Spatial separation between replisome‐ and template‐induced replication stress signaling

Polymerase‐blocking DNA lesions are thought to elicit a checkpoint response via accumulation of single‐stranded DNA at stalled replication forks. However, as an alternative to persistent fork stalling, re‐priming downstream of lesions can give rise to daughter‐strand gaps behind replication forks. We show here that the processing of such structures by an exonuclease, Exo1, is required for timely checkpoint activation, which in turn prevents further gap erosion in S phase. This Rad9‐dependent mechanism of damage signaling is distinct from the Mrc1‐dependent, fork‐associated response to replication stress induced by conditions such as nucleotide depletion or replisome‐inherent problems, but reminiscent of replication‐independent checkpoint activation by single‐stranded DNA. Our results indicate that while replisome stalling triggers a checkpoint response directly at the stalled replication fork, the response to replication stress elicited by polymerase‐blocking lesions mainly emanates from Exo1‐processed, postreplicative daughter‐strand gaps, thus offering a mechanistic explanation for the dichotomy between replisome‐ versus template‐induced checkpoint signaling.     

SCFDia2 regulates DNA replication forks during S‐phase in budding yeast

Dia2 is an F‐box protein, which is involved in the regulation of DNA replication in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The function of Dia2, however, remains largely unknown. In this study, we report that Dia2 is associated with the replication fork and regulates replication fork progression. Using modified yeast two‐hybrid screening, we have identified components of the replisome (Mrc1, Ctf4 and Mcm2), as Dia2‐binding proteins. Mrc1 and Ctf4 were ubiquitinated by SCF^Dia2 both in vivo and in vitro. Domain analysis of Dia2 revealed that the leucine‐rich repeat motif was indispensable for the regulation of replisome progression, whereas the tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) motif was involved in the interaction with replisome components. In addition, the TPR motif was shown to be involved in Dia2 stability; deleting the TPR stabilized Dia2, mimicking the effect of DNA damage. ChIP‐on‐chip analysis illustrated that Dia2 localizes to the replication fork and regulates fork progression on hydroxyurea treatment. These results demonstrate that Dia2 is involved in the regulation of replisome activity through a direct interaction with replisome components.     

A key role for the GINS complex at DNA replication forks

The GINS complex is the most recently identified component of the eukaryotic DNA replication machinery and is required both for the initiation of chromosome replication and also for the normal progression of DNA replication forks. Several recent studies suggest that GINS associates at replication forks with the MCM helicase that is responsible for unwinding the parental DNA duplex. Archaea also have an equivalent GINS complex that can interact with MCM and other replisome components. It seems likely that GINS couples MCM to other key proteins at forks, and we discuss here the current literature regarding this important late-comer to the DNA replication field.     

Mms1 and Mms22 stabilize the replisome during replication stress

Mms1 and Mms22 form a Cul4(Ddb1)-like E3 ubiquitin ligase with the cullin Rtt101. In this complex, Rtt101 is bound to the substrate-specific adaptor Mms22 through a linker protein, Mms1. Although the Rtt101(Mms1/Mms22) ubiquitin ligase is important in promoting replication through damaged templates, how it does so has yet to be determined. Here we show that mms1Δ and mms22Δ cells fail to properly regulate DNA replication fork progression when replication stress is present and are defective in recovery from replication fork stress. Consistent with a role in promoting DNA replication, we find that Mms1 is enriched at sites where replication forks have stalled and that this localization requires the known binding partners of Mms1-Rtt101 and Mms22. Mms1 and Mms22 stabilize the replisome during replication stress, as binding of the fork-pausing complex components Mrc1 and Csm3, and DNA polymerase ε, at stalled replication forks is decreased in mms1Δ and mms22Δ. Taken together, these data indicate that Mms1 and Mms22 are important for maintaining the integrity of the replisome when DNA replication forks are slowed by hydroxyurea and thereby promote efficient recovery from replication stress.     

Differential regulation of homologous recombination at DNA breaks and replication forks by the Mrc1 branch of the S‐phase checkpoint

The Rad52 pathway has a central function in the recombinational repair of chromosome breaks and in the recovery from replication stress. Tolerance to replication stress also depends on the Mec1 kinase, which activates the DNA replication checkpoint in an Mrc1‐dependent manner in response to fork arrest. Although the Mec1 and Rad52 pathways are initiated by the same single‐strand DNA (ssDNA) intermediate, their interplay at stalled forks remains largely unexplored. Here, we show that the replication checkpoint suppresses the formation of Rad52 foci in an Mrc1‐dependent manner and prevents homologous recombination (HR) at chromosome breaks induced by the HO endonuclease. This repression operates at least in part by impeding resection of DNA ends, which is essential to generate 3′ ssDNA tails, the primary substrate of HR. Interestingly, we also observed that the Mec1 pathway does not prevent recombination at stalled forks, presumably because they already contain ssDNA. Taken together, these data indicate that the DNA replication checkpoint suppresses genomic instability in S phase by blocking recombination at chromosome breaks and permitting helpful recombination at stalled forks.     

Distinct roles for Sld3 and GINS during establishment and progression of eukaryotic DNA replication forks

The Cdc45 protein is crucial for the initiation of chromosome replication in eukaryotic cells, as it allows the activation of prereplication complexes (pre-RCs) that contain the MCM helicase. This causes the unwinding of origins and the establishment of DNA replication forks. The incorporation of Cdc45 at nascent forks is a highly regulated and poorly understood process that requires, in budding yeast, the Sld3 protein and the GINS complex. Previous studies suggested that Sld3 is also important for the progression of DNA replication forks after the initiation step, as are Cdc45 and GINS. In contrast, we show here that Sld3 does not move with DNA replication forks and only associates with MCM in an unstable manner before initiation. After the establishment of DNA replication forks from early origins, Sld3 is no longer essential for the completion of chromosome replication. Unlike Sld3, GINS is not required for the initial recruitment of Cdc45 to origins and instead is necessary for stable engagement of Cdc45 with the nascent replisome. Like Cdc45, GINS then associates stably with MCM during S-phase.     

Mrc1 is required for normal progression of replication forks throughout chromatin in S. cerevisiae

Mrc1 associates with replication forks, where it transmits replication stress signals and is required for normal replisome pausing in response to nucleotide depletion. Mrc1 also plays a poorly understood role in DNA replication, which appears distinct from its role in checkpoint signaling. Here, we demonstrate that Mrc1 functions constitutively to promote normal replication fork progression. In mrc1Delta cells, replication forks proceed slowly throughout chromatin, rather than being specifically defective in pausing and progression through loci that impede fork progression. Analysis of genetic interactions with Rrm3, a DNA helicase required to resolve paused forks, indicates that Mrc1 checkpoint signaling is dispensable for the resolution of stalled replication forks and suggests that replication forks lacking Mrc1 create DNA damage that must be repaired by Rrm3. These findings elucidate a central role for Mrc1 in normal replisome function, which is distinct from its role as a checkpoint mediator, but nevertheless critical to genome stability.     

Histone H2A‐H2B binding by Pol α in the eukaryotic replisome contributes to the maintenance of repressive chromatin

The eukaryotic replisome disassembles parental chromatin at DNA replication forks, but then plays a poorly understood role in the re‐deposition of the displaced histone complexes onto nascent DNA. Here, we show that yeast DNA polymerase α contains a histone‐binding motif that is conserved in human Pol α and is specific for histones H2A and H2B. Mutation of this motif in budding yeast cells does not affect DNA synthesis, but instead abrogates gene silencing at telomeres and mating‐type loci. Similar phenotypes are produced not only by mutations that displace Pol α from the replisome, but also by mutation of the previously identified histone‐binding motif in the CMG helicase subunit Mcm2, the human orthologue of which was shown to bind to histones H3 and H4. We show that chromatin‐derived histone complexes can be bound simultaneously by Mcm2, Pol α and the histone chaperone FACT that is also a replisome component. These findings indicate that replisome assembly unites multiple histone‐binding activities, which jointly process parental histones to help preserve silent chromatin during the process of chromosome duplication.     

Mrc1 and Tof1 regulate DNA replication forks in different ways during normal S phase

The Mrc1 and Tof1 proteins are conserved throughout evolution, and in budding yeast they are known to associate with the MCM helicase and regulate the progression of DNA replication forks. Previous work has shown that Mrc1 is important for the activation of checkpoint kinases in responses to defects in S phase, but both Mrc1 and Tof1 also regulate the normal process of chromosome replication. Here, we show that these two important factors control the normal progression of DNA replication forks in distinct ways. The rate of progression of DNA replication forks is greatly reduced in the absence of Mrc1 but much less affected by loss of Tof1. In contrast, Tof1 is critical for DNA replication forks to pause at diverse chromosomal sites where nonnucleosomal proteins bind very tightly to DNA, and this role is not shared with Mrc1.     

The Replisome-Coupled E3 Ubiquitin Ligase Rtt101Mms22 Counteracts Mrc1 Function to Tolerate Genotoxic Stress

Faithful DNA replication and repair requires the activity of cullin 4-based E3 ubiquitin ligases (CRL4), but the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. The budding yeast Cul4 homologue, Rtt101, in complex with the linker Mms1 and the putative substrate adaptor Mms22 promotes progression of replication forks through damaged DNA. Here we characterized the interactome of Mms22 and found that the Rtt101^Mms22 ligase associates with the replisome progression complex during S-phase via the amino-terminal WD40 domain of Ctf4. Moreover, genetic screening for suppressors of the genotoxic sensitivity of rtt101Δ cells identified a cluster of replication proteins, among them a component of the fork protection complex, Mrc1. In contrast to rtt101Δ and mms22Δ cells, mrc1Δ rtt101Δ and mrc1Δ mms22Δ double mutants complete DNA replication upon replication stress by facilitating the repair/restart of stalled replication forks using a Rad52-dependent mechanism. Our results suggest that the Rtt101^Mms22 E3 ligase does not induce Mrc1 degradation, but specifically counteracts Mrc1’s replicative function, possibly by modulating its interaction with the CMG (Cdc45-MCM-GINS) complex at stalled forks.     

A conserved Pol? binding module in Ctf18-RFC is required for S-phase checkpoint activation downstream of Mec1

Defects during chromosome replication in eukaryotes activate a signaling pathway called the S-phase checkpoint, which produces a multifaceted response that preserves genome integrity at stalled DNA replication forks. Work with budding yeast showed that the ‘alternative clamp loader’ known as Ctf18-RFC acts by an unknown mechanism to activate the checkpoint kinase Rad53, which then mediates much of the checkpoint response. Here we show that budding yeast Ctf18-RFC associates with DNA polymerase epsilon, via an evolutionarily conserved ‘Pol ϵ binding module’ in Ctf18-RFC that is produced by interaction of the carboxyl terminus of Ctf18 with the Ctf8 and Dcc1 subunits. Mutations at the end of Ctf18 disrupt the integrity of the Pol ϵ binding module and block the S-phase checkpoint pathway, downstream of the Mec1 kinase that is the budding yeast orthologue of mammalian ATR. Similar defects in checkpoint activation are produced by mutations that displace Pol ϵ from the replisome. These findings indicate that the association of Ctf18-RFC with Pol ϵ at defective replication forks is a key step in activation of the S-phase checkpoint.     

Mrc1 and DNA polymerase epsilon function together in linking DNA replication and the S phase checkpoint

Yeast Mrc1, ortholog of metazoan Claspin, is both a central component of normal DNA replication forks and a mediator of the S phase checkpoint. We report that Mrc1 interacts with Pol2, the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase epsilon, essential for leading-strand DNA replication and for the checkpoint. In unperturbed cells, Mrc1 interacts independently with both the N-terminal and C-terminal halves of Pol2 (Pol2N and Pol2C). Strikingly, phosphorylation of Mrc1 during the S phase checkpoint abolishes Pol2N binding, but not Pol2C interaction. Mrc1 is required to stabilize Pol2 at replication forks stalled in HU. The bimodal Mrc1/Pol2 interaction may be an additional step in regulating the S phase checkpoint response to DNA damage on the leading strand. We propose that Mrc1, which also interacts with the MCMs, may modulate coupling of polymerization and unwinding at the replication fork.     

MCM10 mediates RECQ4 association with MCM2‐7 helicase complex during DNA replication

Mutations in RECQ4, a member of the RecQ family of DNA helicases, have been linked to the progeroid disease Rothmund–Thomson Syndrome. Attempts to understand the complex phenotypes observed in recq4‐deficient cells suggest a potential involvement in DNA repair and replication, yet the molecular basis of the function of RECQ4 in these processes remains unknown. Here, we report the identification of a highly purified chromatin‐bound RECQ4 complex from human cell extracts. We found that essential replisome factors MCM10, MCM2‐7 helicase, CDC45 and GINS are the primary interaction partner proteins of human RECQ4. Importantly, complex formation and the association of RECQ4 with the replication origin are cell‐cycle regulated. Furthermore, we show that MCM10 is essential for the integrity of the RECQ4–MCM replicative helicase complex. MCM10 interacts directly with RECQ4 and regulates its DNA unwinding activity, and that this interaction may be modulated by cyclin‐dependent kinase phosphorylation. Thus, these studies show that RECQ4 is an integral component of the MCM replicative helicase complex participating in DNA replication in human cells.     

Human base excision repair complex is physically associated to DNA replication and cell cycle regulatory proteins

It has been hypothesized that a replication associated repair pathway operates on base damage and single strand breaks (SSB) at replication forks. In this study, we present the isolation from the nuclei of human cycling cells of a multiprotein complex containing most of the essential components of base excision repair (BER)/SSBR, including APE1, UNG2, XRCC1 and POLβ, DNA PK, replicative POLα, δ and , DNA ligase 1 and cell cycle regulatory protein cyclin A. Co-immunoprecipitation revealed that in this complex DNA repair proteins are physically associated to cyclin A and to DNA replication proteins including MCM7. This complex is endowed with DNA polymerase and protein kinase activity and is able to perform BER of uracil and AP sites. This finding suggests that a preassembled DNA repair machinery is constitutively active in cycling cells and is ready to be recruited at base damage and breaks occurring at replication forks.     

Colocalization of Mec1 and Mrc1 is sufficient for Rad53 phosphorylation in vivo

When DNA is damaged or DNA replication goes awry, cells activate checkpoints to allow time for damage to be repaired and replication to complete. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the DNA damage checkpoint, which responds to lesions such as double-strand breaks, is activated when the lesion promotes the association of the sensor kinase Mec1 and its targeting subunit Ddc2 with its activators Ddc1 (a member of the 9-1-1 complex) and Dpb11. It has been more difficult to determine what role these Mec1 activators play in the replication checkpoint, which recognizes stalled replication forks, since Dpb11 has a separate role in DNA replication itself. Therefore we constructed an in vivo replication-checkpoint mimic that recapitulates Mec1-dependent phosphorylation of the effector kinase Rad53, a crucial step in checkpoint activation. In the endogenous replication checkpoint, Mec1 phosphorylation of Rad53 requires Mrc1, a replisome component. The replication-checkpoint mimic requires colocalization of Mrc1-LacI and Ddc2-LacI and is independent of both Ddc1 and Dpb11. We show that these activators are also dispensable for Mec1 activity and cell survival in the endogenous replication checkpoint but that Ddc1 is absolutely required in the absence of Mrc1. We propose that colocalization of Mrc1 and Mec1 is the minimal signal required to activate the replication checkpoint.     

Localization of MCM2-7, Cdc45, and GINS to the site of DNA unwinding during eukaryotic DNA replication

Little is known about the architecture and biochemical composition of the eukaryotic DNA replication fork. To study this problem, we used biotin-streptavidin-modified plasmids to induce sequence-specific replication fork pausing in Xenopus egg extracts. Chromatin immunoprecipitation was employed to identify factors associated with the paused fork. This approach identifies DNA pol alpha, DNA pol delta, DNA pol varepsilon, MCM2-7, Cdc45, GINS, and Mcm10 as components of the vertebrate replisome. In the presence of the DNA polymerase inhibitor aphidicolin, which causes uncoupling of a highly processive DNA helicase from the stalled replisome, only Cdc45, GINS, and MCM2-7 are enriched at the pause site. The data suggest the existence of a large molecular machine, the "unwindosome," which separates DNA strands at the replication fork and contains Cdc45, GINS, and the MCM2-7 holocomplex.     

Mcm10 associates with the loaded DNA helicase at replication origins and defines a novel step in its activation

Mcm10 is essential for chromosome replication in eukaryotic cells and was previously thought to link the Mcm2-7 DNA helicase at replication forks to DNA polymerase alpha. Here, we show that yeast Mcm10 interacts preferentially with the fraction of the Mcm2-7 helicase that is loaded in an inactive form at origins of DNA replication, suggesting a role for Mcm10 during the initiation of chromosome replication, but Mcm10 is not a stable component of the replisome subsequently. Studies with budding yeast and human cells indicated that Mcm10 chaperones the catalytic subunit of polymerase alpha and preserves its stability. We used a novel degron allele to inactivate Mcm10 efficiently and this blocked the initiation of chromosome replication without causing degradation of DNA polymerase alpha. Strikingly, the other essential helicase subunits Cdc45 and GINS were still recruited to Mcm2-7 when cells entered S-phase without Mcm10, but origin unwinding was blocked. These findings indicate that Mcm10 is required for a novel step during activation of the Cdc45-MCM-GINS helicase at DNA replication origins.     

Structure of a human replisome shows the organisation and interactions of a DNA replication machine

The human replisome is an elaborate arrangement of molecular machines responsible for accurate chromosome replication. At its heart is the CDC45‐MCM‐GINS (CMG) helicase, which, in addition to unwinding the parental DNA duplex, arranges many proteins including the leading‐strand polymerase Pol ε, together with TIMELESS‐TIPIN, CLASPIN and AND‐1 that have key and varied roles in maintaining smooth replisome progression. How these proteins are coordinated in the human replisome is poorly understood. We have determined a 3.2 Å cryo‐EM structure of a human replisome comprising CMG, Pol ε, TIMELESS‐TIPIN, CLASPIN and AND‐1 bound to replication fork DNA. The structure permits a detailed understanding of how AND‐1, TIMELESS‐TIPIN and Pol ε engage CMG, reveals how CLASPIN binds to multiple replisome components and identifies the position of the Pol ε catalytic domain. Furthermore, the intricate network of contacts contributed by MCM subunits and TIMELESS‐TIPIN with replication fork DNA suggests a mechanism for strand separation.     

Mechanisms of replication fork protection: a safeguard for genome stability

During S-phase, the genome is extremely vulnerable and the progression of replication forks is often threatened by exogenous and endogenous challenges. When replication fork progression is halted, the intra S-phase checkpoint is activated to promote structural stability of stalled forks, preventing the dissociation of replisome components. This ensures the rapid resumption of replication following DNA repair. Failure in protecting and/or restarting the stalled forks contributes to alterations of the genome. Several human genetic diseases coupled to an increased cancer predisposition are caused by mutations in genes involved in safeguarding genome integrity during DNA replication. Both the ATR (ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein) kinase and the Replication pausing complex (RPC) components Tipin, Tim1 and Claspin play key roles in activating the intra S-phase checkpoint and in stabilizing the stalled replication forks. Here, we discuss the specific contribution of these factors in preserving fork structure and ensuring accurate completion of DNA replication.