DNA polymerase delta, RFC and PCNA are required for repair synthesis of large looped heteroduplexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Small looped mispairs are corrected by DNA mismatch repair (MMR). In addition, a distinct process called large loop repair (LLR) corrects loops up to several hundred nucleotides in extracts of bacteria, yeast or human cells. Although LLR activity can be readily demonstrated, there has been little progress in identifying its protein components. This study identified some of the yeast proteins responsible for DNA repair synthesis during LLR. Polyclonal antisera to either Pol31 or Pol32 subunits of polymerase δ efficiently inhibited LLR in extracts by blocking repair just prior to gap filling. Gap filling was inhibited regardless of whether the loop was retained or removed. These experiments suggest polymerase δ is uniquely required in yeast extracts for LLR-associated synthesis. Similar results were obtained with antisera to the clamp loader proteins Rfc3 and Rfc4, and to PCNA, i.e. LLR was inhibited just prior to gap filling for both loop removal and loop retention. Thus PCNA and RFC seem to act in LLR only during repair synthesis, in contrast to their roles at both pre- and post-excision steps of MMR. These biochemical experiments support the idea that yeast polymerase δ, RFC and PCNA are required for large loop DNA repair synthesis.     

Okazaki fragment maturation involves α-segment error editing by the mammalian FEN1/MutSα functional complex

During nuclear DNA replication, proofreading-deficient DNA polymerase α (Pol α) initiates Okazaki fragment synthesis with lower fidelity than bulk replication by proofreading-proficient Pol δ or Pol ε. Here, we provide evidence that the exonuclease activity of mammalian flap endonuclease (FEN1) excises Pol α replication errors in a MutSα-dependent, MutLα-independent mismatch repair process we call Pol α-segment error editing (AEE). We show that MSH2 interacts with FEN1 and facilitates its nuclease activity to remove mismatches near the 5′ ends of DNA substrates. Mouse cells and mice encoding FEN1 mutations display AEE deficiency, a strong mutator phenotype, enhanced cellular transformation, and increased cancer susceptibility. The results identify a novel role for FEN1 in a specialized mismatch repair pathway and a new cancer etiological mechanism.     

Reconstitution of 5'-directed human mismatch repair in a purified system

This paper reports reconstitution of 5'-nick-directed mismatch repair using purified human proteins. The reconstituted system includes MutSalpha or MutSbeta, MutLalpha, RPA, EXO1, HMGB1, PCNA, RFC, polymerase delta, and ligase I. In this system, MutSbeta plays a limited role in repair of base-base mismatches, but it processes insertion/deletion mispairs much more efficiently than MutSalpha, which efficiently corrects both types of heteroduplexes. MutLalpha reduces the processivity of EXO1 and terminates EXO1-catalyzed excision upon mismatch removal. In the absence of MutLalpha, mismatch-provoked excision by EXO1 occurs extensively. RPA and HMGB1 play similar but complementary roles in stimulating MutSalpha-activated, EXO1-catalyzed excision in the presence of a mismatch, but RPA has a distinct role in facilitating MutLalpha-mediated excision termination past mismatch. Evidence is provided that efficient repair of a single mismatch requires multiple molecules of MutSalpha-MutLalpha complex. These data suggest a model for human mismatch repair involving coordinated initiation and termination of mismatch-provoked excision.     

Regulation of yeast DNA polymerase δ-mediated strand displacement synthesis by 5′-flaps

The strand displacement activity of DNA polymerase δ is strongly stimulated by its interaction with proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA). However, inactivation of the 3′–5′ exonuclease activity is sufficient to allow the polymerase to carry out strand displacement even in the absence of PCNA. We have examined in vitro the basic biochemical properties that allow Pol δ-exo⁻ to carry out strand displacement synthesis and discovered that it is regulated by the 5′-flaps in the DNA strand to be displaced. Under conditions where Pol δ carries out strand displacement synthesis, the presence of long 5′-flaps or addition in trans of ssDNA suppress this activity. This suggests the presence of a secondary DNA binding site on the enzyme that is responsible for modulation of strand displacement activity. The inhibitory effect of a long 5′-flap can be suppressed by its interaction with single-stranded DNA binding proteins. However, this relief of flap-inhibition does not simply originate from binding of Replication Protein A to the flap and sequestering it. Interaction of Pol δ with PCNA eliminates flap-mediated inhibition of strand displacement synthesis by masking the secondary DNA site on the polymerase. These data suggest that in addition to enhancing the processivity of the polymerase PCNA is an allosteric modulator of other Pol δ activities.     

The efficiency and fidelity of 8-oxo-guanine bypass by DNA polymerases δ and η

A DNA lesion created by oxidative stress is 7,8-dihydro-8-oxo-guanine (8-oxoG). Because 8-oxoG can mispair with adenine during DNA synthesis, it is of interest to understand the efficiency and fidelity of 8-oxoG bypass by DNA polymerases. We quantify bypass parameters for two DNA polymerases implicated in 8-oxoG bypass, Pols δ and η. Yeast Pol δ and yeast Pol η both bypass 8-oxoG and misincorporate adenine during bypass. However, yeast Pol η is 10-fold more efficient than Pol δ, and following bypass Pol η switches to less processive synthesis, similar to that observed during bypass of a cis-syn thymine-thymine dimer. Moreover, yeast Pol η is at least 10-fold more accurate than yeast Pol δ during 8-oxoG bypass. These differences are maintained in the presence of the accessory proteins RFC, PCNA and RPA and are consistent with the established role of Pol η in suppressing ogg1-dependent mutagenesis in yeast. Surprisingly different results are obtained with human and mouse Pol η. Both mammalian enzymes bypass 8-oxoG efficiently, but they do so less processively, without a switch point and with much lower fidelity than yeast Pol η. The fact that yeast and mammalian Pol η have intrinsically different catalytic properties has potential biological implications.     

The eukaryotic leading and lagging strand DNA polymerases are loaded onto primer-ends via separate mechanisms but have comparable processivity in the presence of PCNA

Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA polymerase δ (Pol δ) and DNA polymerase ε (Pol ε) are replicative DNA polymerases at the replication fork. Both enzymes are stimulated by PCNA, although to different levels. To understand why and to explore the interaction with PCNA, we compared Pol δ and Pol ε in physical interactions with PCNA and nucleic acids (with or without RPA), and in functional assays measuring activity and processivity. Using surface plasmon resonance technique, we show that Pol ε has a high affinity for DNA, but a low affinity for PCNA. In contrast, Pol δ has a low affinity for DNA and a high affinity for PCNA. The true processivity of Pol δ and Pol ε was measured for the first time in the presence of RPA, PCNA and RFC on single-stranded DNA. Remarkably, in the presence of PCNA, the processivity of Pol δ and Pol ε on RPA-coated DNA is comparable. Finally, more PCNA molecules were found on the template after it was replicated by Pol ε when compared to Pol δ. We conclude that Pol ε and Pol δ exhibit comparable processivity, but are loaded on the primer-end via different mechanisms.     

Different Roles of Eukaryotic MutS and MutL Complexes in Repair of Small Insertion and Deletion Loops in Yeast

DNA mismatch repair greatly increases genome fidelity by recognizing and removing replication errors. In order to understand how this fidelity is maintained, it is important to uncover the relative specificities of the different components of mismatch repair. There are two major mispair recognition complexes in eukaryotes that are homologues of bacterial MutS proteins, MutSα and MutSβ, with MutSα recognizing base-base mismatches and small loop mispairs and MutSβ recognizing larger loop mispairs. Upon recognition of a mispair, the MutS complexes then interact with homologues of the bacterial MutL protein. Loops formed on the primer strand during replication lead to insertion mutations, whereas loops on the template strand lead to deletions. We show here in yeast, using oligonucleotide transformation, that MutSα has a strong bias toward repair of insertion loops, while MutSβ has an even stronger bias toward repair of deletion loops. Our results suggest that this bias in repair is due to the different interactions of the MutS complexes with the MutL complexes. Two mutants of MutLα, pms1-G882E and pms1-H888R, repair deletion mispairs but not insertion mispairs. Moreover, we find that a different MutL complex, MutLγ, is extremely important, but not sufficient, for deletion repair in the presence of either MutLα mutation. MutSβ is present in many eukaryotic organisms, but not in prokaryotes. We suggest that the biased repair of deletion mispairs may reflect a critical eukaryotic function of MutSβ in mismatch repair.     

A Substitution in the Fingers Domain of DNA Polymerase δ Reduces Fidelity by Altering Nucleotide Discrimination in the Catalytic Site

DNA polymerase δ (Pol δ) is one of the major replicative DNA polymerases in eukaryotic cells, catalyzing lagging strand synthesis as well as playing a role in many DNA repair pathways. The catalytic site for polymerization consists of a palm domain and mobile fingers domain that opens and closes each catalytic cycle. We explored the effect of amino acid substitutions in a region of the highly conserved sequence motif B in the fingers domain on replication fidelity. A novel substitution, A699Q, results in a marked increase in mutation rate at the yeast CAN1 locus, and is synthetic lethal with both proofreading deficiency and mismatch repair deficiency. Modeling the A699Q mutation onto the crystal structure of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pol δ template reveals four potential contacts for A699Q but not for A699. We substituted alanine for each of these residues and determined that an interaction with multiple residues of the N-terminal domain is responsible for the mutator phenotype. The corresponding mutation in purified human Pol δ results in a similar 30-fold increase in mutation frequency when copying gapped DNA templates. Sequence analysis indicates that the most characteristic mutation is a guanine-to-adenine (G to A) transition. The increase in deoxythymidine 5′-triphosphate-G mispairs was confirmed by performing steady state single nucleotide addition studies. Our combined data support a model in which the Ala-to-Gln substitution in the fingers domain of Pol δ results in an interaction with the N-terminal domain that affects the base selectivity of the enzyme.     

Strand displacement synthesis by yeast DNA polymerase ε

DNA polymerase ε (Pol ε) is a replicative DNA polymerase with an associated 3′–5′ exonuclease activity. Here, we explored the capacity of Pol ε to perform strand displacement synthesis, a process that influences many DNA transactions in vivo. We found that Pol ε is unable to carry out extended strand displacement synthesis unless its 3′–5′ exonuclease activity is removed. However, the wild-type Pol ε holoenzyme efficiently displaced one nucleotide when encountering double-stranded DNA after filling a gap or nicked DNA. A flap, mimicking a D-loop or a hairpin structure, on the 5′ end of the blocking primer inhibited Pol ε from synthesizing DNA up to the fork junction. This inhibition was observed for Pol ε but not with Pol δ, RB69 gp43 or Pol η. Neither was Pol ε able to extend a D-loop in reconstitution experiments. Finally, we show that the observed strand displacement synthesis by exonuclease-deficient Pol ε is distributive. Our results suggest that Pol ε is unable to extend the invading strand in D-loops during homologous recombination or to add more than two nucleotides during long-patch base excision repair. Our results support the hypothesis that Pol ε participates in short-patch base excision repair and ribonucleotide excision repair.     

Reconstitution of the base excision repair pathway for 7,8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine with purified human proteins

In mammalian cells, repair of the most abundant endogenous premutagenic lesion in DNA, 7,8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine (8-oxoG), is initiated by the bifunctional DNA glycosylase OGG1. By using purified human proteins, we have reconstituted repair of 8-oxoG lesions in DNA in vitro on a plasmid DNA substrate containing a single 8-oxoG residue. It is shown that efficient and complete repair requires only hOGG1, the AP endonuclease HAP1, DNA polymerase (Pol) β and DNA ligase I. After glycosylase base removal, repair occurred through the AP lyase step of hOGG1 followed by removal of the 3′-terminal sugar phosphate by the 3′-diesterase activity of HAP1. Addition of PCNA had a slight stimulatory effect on repair. Fen1 or high concentrations of Pol β were required to induce strand displacement DNA synthesis at incised 8-oxoG in the absence of DNA ligase. Fen1 induced Pol β strand displacement DNA synthesis at HAP1-cleaved AP sites differently from that at gaps introduced by hOGG1/HAP1 at 8-oxoG sites. In the presence of DNA ligase I, the repair reaction at 8-oxoG was confined to 1 nt replacement, even in the presence of high levels of Pol β and Fen1. Thus, the assembly of all the core proteins for 8-oxoG repair catalyses one major pathway that involves single nucleotide repair patches.     

Correction of large mispaired DNA loops by extracts of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Single base mispairs and small loops are corrected by DNA mismatch repair, but little is known about the correction of large loops. In this paper, large loop repair was examined in nuclear extracts of yeast. Biochemical assays showed that repair activity occurred on loops of 16, 27, and 216 bases, whereas a G-T mispair and an 8-base loop were poorly corrected under these conditions. Two modes of loop repair were revealed by comparison of heteroduplexes that contained a site-specific nick or were covalently closed. A nick-stimulated repair mode directs correction to the discontinuous strand, regardless of which strand contains the loop. An alternative mode is nick-independent and preferentially removes the loop. Both outcomes of repair were largely eliminated when DNA replication was inhibited, suggesting a requirement for repair synthesis. Excision tracts of 100-200 nucleotides, spanning the position of the loop, were observed on each strand under conditions of limited DNA repair synthesis. Both repair modes were independent of the mismatch correction genes MSH2, MSH3, MLH1, and PMS1, as judged by activity in mutant extracts. Together the loop specificity and mutant results furnish evidence for a large loop repair pathway in yeast that is distinct from mismatch repair.     

Efficient repair of large DNA loops in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Small looped mispairs are efficiently corrected by mismatch repair. The situation with larger loops is less clear. Repair activity on large loops has been reported as anywhere from very low to quite efficient. There is also uncertainty about how many loop repair activities exist and whether any are conserved. To help address these issues, we studied large loop repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using in vivo and in vitro assays. Transformation of heteroduplexes containing 1, 16 or 38 nt loops led to >90% repair for all three substrates. Repair of the 38 base loop occurred independently of mutations in key genes for mismatch repair (MR) and nucleotide excision repair (NER), unlike other reported loop repair functions in yeast. Correction of the 16 base loop was mostly independent of MR, indicating that large loop repair predominates for this size heterology. Similarities between mammalian and yeast large loop repair were suggested by the inhibitory effects of loop secondary structure and by the role of defined nicks on the relative proportions of loop removal and loop retention products. These observations indicate a robust large loop repair pathway in yeast, distinct from MR and NER, and conserved in mammals.     

Activation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mlh1-Pms1 Endonuclease in a Reconstituted Mismatch Repair System

Previous studies reported the reconstitution of an Mlh1-Pms1-independent 5′ nick-directed mismatch repair (MMR) reaction using Saccharomyces cerevisiae proteins. Here we describe the reconstitution of a mispair-dependent Mlh1-Pms1 endonuclease activation reaction requiring Msh2-Msh6 (or Msh2-Msh3), proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), and replication factor C (RFC) and a reconstituted Mlh1-Pms1-dependent 3′ nick-directed MMR reaction requiring Msh2-Msh6 (or Msh2-Msh3), exonuclease 1 (Exo1), replication protein A (RPA), RFC, PCNA, and DNA polymerase δ. Both reactions required Mg²⁺ and Mn²⁺ for optimal activity. The MMR reaction also required two reaction stages in which the first stage required incubation of Mlh1-Pms1 with substrate DNA, with or without Msh2-Msh6 (or Msh2-Msh3), PCNA, and RFC but did not require nicking of the substrate, followed by a second stage in which other proteins were added. Analysis of different mutant proteins demonstrated that both reactions required a functional Mlh1-Pms1 endonuclease active site, as well as mispair recognition and Mlh1-Pms1 recruitment by Msh2-Msh6 but not sliding clamp formation. Mutant Mlh1-Pms1 and PCNA proteins that were defective for Exo1-independent but not Exo1-dependent MMR in vivo were partially defective in the Mlh1-Pms1 endonuclease and MMR reactions, suggesting that both reactions reflect the activation of Mlh1-Pms1 seen in Exo1-independent MMR in vivo. The availability of this reconstituted MMR reaction should now make it possible to better study both Exo1-independent and Exo1-dependent MMR.     

Promiscuous mismatch extension by human DNA polymerase lambda

DNA polymerase lambda (Pol λ) is one of several DNA polymerases suggested to participate in base excision repair (BER), in repair of broken DNA ends and in translesion synthesis. It has been proposed that the nature of the DNA intermediates partly determines which polymerase is used for a particular repair reaction. To test this hypothesis, here we examine the ability of human Pol λ to extend mismatched primer-termini, either on ‘open’ template-primer substrates, or on its preferred substrate, a 1 nt gapped-DNA molecule having a 5′-phosphate. Interestingly, Pol λ extended mismatches with an average efficiency of ≈10⁻² relative to matched base pairs. The match and mismatch extension catalytic efficiencies obtained on gapped molecules were ≈260-fold higher than on template-primer molecules. A crystal structure of Pol λ in complex with a single-nucleotide gap containing a dG·dGMP mismatch at the primer-terminus (2.40 Å) suggests that, at least for certain mispairs, Pol λ is unable to differentiate between matched and mismatched termini during the DNA binding step, thus accounting for the relatively high efficiency of mismatch extension. This property of Pol λ suggests a potential role as a ‘mismatch extender’ during non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), and possibly during translesion synthesis.     

Mismatch Repair Balances Leading and Lagging Strand DNA Replication Fidelity

The two DNA strands of the nuclear genome are replicated asymmetrically using three DNA polymerases, α, δ, and ε. Current evidence suggests that DNA polymerase ε (Pol ε) is the primary leading strand replicase, whereas Pols α and δ primarily perform lagging strand replication. The fact that these polymerases differ in fidelity and error specificity is interesting in light of the fact that the stability of the nuclear genome depends in part on the ability of mismatch repair (MMR) to correct different mismatches generated in different contexts during replication. Here we provide the first comparison, to our knowledge, of the efficiency of MMR of leading and lagging strand replication errors. We first use the strand-biased ribonucleotide incorporation propensity of a Pol ε mutator variant to confirm that Pol ε is the primary leading strand replicase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We then use polymerase-specific error signatures to show that MMR efficiency in vivo strongly depends on the polymerase, the mismatch composition, and the location of the mismatch. An extreme case of variation by location is a T-T mismatch that is refractory to MMR. This mismatch is flanked by an AT-rich triplet repeat sequence that, when interrupted, restores MMR to >95% efficiency. Thus this natural DNA sequence suppresses MMR, placing a nearby base pair at high risk of mutation due to leading strand replication infidelity. We find that, overall, MMR most efficiently corrects the most potentially deleterious errors (indels) and then the most common substitution mismatches. In combination with earlier studies, the results suggest that significant differences exist in the generation and repair of Pol α, δ, and ε replication errors, but in a generally complementary manner that results in high-fidelity replication of both DNA strands of the yeast nuclear genome.     

The Eukaryotic Mismatch Recognition Complexes Track with the Replisome during DNA Synthesis

During replication, mismatch repair proteins recognize and repair mispaired bases that escape the proofreading activity of DNA polymerase. In this work, we tested the model that the eukaryotic mismatch recognition complex tracks with the advancing replisome. Using yeast, we examined the dynamics during replication of the leading strand polymerase Polε using Pol2 and the eukaryotic mismatch recognition complex using Msh2, the invariant protein involved in mismatch recognition. Specifically, we synchronized cells and processed samples using chromatin immunoprecipitation combined with custom DNA tiling arrays (ChIP-chip). The Polε signal was not detectable in G1, but was observed at active origins and replicating DNA throughout S-phase. The Polε signal provided the resolution to track origin firing timing and efficiencies as well as replisome progression rates. By detecting Polε and Msh2 dynamics within the same strain, we established that the mismatch recognition complex binds origins and spreads to adjacent regions with the replisome. In mismatch repair defective PCNA mutants, we observed that Msh2 binds to regions of replicating DNA, but the distribution and dynamics are altered, suggesting that PCNA is not the sole determinant for the mismatch recognition complex association with replicating regions, but may influence the dynamics of movement. Using biochemical and genomic methods, we provide evidence that both MutS complexes are in the vicinity of the replisome to efficiently repair the entire spectrum of mutations during replication. Our data supports the model that the proximity of MutSα/β to the replisome for the efficient repair of the newly synthesized strand before chromatin reassembles.     

Replicative DNA Polymerase δ but Not ε Proofreads Errors in Cis and in Trans

It is now well established that in yeast, and likely most eukaryotic organisms, initial DNA replication of the leading strand is by DNA polymerase ε and of the lagging strand by DNA polymerase δ. However, the role of Pol δ in replication of the leading strand is uncertain. In this work, we use a reporter system in Saccharomyces cerevisiae to measure mutation rates at specific base pairs in order to determine the effect of heterozygous or homozygous proofreading-defective mutants of either Pol ε or Pol δ in diploid strains. We find that wild-type Pol ε molecules cannot proofread errors created by proofreading-defective Pol ε molecules, whereas Pol δ can not only proofread errors created by proofreading-defective Pol δ molecules, but can also proofread errors created by Pol ε-defective molecules. These results suggest that any interruption in DNA synthesis on the leading strand is likely to result in completion by Pol δ and also explain the higher mutation rates observed in Pol δ-proofreading mutants compared to Pol ε-proofreading defective mutants. For strains reverting via AT→GC, TA→GC, CG→AT, and GC→AT mutations, we find in addition a strong effect of gene orientation on mutation rate in proofreading-defective strains and demonstrate that much of this orientation dependence is due to differential efficiencies of mispair elongation. We also find that a 3′-terminal 8 oxoG, unlike a 3′-terminal G, is efficiently extended opposite an A and is not subject to proofreading. Proofreading mutations have been shown to result in tumor formation in both mice and humans; the results presented here can help explain the properties exhibited by those proofreading mutants.     

Mispair-bound human MutS–MutL complex triggers DNA incisions and activates mismatch repair

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) relies on MutS and MutL ATPases for mismatch recognition and strand-specific nuclease recruitment to remove mispaired bases in daughter strands. However, whether the MutS–MutL complex coordinates MMR by ATP-dependent sliding on DNA or protein–protein interactions between the mismatch and strand discrimination signal is ambiguous. Using functional MMR assays and systems preventing proteins from sliding, we show that sliding of human MutSα is required not for MMR initiation, but for final mismatch removal. MutSα recruits MutLα to form a mismatch-bound complex, which initiates MMR by nicking the daughter strand 5′ to the mismatch. Exonuclease 1 (Exo1) is then recruited to the nick and conducts 5′ → 3′ excision. ATP-dependent MutSα dissociation from the mismatch is necessary for Exo1 to remove the mispaired base when the excision reaches the mismatch. Therefore, our study has resolved a long-standing puzzle, and provided new insights into the mechanism of MMR initiation and mispair removal.Subject terms: Molecular biology     

DNA polymerase delta-dependent repair of DNA single strand breaks containing 3'-end proximal lesions

Base excision repair (BER) is the major pathway for the repair of simple, non-bulky lesions in DNA that is initiated by a damage-specific DNA glycosylase. Several human DNA glycosylases exist that efficiently excise numerous types of lesions, although the close proximity of a single strand break (SSB) to a DNA adduct can have a profound effect on both BER and SSB repair. We recently reported that DNA lesions located as a second nucleotide 5′-upstream to a DNA SSB are resistant to DNA glycosylase activity and this study further examines the processing of these ‘complex’ lesions. We first demonstrated that the damaged base should be excised before SSB repair can occur, since it impaired processing of the SSB by the BER enzymes, DNA ligase IIIα and DNA polymerase β. Using human whole cell extracts, we next isolated the major activity against DNA lesions located as a second nucleotide 5′-upstream to a DNA SSB and identified it as DNA polymerase δ (Pol δ). Using recombinant protein we confirmed that the 3′-5′-exonuclease activity of Pol δ can efficiently remove these DNA lesions. Furthermore, we demonstrated that mouse embryonic fibroblasts, deficient in the exonuclease activity of Pol δ are partially deficient in the repair of these ‘complex’ lesions, demonstrating the importance of Pol δ during the repair of DNA lesions in close proximity to a DNA SSB, typical of those induced by ionizing radiation.     

The C-terminus of Dpb2 is required for interaction with Pol2 and for cell viability

DNA polymerase ε (Pol ε) participates in the synthesis of the leading strand during DNA replication in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Pol ε comprises four subunits: the catalytic subunit, Pol2, and three accessory subunits, Dpb2, Dpb3 and Dpb4. DPB2 is an essential gene with unclear function. A genetic screen was performed in S. cerevisiae to isolate lethal mutations in DPB2. The dpb2-200 allele carried two mutations within the last 13 codons of the open reading frame, one of which resulted in a six amino acid truncation. This truncated Dpb2 subunit was co-expressed with Pol2, Dpb3 and Dpb4 in S. cerevisiae, but this Dpb2 variant did not co-purify with the other Pol ε subunits. This resulted in the purification of a Pol2/Dpb3/Dpb4 complex that possessed high specific activity and high processivity and holoenzyme assays with PCNA, RFC and RPA on a single-primed circular template did not reveal any defects in replication efficiency. In conclusion, the lack of Dpb2 did not appear to have a negative effect on Pol ε activity. Thus, the C-terminal motif of Dpb2 that we have identified may instead be required for Dpb2 to fulfill an essential structural role at the replication origin or at the replication fork.