DNA damage recognition during nucleotide excision repair in mammalian cells

For the bulk of mammalian DNA, the core protein factors needed for damage recognition and incision during nucleotide excision repair (NER) are the XPA protein, the heterotrimeric RPA protein, the 6 to 9-subunit TFIIH, the XPC-hHR23B complex, the XPG nuclease, and the ERCC1-XPF nuclease. With varying efficiencies, NER can repair a very wide range of DNA adducts, from bulky helical distortions to subtle modifications on sugar residues. Several of the NER factors have an affinity for damaged DNA. The strongest binding factor appears to be XPC-hHR23B but preferential binding to damage is also a property of XPA, RPA, and components of TFIIH. It appears that in order to be repaired by NER, an adduct in DNA must have two features: it must create a helical distortion, and there must be a change in DNA chemistry. Initial recognition of the distortion is the most likely function for XPC-hHR23B and perhaps XPA and RPA, whereas TFIIH is well-suited to locate the damaged DNA strand by locating altered DNA chemistry that blocks translocation of the XPB and XPD components.     

DNA damage induced nucleotide excision repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is the most versatile and universal pathway of DNA repair that is capable of repairing virtually any damages other than a double strand break (DSB). This pathway has been shown to be inducible in several systems. However, question of a threshold and the nature of the damage that can signal induction of this pathway remain poorly understood. In this study it has been shown that prior exposure to very low doses of osmium tetroxide enhanced the survival of wild type Saccharomyces cerevisiae when the cells were challenged with UV light. Moreover, it was also found that osmium tetroxide treated rad3 mutants did not show enhanced survival indicating an involvement of nucleotide excision repair in the enhanced survival. To probe this further the actual removal of pyrimidine dimers by the treated and control cells was studied. Osmium tetroxide treated cells removed pyrimidine dimers more efficiently as compared to control cells. This was confirmed by measuring the in vitro repair synthesis in cell free extracts prepared from control and primed cells. It was found that the uptake of active ³²P was significantly higher in the plasmid substrates incubated with extracts of primed cells. This induction is dependent on de novo synthesis of proteins as cycloheximide treatment abrogated this response. The nature of induced repair was found to be essentially error free. Study conclusively shows that NER is an inducible pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and its induction is dependent on exposure to a threshold of a genotoxic stress.     

Hierarchy of DNA damage recognition in Escherichia coli nucleotide excision repair

DNA damage recognition plays a central role in nucleotide excision repair (NER). Here we present evidence that in Escherichia coli NER, DNA damage is recognized through at least two separate but successive steps, with the first focused on distortions from the normal structure of the DNA double helix (initial recognition) and the second specifically recognizing the type of DNA base modifications (second recognition), after an initial local separation of the DNA strands. DNA substrates containing stereoisomeric (+)- or (-)-trans- or (+)- or (-)-cis-BPDE-N(2)-dG lesions in DNA duplexes of known conformations were incised by UvrABC nuclease with efficiencies varying by up to 3-fold. However, these stereoisomeric adducts, when positioned in an opened, single-stranded DNA region, were all incised with similar efficiencies and with enhanced rates (by factors of 1.4-6). These bubble substrates were also equally and efficiently incised by UvrBC nuclease without UvrA. Furthermore, removal of the Watson-Crick partner cytosine residue (leaving an abasic site) in the complementary strand opposite a (+)-cis-BPDE-N(2)-dG lesion led to a significant reduction in both the binding of UvrA and the incision efficiency of UvrABC by a factor of 5. These data suggest that E. coli NER features a dynamic two-stage recognition mechanism.     

Scanning the DNA for damage by the nucleotide excision repair machinery

Damage detection during nucleotide excision repair requires the action of multiple proteins that probe the DNA for different parameters like disruption of basepairing, DNA bendability and presence of chemical modifications. In a recent study it has been shown that two of these probing events can be spatially separated on the DNA. Upon initial binding of the XPC protein to a region with disrupted basepairing a complex of XPC, TFIIH and XPA is translocated to a CPD lesion even when this chemical modification is located up to 160 nucleotides from the mispaired region.     

Accessibility of DNA polymerases to repair synthesis during nucleotide excision repair in yeast cell-free extracts

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) removes a variety of DNA lesions. Using a yeast cell-free repair system, we have analyzed the repair synthesis step of NER. NER was proficient in yeast mutant cell-free extracts lacking DNA polymerases (Pol) β, ζ or η. Base excision repair was also proficient without Polβ. Repair synthesis of NER was not affected by thermal inactivation of the temperature-sensitive mutant Polα (pol1-17), but was reduced after thermal inactivation of the temperature-sensitive mutant Polδ (pol3-1) or Pol (pol2-18). Residual repair synthesis was observed in pol3-1 and pol2-18 mutant extracts, suggesting a repair deficiency rather than a complete repair defect. Deficient NER in pol3-1 and pol2-18 mutant extracts was specifically complemented by purified yeast Polδ and Pol, respectively. Deleting the polymerase catalytic domain of Pol (pol2-16) also led to a deficient repair synthesis during NER, which was complemented by purified yeast Pol, but not by purified yeast Polη. These results suggest that efficient repair synthesis of yeast NER requires both Polδ and Pol in vitro, and that the low fidelity Polη is not accessible to repair synthesis during NER.     

Regulation of nucleotide excision repair by UV-DDB: prioritization of damage recognition to internucleosomal DNA

How tightly packed chromatin is thoroughly inspected for DNA damage is one of the fundamental unanswered questions in biology. In particular, the effective excision of carcinogenic lesions caused by the ultraviolet (UV) radiation of sunlight depends on UV-damaged DNA-binding protein (UV-DDB), but the mechanism by which this DDB1-DDB2 heterodimer stimulates DNA repair remained enigmatic. We hypothesized that a distinctive function of this unique sensor is to coordinate damage recognition in the nucleosome repeat landscape of chromatin. Therefore, the nucleosomes of human cells have been dissected by micrococcal nuclease, thus revealing, to our knowledge for the first time, that UV-DDB associates preferentially with lesions in hypersensitive, hence, highly accessible internucleosomal sites joining the core particles. Surprisingly, the accompanying CUL4A ubiquitin ligase activity is necessary to retain the xeroderma pigmentosum group C (XPC) partner at such internucleosomal repair hotspots that undergo very fast excision kinetics. This CUL4A complex thereby counteracts an unexpected affinity of XPC for core particles that are less permissive than hypersensitive sites to downstream repair subunits. That UV-DDB also adopts a ubiquitin-independent function is evidenced by domain mapping and in situ protein dynamics studies, revealing direct but transient interactions that promote a thermodynamically unfavorable β-hairpin insertion of XPC into substrate DNA. We conclude that the evolutionary advent of UV-DDB correlates with the need for a spatiotemporal organizer of XPC positioning in higher eukaryotic chromatin.     

Chromatin rearrangements during nucleotide excision repair

The removal of DNA damage from the eukaryotic genome requires DNA repair enzymes to operate within the complex environment of chromatin. We review the evidence for chromatin rearrangements during nucleotide excision repair and discuss the extent and possible molecular mechanisms of these rearrangements, focusing on events at the nucleosome level of chromatin structure.     

DNA damage recognition of mutated forms of UvrB proteins in nucleotide excision repair

The DNA repair protein UvrB plays an indispensable role in the stepwise and sequential damage recognition of nucleotide excision repair in Escherichia coli. Our previous studies suggested that UvrB is responsible for the chemical damage recognition only upon a strand opening mediated by UvrA. Difficulties were encountered in studying the direct interaction of UvrB with adducts due to the presence of UvrA. We report herein that a single point mutation of Y95W in which a tyrosine is replaced by a tryptophan results in an UvrB mutant that is capable of efficiently binding to structure-specific DNA adducts even in the absence of UvrA. This mutant is fully functional in the UvrABC incisions. The dissociation constant for the mutant-DNA adduct interaction was less than 100 nM at physiological temperatures as determined by fluorescence spectroscopy. In contrast, similar substitutions at other residues in the beta-hairpin with tryptophan or phenylalanine do not confer UvrB such binding ability. Homology modeling of the structure of E. coli UvrB shows that the aromatic ring of residue Y95 and only Y95 directly points into the DNA binding cleft. We have also examined UvrB recognition of both "normal" bulky BPDE-DNA and protein-cross-linked DNA (DPC) adducts and the roles of aromatic residues of the beta-hairpin in the recognition of these lesions. A mutation of Y92W resulted in an obvious decrease in the efficiency of UvrABC incisions of normal adducts, while the incision of the DPC adduct is dramatically increased. Our results suggest that Y92 may function differently with these two types of adducts, while the Y95 residue plays an unique role in stabilizing the interaction of UvrB with DNA damage, most likely by a hydrophobic stacking.     

Reconstitution of damage DNA excision reaction from SV40 minichromosomes with purified nucleotide excision repair proteins

We previously constructed the cell-free nucleotide excision repair (NER) assay system with UV-irradiated SV40 minichromosomes to analyze the mechanism of NER reaction on chromatin DNA. Here we investigate the factor that acts especially on nucleosomal DNA during the damage excision reaction, and reconstitute the damage excision reaction on SV40 minichromosomes. NER-proficient HeLa whole cell extracts were fractionated, and the amounts of known NER factors involved in the column fractions were determined by immunoblot analyses. The column fractions were quantitatively and systematically replaced by highly purified NER factors. Finally, damage DNA excision reaction on SV40 minichromosomes was reconstituted with six highly purified NER factors, XPA, XPC-HR23B, XPF-ERCC1, XPG, RPA and TFIIH, as those essential for the reaction with naked DNA. Further analysis showed that the damages on chromosomal DNA were excised as the same efficiency as those on naked DNA for short incubation. At longer incubation time, however, the damage excision efficiency on nucleosomal DNA was decreased whereas naked DNA was still vigorously repaired. These observations suggest that although the six purified NER factors have a potential to eliminate the damage DNA from SV40 minichromosomes, the chromatin structure may still have some repressive effects on NER.     

DNA interstrand crosslink repair during G1 involves nucleotide excision repair and DNA polymerase zeta

The repair mechanisms acting on DNA interstrand crosslinks (ICLs) in eukaryotes are poorly understood. Here, we provide evidence for a pathway of ICL processing that uses components from both nucleotide excision repair (NER) and translesion synthesis (TLS) and predominates during the G1 phase of the yeast cell cycle. Our results suggest that repair is initiated by the NER apparatus and is followed by a thwarted attempt at gap-filling by the replicative Polymerase delta, which likely stalls at the site of the remaining crosslinked oligonucleotide. This in turn leads to ubiquitination of PCNA and recruitment of the damage-tolerant Polymerase zeta that can perform TLS. The ICL repair factor Pso2 acts downstream of the incision step and is not required for Polymerase zeta activation. We show that this combination of NER and TLS is the only pathway of ICL repair available to the cell in G1 phase and is essential for viability in the presence of DNA crosslinks.     

Damage recognition in nucleotide excision DNA repair

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is a highly versatile DNA repair process. Its ability to repair a large number of different damages with the same subset of recognition factors requires structural tools for damage recognition that are both broad and very accurate. Over the past few years detailed structural information on damage recognition factors from eukaryotic and prokaryotic NER has emerged. These structures shed light on the toolkit utilized in the damage recognition process and help explain the broad substrate specificity of NER.     

Damage recognition in nucleotide excision repair of DNA

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is found throughout nature, in eubacteria, eukaryotes and archaea. In human cells it is the main pathway for the removal of damage caused by UV light, but it also acts on a wide variety of other bulky helix-distorting lesions caused by chemical mutagens. An ongoing challenge is to understand how a site of DNA damage is located during NER and distinguished from non-damaged sites. This article reviews information on damage recognition in mammalian cells and the bacterium Escherichia coli. In mammalian cells the XPC-hHR23B, XPA, RPA and TFIIH factors may all have a role in damage recognition. XPC-hHR23B has the strongest affinity for damaged DNA in some assays, as does the similar budding yeast complex Rad4-Rad23. There is current discussion as to whether XPC or XPA acts first in the repair process to recognise damage or distortions. TFIIH may play a role in distinguishing the damaged strand from the non-damaged one, if translocation along a DNA strand by the TFIIH DNA helicases is interrupted by encountering a lesion. The recognition and incision steps of human NER use 15 to 18 polypeptides, whereas E. coli requires only three proteins to obtain a similar result. Despite this, many remarkable similarities in the NER mechanism have emerged between eukaryotes and bacteria. These include use of a distortion-recognition factor, a strand separating helicase to create an open preincision complex, participation of structure-specific endonucleases and the lack of a need for certain factors when a region containing damage is already sufficiently distorted.     

DNA with damage in both strands as affinity probes and nucleotide excision repair substrates

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is a multistep process of recognition and elimination of a wide spectrum of damages that cause significant distortions in DNA structure, such as UV-induced damage and bulky chemical adducts. A series of model DNAs containing new bulky fluoro-azidobenzoyl photoactive lesion dC^FAB and well-recognized nonnucleoside lesions nFlu and nAnt have been designed and their interaction with repair proteins investigated. We demonstrate that modified DNA duplexes dC^FAB/dG (probe I), dC^FAB/nFlu₊₄ (probe II), and dC^FAB/nFlu_?3 (probe III) have increased (as compared to unmodified DNA, umDNA) structure-dependent affinity for XPC—HR23B (Kd_um > Kd_I > Kd_II ≈ Kd_III) and differentially crosslink to XPC and proteins of NER-competent extracts. The presence of dC^FAB results in (i) decreased melting temperature (ΔT_m = ?3°C) and (ii) 12° DNA bending. The extended dC^FAB/dG-DNA (137 bp) was demonstrated to be an effective NER substrate. Lack of correlation between the affinity to XPC—HR23B and substrate properties of the model DNA suggests a high impact of the verification stage on the overall NER process. In addition, DNAs containing closely positioned, well-recognized lesions in the complementary strands represent hardly repairable (dC^FAB/nFlu₊₄, dC^FAB/nFlu_?3) or irreparable (nFlu/nFlu₊₄, nFlu/nFlu_?3, nAnt/nFlu₊₄, nAnt/nFlu_?3) structures. Our data provide evidence that the NER system of higher eukaryotes recognizes and eliminates damaged DNA fragments on a multi-criterion basis.     

Transient conformation changes in chromatin during excision repair of ultraviolet damage to DNA.

DNA labeled for 15 minutes during UV induced repair synthesis is two-fold more sensitive to micrococcal nuclease than the bulk nuclear DNA. As the length of the labeling period increases from 15 minutes to 4 hours the nuclease sensitivity of repair labeled DNA approaches that of bulk chromatin. Pulse-chase experiments indicate that the nuclease sensitivity of the repaired DNA labeled during a brief pulse decreases with a half-life of about 15 minutes. In contrast to previous interpretations, we consider these results to mean that immediately after synthesis, chromatin labeled during repair has a conformation which renders it more susceptible to nuclease digestion than the bulk chromatin. With time these repaired regions are assembled into a nucleosome structure with normal nuclease sensitivity.     

Biochemical analysis of the damage recognition process in nucleotide excision repair

XPA, XPC-hHR23B, RPA, and TFIIH all are the damage recognition proteins essential for the early stage of nucleotide excision repair. Nonetheless, it is not clear how these proteins work together at the damaged DNA site. To get insight into the molecular mechanism of damage recognition, we carried out a comprehensive analysis on the interaction between damage recognition proteins and their assembly on damaged DNA. XPC physically interacted with XPA, but failed to stabilize the XPA-damaged DNA complex. Instead, XPC-hHR23B was effectively displaced from the damaged DNA by the combined action of RPA and XPA. A mutant RPA lacking the XPA interaction domain failed to displace XPC-hHR23B from damaged DNA, suggesting that XPA and RPA cooperate with each other to destabilize the XPC-hHR23B-damaged DNA complex. Interestingly, the presence of hHR23B significantly increased RPA/XPA-mediated displacement of XPC from damaged DNA, suggesting that hHR23B may modulate the binding of XPC to damaged DNA. Together, our results suggest that damage recognition occurs in a multistep process such that XPC-hHR23B initiates damage recognition, which was replaced by combined action of XPA and RPA. XPA and RPA, once forming a complex at the damage site, would likely work with TFIIH, XPG, and ERCC1-XPF for dual incision.