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.     

Analysis of the Viral Elements Required in the Nuclear Import of HIV-1 DNA

HIV-1 possesses an exquisite ability to infect cells independently from their cycling status by undergoing an active phase of nuclear import through the nuclear pore. This property has been ascribed to the presence of karyophilic elements present in viral nucleoprotein complexes, such as the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a cis-acting structure present in the newly synthesized DNA, the DNA flap. However, their role in nuclear import remains controversial at best. In the present study, we carried out a comprehensive analysis of the role of these elements in nuclear import in a comparison between several primary cell types, including stimulated lymphocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells. We show that despite the fact that none of these elements is absolutely required for nuclear import, disruption of the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS) clearly affects the kinetics of viral DNA entry into the nucleus. This effect is independent of the cell cycle status of the target cells and is observed in cycling as well as in nondividing primary cells, suggesting that nuclear import of viral DNA may occur similarly under both conditions. Nonetheless, this study indicates that other components are utilized along with the cPPT-CTS for an efficient entry of viral DNA into the nucleus.Lentiviruses display an exquisite ability to infect dividing and nondividing cells alike that is unequalled among Retroviridae. This property is thought to be due to the particular behavior or composition of the viral nucleoprotein complexes (NPCs) that are liberated into the cytoplasm of target cells upon virus-to-cell membrane fusion and that allow lentiviruses to traverse an intact nuclear membrane (17, 28, 29, 39, 52, 55, 67, 79). In the case of the human immunodeficiency type I virus (HIV-1), several studies over the years identified viral components of such structures with intrinsic karyophilic properties and thus perfect candidates for mediation of the passage of viral DNA (vDNA) through the nuclear pore: the matrix protein (MA); Vpr; the integrase (IN); and a three-stranded DNA flap, a structure present in neo-synthesized viral DNA, specified by the central polypurine tract-central termination sequence (cPPT-CTS). It is clear that these elements may mediate nuclear import directly or via the recruitment of the host''s proteins, and indeed, several cellular proteins have been found to influence HIV-1 infection during nuclear import, like the karyopherin α2 Rch1 (38); importin 7 (3, 30, 93); the transportin SR-2 (13, 20); or the nucleoporins Nup98 (27), Nup358/RANBP2, and Nup153 (13, 56).More recently, the capsid protein (CA), the main structural component of viral nucleoprotein complexes at least upon their cytoplasmic entry, has also been suggested to be involved in nuclear import or in postnuclear entry steps (14, 25, 74, 90, 92). Whether this is due to a role for CA in the shaping of viral nucleoprotein complexes or to a direct interaction between CA and proteins involved in nuclear import remains at present unknown.Despite a large number of reports, no single viral or cellular element has been described as absolutely necessary or sufficient to mediate lentiviral nuclear import, and important controversies as to the experimental evidences linking these elements to this step exist. For example, MA was among the first viral protein of HIV-1 described to be involved in nuclear import, and 2 transferable nuclear localization signals (NLSs) have been described to occur at its N and C termini (40). However, despite the fact that early studies indicated that the mutation of these NLSs perturbed HIV-1 nuclear import and infection specifically in nondividing cells, such as macrophages (86), these findings failed to be confirmed in more-recent studies (23, 33, 34, 57, 65, 75).Similarly, Vpr has been implicated by several studies of the nuclear import of HIV-1 DNA (1, 10, 21, 43, 45, 47, 64, 69, 72, 73, 85). Vpr does not possess classical NLSs, yet it displays a transferable nucleophilic activity when fused to heterologous proteins (49-51, 53, 77, 81) and has been shown to line onto the nuclear envelope (32, 36, 47, 51, 58), where it can truly facilitate the passage of the viral genome into the nucleus. However, the role of Vpr in this step remains controversial, as in some instances Vpr is not even required for viral replication in nondividing cells (1, 59).Conflicting results concerning the role of IN during HIV-1 nuclear import also exist. Indeed, several transferable NLSs have been described to occur in the catalytic core and the C-terminal DNA binding domains of IN, but for some of these, initial reports of nuclear entry defects (2, 9, 22, 46, 71) were later shown to result from defects at steps other than nuclear import (60, 62, 70, 83). These reports do not exclude a role for the remaining NLSs in IN during nuclear import, and they do not exclude the possibility that IN may mediate this step by associating with components of the cellular nuclear import machinery, such as importin alpha and beta (41), importin 7 (3, 30, 93, 98), and, more recently, transportin-SR2 (20).The central DNA flap, a structure present in lentiviruses and in at least 1 yeast retroelement (44), but not in other orthoretroviruses, has also been involved in the nuclear import of viral DNA (4, 6, 7, 31, 78, 84, 95, 96), and more recently, it has been proposed to provide a signal for viral nucleoprotein complexes uncoating in the proximity of the nuclear pore, with the consequence of providing a signal for import (8). However, various studies showed an absence or weakness of nuclear entry defects in viruses devoid of the DNA flap (24, 26, 44, 61).Overall, the importance of viral factors in HIV-1 nuclear import is still unclear. The discrepancies concerning the role of MA, IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS in HIV-1 nuclear import could in part be explained by their possible redundancy. To date, only one comprehensive study analyzed the role of these four viral potentially karyophilic elements together (91). This study showed that an HIV-1 chimera where these elements were either deleted or replaced by their murine leukemia virus (MLV) counterparts was, in spite of an important infectivity defect, still able to infect cycling and cell cycle-arrested cell lines to similar efficiencies. If this result indicated that the examined viral elements of HIV-1 were dispensable for the cell cycle independence of HIV, as infections proceeded equally in cycling and arrested cells, they did not prove that they were not required in nuclear import, because chimeras displayed a severe infectivity defect that precluded their comparison with the wild type (WT).Nuclear import and cell cycle independence may not be as simply linked as previously thought. On the one hand, there has been no formal demonstration that the passage through the nuclear pore, and thus nuclear import, is restricted to nondividing cells, and for what we know, this passage may be an obligatory step in HIV infection in all cells, irrespective of their cycling status. In support of this possibility, certain mutations in viral elements of HIV affect nuclear import in dividing as well as in nondividing cells (4, 6, 7, 31, 84, 95). On the other hand, cell cycle-independent infection may be a complex phenomenon that is made possible not only by the ability of viral DNA to traverse the nuclear membrane but also by its ability to cope with pre- and postnuclear entry events, as suggested by the phenotypes of certain CA mutants (74, 92).Given that the cellular environment plays an important role during the early steps of viral infection, we chose to analyze the role of the four karyophilic viral elements of HIV-1 during infection either alone or combined in a wide comparison between cells highly susceptible to infection and more-restrictive primary cell targets of HIV-1 in vivo, such as primary blood lymphocytes (PBLs), monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), and dendritic cells (DCs).In this study, we show that an HIV-1-derived virus in which the 2 NLSs of MA are mutated and the IN, Vpr, and cPPT-CTS elements are removed displays no detectable nuclear import defect in HeLa cells independently of their cycling status. However, this mutant virus is partially impaired for nuclear entry in primary cells and more specifically in DCs and PBLs. We found that this partial defect is specified by the cPPT-CTS, while the 3 remaining elements seem to play no role in nuclear import. Thus, our study indicates that the central DNA flap specifies the most important role among the viral elements involved thus far in nuclear import. However, it also clearly indicates that the role played by the central DNA flap is not absolute and that its importance varies depending on the cell type, independently from the dividing status of the cell.     

Interactions of DNA with Biofilm-Derived Membrane Vesicles

The biofilm matrix contributes to the chemistry, structure, and function of biofilms. Biofilm-derived membrane vesicles (MVs) and DNA, both matrix components, demonstrated concentration-, pH-, and cation-dependent interactions. Furthermore, MV-DNA association influenced MV surface properties. This bears consequences for the reactivity and availability for interaction of matrix polymers and other constituents.The biofilm matrix contributes to the chemistry, structure, and function of biofilms and is crucial for the development of fundamental biofilm properties (46, 47). Early studies defined polysaccharides as the matrix component, but proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids are all now acknowledged as important contributors (7, 15). Indeed, DNA has emerged as a vital participant, fulfilling structural and functional roles (1, 5, 6, 19, 31, 34, 36, 41, 43, 44). The phosphodiester bond of DNA renders this polyanionic at a physiological pH, undoubtedly contributing to interactions with cations, humic substances, fine-dispersed minerals, and matrix entities (25, 41, 49).In addition to particulates such as flagella and pili, membrane vesicles (MVs) are also found within the matrices of gram-negative and mixed biofilms (3, 16, 40). MVs are multifunctional bilayered structures that bleb from the outer membranes of gram-negative bacteria (reviewed in references 4, 24, 27, 28, and 30) and are chemically heterogeneous, combining the known chemistries of the biofilm matrix. Examination of biofilm samples by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) has suggested that matrix material interacts with MVs (Fig. ​(Fig.1).1). Since MVs produced in planktonic culture have associated DNA (11, 12, 13, 20, 21, 30, 39, 48), could biofilm-derived MVs incorporate DNA (1, 39, 40, 44)?Open in a separate windowFIG. 1.Possible interactions between matrix polymers and particulate structures. Shown is an electron micrograph of a thin section through a P. aeruginosa PAO1 biofilm. During processing, some dehydration occurred, resulting in collapse of matrix material into fibrillate arrangements (black filled arrows). There is a suggestion of interactions occurring with particulate structures such as MVs (hollow white arrow) and flagella (filled white arrows) (identified by the appearance and cross-dimension of these highly ordered structures when viewed at high magnification), which was consistently observed with other embedded samples and also with whole-mount preparations of gently disrupted biofilms (data not shown). The scale bar represents 200 nm.     

Widespread Phosphorylation of Histone H2AX by Species C Adenovirus Infection Requires Viral DNA Replication

Adenovirus infection activates cellular DNA damage response and repair pathways. Viral proteins that are synthesized before viral DNA replication prevent recognition of viral genomes as a substrate for DNA repair by targeting members of the sensor complex composed of Mre11/Rad50/NBS1 for degradation and relocalization, as well as targeting the effector protein DNA ligase IV. Despite inactivation of these cellular sensor and effector proteins, infection results in high levels of histone 2AX phosphorylation, or γH2AX. Although phosphorylated H2AX is a characteristic marker of double-stranded DNA breaks, this modification was widely distributed throughout the nucleus of infected cells and was coincident with the bulk of cellular DNA. H2AX phosphorylation occurred after the onset of viral DNA replication and after the degradation of Mre11. Experiments with inhibitors of the serine-threonine kinases ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), AT- and Rad3-related (ATR), and DNA protein kinase (DNA-PK), the kinases responsible for H2AX phosphorylation, indicate that H2AX may be phosphorylated by ATR during a wild-type adenovirus infection, with some contribution from ATM and DNA-PK. Viral DNA replication appears to be the stimulus for this phosphorylation event, since infection with a nonreplicating virus did not elicit phosphorylation of H2AX. Infected cells also responded to high levels of input viral DNA by localized phosphorylation of H2AX. These results are consistent with a model in which adenovirus-infected cells sense and respond to both incoming viral DNA and viral DNA replication.Cellular DNA damage response pathways protect and preserve the integrity of the genome. These pathways, which are activated in response to various forms of DNA damage, involve a number of proteins that participate in both DNA repair and cell cycle progression (62). The serine-threonine kinases ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), AT- and Rad3-related (ATR), and DNA protein kinase (DNA-PK) are activated in response to distinct types of damage. The ATM pathway is activated primarily by double-stranded DNA breaks (4, 30). DNA-PK acts in conjunction with the DNA ligase IV/XRCC4 complex to mediate the ligation of double-stranded breaks through nonhomologous end joining (34). The ATR pathway can be activated in response to a wide range of genotoxic stresses, such as base or nucleotide excision, double-stranded breaks, or single-stranded breaks. Activation of ATR is generally thought to occur via the recognition of single-stranded tracks of DNA (63). Each of these pathways leads to the phosphorylation and activation of a number of cellular proteins such as the variant histone H2AX, checkpoint kinases 1 and 2 (Chk1 and Chk2), and Nijmegen break syndrome protein 1 (NBS1), among others (62). Signals transmitted by a cascade of phosphorylation events result in cell cycle arrest and the accumulation of repair protein complexes at sites of DNA damage.Upon recognition of a double-stranded DNA break by the cell, H2AX is phosphorylated on an extended C-terminal tail at serine 139 by the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)-related kinases ATM, ATR, and DNA-PK (9, 41, 44, 58). Considered one of the earliest indications of a double-stranded DNA break, phosphorylated H2AX (γH2AX) acts as a scaffolding protein to which a number of DNA repair factors can dock to facilitate repair of the damaged DNA (36, 42, 53). Areas of phosphorylated H2AX, termed γH2AX foci, are enriched for proteins involved in both homologous recombination and nonhomologous end joining, such as NBS1, BRCA1 (42), and Mdc1 (24, 50).Although adenovirus is able to activate both ATM and ATR pathways (11), adenoviral proteins limit the extent and consequences of signaling through these pathways. The E1B-55K and E4orf6 proteins form an E3 ubiquitin ligase with the cellular proteins Cullin-5, elongins B and C, and Rbx1 (28, 43). This complex targets key cellular proteins involved in cellular response to DNA damage, including p53 (28, 43), Mre11 (51), and DNA ligase IV (3). The E4orf3 gene product targets cellular proteins central to both the cellular DNA damage response and the antiviral response. The E4orf3 protein of species C adenoviruses alters the localization of Mre11/Rad50/NBS1 (MRN) complex members within the nucleus to prevent association with centers of viral DNA replication and to ensure efficient viral DNA replication (17, 18, 52). In addition, these three viral early proteins direct members of the MRN complex (2, 35) and the single-stranded DNA-binding protein 2 (20) to cytoplasmic aggresomes, where these sequestered proteins are effectively inactivated. These viral activities, along with the inactivation of DNA-PK by E4orf3 and E4orf6 gene products (7), appear to prevent recognition of viral genomes by the MRN complex and prevent ligation of these genomes through nonhomologous end joining. In cells infected with a virus with E4 deleted, Mre11 physically binds to viral DNA in an NBS1-dependent manner and may prevent efficient genome replication (37). The overlapping means by which adenovirus disables the MRN complex and prevents DNA damage repair serves to illustrate the importance of this activity for a productive adenovirus infection. However, despite having DNA damage signaling and DNA repair pathways dismantled, adenovirus-infected cells exhibit some characteristic changes associated with DNA damage signaling events, such as the phosphorylation of H2AX (6, 15). Thus, it appears that adenovirus effectively inhibits DNA repair activity but may not fully suppress the early events of DNA damage signaling.The focus of the present study was to elucidate the activation of DNA damage signaling pathways revealed by phosphorylation of the variant histone H2AX during wild-type adenovirus infection and to determine what stage of the virus life cycle leads to this activation. We demonstrate that infected cells respond to viral genome replication with high levels of H2AX phosphorylation throughout the cell nucleus. This phosphorylation event is not localized to viral replication centers and does not appear to be concurrent with cellular double-stranded DNA breaks; rather, H2AX phosphorylation occurs coincident with the bulk of cellular chromatin. H2AX phosphorylation follows viral DNA replication and reaches peak levels after the degradation of the Mre11. In addition, we observed that infected cells can respond to both the presence of incoming viral genomes and genome replication by initiating H2AX phosphorylation.     

Adeno-Associated Virus Replication Induces a DNA Damage Response Coordinated by DNA-Dependent Protein Kinase

The parvovirus adeno-associated virus (AAV) contains a small single-stranded DNA genome with inverted terminal repeats that form hairpin structures. In order to propagate, AAV relies on the cellular replication machinery together with functions supplied by coinfecting helper viruses such as adenovirus (Ad). Here, we examined the host cell response to AAV replication in the context of Ad or Ad helper proteins. We show that AAV and Ad coinfection activates a DNA damage response (DDR) that is distinct from that seen during Ad or AAV infection alone. The DDR was also triggered when AAV replicated in the presence of minimal Ad helper proteins. We detected autophosphorylation of the kinases ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit (DNA-PKcs) and signaling to downstream targets SMC1, Chk1, Chk2, H2AX, and XRCC4 and multiple sites on RPA32. The Mre11 complex was not required for activation of the DDR to AAV infection. Additionally, we found that DNA-PKcs was the primary mediator of damage signaling in response to AAV replication. Immunofluorescence revealed that some activated damage proteins were found in a pan-nuclear pattern (phosphorylated ATM, SMC1, and H2AX), while others such as DNA-PK components (DNA-PKcs, Ku70, and Ku86) and RPA32 accumulated at AAV replication centers. Although expression of the large viral Rep proteins contributed to some damage signaling, we observed that the full response required replication of the AAV genome. Our results demonstrate that AAV replication in the presence of Ad helper functions elicits a unique damage response controlled by DNA-PK.Replication of viral genomes produces a large amount of extrachromosomal DNA that may be recognized by the cellular DNA damage machinery. This is often accompanied by activation of DNA damage response (DDR) signaling pathways and recruitment of cellular repair proteins to sites of viral replication. Viruses therefore provide good model systems to study the recognition and response to DNA damage (reviewed in reference 48). The Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 (MRN) complex functions as a sensor of chromosomal DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and is involved in activation of damage signaling (reviewed in reference 41). The MRN complex also localizes to DNA DSBs and is found at viral replication compartments during infection with a number of DNA viruses (6, 40, 47, 70, 75, 77, 87, 93). The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-like kinases (PIKKs) ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), ATM and Rad3-related kinase (ATR), and the catalytic subunit of the DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PKcs) are involved in the signal transduction cascades activated by DNA damage (reviewed in references 43, 51, and 71). These kinases respond to distinct types of damage and regulate DSB repair during different phases of the cell cycle (5), either through nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) or homologous recombination pathways (reviewed in references 63, 81, and 86). The DNA-PK holoenzyme is composed of DNA-PKcs and two regulatory subunits, the Ku70 and Ku86 heterodimer. DNA-PK functions with XRCC4/DNA ligase IV to repair breaks during NHEJ, and works with Artemis to process DNA hairpin structures during VDJ recombination and during a subset of DNA DSB events (46, 50, 86). While the kinase activity of DNA-PKcs leads to phosphorylation of a large number of substrates in vitro as well as autophosphorylation of specific residues (reviewed in references 16 and 85), it is currently unclear how DNA-PKcs contributes to signaling in cells upon different types of damage.The adeno-associated virus (AAV) genome consists of a molecule of single-stranded DNA with inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) at both ends that form double-hairpin structures due to their palindromic sequences (reviewed in reference 52). The ITRs are important for replication and packaging of the viral genome and for integration into the host genome. Four viral Rep proteins (Rep78, Rep68, Rep52, and Rep40) are also required for replication and packaging of the AAV genome into virions assembled from the Cap proteins. Although the Rep and Cap genes are replaced in recombinant AAV vectors (rAAV) that retain only the ITRs flanking the gene of interest, these vectors can be replicated by providing Rep in trans (reviewed in reference 7). Productive AAV infection requires helper functions supplied by adenovirus (Ad) or other viruses such as herpes simplex virus (HSV) (reviewed in reference 27), together with components of the host cell DNA replication machinery (54, 55, 58). In the presence of helper viruses or minimal helper proteins from Ad or HSV, AAV replicates in the nucleus at centers where the viral DNA and Rep proteins accumulate (35, 76, 84, 89). Cellular and viral proteins involved in AAV replication, including replication protein A (RPA), Ad DNA-binding protein (DBP), and HSV ICP8, localize with Rep proteins at these viral centers (29, 33, 76).A number of published reports suggest associations between AAV and the cellular DNA damage machinery. For example, transduction by rAAV vectors is increased by genotoxic agents and DNA damaging treatments (1, 62, 91) although the mechanisms involved remain unclear. Additionally, the ATM kinase negatively regulates rAAV transduction (64, 92), and we have shown that the MRN complex poses a barrier to both rAAV transduction and wild-type AAV replication (11, 67). UV-inactivated AAV particles also appear to activate a DDR involving ATM and ATR kinases that perturbs cell cycle progression (39, 60, 88). It has been suggested that this response is provoked by the AAV ITRs (60) and that UV-treated particles mimic stalled replication forks in infected cells (39). In addition to AAV genome components, the viral Rep proteins have been observed to exhibit cytotoxicity and induce S-phase arrest (3, 65).The role of cellular repair proteins in AAV genome processing has also been explored by examining the molecular fate of rAAV vectors, which are converted into circular and concatemeric forms that persist episomally (18, 19, 66). Proteins shown to regulate circularization in cell culture include ATM and the MRN complex (14, 64), while in vivo experiments using mouse models have implicated ATM and DNA-PK in this process (14, 20, 72). Additionally, DNA-PKcs and Artemis have recently been shown to cleave the ITR hairpins of rAAV vectors in vivo in a tissue-dependent manner (36). Despite these studies, it is not clear how damage response factors function together and how they impact AAV transduction and replication in human cells.In this study we examined the cellular response to AAV replication in the context of Ad infection or helper proteins. We show that coinfection with AAV and Ad activates a DDR that is distinct from that seen during infection with Ad alone. The ATM and DNA-PKcs damage kinases are activated and signal to downstream substrates, but the response does not require the MRN complex and is primarily mediated by DNA-PKcs. Although expression of the large Rep proteins induced some DDR events, full signaling appeared to require AAV replication and was accompanied by accumulation of DNA-PK at viral replication compartments. Our results demonstrate that AAV replication induces a unique DNA damage signal transduction response and provides a model system for studying DNA-PK.     

Strategy for Extracting DNA from Clay Soil and Detecting a Specific Target Sequence via Selective Enrichment and Real-Time (Quantitative) PCR Amplification

We present a simple strategy for isolating and accurately enumerating target DNA from high-clay-content soils: desorption with buffers, an optional magnetic capture hybridization step, and quantitation via real-time PCR. With the developed technique, μg quantities of DNA were extracted from mg samples of pure kaolinite and a field clay soil.Isolating and characterizing DNA sequences for use in molecular methods are integral to evaluating microbial community diversity in soil (6, 21, 22, 24, 37). Any isolation protocol should maximize nucleic acid isolation while minimizing copurification of enzymatic inhibitors. Although several methods that focus on extraction of total community DNA from environmental soil and water samples have been published (7, 21, 26, 34), the lack of a standard nucleic acid isolation protocol (32) reflects the difficulty in accomplishing these goals, most likely due to the complex nature of the soil environment.DNA extraction is especially difficult for soils containing clay (3, 5), given the tight binding of DNA strands to clay soil particles (7, 10, 20). Additionally, extracellular DNA binds to and is copurified with soil humic substances (10), which inhibit the activity of enzymes such as restriction endonucleases and DNA polymerase (6, 13, 23). Although clay-bound DNA can be PCR amplified in the absence of inhibitors (1), it is often the case that inhibitors are present in the soil environment, among them bilirubin, bile salts, urobilinogens, and polysaccharides (40). Of these inhibitors, humic substances have been found to be the most recalcitrant (36).A promising technique for isolating specific target sequences from soil particles and enzymatic inhibitors is the magnetic capture hybridization-PCR technique (MCH-PCR) presented by Jacobsen (19) and used to obtain high detection sensitivities (11, 38).We have found no evidence in the published literature of the use of MCH-PCR on soils that have high clay contents and here present a three-step strategy for isolating specific DNA sequences from the most difficult soil environment—clay that contains humic substances—and enumerating a specific target sequence from the crude extract.     

The C-Terminal Domain of Cernunnos/XLF Is Dispensable for DNA Repair In Vivo

The core nonhomologous end-joining DNA repair pathway is composed of seven factors: Ku70, Ku80, DNA-PKcs, Artemis, XRCC4 (X4), DNA ligase IV (L4), and Cernunnos/XLF (Cernunnos). Although Cernunnos and X4 are structurally related and participate in the same complex together with L4, they have distinct functions during DNA repair. L4 relies on X4 but not on Cernunnos for its stability, and L4 is required for optimal interaction of Cernunnos with X4. We demonstrate here, using in vitro-generated Cernunnos mutants and a series of functional assays in vivo, that the C-terminal region of Cernunnos is dispensable for its activity during DNA repair.Nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) represents the main pathway for solving DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) in mammals. The core of the NHEJ pathway is composed of seven proteins: Ku70, Ku80, DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit (DNA-PKcs), Artemis, XRCC4 (X4), DNA ligase IV (L4), and Cernunnos/XLF (Cernunnos) (reviewed in reference 18). Briefly, the Ku70-Ku80 heterodimer bound to broken DNA recruits the serine/threonine kinase DNA-PKcs. DNA-PK phosphorylates downstream effectors such as the nuclease Artemis. The X4-L4 complex carries out the final joining of synapsed DNA ends in association with Cernunnos (2, 6). Cernunnos was identified through cDNA functional complementation of a fibroblast cell line obtained from a human patient with immune deficiency and microcephaly (5). The same factor, called XLF, was identified through a yeast two-hybrid screen with X4 as a bait (2).Cernunnos is structurally related to X4 and consists of a globular head domain followed by a coiled-coil region and an unstructured C-terminal domain (2, 6, 12). One major difference between the structures of X4 and Cernunnos appears in the coiled-coil region. While this region is linear in X4, a hinge in the middle of the coiled-coil of Cernunnos folds back the end of the domain toward the head (3, 14).Cernunnos interacts with the X4-L4 complex in vivo and in vitro (2, 6). Cernunnos and X4 both appear to interact directly with L4, but the Cernunnos-L4 interaction seems to be very weak (7). In addition, purified Cernunnos associates with DNA in a sequence-independent manner (20) but in a DNA length-dependent manner, like X4 (15). Although the X4-L4 complex can ligate DNA in vitro (10), Cernunnos further improves this activity (11, 15, 16, 20). Cernunnos seems important, in particular, for the ligation of mismatched or noncohesive DNA ends, but not for that of compatible DNA ends, in vitro (10, 20).Cernunnos is therefore a “core” NHEJ component, but limited information is available about its precise function during DNA repair in vivo. We show here that although X4 and Cernunnos share sequence and structural homologies, their functions are distinct. We also demonstrate that Cernunnos requires L4 for its association with X4. Lastly, the Cernunnos C terminus is dispensable for DNA repair following ionizing radiation (IR) and V(D)J recombination.     

Widely Conserved Recombination Patterns among Single-Stranded DNA Viruses

The combinatorial nature of genetic recombination can potentially provide organisms with immediate access to many more positions in sequence space than can be reached by mutation alone. Recombination features particularly prominently in the evolution of a diverse range of viruses. Despite rapid progress having been made in the characterization of discrete recombination events for many species, little is currently known about either gross patterns of recombination across related virus families or the underlying processes that determine genome-wide recombination breakpoint distributions observable in nature. It has been hypothesized that the networks of coevolved molecular interactions that define the epistatic architectures of virus genomes might be damaged by recombination and therefore that selection strongly influences observable recombination patterns. For recombinants to thrive in nature, it is probably important that the portions of their genomes that they have inherited from different parents work well together. Here we describe a comparative analysis of recombination breakpoint distributions within the genomes of diverse single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) virus families. We show that whereas nonrandom breakpoint distributions in ssDNA virus genomes are partially attributable to mechanistic aspects of the recombination process, there is also a significant tendency for recombination breakpoints to fall either outside or on the peripheries of genes. In particular, we found significantly fewer recombination breakpoints within structural protein genes than within other gene types. Collectively, these results imply that natural selection acting against viruses expressing recombinant proteins is a major determinant of nonrandom recombination breakpoint distributions observable in most ssDNA virus families.Genetic recombination is a ubiquitous biological process that is both central to DNA repair pathways (10, 57) and an important evolutionary mechanism. By generating novel combinations of preexisting nucleotide polymorphisms, recombination can potentially accelerate evolution by increasing the population-wide genetic diversity upon which adaptive selection relies. Recombination can paradoxically also prevent the progressive accumulation of harmful mutations within individual genomes (18, 35, 53). Whereas its ability to defend high-fitness genomes from mutational decay possibly underlies the evolutionary value of sexuality in higher organisms, in many microbial species where pseudosexual genetic exchange is permissible among even highly divergent genomes, recombination can enable access to evolutionary innovations that would otherwise be inaccessible by mutation alone.Such interspecies recombination is fairly common in many virus families (8, 17, 27, 44, 82). It is becoming clear, however, that as with mutation events, most recombination events between distantly related genomes are maladaptive (5, 13, 38, 50, 63, 80). As genetic distances between parental genomes increase, so too does the probability of fitness defects in their recombinant offspring (16, 51). The viability of recombinants is apparently largely dependent on how severely recombination disrupts coevolved intragenome interaction networks (16, 32, 51). These networks include interacting nucleotide sequences that form secondary structures, sequence-specific protein-DNA interactions, interprotein interactions, and amino acid-amino acid interactions within protein three-dimensional folds.One virus family where such interaction networks appear to have a large impact on patterns of natural interspecies recombination are the single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) geminiviruses. As with other ssDNA viruses, recombination is very common among the species of this family (62, 84). Partially conserved recombination hot and cold spots have been detected in different genera (39, 81) and are apparently caused by both differential mechanistic predispositions of genome regions to recombination and natural selection disfavoring the survival of recombinants with disrupted intragenome interaction networks (38, 51).Genome organization and rolling circle replication (RCR)—the mechanism by which geminiviruses and many other ssDNA viruses replicate (9, 67, 79; see reference 24 for a review)—seem to have a large influence on basal recombination rates in different parts of geminivirus genomes (20, 33, 39, 61, 81). To initiate RCR, virion-strand ssDNA molecules are converted by host-mediated pathways into double-stranded “replicative-form” (RF) DNAs (34, 67). Initiated by a virus-encoded replication-associated protein (Rep) at a well-defined virion-strand replication origin (v-ori), new virion strands are synthesized on the complementary strand of RF DNAs (28, 73, 74) by host DNA polymerases. Virion-strand replication is concomitant with the displacement of old virion strands, which, once complete, yields covalently closed ssDNA molecules which are either encapsidated or converted into additional RF DNAs. Genome-wide basal recombination rates in ssDNA viruses are probably strongly influenced by the specific characteristics of host DNA polymerases that enable RCR. Interruption of RCR has been implicated directly in geminivirus recombination (40) and is most likely responsible for increased basal recombination rates both within genes transcribed in the opposite direction from that of virion-strand replication (40, 71) and at the v-ori (1, 9, 20, 69, 74).Whereas most ssDNA virus families replicate via either a rolling circle mechanism (the Nanoviridae, Microviridae, and Geminiviridae) (3, 23, 24, 31, 59, 67, 74) or a related rolling hairpin mechanism (the Parvoviridae) (25, 76), among the Circoviridae only the Circovirus genus is known to use RCR (45). Although the Gyrovirus genus (the other member of the Circoviridae) and the anelloviruses (a currently unclassified ssDNA virus group) might also use RCR, it is currently unknown whether they do or not (78). Additionally, some members of the Begomovirus genus of the Geminiviridae either have a second genome component, called DNA-B, or are associated with satellite ssDNA molecules called DNA-1 and DNA-Beta, all of which also replicate by RCR (1, 47, 68).Recombination is known to occur in the parvoviruses (19, 43, 70), microviruses (66), anelloviruses (40, 46), circoviruses (11, 26, 60), nanoviruses (30), geminivirus DNA-B components, and geminivirus satellite molecules (2, 62). Given that most, if not all, of these ssDNA replicons are evolutionarily related to and share many biological features with the geminiviruses (22, 31, 36), it is of interest to determine whether conserved recombination patterns observed in the geminiviruses (61, 81) are evident in these other groups. To date, no comparative analyses have ever been performed with different ssDNA virus families to identify, for example, possible influences of genome organization on recombination breakpoint distributions found in these viruses.Here we compare recombination frequencies and recombination breakpoint distributions in most currently described ssDNA viruses and satellite molecules and identify a number of sequence exchange patterns that are broadly conserved across this entire group.