Functional analysis of DNA replication fork reversal catalyzed by Mycobacterium tuberculosis RuvAB proteins

Initially discovered in Escherichia coli, RuvAB proteins are ubiquitous in bacteria and play a dual role as molecular motor proteins responsible for branch migration of the Holliday junction(s) and reversal of stalled replication forks. Despite mounting genetic evidence for a crucial role of RuvA and RuvB proteins in reversal of stalled replication forks, the mechanistic aspects of this process are still not fully understood. Here, we elucidate the ability of Mycobacterium tuberculosis RuvAB (MtRuvAB) complex to catalyze the reversal of replication forks using a range of DNA replication fork substrates. Our studies show that MtRuvAB, unlike E. coli RuvAB, is able to drive replication fork reversal via the formation of Holliday junction intermediates, suggesting that RuvAB-catalyzed fork reversal involves concerted unwinding and annealing of nascent leading and lagging strands. We also demonstrate the reversal of replication forks carrying hemi-replicated DNA, indicating that MtRuvAB complex-catalyzed fork reversal is independent of symmetry at the fork junction. The fork reversal reaction catalyzed by MtRuvAB is coupled to ATP hydrolysis, is processive, and culminates in the formation of an extended reverse DNA arm. Notably, we found that sequence heterology failed to impede the fork reversal activity of MtRuvAB. We discuss the implications of these results in the context of recognition and processing of varied types of replication fork structures by RuvAB proteins.     

Recombination proteins and rescue of arrested replication forks

Recombination proteins play crucial roles in the rescue of inactivated replication forks in Escherichia coli. The enzymes that catalyze the repair of DNA double-strand breaks by a classical strand-exchange reaction (RecBCD, RecA) act in two well-characterized fork repair pathways. They repair the DNA double-strand end made when a replication fork runs into a single-strand interruption. They reset the DNA double-strand end generated by replication fork reversal when a component of the replication machinery is inactivated. In addition, recombination proteins also act at replication forks in ways other than the classical strand-exchange reaction. For example, the RuvAB enzyme that catalyzes Holliday junction branch-migration during homologous recombination is also able to catalyze replication fork reversal in certain replication mutants, i.e. to convert certain blocked replication forks into Holliday junctions. Finally, some of the actions of recombination proteins after replication impairment are still unclear, as for example in UV-irradiated cells, where RecFOR and RecA catalyze gap repair but also participate, in a yet undefined way, in "replisome reactivation".     

Replication fork reversal in DNA polymerase III mutants of Escherichia coli: a role for the beta clamp

Certain replication mutations lead in Escherichia coli to a specific reaction named replication fork reversal: at blocked forks, annealing of the nascent strands and pairing of the template strands form a four-way junction. RuvABC-catalysed resolution of this Holliday junction causes chromosome double-strand breaks (DSBs) in a recBC context and therefore creates a requirement for the recombination proteins RecBC for viability. In the present work, two mutants were tested for replication fork reversal: a dnaEts mutant and a dnaNts mutant, affected in the alpha (polymerase) and beta (processivity clamp) subunits of DNA polymerase III holoenzyme respectively. In the dnaEts recB strain, RuvABC-dependent DSBs caused by the dnaEts mutation occurred at 37 degrees C or 42 degrees C, indicating the occurrence of replication fork reversal upon partial or complete inactivation of the DNA polymerase alpha subunit. DSB formation was independent of RecA, RecQ and the helicase function of PriA. In the dnaNts recB mutant, RuvABC-dependent DSB caused by the dnaNts mutation occurred only at semi-permissive temperature, 37 degrees C, indicating the occurrence of replication fork reversal in conditions in which the remaining activity of the beta clamp is sufficient for viability. In contrast, the dnaNts mutation did not cause chromosome breakage at 42 degrees C, a temperature at which DnaN is totally inactive and the dnaNts mutant is inviable. We propose that a residual activity of the DNA polymerase III beta clamp is required for replication fork reversal in the dnaNts mutant.     

Fork-Remodeling Helicase Rad5 Preferentially Reverses Replication Forks with Gaps in the Leading Strand

DNA damage bypass pathways promote the replication of damaged DNA when replication forks stall at sites of DNA damage. Template switching is a DNA damage bypass pathway in which fork-reversal helicases convert stalled replication forks into four-way DNA junctions called chicken foot intermediates, which are subsequently extended by replicative DNA polymerases. In yeast, fork-reversal is carried out by the Rad5 helicase using an unknown mechanism. To better understand the mechanism of Rad5 and its specificity for different fork DNA substrates, we used a FRET-based assay to observe fork reversal in real time. We examined the ability of Rad5 to bind and catalyze the reversal of various fork DNA substrates in the presence of short gaps in the leading or lagging strand as well as in the presence or absence of RPA and RNA primers in the lagging strand. We found that Rad5 preferentially reverses fork DNA substrates with short gaps (10 to 30 nt.) in the leading strand. Thus, Rad5 preferentially reverses fork DNA substrates that form chicken foot intermediates with 5′ overhangs that can be extended by replicative DNA polymerases during the subsequent steps of template switching.     

Oligomerization of DNA replication regulatory protein RADX is essential to maintain replication fork stability

Genome integrity requires complete and accurate DNA replication once per cell division cycle. Replication stress poses obstacles to this process that must be overcome to prevent replication fork collapse. An important regulator of replication fork stability is the RAD51 protein, which promotes replication fork reversal and protects nascent DNA strands from nuclease-mediated degradation. Many regulatory proteins control these RAD51 activities, including RADX, which binds both ssDNA and RAD51 at replication forks to ensure that fork reversal is confined to stalled forks. Many ssDNA-binding proteins function as hetero- or homo-oligomers. In this study, we addressed whether this is also the case for RADX. Using biochemical and genetic approaches, we found that RADX acts as a homo-oligomer to control replication fork stability. RADX oligomerizes using at least two different interaction surfaces, including one mapped to a C-terminal region. We demonstrate that mutations in this region prevent oligomerization and prevent RADX function in cells, and that addition of a heterologous dimerization domain to the oligomerization mutants restored their ability to regulate replication. Taken together, our results demonstrate that like many ssDNA-binding proteins, oligomerization is essential for RADX-mediated regulation of genome stability.     

A step backward in advancing DNA replication: rescue of stalled replication forks by RecG.

In the October 5 issue of Cell, Singleton et al. report the crystal structure of RecG protein bound to an analog of a stalled DNA replication fork. This structure shows how RecG can recognize branched DNA structures and suggests a mechanism for fork reversal, an early event in recombination-dependent reinitiation of DNA replication.     

Structural analysis of DNA replication fork reversal by RecG

The stalling of DNA replication forks that occurs as a consequence of encountering DNA damage is a critical problem for cells. RecG protein is involved in the processing of stalled replication forks, and acts by reversing the fork past the damage to create a four-way junction that allows template switching and lesion bypass. We have determined the crystal structure of RecG bound to a DNA substrate that mimics a stalled replication fork. The structure not only reveals the elegant mechanism used by the protein to recognize junctions but has also trapped the protein in the initial stage of fork reversal. We propose a mechanism for how forks are processed by RecG to facilitate replication fork restart. In addition, this structure suggests that the mechanism and function of the two largest helicase superfamilies are distinct.     

Human HLTF mediates postreplication repair by its HIRAN domain-dependent replication fork remodelling

Defects in the ability to respond properly to an unrepaired DNA lesion blocking replication promote genomic instability and cancer. Human HLTF, implicated in error-free replication of damaged DNA and tumour suppression, exhibits a HIRAN domain, a RING domain, and a SWI/SNF domain facilitating DNA-binding, PCNA-polyubiquitin-ligase, and dsDNA-translocase activities, respectively. Here, we investigate the mechanism of HLTF action with emphasis on its HIRAN domain. We found that in cells HLTF promotes the filling-in of gaps left opposite damaged DNA during replication, and this postreplication repair function depends on its HIRAN domain. Our biochemical assays show that HIRAN domain mutant HLTF proteins retain their ubiquitin ligase, ATPase and dsDNA translocase activities but are impaired in binding to a model replication fork. These data and our structural study indicate that the HIRAN domain recruits HLTF to a stalled replication fork, and it also provides the direction for the movement of the dsDNA translocase motor domain for fork reversal. In more general terms, we suggest functional similarities between the HIRAN, the OB, the HARP2, and other domains found in certain motor proteins, which may explain why only a subset of DNA translocases can carry out fork reversal.     

Fork regression is an active helicase‐driven pathway in bacteriophage T4

Reactivation of stalled replication forks requires specialized mechanisms that can recognize the fork structure and promote downstream processing events. Fork regression has been implicated in several models of fork reactivation as a crucial processing step that supports repair. However, it has also been suggested that regressed forks represent pathological structures rather than physiological intermediates of repair. To investigate the biological role of fork regression in bacteriophage T4, we tested several mechanistic models of regression: strand exchange‐mediated extrusion, topology‐driven fork reversal and helicase‐mediated extrusion. Here, we report that UvsW, a T4 branch‐specific helicase, is necessary for the accumulation of regressed forks in vivo, and that UvsW‐catalysed regression is the dominant mechanism of origin‐fork processing that contributes to double‐strand end formation. We also show that UvsW resolves purified fork intermediates in vitro by fork regression. Regression is therefore part of an active, UvsW‐driven pathway of fork processing in bacteriophage T4.     

Cells defective for replication restart undergo replication fork reversal

We have studied the fate of blocked replication forks with the use of the Escherichia coli priA mutant, in which spontaneously arrested replication forks persist owing to the lack of the major replication restart pathway. Such blocked forks undergo a specific reaction named replication fork reversal, in which newly synthesized strands anneal to form a DNA double-strand end adjacent to a four-way junction. Indeed, (i) priA recB mutant chromosomes are linearized by a reaction that requires the presence of the Holliday junction resolvase RuvABC, and (ii) RuvABC-dependent linearization is prevented by the presence of RecBC. Replication fork reversal in a priA mutant occurs independently of the recombination proteins RecA and RecR. recBC inactivation does not affect priA mutant viability but prevents priA chronic SOS induction. We propose that, in the absence of PriA, RecBC action at reversed forks does not allow replication restart, which leads to the accumulation of SOS-inducing RecA filaments. Our results suggest that types of replication blockage that cause replication fork reversal occur spontaneously.     

Replication fork collapse at a protein‐DNA roadblock leads to fork reversal,promoted by the RecQ helicase

Proteins that bind DNA are the cause of the majority of impediments to replication fork progression and can lead to subsequent collapse of the replication fork. Failure to deal with fork collapse efficiently leads to mutation or cell death. Several models have been proposed for how a cell processes a stalled or collapsed replication fork; eukaryotes and bacteria are not dissimilar in terms of the general pathways undertaken to deal with these events. This study shows that replication fork regression, the combination of replication fork reversal leading to formation of a Holliday Junction along with exonuclease digestion, is the preferred pathway for dealing with a collapsed fork in Escherichia coli. Direct endo‐nuclease activity at the replication fork was not observed. The protein that had the greatest effect on these fork processing events was the RecQ helicase, while RecG and RuvABC, which have previously been implicated in this process, were found to play a lesser role. Eukaryotic RecQ homologues, BLM and WRN, have also been implicated in processing events following replication fork collapse and may reflect a conserved mechanism. Finally, the SOS response was not induced by the protein‐DNA roadblock under these conditions, so did not affect fork processing.     

DNA2 drives processing and restart of reversed replication forks in human cells

Accurate processing of stalled or damaged DNA replication forks is paramount to genomic integrity and recent work points to replication fork reversal and restart as a central mechanism to ensuring high-fidelity DNA replication. Here, we identify a novel DNA2- and WRN-dependent mechanism of reversed replication fork processing and restart after prolonged genotoxic stress. The human DNA2 nuclease and WRN ATPase activities functionally interact to degrade reversed replication forks with a 5′-to-3′ polarity and promote replication restart, thus preventing aberrant processing of unresolved replication intermediates. Unexpectedly, EXO1, MRE11, and CtIP are not involved in the same mechanism of reversed fork processing, whereas human RECQ1 limits DNA2 activity by preventing extensive nascent strand degradation. RAD51 depletion antagonizes this mechanism, presumably by preventing reversed fork formation. These studies define a new mechanism for maintaining genome integrity tightly controlled by specific nucleolytic activities and central homologous recombination factors.     

RNF4 controls the extent of replication fork reversal to preserve genome stability

Replication fork reversal occurs via a two-step process that entails reversal initiation and reversal extension. DNA topoisomerase IIalpha (TOP2A) facilitates extensive fork reversal, on one hand through resolving the topological stress generated by the initial reversal, on the other hand via its role in recruiting the SUMO-targeted DNA translocase PICH to stalled forks in a manner that is dependent on its SUMOylation by the SUMO E3 ligase ZATT. However, how TOP2A activities at stalled forks are precisely regulated remains poorly understood. Here we show that, upon replication stress, the SUMO-targeted ubiquitin E3 ligase RNF4 accumulates at stalled forks and targets SUMOylated TOP2A for ubiquitination and degradation. Downregulation of RNF4 resulted in aberrant activation of the ZATT–TOP2A–PICH complex at stalled forks, which in turn led to excessive reversal and elevated frequencies of fork collapse. These results uncover a previously unidentified regulatory mechanism that regulates TOP2A activities at stalled forks and thus the extent of fork reversal.     

Replisome structure suggests mechanism for continuous fork progression and post-replication repair

What happens to DNA replication when it encounters a damaged or nicked DNA template has been under investigation for five decades. Initially it was thought that DNA polymerase, and thus the replication-fork progression, would stall at road blocks. After the discovery of replication-fork helicase and replication re-initiation factors by the 1990s, it became clear that the replisome can “skip” impasses and finish replication with single-stranded gaps and double-strand breaks in the product DNA. But the mechanism for continuous fork progression after encountering roadblocks is entangled with translesion synthesis, replication fork reversal and recombination repair. The recently determined structure of the bacteriophage T7 replisome offers the first glimpse of how helicase, primase, leading-and lagging-strand DNA polymerases are organized around a DNA replication fork. The tightly coupled leading-strand polymerase and lagging-strand helicase provides a scaffold to consolidate data accumulated over the past five decades and offers a fresh perspective on how the replisome may skip lesions and complete discontinuous DNA synthesis. Comparison of the independently evolved bacterial and eukaryotic replisomes suggests that repair of discontinuous DNA synthesis occurs post replication in both.     

sbcB sbcC null mutations allow RecF-mediated repair of arrested replication forks in rep recBC mutants

We have proposed previously that, in Escherichia coli, blockage of replication forks can lead to the reversal of the fork. Annealing of the newly synthesized strands creates a double-stranded end adjacent to a Holliday junction. The junction is migrated away from the DNA end by RuvAB and can be cleaved by RuvC, while RecBCD is required for the repair of the double-stranded tail. Consequently, the rep mutant, in which replication arrests are frequent and fork reversal occurs, requires RecBCD for growth. We show here that the combination of sbcB sbcCD null mutations restores the viability to rep recBC mutants by activation of the RecF pathway of recombination. This shows that the proteins belonging to the RecF pathway are able to process the DNA ends made by the replication fork reversal into a structure that allows recombination-dependent replication restart. However, we confirm that, unlike sbcB null mutations, sbcB15, which suppresses all other recBC mutant defects, does not restore the viability of rep recBC sbcCD strains. We also show that ruvAB inactivation suppresses the lethality and the formation of double-stranded breaks (DSBs) in a rep recBC recF strain, totally deficient for homologous recombination, as well as in rep recBC mutants. This confirms that RuvAB processing of arrested replication forks is independent of the presence of recombination intermediates.     

ruvA and ruvB mutants specifically impaired for replication fork reversal

Replication fork reversal (RFR) is a reaction that takes place in Escherichia coli at replication forks arrested by the inactivation of a replication protein. Fork reversal involves the annealing of the leading and lagging strand ends; it results in the formation of a Holliday junction adjacent to DNA double-strand end, both of which are processed by recombination enzymes. In several replication mutants, replication fork reversal is catalysed by the RuvAB complex, originally characterized for its role in the last steps of homologous recombination, branch migration and resolution of Holliday junctions. We present here the isolation and characterization of ruvA and ruvB single mutants that are impaired for RFR at forks arrested by the inactivation of polymerase III, while they remain capable of homologous recombination. The positions of the mutations in the proteins and the genetic properties of the mutants suggest that the mutations affect DNA binding, RuvA-RuvB interaction and/or RuvB-helicase activity. These results show that a partial RuvA or RuvB defect affects primarily RFR, implying that RFR is a more demanding reaction than Holliday junction resolution.     

A fork-clearing role for UvrD

The inactivation of a replication protein causes the disassembly of the replication machinery and creates a need for replication reactivation. In several replication mutants, restart occurs after the fork has been isomerized into a four-armed junction, a reaction called replication fork reversal. The repair helicase UvrD is essential for replication fork reversal upon inactivation of the polymerase (DnaE) or the beta-clamp (DnaN) subunits of the Escherichia coli polymerase III, and for the viability of dnaEts and dnaNts mutants at semi-permissive temperature. We show here that the inactivation of recA, recFOR, recJ or recQ recombination genes suppresses the requirement for UvrD for replication fork reversal and suppresses the lethality conferred by uvrD inactivation to Pol IIIts mutants at semi-permissive temperature. We propose that RecA binds inappropriately to blocked replication forks in the dnaEts and dnaNts mutants in a RecQ- RecJ- RecFOR-dependent way and that UvrD acts by removing RecA or a RecA-made structure, allowing replication fork reversal. This work thus reveals the existence of a futile reaction of RecA binding to blocked replication forks, that requires the action of UvrD for fork-clearing and proper replication restart.     

The emerging determinants of replication fork stability

A universal response to replication stress is replication fork reversal, where the nascent complementary DNA strands are annealed to form a protective four-way junction allowing forks to avert DNA damage while replication stress is resolved. However, reversed forks are in turn susceptible to nucleolytic digestion of the regressed nascent DNA arms and rely on dedicated mechanisms to protect their integrity. The most well studied fork protection mechanism involves the BRCA pathway and its ability to catalyze RAD51 nucleofilament formation on the reversed arms of stalled replication forks. Importantly, the inability to prevent the degradation of reversed forks has emerged as a hallmark of BRCA deficiency and underlies genome instability and chemosensitivity in BRCA-deficient cells. In the past decade, multiple factors underlying fork stability have been discovered. These factors either cooperate with the BRCA pathway, operate independently from it to augment fork stability in its absence, or act as enablers of fork degradation. In this review, we examine these novel determinants of fork stability, explore the emergent conceptual underpinnings underlying fork protection, as well as the impact of fork protection on cellular viability and cancer therapy.     

Rad51-mediated replication fork reversal is a global response to genotoxic treatments in human cells

Replication fork reversal protects forks from breakage after poisoning of Topoisomerase 1. We here investigated fork progression and chromosomal breakage in human cells in response to a panel of sublethal genotoxic treatments, using other topoisomerase poisons, DNA synthesis inhibitors, interstrand cross-linking inducers, and base-damaging agents. We used electron microscopy to visualize fork architecture under these conditions and analyzed the association of specific molecular features with checkpoint activation. Our data identify replication fork uncoupling and reversal as global responses to genotoxic treatments. Both events are frequent even after mild treatments that do not affect fork integrity, nor activate checkpoints. Fork reversal was found to be dependent on the central homologous recombination factor RAD51, which is consistently present at replication forks independently of their breakage, and to be antagonized by poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase/RECQ1-regulated restart. Our work establishes remodeling of uncoupled forks as a pivotal RAD51-regulated response to genotoxic stress in human cells and as a promising target to potentiate cancer chemotherapy.