Frequent and efficient use of the sister chromatid for DNA double-strand break repair during budding yeast meiosis

Recombination between homologous chromosomes of different parental origin (homologs) is necessary for their accurate segregation during meiosis. It has been suggested that meiotic inter-homolog recombination is promoted by a barrier to inter-sister-chromatid recombination, imposed by meiosis-specific components of the chromosome axis. Consistent with this, measures of Holliday junction-containing recombination intermediates (joint molecules [JMs]) show a strong bias towards inter-homolog and against inter-sister JMs. However, recombination between sister chromatids also has an important role in meiosis. The genomes of diploid organisms in natural populations are highly polymorphic for insertions and deletions, and meiotic double-strand breaks (DSBs) that form within such polymorphic regions must be repaired by inter-sister recombination. Efforts to study inter-sister recombination during meiosis, in particular to determine recombination frequencies and mechanisms, have been constrained by the inability to monitor the products of inter-sister recombination. We present here molecular-level studies of inter-sister recombination during budding yeast meiosis. We examined events initiated by DSBs in regions that lack corresponding sequences on the homolog, and show that these DSBs are efficiently repaired by inter-sister recombination. This occurs with the same timing as inter-homolog recombination, but with reduced (2- to 3-fold) yields of JMs. Loss of the meiotic-chromosome-axis-associated kinase Mek1 accelerates inter-sister DSB repair and markedly increases inter-sister JM frequencies. Furthermore, inter-sister JMs formed in mek1Δ mutants are preferentially lost, while inter-homolog JMs are maintained. These findings indicate that inter-sister recombination occurs frequently during budding yeast meiosis, with the possibility that up to one-third of all recombination events occur between sister chromatids. We suggest that a Mek1-dependent reduction in the rate of inter-sister repair, combined with the destabilization of inter-sister JMs, promotes inter-homolog recombination while retaining the capacity for inter-sister recombination when inter-homolog recombination is not possible.     

Smc5/6-Mms21 Prevents and Eliminates Inappropriate Recombination Intermediates in Meiosis

Repairing broken chromosomes via joint molecule (JM) intermediates is hazardous and therefore strictly controlled in most organisms. Also in budding yeast meiosis, where production of enough crossovers via JMs is imperative, only a subset of DNA breaks are repaired via JMs, closely regulated by the ZMM pathway. The other breaks are repaired to non-crossovers, avoiding JM formation, through pathways that require the BLM/Sgs1 helicase. “Rogue” JMs that escape the ZMM pathway and BLM/Sgs1 are eliminated before metaphase by resolvases like Mus81-Mms4 to prevent chromosome nondisjunction. Here, we report the requirement of Smc5/6-Mms21 for antagonizing rogue JMs via two mechanisms; destabilizing early intermediates and resolving JMs. Elimination of the Mms21 SUMO E3-ligase domain leads to transient JM accumulation, depending on Mus81-Mms4 for resolution. Absence of Smc6 leads to persistent rogue JMs accumulation, preventing chromatin separation. We propose that the Smc5/6-Mms21 complex antagonizes toxic JMs by coordinating helicases and resolvases at D-Loops and HJs, respectively.     

Dbf4‐dependent kinase and the Rtt107 scaffold promote Mus81‐Mms4 resolvase activation during mitosis

DNA repair by homologous recombination is under stringent cell cycle control. This includes the last step of the reaction, disentanglement of DNA joint molecules (JMs). Previous work has established that JM resolving nucleases are activated specifically at the onset of mitosis. In case of budding yeast Mus81‐Mms4, this cell cycle stage‐specific activation is known to depend on phosphorylation by CDK and Cdc5 kinases. Here, we show that a third cell cycle kinase, Cdc7‐Dbf4 (DDK), targets Mus81‐Mms4 in conjunction with Cdc5—both kinases bind to as well as phosphorylate Mus81‐Mms4 in an interdependent manner. Moreover, DDK‐mediated phosphorylation of Mms4 is strictly required for Mus81 activation in mitosis, establishing DDK as a novel regulator of homologous recombination. The scaffold protein Rtt107, which binds the Mus81‐Mms4 complex, interacts with Cdc7 and thereby targets DDK and Cdc5 to the complex enabling full Mus81 activation. Therefore, Mus81 activation in mitosis involves at least three cell cycle kinases, CDK, Cdc5 and DDK. Furthermore, tethering of the kinases in a stable complex with Mus81 is critical for efficient JM resolution.     

Delineation of joint molecule resolution pathways in meiosis identifies a crossover-specific resolvase

At the final step of homologous recombination, Holliday junction-containing joint molecules (JMs) are resolved to form crossover or noncrossover products. The enzymes responsible for JM resolution in?vivo remain uncertain, but three distinct endonucleases capable of resolving JMs in?vitro have been identified: Mus81-Mms4(EME1), Slx1-Slx4(BTBD12), and Yen1(GEN1). Using physical monitoring of recombination during budding yeast meiosis, we show that all three endonucleases are capable of promoting JM resolution in?vivo. However, in mms4 slx4 yen1 triple mutants, JM resolution and crossing over occur efficiently. Paradoxically, crossing over in this background is strongly dependent on the Blooms helicase ortholog Sgs1, a component of a well-characterized anticrossover activity. Sgs1-dependent crossing over, but not JM resolution per se, also requires XPG family nuclease Exo1 and the MutLγ complex Mlh1-Mlh3. Thus, Sgs1, Exo1, and MutLγ together define a previously undescribed meiotic JM resolution pathway that produces the majority of crossovers in budding yeast and, by inference, in mammals.     

BLM helicase ortholog Sgs1 is a central regulator of meiotic recombination intermediate metabolism

The BLM helicase has been shown to maintain genome stability by preventing accumulation of aberrant recombination intermediates. We show here that the Saccharomyces cerevisiae BLM ortholog, Sgs1, plays an integral role in normal meiotic recombination, beyond its documented activity limiting aberrant recombination intermediates. In wild-type meiosis, temporally and mechanistically distinct pathways produce crossover and noncrossover recombinants. Crossovers form late in meiosis I prophase, by polo kinase-triggered resolution of Holliday junction (HJ) intermediates. Noncrossovers form earlier, via processes that do not involve stable HJ intermediates. In contrast, sgs1 mutants abolish early noncrossover formation. Instead, both noncrossovers and crossovers form by late HJ intermediate resolution, using an alternate pathway requiring the overlapping activities of Mus81-Mms4, Yen1, and Slx1-Slx4, nucleases with minor roles in wild-type meiosis. We conclude that Sgs1 is a primary regulator of recombination pathway choice during meiosis and suggest a similar function in the mitotic cell cycle.     

The role of Holliday junction resolvases in the repair of spontaneous and induced DNA damage

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and other lesions occur frequently during cell growth and in meiosis. These are often repaired by homologous recombination (HR). HR may result in the formation of DNA structures called Holliday junctions (HJs), which need to be resolved to allow chromosome segregation. Whereas HJs are present in most HR events in meiosis, it has been proposed that in vegetative cells most HR events occur through intermediates lacking HJs. A recent screen in yeast has shown HJ resolution activity for a protein called Yen1, in addition to the previously known Mus81/Mms4 complex. Yeast strains deleted for both YEN1 and MMS4 show a reduction in growth rate, and are very sensitive to DNA-damaging agents. In addition, we investigate the genetic interaction of yen1 and mms4 with mutants defective in different repair pathways. We find that in the absence of Yen1 and Mms4 deletion of RAD1 or RAD52 have no further effect, whereas additional sensitivity is seen if RAD51 is deleted. Finally, we show that yeast cells are unable to carry out meiosis in the absence of both resolvases. Our results show that both Yen1 and Mms4/Mus81 play important (although not identical) roles during vegetative growth and in meiosis.     

The Slx4-Dpb11 scaffold complex: coordinating the response to replication fork stalling in S-phase and the subsequent mitosis

Replication fork stalling at DNA lesions is a common problem during the process of DNA replication. One way to allow the bypass of these lesions is via specific recombination-based mechanisms that involve switching of the replication template to the sister chromatid. Inherent to these mechanisms is the formation of DNA joint molecules (JMs) between sister chromatids. Such JMs need to be disentangled before chromatid separation in mitosis and the activity of JM resolution enzymes, which is under stringent cell cycle control, is therefore up-regulated in mitosis. An additional layer of control is facilitated by scaffold proteins. In budding yeast, specifically during mitosis, Slx4 and Dpb11 form a cell cycle kinase-dependent complex with the Mus81-Mms4 structure-selective endonuclease, which allows efficient JM resolution by Mus81. Furthermore, Slx4 and Dpb11 interact even prior to joining Mus81 and respond to replication fork stalling in S-phase. This S-phase complex is involved in the regulation of the DNA damage checkpoint as well as in early steps of template switch recombination. Similar interactions and regulatory principles are found in human cells suggesting that Slx4 and Dpb11 may have an evolutionary conserved role organizing the cellular response to replication fork stalling.     

The Slx4-Dpb11 scaffold complex: coordinating the response to replication fork stalling in S-phase and the subsequent mitosis

Replication fork stalling at DNA lesions is a common problem during the process of DNA replication. One way to allow the bypass of these lesions is via specific recombination-based mechanisms that involve switching of the replication template to the sister chromatid. Inherent to these mechanisms is the formation of DNA joint molecules (JMs) between sister chromatids. Such JMs need to be disentangled before chromatid separation in mitosis and the activity of JM resolution enzymes, which is under stringent cell cycle control, is therefore up-regulated in mitosis. An additional layer of control is facilitated by scaffold proteins. In budding yeast, specifically during mitosis, Slx4 and Dpb11 form a cell cycle kinase-dependent complex with the Mus81-Mms4 structure-selective endonuclease, which allows efficient JM resolution by Mus81. Furthermore, Slx4 and Dpb11 interact even prior to joining Mus81 and respond to replication fork stalling in S-phase. This S-phase complex is involved in the regulation of the DNA damage checkpoint as well as in early steps of template switch recombination. Similar interactions and regulatory principles are found in human cells suggesting that Slx4 and Dpb11 may have an evolutionary conserved role organizing the cellular response to replication fork stalling.     

Mus81 nuclease and Sgs1 helicase are essential for meiotic recombination in a protist lacking a synaptonemal complex

Mus81 resolvase and Sgs1 helicase have well-established roles in mitotic DNA repair. Moreover, Mus81 is part of a minor crossover (CO) pathway in the meiosis of budding yeast, plants and vertebrates. The major pathway depends on meiosis-specific synaptonemal complex (SC) formation, ZMM proteins and the MutLγ complex for CO-directed resolution of joint molecule (JM)-recombination intermediates. Sgs1 has also been implicated in this pathway, although it may mainly promote the non-CO outcome of meiotic repair. We show in Tetrahymena, that homologous chromosomes fail to separate and JMs accumulate in the absence of Mus81 or Sgs1, whereas deletion of the MutLγ-component Mlh1 does not affect meiotic divisions. Thus, our results are consistent with Mus81 being part of an essential, if not the predominant, CO pathway in Tetrahymena. Sgs1 may exert functions similar to those in other eukaryotes. However, we propose an additional role in supporting homologous CO formation by promoting homologous over intersister interactions. Tetrahymena shares the predominance of the Mus81 CO pathway with the fission yeast. We propose that in these two organisms, which independently lost the SC during evolution, the basal set of mitotic repair proteins is sufficient for executing meiotic recombination.     

Single Holliday junctions are intermediates of meiotic recombination

Crossing-over between homologous chromosomes facilitates their accurate segregation at the first division of meiosis. Current models for crossing-over invoke an intermediate in which homologs are connected by two crossed-strand structures called Holliday junctions. Such double Holliday junctions are a prominent intermediate in Saccharomyces cerevisiae meiosis, where they form preferentially between homologs rather than between sister chromatids. In sharp contrast, we find that single Holliday junctions are the predominant intermediate in Schizosaccharomyces pombe meiosis. Furthermore, these single Holliday junctions arise preferentially between sister chromatids rather than between homologs. We show that Mus81 is required for Holliday junction resolution, providing further in vivo evidence that the structure-specific endonuclease Mus81-Eme1 is a Holliday junction resolvase. To reconcile these observations, we present a unifying recombination model applicable for both meiosis and mitosis in which single Holliday junctions arise from single- or double-strand breaks, lesions postulated by previous models to initiate recombination.     

Controlling Meiotic Recombinational Repair – Specifying the Roles of ZMMs,Sgs1 and Mus81/Mms4 in Crossover Formation

Crossovers (COs) play a critical role in ensuring proper alignment and segregation of homologous chromosomes during meiosis. How the cell balances recombination between CO vs. noncrossover (NCO) outcomes is not completely understood. Further lacking is what constrains the extent of DNA repair such that multiple events do not arise from a single double-strand break (DSB). Here, by interpreting signatures that result from recombination genome-wide, we find that synaptonemal complex proteins promote crossing over in distinct ways. Our results suggest that Zip3 (RNF212) promotes biased cutting of the double Holliday-junction (dHJ) intermediate whereas surprisingly Msh4 does not. Moreover, detailed examination of conversion tracts in sgs1 and mms4-md mutants reveal distinct aberrant recombination events involving multiple chromatid invasions. In sgs1 mutants, these multiple invasions are generally multichromatid involving 3–4 chromatids; in mms4-md mutants the multiple invasions preferentially resolve into one or two chromatids. Our analysis suggests that Mus81/Mms4 (Eme1), rather than just being a minor resolvase for COs is crucial for both COs and NCOs in preventing chromosome entanglements by removing 3′- flaps to promote second-end capture. Together our results force a reevaluation of how key recombination enzymes collaborate to specify the outcome of meiotic DNA repair.     

Meiotic versus mitotic recombination: two different routes for double-strand break repair: the different functions of meiotic versus mitotic DSB repair are reflected in different pathway usage and different outcomes

Studies in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have validated the major features of the double-strand break repair (DSBR) model as an accurate representation of the pathway through which meiotic crossovers (COs) are produced. This success has led to this model being invoked to explain double-strand break (DSB) repair in other contexts. However, most non-crossover (NCO) recombinants generated during S. cerevisiae meiosis do not arise via a DSBR pathway. Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clear that DSBR is a minor pathway for recombinational repair of DSBs that occur in mitotically-proliferating cells and that the synthesis-dependent strand annealing (SDSA) model appears to describe mitotic DSB repair more accurately. Fundamental dissimilarities between meiotic and mitotic recombination are not unexpected, since meiotic recombination serves a very different purpose (accurate chromosome segregation, which requires COs) than mitotic recombination (repair of DNA damage, which typically generates NCOs).     

Temporally and biochemically distinct activities of Exo1 during meiosis: double-strand break resection and resolution of double Holliday junctions

The Rad2/XPG family nuclease, Exo1, functions in?a variety of DNA repair pathways. During meiosis, Exo1 promotes crossover recombination and thereby facilitates chromosome segregation at the first division. Meiotic recombination is initiated by programmed DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Nucleolytic resection of DSBs generates long 3' single-strand tails that undergo strand exchange with a homologous chromosome to form joint molecule (JM) intermediates. We show that meiotic DSB resection is dramatically reduced in exo1Δ mutants and test the idea that Exo1-catalyzed resection promotes crossing over by facilitating formation of crossover-specific JMs called double Holliday junctions (dHJs). Contrary to this idea, dHJs form at wild-type levels in exo1Δ mutants, implying that Exo1 has a second function that promotes resolution of dHJs into crossovers. Surprisingly, the dHJ resolution function of Exo1 is independent of its nuclease activities but requires interaction with the putative endonuclease complex, Mlh1-Mlh3. Thus, the DSB resection and procrossover functions of Exo1 during meiosis involve temporally and biochemically distinct activities.     

Separable Roles for a Caenorhabditis elegans RMI1 Homolog in Promoting and Antagonizing Meiotic Crossovers Ensure Faithful Chromosome Inheritance

During the first meiotic division, crossovers (COs) between homologous chromosomes ensure their correct segregation. COs are produced by homologous recombination (HR)-mediated repair of programmed DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). As more DSBs are induced than COs, mechanisms are required to establish a regulated number of COs and to repair remaining intermediates as non-crossovers (NCOs). We show that the Caenorhabditis elegans RMI1 homolog-1 (RMH-1) functions during meiosis to promote both CO and NCO HR at appropriate chromosomal sites. RMH-1 accumulates at CO sites, dependent on known pro-CO factors, and acts to promote CO designation and enforce the CO outcome of HR-intermediate resolution. RMH-1 also localizes at NCO sites and functions in parallel with SMC-5 to antagonize excess HR-based connections between chromosomes. Moreover, RMH-1 also has a major role in channeling DSBs into an NCO HR outcome near the centers of chromosomes, thereby ensuring that COs form predominantly at off-center positions.     

Mus81-Eme1 are essential components of a Holliday junction resolvase.

Mus81, a fission yeast protein related to the XPF subunit of ERCC1-XPF nucleotide excision repair endonuclease, is essential for meiosis and important for coping with stalled replication forks. These processes require resolution of X-shaped DNA structures known as Holliday junctions. We report that Mus81 and an associated protein Eme1 are components of an endonuclease that resolves Holliday junctions into linear duplex products. Mus81 and Eme1 are required during meiosis at a late step of meiotic recombination. The mus81 meiotic defect is rescued by expression of a bacterial Holliday junction resolvase. These findings constitute strong evidence that Mus81 and Eme1 are subunits of a nuclear Holliday junction resolvase.     

RNA interference inhibition of Mus81 reduces mitotic recombination in human cells

Mus81 is a highly conserved endonuclease with homology to the XPF subunit of the XPF-ERCC1 complex. In yeast Mus81 associates with a second subunit, Eme1 or Mms4, which is essential for endonuclease activity in vitro and for in vivo function. Human Mus81 binds to a homolog of fission yeast Eme1 in vitro and in vivo. We show that recombinant Mus81-Eme1 cleaves replication forks, 3' flap substrates, and Holliday junctions in vitro. By use of differentially tagged versions of Mus81 and Eme1, we find that Mus81 associates with Mus81 and that Eme1 associates with Eme1. Thus, complexes containing two or more Mus81-Eme1 units could function to coordinate substrate cleavage in vivo. Down-regulation of Mus81 by RNA interference reduces mitotic recombination in human somatic cells. The recombination defect is rescued by expression of a bacterial Holliday junction resolvase. These data provide direct evidence for a role of Mus81-Eme1 in mitotic recombination in higher eukaryotes and support the hypothesis that Mus81-Eme1 resolves Holliday junctions in vivo.     

Progression through meiosis I and meiosis II in Arabidopsis anthers is regulated by an A-type cyclin predominately expressed in prophase I

Meiosis is often described as a special case of cell division since it differs from mitosis in having two nuclear divisions without an intervening S-phase. It will be of great interest to uncover what molecular mechanisms underlie these special features of meiosis. We previously reported that the tardy asynchronous meiosis (tam) mutant of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) is slower in cell cycle progression in male meiosis. Here we report that TAM encodes the A-type cyclin, CYCA1;2. The point mutation in tam replaced a conserved threonine with an isoleucine in the linker region between the alpha4 and alpha5 helices of the first cyclin fold. By studying the dynamics of a CYCA1;2-green fluorescent protein fusion protein under the control of the CYCA1;2 promoter, we found that the fusion protein was most abundant at pachytene, but was undetectable from late prophase I until telophase II. Nonetheless, cell cycle progression in tam was delayed in both pachytene and meiosis II. We conclude either that the CYCA1;2 produced in prophase I indirectly regulates meiosis II progression, or that a very low level of CYCA1;2 directly regulates meiosis II progression. Either of these scenarios is a deviation from the typical mode of action of mitotic cyclins in mitosis and meiosis I, in which each nuclear division is coupled with a peak of expression of mitotic cyclins.     

Caenorhabditis elegans RMI2 functional homolog-2 (RMIF-2) and RMI1 (RMH-1) have both overlapping and distinct meiotic functions within the BTR complex

Homologous recombination is a high-fidelity repair pathway for DNA double-strand breaks employed during both mitotic and meiotic cell divisions. Such repair can lead to genetic exchange, originating from crossover (CO) generation. In mitosis, COs are suppressed to prevent sister chromatid exchange. Here, the BTR complex, consisting of the Bloom helicase (HIM-6 in worms), topoisomerase 3 (TOP-3), and the RMI1 (RMH-1 and RMH-2) and RMI2 scaffolding proteins, is essential for dismantling joint DNA molecules to form non-crossovers (NCOs) via decatenation. In contrast, in meiosis COs are essential for accurate chromosome segregation and the BTR complex plays distinct roles in CO and NCO generation at different steps in meiotic recombination. RMI2 stabilizes the RMI1 scaffolding protein, and lack of RMI2 in mitosis leads to elevated sister chromatid exchange, as observed upon RMI1 knockdown. However, much less is known about the involvement of RMI2 in meiotic recombination. So far, RMI2 homologs have been found in vertebrates and plants, but not in lower organisms such as Drosophila, yeast, or worms. We report the identification of the Caenorhabditis elegans functional homolog of RMI2, which we named RMIF-2. The protein shows a dynamic localization pattern to recombination foci during meiotic prophase I and concentration into recombination foci is mutually dependent on other BTR complex proteins. Comparative analysis of the rmif-2 and rmh-1 phenotypes revealed numerous commonalities, including in regulating CO formation and directing COs toward chromosome arms. Surprisingly, the prevalence of heterologous recombination was several fold lower in the rmif-2 mutant, suggesting that RMIF-2 may be dispensable or less strictly required for some BTR complex-mediated activities during meiosis.     

The temporal and spatial distribution of the proliferation associated Ki-67 protein during female and male meiosis

We used immunolocalization in tissue sections and cytogenetic preparations of female and male gonads to study the distribution of the proliferation marker pKi-67 during meiotic cell cycles of the house mouse, Mus musculus. During male meiosis, pKi-67 was continuously present in nuclei of all stages from the spermatogonium through spermatocytes I and II up to the earliest spermatid stage (early round spermatids) when it appeared to fade out. It was not detected in later spermatid stages or sperm. During female meiosis, pKi-67 was present in prophase I oocytes of fetal ovaries. It was absent in oocytes from newborn mice and most oocytes of primordial follicles from adults. The Ki-67 protein reappeared in oocytes of growing follicles and was continuously present up to metaphase II. Thus, pKi-67 was present in all stages of cell growth and cell division while it was absent from resting oocytes and during the main stages of spermiocytogenesis. Progression through the meiotic cell cycle was associated with extensive intranuclear relocation of pKi-67. In the zygotene and pachytene stages, most of the pKi-67 colocalized with centromeric (centric and pericentric) heterochromatin and adjacent nucleoli; the heterochromatic XY body in male pachytene, however, was free of pKi-67. At early diplotene, pKi-67 was mainly associated with nucleoli. At late diplotene, diakinesis, metaphase I and metaphase II of meiosis, pKi-67 preferentially bound to the perichromosomal layer and was almost absent from the heterochromatic centromeric regions of the chromosomes. After the second division of male meiosis, the protein reappeared at the centromeric heterochromatin and an adjacent region in the earliest spermatid stage and then faded out. The general patterns of pKi-67 distribution were comparable to those in mitotic cell cycles. With respect to the timing, it is interesting to note that relocation from the nucleolus to the perichromosomal layer takes place at the G2/M-phase transition in the mitotic cell cycle but at late diplotene of prophase I in meiosis, suggesting physiological similarity of these stages.