Replication Initiator DnaA of Escherichia coli Changes Its Assembly Form on the Replication Origin during the Cell Cycle

DnaA is a replication initiator protein that is conserved among bacteria. It plays a central role in the initiation of DNA replication. In order to monitor its behavior in living Escherichia coli cells, a nonessential portion of the protein was replaced by a fluorescent protein. Such a strain grew normally, and flow cytometry data suggested that the chimeric protein has no substantial loss of the initiator activity. The initiator was distributed all over the nucleoid. Furthermore, a majority of the cells exhibited certain distinct foci that emitted bright fluorescence. These foci colocalized with the replication origin (oriC) region and were brightest during the period spanning the initiation event. In cells that had undergone the initiation, the foci were enriched in less intense ones. In addition, a significant portion of the oriC regions at this cell cycle stage had no colocalized DnaA-enhanced yellow fluorescent protein (EYFP) focus point. It was difficult to distinguish the initiator titration locus (datA) from the oriC region. However, involvement of datA in the initiation control was suggested from the observation that, in ΔdatA cells, DnaA-EYFP maximally colocalized with the oriC region earlier in the cell cycle than it did in wild-type cells and oriC concentration was increased.Initiation of DNA replication is highly regulated to coordinate with cell proliferation. It begins with a series of events in which the replication machinery is assembled at the replication origin of the chromosomal DNA (15, 26, 28, 38). Central to this process are the initiator proteins that bind to the origin of replication and eventually lead to the unwinding of the origin and to helicase loading on the unwound region. Previous biochemical studies and recent structural studies of the bacterial initiator protein DnaA have proposed the molecular mechanism of the action of ATP-DnaA in forming a large oligomeric complex to remodel the unique origin, oriC, and trigger duplex melting (12, 26). However, it is still not clear how the timing of initiation is controlled so that it takes place at a fixed time in the cell cycle. It has been reported that a basal level of DnaA molecules is bound by high-affinity DnaA binding sites (DnaA boxes R1, R2, and R4) at oriC throughout the cell cycle (9, 37). It is also suggested that noncanonical ATP-DnaA binding sites within oriC are occupied at elevated levels of the initiator molecules prior to the initiation event (18, 25). Thus, regulation of the activity and availability of DnaA is an important factor for the initiation control.At least three schemes are known to prevent untimely initiations in Escherichia coli. First, oriC is subject to sequestration, a process that prevents reinitiation, possibly by blocking ATP-DnaA from binding to newly replicated oriC (8, 24). E. coli oriC contains 11 GATC sites that are normally methylated on both strands by Dam methyltransferase. Immediately after passage of the replication fork, GATC sites are in a hemimethylated state, with the newly synthesized strands remaining unmethylated. SeqA binds specifically to such sites and, at oriC, protects these regions from reinitiation for about one-third of the cell cycle (6, 39). Second, in a process termed regulatory inactivation of DNA (RIDA), ATP-DnaA molecules are converted to an inactive ADP-bound form after initiation by the combined action of a β subunit of DNA polymerase III holoenzyme and Hda (16, 17). Newly synthesized DnaA molecules are able to bind ATP for the next initiation event, since its cellular concentration is much higher than that of ADP. ATP-DnaA is also regenerated from the inactive ADP-DnaA later in the cell cycle (21). Finally, the chromosomal segment datA serves to reduce the level of free DnaA protein by titrating a large number of DnaA molecules after replication of the site close to oriC (20).Cytological studies would be very useful for developing our understanding of the regulation mechanisms associated with the initiation step. In the present study, we tagged E. coli DnaA with a fluorescent protein in order to monitor its behavior in live cells. Microscopic observation revealed that DnaA is distributed all over the nucleoid. Remarkably, the majority of cells bore distinct foci that emitted brighter fluorescence against a weak fluorescent background on the nucleoid. We analyzed the behavior of these foci during the cell cycle with respect to oriC and datA.     

Replacement of the Replication Factors of Porcine Circovirus (PCV) Type 2 with Those of PCV Type 1 Greatly Enhances Viral Replication In Vitro

Porcine circovirus type 1 (PCV1), originally isolated as a contaminant of PK-15 cells, is nonpathogenic, whereas porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) causes an economically important disease in pigs. To determine the factors affecting virus replication, we constructed chimeric viruses by swapping open reading frame 1 (ORF1) (rep) or the origin of replication (Ori) between PCV1 and PCV2 and compared the replication efficiencies of the chimeric viruses in PK-15 cells. The results showed that the replication factors of PCV1 and PCV2 are fully exchangeable and, most importantly, that both the Ori and rep of PCV1 enhance the virus replication efficiencies of the chimeric viruses with the PCV2 backbone.Porcine circovirus (PCV) is a single-stranded DNA virus in the family Circoviridae (34). Type 1 PCV (PCV1) was discovered in 1974 as a contaminant of porcine kidney cell line PK-15 and is nonpathogenic in pigs (31-33). Type 2 PCV (PCV2) was discovered in piglets with postweaning multisystemic wasting syndrome (PMWS) in the mid-1990s and causes porcine circovirus-associated disease (PCVAD) (1, 9, 10, 25). PCV1 and PCV2 have similar genomic organizations, with two major ambisense open reading frames (ORFs) (16). ORF1 (rep) encodes two viral replication-associated proteins, Rep and Rep′, by differential splicing (4, 6, 21, 22). The Rep and Rep′ proteins bind to specific sequences within the origin of replication (Ori) located in the intergenic region, and both are responsible for viral replication (5, 7, 8, 21, 23, 28, 29). ORF2 (cap) encodes the immunogenic capsid protein (Cap) (26). PCV1 and PCV2 share approximately 80%, 82%, and 62% nucleotide sequence identity in the Ori, rep, and cap, respectively (19).In vitro studies using a reporter gene-based assay system showed that the replication factors of PCV1 and PCV2 are functionally interchangeable (2-6, 22), although this finding has not yet been validated in a live infectious-virus system. We have previously shown that chimeras of PCV in which cap has been exchanged between PCV1 and PCV2 are infectious both in vitro and in vivo (15), and an inactivated vaccine based on the PCV1-PCV2 cap (PCV1-cap2) chimera is used in the vaccination program against PCVAD (13, 15, 18, 27).PCV1 replicates more efficiently than PCV2 in PK-15 cells (14, 15); thus, we hypothesized that the Ori or rep is directly responsible for the differences in replication efficiencies. The objectives of this study were to demonstrate that the Ori and rep are interchangeable between PCV1 and PCV2 in a live-virus system and to determine the effects of swapped heterologous replication factors on virus replication efficiency in vitro.     

The Direct Binding of Mrc1, a Checkpoint Mediator,to Mcm6, a Replication Helicase,Is Essential for the Replication Checkpoint against Methyl Methanesulfonate-Induced Stress

Mrc1 plays a role in mediating the DNA replication checkpoint. We surveyed replication elongation proteins that interact directly with Mrc1 and identified a replicative helicase, Mcm6, as a specific Mrc1-binding protein. The central portion of Mrc1, containing a conserved coiled-coil region, was found to be essential for interaction with the 168-amino-acid C-terminal region of Mcm6, and introduction of two amino acid substitutions in this C-terminal region abolished the interaction with Mrc1 in vivo. An mcm6 mutant bearing these substitutions showed a severe defect in DNA replication checkpoint activation in response to stress caused by methyl methanesulfonate. Interestingly, the mutant did not show any defect in DNA replication checkpoint activation in response to hydroxyurea treatment. The phenotype of the mcm6 mutant was suppressed when the mutant protein was physically fused with Mrc1. These results strongly suggest for the first time that an Mcm helicase acts as a checkpoint sensor for methyl methanesulfonate-induced DNA damage through direct binding to the replication checkpoint mediator Mrc1.Progression of the DNA replication machinery along chromosomes is a complex process. Replication forks pause occasionally when they encounter genomic regions that are difficult to replicate, such as highly transcribed regions, tRNA genes, and regions with specialized chromatin structure, like centromeric and heterochromatic regions (17). Replication forks also stall when treated with chemicals like methyl methanesulfonate (MMS), which causes DNA damage, or hydroxyurea (HU), which limits the cellular concentration of the deoxynucleoside triphosphate pool (17). Because de novo assembly and programming of the replisome do not occur after the onset of S phase (18), DNA replication forks must be protected from replicative stresses. The DNA replication checkpoint constitutes a surveillance mechanism for S-phase progression that safeguards replication forks from various replicative stresses (22, 38, 40), and malfunction of this checkpoint leads to chromosome instability and cancer development in higher organisms (4, 9).The Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA replication checkpoint mediator Mrc1 is functionally conserved and is involved directly in DNA replication as a component of the replisome (1, 8, 16, 19, 29, 30). Mrc1, together with Tof1 and Csm3, is required for forming a replication pausing complex when the fork is exposed to replicative stress by HU (16). The pausing complex subsequently triggers events leading to DNA replication checkpoint activation and hence stable replicative arrest. A sensor kinase complex, Mec1-Ddc2 (ATR-ATRIP homolog of higher eukaryotes), is then recruited to the complex (14, 16). Mec1-Ddc2-mediated phosphorylation of Mrc1 activates the pausing complex, and phosphorylated Mrc1 likely recruits Rad53 (a putative homolog of CHK2 of higher eukaryotes), which is then activated via phosphorylation by Mec1-Ddc2 (1, 16, 20, 30). Activated Rad53 subsequently elicits a stress responses, i.e., stabilization of replication forks, induction of repair genes, and suppression of late-firing origins (24). It remains unclear, however, whether DNA replication checkpoint activation is induced in response to DNA damage by MMS, a reagent commonly used to study the DNA replication stress response. Several lines of evidence have suggested that MMS-induced damage is also sensed directly by the replication machinery (38, 40).Although biochemical and genetic interaction data have placed Mrc1 at the center of the replication checkpoint signal transduction cascade, its molecular function remains largely unknown. The proteins Mrc1, Tof1, and Csm3 associate with the Mcm complex (8, 27), a heterohexameric DNA helicase consisting of Mcm2 to Mcm7 proteins which unwinds the parental DNA duplex to allow replisome progression (3, 12, 18, 31, 32, 35). The Mcm complex associates with a specific set of regulatory proteins at forks to form replisome progression complexes (8). In addition to Mcm, Tof1, Csm3, and Mrc1, replisome progression complexes include factors such as Cdc45 and the GINS complex that are also required for fork progression (13, 26, 31, 32, 39). Claspin, a putative Xenopus laevis homolog of Mrc1, is also reported to associate with Cdc45, DNA polymerase ɛ (Polɛ), replication protein A, and two of the replication factor C complexes in aphidicolin-treated Xenopus egg extracts (19). Recently, Mrc1 was reported to interact directly with Polɛ (23).The aim of this study was to provide mechanistic insight into Mrc1 function in the DNA replication checkpoint. For this purpose, it was essential to identify, among all the essential proteins in the replication machinery, a specific protein that interacts with Mrc1 and to examine the role of this interaction in the DNA replication checkpoint. We found that Mrc1 interacts with Mcm6 directly and specifically. When the interaction between Mrc1 and Mcm6 was impaired, cells no longer activated the DNA replication checkpoint in response to MMS-induced replicative stress. Interestingly and unexpectedly, this interaction was not required for DNA replication checkpoint activation in response to HU-induced replicative stress. Our results provide the first mechanistic evidence that cells use separate mechanisms to transmit replicative stresses caused by MMS and HU for DNA replication checkpoint activation.     

Lack of Bax Prevents Influenza A Virus-Induced Apoptosis and Causes Diminished Viral Replication

The ectopic overexpression of Bcl-2 restricts both influenza A virus-induced apoptosis and influenza A virus replication in MDCK cells, thus suggesting a role for Bcl-2 family members during infection. Here we report that influenza A virus cannot establish an apoptotic response without functional Bax, a downstream target of Bcl-2, and that both Bax and Bak are directly involved in influenza A virus replication and virus-induced cell death. Bak is substantially downregulated during influenza A virus infection in MDCK cells, and the knockout of Bak in mouse embryonic fibroblasts yields a dramatic rise in the rate of apoptotic death and a corresponding increase in levels of virus replication, suggesting that Bak suppresses both apoptosis and the replication of virus and that the virus suppresses Bak. Bax, however, is activated and translocates from the cytosol to the mitochondria; this activation is required for the efficient induction of apoptosis and virus replication. The knockout of Bax in mouse embryonic fibroblasts blocks the induction of apoptosis, restricts the infection-mediated activation of executioner caspases, and inhibits virus propagation. Bax knockout cells still die but by an alternative death pathway displaying characteristics of autophagy, similarly to our previous observation that influenza A virus infection in the presence of a pancaspase inhibitor leads to an increase in levels of autophagy. The knockout of Bax causes a retention of influenza A virus NP within the nucleus. We conclude that the cell and virus struggle to control apoptosis and autophagy, as appropriately timed apoptosis is important for the replication of influenza A virus.The pathology of influenza A virus infection usually arises from acute lymphopenia and inflammation of the lungs and airway columnar epithelial cells (23, 38). Influenza A virus induces apoptotic death in infected epithelial, lymphocyte, and phagocytic cells, and apoptosis is a source of tissue damage during infection (3, 22, 33) and increased susceptibility to bacterial pathogens postinfection (31). While the induction of apoptosis by influenza A virus has been well documented (4, 19-21, 28, 33, 37), the mechanisms of this interaction are not well understood. Two viral proteins, NS1 and PB1-F2, have been associated with viral killing of cells. NS1, originally characterized as being proapoptotic (34), was later identified as being an interferon antagonist, inhibiting the activation of several key antiviral responses and restricting the apoptotic response to infection (1, 10, 15, 18, 35, 39, 46). In contrast, PB1-F2 induces apoptosis primarily by localizing to the outer mitochondrial membrane, promoting cytochrome c release, and triggering the apoptotic cascade (43). This effect, however, is typically restricted to infected monocytes, leading to the hypothesis that PB1-F2 induces apoptosis specifically to clear the landscape of immune responders (5, 44). Although PB1-F2 activity does not directly manipulate virus replication or virus-induced apoptosis, PB1-F2 localization to the mitochondrial membrane during infection potentiates the apoptotic response in epithelial and fibroblastic cells through tBID signaling with proapoptotic Bcl-2 family protein members Bax and Bak (22, 43, 44).The Bcl-2 protein family consists of both pro- and antiapoptotic members that regulate cytochrome c release during mitochondrion-mediated apoptosis through the formation of pore-like channels in the outer mitochondrial membrane (12, 16). During the initiation of mitochondrion-mediated apoptosis, cytoplasmic Bid is cleaved to form tBID. This, in turn, activates proapoptotic Bax and Bak (40), which drive cytochrome c release and subsequent caspase activation. Bak is constitutively associated with the mitochondrial membrane, whereas inactive Bax is primarily cytosolic, translocating to the outer mitochondrial membrane only after activation (6). The activation of Bax and Bak results in homo- and heterodimer formation at the outer mitochondrial membrane, generating pores that facilitate mitochondrial membrane permeabilization and cytochrome c release (14, 17), leading to caspase activation and the apoptotic cascade (8). Antiapoptotic members of the Bcl-2 protein family, including Bcl-2, inhibit the activation of proapoptotic Bax and Bak primarily by sequestering inactive Bax and Bak monomers via interactions between their BH3 homology domains (7).Bcl-2 expression has been linked to decreased viral replication rates (26). Bcl-2 overexpression inhibits influenza A virus-induced cell death and reduces the titer and spread of newly formed virions (29). The activation of caspase-3 in the absence of sufficient Bcl-2 is critical to the influenza A virus life cycle. Both Bcl-2 expression and the lack of caspase activation during infection lead to the nuclear accumulation of influenza virus ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes, thereby leading to the improper assembly of progeny virions and a marked reduction in titers of infectious virus (26, 41, 42, 45).Here we show that influenza A virus induces mitochondrion-mediated (intrinsic-pathway) apoptosis signaled specifically through Bax and that this Bax signaling is essential for the maximum efficiency of virus propagation. In contrast, Bak expression is strongly downregulated during infection. Cells lacking Bak (while expressing Bax) display a much more severe apoptotic phenotype in response to infection and produce infectious virions at a higher rate than the wild type (WT), suggesting that Bak, which can suppress viral replication, is potentially downregulated by the virus. Our results indicate essential and opposing roles for Bax and Bak in both the response of cells to influenza A virus infection and the ability of the virus to maximize its own replicative potential.