are composed of double-stranded (TTAGGG)_n repeats followed by 3′-single-stranded overhangs (10). In addition to the telomerase that directly mediates the addition of telomere repeats to the end of chromosomes (11, 12), a multitude of telomere-specific proteins have been identified that form the telosome/shelterin complex and participate in telomere maintenance (9, 13). The telosome in turn acts as the platform onto which higher order telomere regulatory complexes may be assembled into the telomere interactome (14). The telomere interactome has been proposed to integrate the complex and labyrinthine network of protein signaling pathways involved in DNA damage response, cell cycle checkpoint, and chromosomal end maintenance and protection for telomere homeostasis and genome stability.Of the six telomeric proteins (TRF1, TRF2, RAP1, TIN2, POT1, and TPP1) that make up the telosome, TRF1 and TRF2 have been shown to bind telomeric double-stranded DNA (15, 16), whereas the OB³ fold-containing protein POT1 exhibits high affinities for telomeric ssDNA in vitro (17, 18). Although the OB fold of TPP1 does not show appreciable ssDNA binding activity, heterodimerization of TPP1 and POT1 enhances the POT1 ssDNA binding (17, 18). More importantly, POT1 depends on TPP1 for telomere recruitment, and the POT1-TPP1 heterodimer functions in telomere end protection and telomerase recruitment. Notably, the OB fold of TPP1 is critical for the recruitment of the telomerase (18). Disruption of POT1-TPP1 interaction by dominant negative inhibition, RNA interference, or gene targeting could lead to dysregulation of telomere length as well DNA damage responses at the telomeres (18–21).In budding yeast, the homolog of mammalian POT1, Cdc13, has been shown to interact with two other OB fold-containing proteins, Stn1 and Ten1, to form a Cdc13-Stn1-Ten1 (CST) complex (22, 23). The CST complex participates in both telomere length control and telomere end capping (22, 23). The presence of multiple OB fold-containing proteins from yeast to human suggests a common theme for telomere ssDNA protection (4). Indeed, it has been proposed that the CST complex is structurally analogous to the replication factor A complex and may in fact function as a telomere-specific replication factor A complex (23). Notably, homologs of the CST complex have been found in other species such as Arabidopsis (24), further supporting the notion that multiple OB fold proteins may be involved in evolutionarily conserved mechanisms for telomere end protection and length regulation. It remains to be determined whether the CST complex exists in mammals.Although the circuitry of interactions among telosome components has been well documented and studied, how core telosome subunits such as TPP1 help to coordinate the cross-talks between telomere-specific signaling pathways and other cellular networks remains unclear. To this end, we carried out large scale immunoprecipitations and mass spectrometry analysis of the TPP1 protein complexes in mammalian cells. Through these studies, we identified OB fold-containing protein 1 (OBFC1) as a new TPP1-associated protein. OBFC1 is also known as α-accessory factor AAF44 (36). Sequence alignment analysis indicates that OBFC1 is a homolog of the yeast Stn1 protein (25). Further biochemical and cellular studies demonstrate the association of OBFC1 with TPP1 in live cells. Moreover, we showed that OBFC1 bound to telomeric ssDNA and localized to telomeres in mammalian cells. Dominant expression of an OBFC1 mutant led to telomere length dysregulation, indicating that OBFC1 is a novel telomere-associated OB fold protein functioning in telomere length regulation.     

Cell Cycle-Dependent Role of MRN at Dysfunctional Telomeres: ATM Signaling-Dependent Induction of Nonhomologous End Joining (NHEJ) in G1 and Resection-Mediated Inhibition of NHEJ in G2

Here, we address the role of the MRN (Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1) complex in the response to telomeres rendered dysfunctional by deletion of the shelterin component TRF2. Using conditional NBS1/TRF2 double-knockout MEFs, we show that MRN is required for ATM signaling in response to telomere dysfunction. This establishes that MRN is the only sensor for the ATM kinase and suggests that TRF2 might block ATM signaling by interfering with MRN binding to the telomere terminus, possibly by sequestering the telomere end in the t-loop structure. We also examined the role of the MRN/ATM pathway in nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) of damaged telomeres. NBS1 deficiency abrogated the telomere fusions that occur in G₁, consistent with the requirement for ATM and its target 53BP1 in this setting. Interestingly, NBS1 and ATM, but not H2AX, repressed NHEJ at dysfunctional telomeres in G₂, specifically at telomeres generated by leading-strand DNA synthesis. Leading-strand telomere ends were not prone to fuse in the absence of either TRF2 or MRN/ATM, indicating redundancy in their protection. We propose that MRN represses NHEJ by promoting the generation of a 3′ overhang after completion of leading-strand DNA synthesis. TRF2 may ensure overhang formation by recruiting MRN (and other nucleases) to newly generated telomere ends. The activation of the MRN/ATM pathway by the dysfunctional telomeres is proposed to induce resection that protects the leading-strand ends from NHEJ when TRF2 is absent. Thus, the role of MRN at dysfunctional telomeres is multifaceted, involving both repression of NHEJ in G₂ through end resection and induction of NHEJ in G₁ through ATM-dependent signaling.Mammalian telomeres solve the end protection problem through their association with shelterin. The shelterin factor TRF2 (telomere repeat-binding factor 2) protects chromosome ends from inappropriate DNA repair events that threaten the integrity of the genome (reviewed in reference 32). When TRF2 is removed by Cre-mediated deletion from conditional knockout mouse embryo fibroblasts (TRF2^F/− MEFs), telomeres activate the ATM kinase pathway and are processed by the canonical nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) pathway to generate chromosome end-to-end fusions (10, 11).The repair of telomeres in TRF2-deficient cells is readily monitored in metaphase spreads. Over the course of four or five cell divisions, the majority of chromosome ends become fused, resulting in metaphase spreads displaying the typical pattern of long trains of joined chromosomes (10). The reproducible pace and the efficiency of telomere NHEJ have allowed the study of factors involved in its execution and regulation. In addition to depending on the NHEJ factors Ku70 and DNA ligase IV (10, 11), telomere fusions are facilitated by the ATM kinase (26). This aspect of telomere NHEJ is mediated through the ATM kinase target 53BP1. 53BP1 accumulates at telomeres in TRF2-depleted cells and stimulates chromatin mobility, thereby promoting the juxtaposition of distantly positioned chromosome ends prior to their fusion (18). Telomere NHEJ is also accelerated by the ATM phosphorylation target MDC1, which is required for the prolonged association of 53BP1 at sites of DNA damage (19).Although loss of TRF2 leads to telomere deprotection at all stages of the cell cycle, NHEJ of uncapped telomeres takes place primarily before their replication in G₁ (25). Postreplicative (G₂) telomere fusions can occur at a low frequency upon TRF2 deletion, but only when cyclin-dependent kinase activity is inhibited with roscovitine (25). The target of Cdk1 in this setting is not known.Here, we dissect the role of the MRN (Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1) complex and H2AX at telomeres rendered dysfunctional through deletion of TRF2. The highly conserved MRN complex has been proposed to function as the double-stranded break (DSB) sensor in the ATM pathway (reviewed in references 34 and 35). In support of this model, Mre11 interacts directly with DNA ends via two carboxy-terminal DNA binding domains (13, 14); the recruitment of MRN to sites of damage is independent of ATM signaling, as it occurs in the presence of the phosphoinositide-3-kinase-related protein kinase inhibitor caffeine (29, 44); in vitro analysis has demonstrated that MRN is required for activation of ATM by linear DNAs (27); a mutant form of Rad50 (Rad50S) can induce ATM signaling in the absence of DNA damage (31); and phosphorylation of ATM targets in response to ionizing radiation is completely abrogated upon deletion of NBS1 from MEFs (17). These data and the striking similarities between syndromes caused by mutations in ATM, Nbs1, and Mre11 (ataxia telangiectasia, Nijmegen breakage syndrome, and ataxia telangiectasia-like disease, respectively) are consistent with a sensor function for MRN.MRN has also been implicated in several aspects of DNA repair. Potentially relevant to DNA repair events, Mre11 dimers can bridge and align the two DNA ends in vitro (49) and Rad50 may promote long-range tethering of sister chromatids (24, 50). In addition, a binding partner of the MRN complex, CtIP, has been implicated in end resection of DNA ends during homology-directed repair (39, 45). The role of MRN in NHEJ has been much less clear. MRX, the yeast orthologue of MRN, functions during NHEJ in Saccharomyces cerevisiae but not in Schizosaccharomyces pombe (28, 30). In mammalian cells, MRN is not recruited to I-SceI-induced DSBs in G₁, whereas Ku70 is, and MRN does not appear to be required for NHEJ-mediated repair of these DSBs (38, 54). On the other hand, MRN promotes class switch recombination (37) and has been implicated in accurate NHEJ repair during V(D)J recombination (22).The involvement of MRN in ATM signaling and DNA repair pathways has been intriguing from the perspective of telomere biology. While several of the attributes of MRN might be considered a threat to telomere integrity, MRN is known to associate with mammalian telomeres, most likely through an interaction with the TRF2 complex (48, 51, 57). MRN has been implicated in the generation of the telomeric overhang (12), the telomerase pathway (36, 52), the ALT pathway (55), and the protection of telomeres from stochastic deletion events (1). It has also been speculated that MRN may contribute to formation of the t-loop structure (16). t-loops, the lariats formed through the strand invasion of the telomere terminus into the duplex telomeric DNA (21), are thought to contribute to telomere protection by effectively shielding the chromosome end from DNA damage response factors that interact with DNA ends, including nucleases, and the Ku heterodimer (15).H2AX has been studied extensively in the context of chromosome-internal DSBs. When a DSB is formed, ATM acts near the lesion to phosphorylate a conserved carboxy-terminal serine of H2AX, a histone variant present throughout the genome (7). Phosphorylated H2AX (referred to as γ-H2AX) promotes the spreading of DNA damage factors over several megabases along the damaged chromatin and mediates the amplification of the DNA damage signal (43). The signal amplification is accomplished through a sequence of phospho-specific interactions among γ-H2AX, MDC1, NBS1, RNF8, and RNF168, which results in the additional binding of ATM and additional phosphorylation of H2AX in adjacent chromatin (reviewed in reference 33). The formation of these large domains of altered chromatin, referred to as irradiation-induced foci at DSBs and telomere dysfunction-induced foci (TIFs) at dysfunctional telomeres (44), promotes the binding of several factors implicated in DNA repair, including the BRCA1 A complex and 53BP1 (33).In agreement with a role for H2AX in DNA repair, H2AX-deficient cells exhibit elevated levels of irradiation-induced chromosome abnormalities (5, 9). In addition, H2AX-null B cells are prone to chromosome breaks and translocations in the immunoglobulin locus, indicative of impaired class switch recombination, a process that involves the repair of DSBs through the NHEJ pathway (9, 20). Since H2AX is dispensable for the activation of irradiation-induced checkpoints (8), these data argue that H2AX contributes directly to DNA repair. However, a different set of studies has concluded that H2AX is not required for NHEJ during V(D)J recombination (5, 9) but that it plays a role in homology-directed repair (53). In this study, we have further queried the contribution of H2AX to NHEJ in the context of dysfunctional telomeres.Our aim was to dissect the contribution of MRN and H2AX to DNA damage signaling and NHEJ-mediated repair in response to telomere dysfunction elicited by deletion of TRF2. Importantly, since ATM is the only kinase activated in this setting, deletion of TRF2 can illuminate the specific contribution of these factors in the absence of the confounding effects of ATR signaling (26). This approach revealed a dual role for MRN at telomeres, involving both its function as a sensor in the ATM pathway and its ability to protect telomeres from NHEJ under certain circumstances.     

RPA and POT1: Friends or foes at telomeres?

Telomere maintenance in cycling cells relies on both DNA replication and capping by the protein complex shelterin. Two single-stranded DNA (ssDNA)-binding proteins, replication protein A (RPA) and protection of telomere 1 (POT1) play critical roles in DNA replication and telomere capping, respectively. While RPA binds to ssDNA in a non-sequence-specific manner, POT1 specifically recognizes singlestranded TTAGGG telomeric repeats. Loss of POT1 leads to aberrant accumulation of RPA at telomeres and activation of the ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related kinase (ATR)-mediated checkpoint response, suggesting that POT1 antagonizes RPA binding to telomeric ssDNA. The requirement for both POT1 and RPA in telomere maintenance and the antagonism between the two proteins raises the important question of how they function in concert on telomeric ssDNA. Two interesting models were proposed by recent studies to explain the regulation of POT1 and RPA at telomeres. Here, we discuss how these models help unravel the coordination, and also the antagonism, between POT1 and RPA during the cell cycle.Key words: RPA, POT1, telomere, ATR, checkpointTelomeres, the natural ends of chromosomes, are composed of repetitive DNA sequences and “capped” by both specific proteins and non-coding RNAs.^1–3 One of the critical functions of telomeres is to prevent chromosomal ends from recognition by the DNA damage response machinery. Critically short or improperly capped telomeres lead to telomere dysfunction and are a major source of genomic instability.⁴ While telomeres need to be properly capped to remain stable, they also need to be duplicated during each cell division by the DNA replication machinery. The requirement of these two seemingly competing processes for telomere maintenance suggests that the cell must coordinate DNA replication and capping of telomeres to ensure faithful telomere duplication yet avoid an inappropriate DNA damage response.Telomeric DNA is unique in several ways. The bulk of each human telomere is comprised of double-stranded TTA GGG repeats. At the very end of each telomere, a stretch of single-stranded TTAGGG repeats exists as a 3′ overhang. The TTA GGG repeats in the telomeric single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) allow it to loop back and invade telomeric double-stranded DNA (dsDNA), forming a structure called the t-loop.⁵ At the base of the t-loop, the TTAGGG strand of the telomeric dsDNA is displaced by the invading single-stranded 3′ overhang to form a single-stranded D-loop. Thus, the unique DNA sequence and structures of telomeres confer the ability to bind proteins in both sequence- and structure-specific manners, providing the basis for additional regulations.In human cells, telomere capping is orchestrated by the protein complex shelterin, which contains TRF1, TRF2, RAP1, TIN2, TPP1 and POT1.³ Among these shelterin components, TRF1 and TRF2 interact with telomeric dsDNA in a sequence-specific manner, whereas POT1, in a complex with TPP1, binds to telomeric ssDNA in a sequence-specific manner.^6–8 While the human genome contains only one POT1 gene, the mouse genome contains two POT1-related genes, POT1a and POT1b.^9–11 TIN2 functions to stabilize TRF1 and TRF2 DNA binding and also tethers the POT1-TPP1 heterodimer to the rest of the shelterin complex on telomeric dsDNA.^12,13Unlike the properly capped telomeres, double-stranded DNA breaks (DSBs) with ssDNA overhangs are known to activate the ATR checkpoint kinase.^14,15 In a complex with its functional partner ATRIP, ATR is recruited to ssDNA by RPA, a non-sequence-specific ssDNA-binding protein complex.¹⁶ In addition to the ATR-ATRIP kinase complex, several other checkpoint proteins involved in ATR activation are also recruited in the presence of RPA-ssDNA.¹⁵ The structural resemblance between DSBs and telomeres and the presence of ssDNA at telomeres raise the important question as to how ATR activation is repressed at telomeres.     

Kinase-Independent Functions of TEL1 in Telomere Maintenance

TEL1 is important in Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomere maintenance, and its kinase activity is required. Tel1p associates with telomeres in vivo, is enriched at short telomeres, and enhances the binding of telomerase components to short telomeres. However, it is unclear how the kinase activity and telomere association contribute to Tel1p''s overall function in telomere length maintenance. To investigate this question, we generated a set of single point mutants and a double point mutant (tel1^KD) of Tel1p that were kinase deficient and two Xrs2p mutants that failed to bind Tel1p. Using these separation-of-function alleles in a de novo telomere elongation assay, we found, surprisingly, that the tel1^KD allele and xrs2 C-terminal mutants were both partially functional. Combining the tel1^KD and xrs2 C-terminal mutants had an additive effect and resembled the TEL1 null (tel1Δ) phenotype. These data indicate that Tel1p has two separate functions in telomere maintenance and that the Xrs2p-dependent recruitment of Tel1p to telomeres plays an important role even in the absence of its kinase activity.The telomere is a highly ordered complex of proteins and DNA found at the ends of linear chromosomes that functions to protect the ends and prevents them from being recognized as double-strand DNA breaks (51). Telomeres shorten gradually due to incomplete replication (1, 20), and this shortening is counteracted by telomerase, which elongates telomeres (18, 19).Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomeres are composed of 300 ± 50 bp of the sequence TG_1-3/C_1-3A. The yeast telomerase complex consists of Est2p (catalytic subunit), the RNA component TLC1, and two accessory proteins, Est1p and Est3p (50). Cells deficient for any of these telomerase components undergo progressive telomere shortening and a simultaneous decrease in growth rate, described as senescence (24, 27). Typically, a small fraction of cells, termed survivors, escape senescence and maintain telomere length by utilizing RAD52-dependent recombination (24, 26).In addition to the telomerase complex, a number of yeast proteins are important in maintaining telomere length and integrity. These include Tel1p and Mec1p, the yeast homologues of mammalian ATM and ATR, respectively (39). While deletion of TEL1 results in short but stable telomeres, MEC1 deletion has little effect on average telomere length. However, cells lacking TEL1 that have a mutant mec1-21 allele undergo senescence, similar to telomerase null cells (36), suggesting that MEC1 plays a minor but essential role in telomere length maintenance in tel1Δ cells. It has been shown that the protein kinase activities of Tel1p and Mec1p are essential in telomere maintenance, since tel1^KD cells have short telomeres and tel1Δ mec1^KD cells undergo senescence (29).In current models, Tel1p acts to maintain telomere length by regulating the access of telomerase to short telomeres. TEL1 is required for the association of Est1p and Est2p with telomeres in the late S/G₂ phase of the cell cycle (16), the time when telomeres are elongated (9, 31). Additionally, in both yeast and mammalian cells, telomerase preferentially elongates the shortest telomeres (22, 30, 47). Therefore, TEL1 seems to be required mainly for the association of telomerase to short telomeres in yeast. Indeed, Tel1p preferentially binds to short telomeres (4, 21, 38) and is essential for the increased association of Est1p and Est2p to short telomeres during late S/G₂ (38). However, the kinase activity of Tel1p is not required for the telomere association (21). In addition to its role in telomerase recruitment, TEL1 may also regulate telomere length by enhancing the processivity of telomerase at short telomeres (7).The Mre11p, Rad50p, and Xrs2p (MRX) complex also plays important roles in telomere maintenance. Cells lacking any one of these components (mrxΔ) have short and stable telomeres. Since combining mrxΔ with tel1Δ has no synergistic effect on telomere shortening and mrxΔ mec1Δ cells undergo senescence, it was proposed that the MRX complex and Tel1p function in the same telomere maintenance pathway (37). In agreement with this model, the C-terminal region of Xrs2p is essential in recruiting Tel1p both to double-strand breaks (32) and to short telomeres (38). Interestingly, the mammalian functional homologue of Xrs2p, NBS1, interacts with ATM via its extreme C terminus (13), suggesting that the recruitment of Tel1p to telomeres and the recruitment of ATM to DNA damage sites are conserved.It remains a question what exact roles the kinase activity of Tel1p and its telomere binding play in telomere maintenance. Tel1p''s telomere maintenance function seems to be dependent on its kinase activity, since tel1^KD cells have short telomeres (29). It has been proposed that Tel1p may regulate the recruitment of Est1p, and thus the rest of the telomerase complex (12, 23, 54), to telomeres by phosphorylating Cdc13p (3, 48). Other experiments suggest the association of Tel1p to the telomere plays a major role. The preferential binding of Tel1p to short telomeres is lost in xrs2-664 cells (38), which lack the C-terminal 190 amino acids of Xrs2p and have short telomeres, similar to xrs2Δ (41). It has been suggested that the association of Tel1p to telomeres is required for its substrate phosphorylation and, therefore, telomere length maintenance (3, 39).To further analyze the functions of Tel1p in telomere maintenance, we generated a novel kinase-dead allele of TEL1 and new alleles of XRS2 that do not interact with Tel1p. Through these separation-of-function mutants, we show that both sets of alleles are partially active in a de novo telomere elongation assay. However, combining both the tel1^KD and either of the Tel1p interaction-deficient xrs2 alleles resulted in a phenotype resembling the tel1Δ phenotype, suggesting that Tel1p has kinase-dependent and kinase-independent, but telomere binding-dependent, functions in telomere maintenance.     

Effect of Telomere Proximity on Telomere Position Effect,Chromosome Healing,and Sensitivity to DNA Double-Strand Breaks in a Human Tumor Cell Line

The ends of chromosomes, called telomeres, are composed of a DNA repeat sequence and associated proteins, which prevent DNA degradation and chromosome fusion. We have previously used plasmid sequences integrated adjacent to a telomere to demonstrate that mammalian telomeres suppress gene expression, called telomere position effect (TPE). We have also shown that subtelomeric regions are highly sensitive to double-strand breaks, leading to chromosome instability, and that this instability can be prevented by the addition of a new telomere to the break, a process called chromosome healing. We have now targeted the same plasmid sequences to a site 100 kb from a telomere in a human carcinoma cell line to address the effect of telomere proximity on telomere position effect, chromosome healing, and sensitivity to double-strand breaks. The results demonstrate a substantial decrease in TPE 100 kb from the telomere, demonstrating that TPE is very limited in range. Chromosome healing was also diminished 100 kb from the telomere, consistent with our model that chromosome healing serves as a repair process for restoring lost telomeres. Conversely, the region 100 kb from the telomere was highly sensitive to double-strand breaks, demonstrating that the sensitive region is a relatively large target for ionizing radiation-induced chromosome instability.Telomeres are composed of a six-base pair repeat sequence and associated proteins that together form a cap to protect the ends of chromosomes and prevent chromosome fusion (6). Telomeres are actively maintained by the enzyme telomerase in human germ line cells but shorten with age in most somatic cells due to the low level of expression of telomerase (12). When a telomere shortens to the point that it is recognized as a double-strand break (DSB), it serves as a signal for replicative cell senescence (13). Human cells that lose the ability to senesce continue to show telomere shortening and eventually enter crisis, which involves increased chromosome fusion, aneuploidy, and cell death (11, 15). An important step that is required for continued division of cancer cells is therefore that they possess the ability to maintain telomeres, not only to avoid senescence but also to avoid chromosome fusion brought on by crisis (11, 25).In addition to their role in protecting the ends of chromosomes, telomeres can also inhibit the expression of nearby genes, called telomere position effect (TPE). TPE has been proposed to have a role in the cellular response to changes in telomere length (26); however, the function of TPE remains unknown. TPE has been extensively studied in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using transgenes integrated near telomeres on truncated chromosomes (1, 2, 22, 47). These studies demonstrated that TPE involves changes in chromatin conformation and is dependent upon both the distance from the telomere and telomere length (55). Subsequent studies of endogenous yeast genes, however, revealed that the influence of TPE on gene expression varies depending on the presence of insulator sequences (18, 45). TPE also occurs in mammalian cells and has been implicated in the loss of expression of genes relocated near telomeres in a variety of human syndromes (9, 16, 28, 58, 59). As in yeast, transgenes located near telomeres have been used to study TPE in the C33-A (32) and HeLa (4) human cervical carcinoma cell lines. We have also studied TPE using transgenes located adjacent to telomeres in mouse embryonic stem (ES) cells, mouse embryo fibroblasts, and transgenic mice (43). However, none of the studies of TPE in mammalian cells has addressed the distance over which TPE extends from the telomere, and so the number of genes whose expression is likely to be affected is not known.The presence of a telomere can also influence the sensitivity of subtelomeric regions to DSBs. We previously demonstrated the sensitivity of subtelomeric regions to DSBs using selectable transgenes and a recognition site for the I-SceI endonuclease that are integrated immediately adjacent to a telomere. Unlike I-SceI-induced DSBs at most locations, which primarily result in small deletions (27, 34, 46, 50), I-SceI-induced DSBs near telomeres commonly result in large deletions, gross chromosome rearrangements (GCRs), and chromosome instability in both mouse ES cells (37) and human tumor cells (65). Therefore, depending on the size of the sensitive region, the combined targets of the subtelomeric regions on all telomeres could contribute significantly to the genomic instability caused by ionizing radiation or other agents that produce DSBs (35). This sensitivity to DSBs may result from a deficiency in DSB repair since regions near telomeres in yeast are deficient in nonhomologous end joining, resulting in an increase in GCRs (48). One possible reason for a deficiency in DSB repair near telomeres is the role of the telomere in preventing chromosome fusion. Telomeric repeat sequences in yeast have been shown to suppress the activation of cell cycle checkpoints in response to DSBs (39). Similarly, the human TRF2 protein, which is required to prevent chromosome fusion, has been demonstrated to inhibit ATM (31), whose activation is instrumental in the repair of DSBs in heterochromatin (20).One mechanism for avoiding the consequences of DSBs near telomeres is through the addition of a new telomere to the site of a DSB, termed chromosome healing (44). Studies in yeast have shown that chromosome healing occurs through the de novo addition of telomeric repeat sequences by telomerase (14, 33, 38). Chromosome healing in S. cerevisiae is inhibited by the 5′-3′ helicase, Pif1 (52), with Pif1-deficient cells showing up to a 1,000-fold increase in chromosome healing (33, 38). The ability of Pif1 to inhibit chromosome healing has been proposed to serve as a mechanism to prevent chromosome healing from interfering with DSB repair (63). Mammalian cells that express telomerase are also capable of performing chromosome healing. We have shown that chromosome healing can also occur following spontaneous telomere loss (17, 49) or DSBs near telomeres in a human cancer cell line (65) or mouse ES cells (19, 54). We have also shown that chromosome healing can prevent the chromosome instability resulting from DSBs near telomeres (19). Because the de novo addition of telomeric repeat sequences has not been observed in mammalian cells at I-SceI-induced DSBs at interstitial sites (27, 34, 46, 50), we have proposed that chromosome healing is inhibited at most locations but serves as an important mechanism for dealing with DSBs near telomeres that would otherwise result in chromosome instability. However, an alternative possibility that has not been ruled out is that chromosome healing also occurs at interstitial sites but that the large terminal deletions that it causes at these sites results in cell death.In the present study, we address several key questions regarding the importance of telomere proximity on TPE, chromosome healing, and sensitivity to DSBs by investigating how telomere proximity affects these processes. The first of these questions involves establishing the distance over which TPE extends from the telomere to gain insights into the numbers of genes that would be affected by changes in TPE. Second, we will investigate whether chromosome healing can occur at a site that is distant from a telomere but in which terminal deletions are known not to be lethal. This will determine for the first time whether chromosome healing is limited to regions near telomeres. Finally, we will investigate the size of the region near a telomere that is sensitive to DSBs, which will address the potential importance of the subtelomeric region as a target for ionizing radiation-induced genomic instability (35). The distance over which a telomere can exert its effects was investigated by comparing TPE, chromosome healing, and the sensitivity to DSBs at a site 100 kb from a telomere with a site immediately adjacent to the same telomere. As a control for the efficiency of generating DSBs at these sites, we have also analyzed the frequency of small deletions, the most common type of I-SceI-induced DNA rearrangement at interstitial sites in mammalian cells (27, 60). Small deletions serve as an excellent internal control for comparing the frequency of other types of rearrangements since we have previously observed a similar frequency of small deletions at telomeric and interstitial sites (65). The results provide important information on the distance over which a telomere can influence TPE, chromosome healing, and the sensitivity to DSBs.     

DNA Damage-Induced Phosphorylation of TRF2 Is Required for the Fast Pathway of DNA Double-Strand Break Repair

Protein kinases of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-like kinase family, originally known to act in maintaining genomic integrity via DNA repair pathways, have been shown to also function in telomere maintenance. Here we focus on the functional role of DNA damage-induced phosphorylation of the essential mammalian telomeric DNA binding protein TRF2, which coordinates the assembly of the proteinaceous cap to disguise the chromosome end from being recognized as a double-stand break (DSB). Previous results suggested a link between the transient induction of human TRF2 phosphorylation at threonine 188 (T188) by the ataxia telangiectasia mutated protein kinase (ATM) and the DNA damage response. Here, we report evidence that X-ray-induced phosphorylation of TRF2 at T188 plays a role in the fast pathway of DNA DSB repair. These results connect the highly transient induction of human TRF2 phosphorylation to the DNA damage response machinery. Thus, we find that a protein known to function in telomere maintenance, TRF2, also plays a functional role in DNA DSB repair.Telomeres act as protective caps to disguise the chromosome end from being recognized as a DNA double-strand break (DSB) and play other important roles in maintaining genomic integrity (2, 21, 26). Telomere capping dysfunction resulting in genomic instability is likely a major pathway leading to human cancers and other age-related diseases (8, 27).An increasing number of proteins known to play important roles in DNA repair have also been found to be critical for telomere maintenance (6). Specifically, phosphatidylinositol (PI) 3-kinase-like kinase family members, such as ataxia telangiectasia mutated protein kinase (ATM) and the DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit in mammals, originally known to act in maintaining genomic stability via DNA repair pathways, have been shown to be important in telomere maintenance (1, 4, 7, 9, 10, 16, 25). Previous reports indicate that ATM is required for the DNA damage-induced phosphorylation of two major telomere-associated proteins in mammals, human TRF1 and TRF2 (16, 28). The specific molecular roles played by the DNA damage-induced phosphorylation of TRF1 and TRF2 in telomere maintenance and/or DNA repair are unclear and under active investigation. We previously reported that upon DNA damage, human TRF2 was rapidly and transiently phosphorylated at threonine 188 (T188) (28). Here, we report that X-ray-induced phosphorylation of human TRF2 at T188 plays a functional role in the fast pathway of DNA DSB repair.     

Virus Entry via the Alternative Coreceptors CCR3 and FPRL1 Differs by Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Subtype

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding to CD4 and a chemokine receptor, most commonly CCR5. CXCR4 is a frequent alternative coreceptor (CoR) in subtype B and D HIV-1 infection, but the importance of many other alternative CoRs remains elusive. We have analyzed HIV-1 envelope (Env) proteins from 66 individuals infected with the major subtypes of HIV-1 to determine if virus entry into highly permissive NP-2 cell lines expressing most known alternative CoRs differed by HIV-1 subtype. We also performed linear regression analysis to determine if virus entry via the major CoR CCR5 correlated with use of any alternative CoR and if this correlation differed by subtype. Virus pseudotyped with subtype B Env showed robust entry via CCR3 that was highly correlated with CCR5 entry efficiency. By contrast, viruses pseudotyped with subtype A and C Env proteins were able to use the recently described alternative CoR FPRL1 more efficiently than CCR3, and use of FPRL1 was correlated with CCR5 entry. Subtype D Env was unable to use either CCR3 or FPRL1 efficiently, a unique pattern of alternative CoR use. These results suggest that each subtype of circulating HIV-1 may be subject to somewhat different selective pressures for Env-mediated entry into target cells and suggest that CCR3 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtype B while FPRL1 may be used as a surrogate CoR by subtypes A and C. These data may provide insight into development of resistance to CCR5-targeted entry inhibitors and alternative entry pathways for each HIV-1 subtype.Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infects target cells by binding first to CD4 and then to a coreceptor (CoR), of which C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is the most common (6, 53). CXCR4 is an additional CoR for up to 50% of subtype B and D HIV-1 isolates at very late stages of disease (4, 7, 28, 35). Many other seven-membrane-spanning G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been identified as alternative CoRs when expressed on various target cell lines in vitro, including CCR1 (76, 79), CCR2b (24), CCR3 (3, 5, 17, 32, 60), CCR8 (18, 34, 38), GPR1 (27, 65), GPR15/BOB (22), CXCR5 (39), CXCR6/Bonzo/STRL33/TYMSTR (9, 22, 25, 45, 46), APJ (26), CMKLR1/ChemR23 (49, 62), FPLR1 (67, 68), RDC1 (66), and D6 (55). HIV-2 and simian immunodeficiency virus SIVmac isolates more frequently show expanded use of these alternative CoRs than HIV-1 isolates (12, 30, 51, 74), and evidence that alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 mediate infection of primary target cells by HIV-1 isolates is sparse (18, 30, 53, 81). Genetic deficiency in CCR5 expression is highly protective against HIV-1 transmission (21, 36), establishing CCR5 as the primary CoR. The importance of alternative CoRs other than CXCR4 has remained elusive despite many studies (1, 30, 70, 81). Expansion of CoR use from CCR5 to include CXCR4 is frequently associated with the ability to use additional alternative CoRs for viral entry (8, 16, 20, 63, 79) in most but not all studies (29, 33, 40, 77, 78). This finding suggests that the sequence changes in HIV-1 env required for use of CXCR4 as an additional or alternative CoR (14, 15, 31, 37, 41, 57) are likely to increase the potential to use other alternative CoRs.We have used the highly permissive NP-2/CD4 human glioma cell line developed by Soda et al. (69) to classify virus entry via the alternative CoRs CCR1, CCR3, CCR8, GPR1, CXCR6, APJ, CMKLR1/ChemR23, FPRL1, and CXCR4. Full-length molecular clones of 66 env genes from most prevalent HIV-1 subtypes were used to generate infectious virus pseudotypes expressing a luciferase reporter construct (19, 57). Two types of analysis were performed: the level of virus entry mediated by each alternative CoR and linear regression of entry mediated by CCR5 versus all other alternative CoRs. We thus were able to identify patterns of alternative CoR use that were subtype specific and to determine if use of any alternative CoR was correlated or independent of CCR5-mediated entry. The results obtained have implications for the evolution of env function, and the analyses revealed important differences between subtype B Env function and all other HIV-1 subtypes.     

Investigation of Clade B New World Arenavirus Tropism by Using Chimeric GP1 Proteins

Clade B of the New World arenaviruses contains both pathogenic and nonpathogenic members, whose surface glycoproteins (GPs) are characterized by different abilities to use the human transferrin receptor type 1 (hTfR1) protein as a receptor. Using closely related pairs of pathogenic and nonpathogenic viruses, we investigated the determinants of the GP1 subunit that confer these different characteristics. We identified a central region (residues 85 to 221) in the Guanarito virus GP1 that was sufficient to interact with hTfR1, with residues 159 to 221 being essential. The recently solved structure of part of the Machupo virus GP1 suggests an explanation for these requirements.Arenaviruses are bisegmented, single-stranded RNA viruses that use an ambisense coding strategy to express four proteins: NP (nucleoprotein), Z (matrix protein), L (polymerase), and GP (glycoprotein). The viral GP is sufficient to direct entry into host cells, and retroviral vectors pseudotyped with GP recapitulate the entry pathway of these viruses (5, 13, 24, 31). GP is a class I fusion protein comprising two subunits, GP1 and GP2, cleaved from the precursor protein GPC (4, 14, 16, 18, 21). GP1 contains the receptor binding domain (19, 28), while GP2 contains structural elements characteristic of viral membrane fusion proteins (8, 18, 20, 38). The N-terminal stable signal peptide (SSP) remains associated with the mature glycoprotein after cleavage (2, 39) and plays a role in transport, maturation, and pH-dependent fusion (17, 35, 36, 37).The New World arenaviruses are divided into clades A, B, and C based on phylogenetic relatedness (7, 9, 11). Clade B contains the human pathogenic viruses Junin (JUNV), Machupo (MACV), Guanarito (GTOV), Sabia, and Chapare, which cause severe hemorrhagic fevers in South America (1, 10, 15, 26, 34). Clade B also contains the nonpathogenic viruses Amapari (AMAV), Cupixi, and Tacaribe (TCRV), although mild disease has been reported for a laboratory worker infected with TCRV (29).Studies with both viruses and GP-pseudotyped retroviral vectors have shown that the pathogenic clade B arenaviruses use the human transferrin receptor type 1 (hTfR1) to gain entry into human cells (19, 30). In contrast, GPs from nonpathogenic viruses, although capable of using TfR1 orthologs from other species (1), cannot use hTfR1 (1, 19) and instead enter human cells through as-yet-uncharacterized hTfR1-independent pathways (19). In addition, human T-cell lines serve as useful tools to distinguish these GPs, since JUNV, GTOV, and MACV pseudotyped vectors readily transduce CEM cells, while TCRV and AMAV GP vectors do not (27; also unpublished data). These properties of the GPs do not necessarily reflect a tropism of the pathogenic viruses for human T cells, since viral tropism is influenced by many factors and T cells are not a target for JUNV replication in vivo (3, 22, 25).