The mph1 helicase can promote telomere uncapping and premature senescence in budding yeast

Double strand breaks (DSBs) can be repaired via either Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ) or Homology directed Repair (HR). Telomeres, which resemble DSBs, are refractory to repair events in order to prevent chromosome end fusions and genomic instability. In some rare instances telomeres engage in Break-Induced Replication (BIR), a type of HR, in order to maintain telomere length in the absence of the enzyme telomerase. Here we have investigated how the yeast helicase, Mph1, affects DNA repair at both DSBs and telomeres. We have found that overexpressed Mph1 strongly inhibits BIR at internal DSBs however allows it to proceed at telomeres. Furthermore, while overexpressed Mph1 potently inhibits NHEJ at telomeres it has no effect on NHEJ at DSBs within the chromosome. At telomeres Mph1 is able to promote telomere uncapping and the accumulation of ssDNA, which results in premature senescence in the absence of telomerase. We propose that Mph1 is able to direct repair towards HR (thereby inhibiting NHEJ) at telomeres by remodeling them into a nuclease-sensitive structure, which promotes the accumulation of a recombinogenic ssDNA intermediate. We thus put forward that Mph1 is a double-edge sword at the telomere, it prevents NHEJ, but promotes senescence in cells with dysfunctional telomeres by increasing the levels of ssDNA.     

Polymerase epsilon is required to maintain replicative senescence

Replicative senescence is a permanent cell cycle arrest in response to extensive telomere shortening. To understand the mechanisms behind a permanent arrest, we screened for factors affecting replicative senescence in budding yeast lacking telomere elongation pathways. Intriguingly, we found that DNA polymerase epsilon (Pol ε) acts synergistically with Exo1 nuclease to maintain replicative senescence. In contrast, the Pol ε-associated checkpoint and replication protein Mrc1 facilitates escape from senescence. To understand this paradox, in which DNA-synthesizing factors cooperate with DNA-degrading factors to maintain arrest, whereas a checkpoint protein opposes arrest, we analyzed the dynamics of double- and single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) at chromosome ends during senescence. We found evidence for cycles of DNA resection, followed by resynthesis. We propose that resection of the shortest telomere, activating a Rad24(Rad17)-dependent checkpoint pathway, alternates in time with an Mrc1-regulated Pol ε resynthesis of a short, double-stranded chromosome end, which in turn activates a Rad9(53BP1)-dependent checkpoint pathway. Therefore, instead of one type of DNA damage, different types (ssDNA and a double-strand break-like structure) alternate in a "vicious circle," each activating a different checkpoint sensor. Every time resection and resynthesis switches, a fresh signal initiates, thus preventing checkpoint adaptation and ensuring the permanent character of senescence.     

Exo1 and Rad24 differentially regulate generation of ssDNA at telomeres of Saccharomyces cerevisiae cdc13-1 mutants

Cell cycle arrest in response to DNA damage depends upon coordinated interactions between DNA repair and checkpoint pathways. Here we examine the role of DNA repair and checkpoint genes in responding to unprotected telomeres in budding yeast cdc13-1 mutants. We show that Exo1 is unique among the repair genes tested because like Rad9 and Rad24 checkpoint proteins, Exo1 inhibits the growth of cdc13-1 mutants at the semipermissive temperatures. In contrast Mre11, Rad50, Xrs2, and Rad27 contribute to the vitality of cdc13-1 strains grown at permissive temperatures, while Din7, Msh2, Nuc1, Rad2, Rad52, and Yen1 show no effect. Exo1 is not required for cell cycle arrest of cdc13-1 mutants at 36 degrees but is required to maintain arrest. Exo1 affects but is not essential for the production of ssDNA in subtelomeric Y' repeats of cdc13-1 mutants. However, Exo1 is critical for generating ssDNA in subtelomeric X repeats and internal single-copy sequences. Surprisingly, and in contrast to Rad24, Exo1 is not essential to generate ssDNA in X or single-copy sequences in cdc13-1 rad9Delta mutants. We conclude that Rad24 and Exo1 regulate nucleases with different properties at uncapped telomeres and propose a model to explain our findings.     

Rad59-Facilitated Acquisition of Y′ Elements by Short Telomeres Delays the Onset of Senescence

Telomerase-negative yeasts survive via one of the two Rad52-dependent recombination pathways, which have distinct genetic requirements. Although the telomere pattern of type I and type II survivors is well characterized, the mechanistic details of short telomere rearrangement into highly evolved pattern observed in survivors are still missing. Here, we analyze immediate events taking place at the abruptly shortened VII-L and native telomeres. We show that short telomeres engage in pairing with internal Rap1-bound TG_1–3-like tracts present between subtelomeric X and Y′ elements, which is followed by BIR-mediated non-reciprocal translocation of Y′ element and terminal TG_1–3 repeats from the donor end onto the shortened telomere. We found that choice of the Y′ donor was not random, since both engineered telomere VII-L and native VI-R acquired Y′ elements from partially overlapping sets of specific chromosome ends. Although short telomere repair was associated with transient delay in cell divisions, Y′ translocation on native telomeres did not require Mec1-dependent checkpoint. Furthermore, the homeologous pairing between the terminal TG_1–3 repeats at VII-L and internal repeats on other chromosome ends was largely independent of Rad51, but instead it was facilitated by Rad59 that stimulates Rad52 strand annealing activity. Therefore, Y′ translocation events taking place during presenescence are genetically separable from Rad51-dependent Y′ amplification process that occurs later during type I survivor formation. We show that Rad59-facilitated Y′ translocations on X-only telomeres delay the onset of senescence while preparing ground for type I survivor formation.     

Slx4 and Rtt107 control checkpoint signalling and DNA resection at double-strand breaks

The DNA damage checkpoint pathway is activated in response to DNA lesions and replication stress to preserve genome integrity. However, hyper-activation of this surveillance system is detrimental to the cell, because it might prevent cell cycle re-start after repair, which may also lead to senescence. Here we show that the scaffold proteins Slx4 and Rtt107 limit checkpoint signalling at a persistent double-strand DNA break (DSB) and at uncapped telomeres. We found that Slx4 is recruited within a few kilobases of an irreparable DSB, through the interaction with Rtt107 and the multi-BRCT domain scaffold Dpb11. In the absence of Slx4 or Rtt107, Rad9 binding near the irreparable DSB is increased, leading to robust checkpoint signalling and slower nucleolytic degradation of the 5′ strand. Importantly, in slx4Δ sae2Δ double mutant cells these phenotypes are exacerbated, causing a severe Rad9-dependent defect in DSB repair. Our study sheds new light on the molecular mechanism that coordinates the processing and repair of DSBs with DNA damage checkpoint signalling, preserving genome integrity.     

Histone methyltransferase Dot1 and Rad9 inhibit single-stranded DNA accumulation at DSBs and uncapped telomeres

Cells respond to DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and uncapped telomeres by recruiting checkpoint and repair factors to the site of lesions. Single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) is an important intermediate in the repair of DSBs and is produced also at uncapped telomeres. Here, we provide evidence that binding of the checkpoint protein Rad9, through its Tudor domain, to methylated histone H3-K79 inhibits resection at DSBs and uncapped telomeres. Loss of DOT1 or mutations in RAD9 influence a Rad50-dependent nuclease, leading to more rapid accumulation of ssDNA, and faster activation of the critical checkpoint kinase, Mec1. Moreover, deletion of RAD9 or DOT1 partially bypasses the requirement for CDK1 in DSB resection. Interestingly, Dot1 contributes to checkpoint activation in response to low levels of telomere uncapping but is not essential with high levels of uncapping. We suggest that both Rad9 and histone H3 methylation allow transmission of the damage signal to checkpoint kinases, and keep resection of damaged DNA under control influencing, both positively and negatively, checkpoint cascades and contributing to a tightly controlled response to DNA damage.     

Checkpoint-dependent phosphorylation of Exo1 modulates the DNA damage response

Exo1 is a nuclease involved in mismatch repair, DSB repair, stalled replication fork processing and in the DNA damage response triggered by dysfunctional telomeres. In budding yeast and mice, Exo1 creates single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) at uncapped telomeres. This ssDNA accumulation activates the checkpoint response resulting in cell cycle arrest. Here, we demonstrate that Exo1 is phosphorylated when telomeres are uncapped in cdc13-1 and yku70Delta yeast cells, and in response to the induction of DNA damage. After telomere uncapping, Exo1 phosphorylation depends on components of the checkpoint machinery such as Rad24, Rad17, Rad9, Rad53 and Mec1, but is largely independent of Chk1, Tel1 and Dun1. Serines S372, S567, S587 and S692 of Exo1 were identified as targets for phosphorylation. Furthermore, mutation of these Exo1 residues altered the DNA damage response to uncapped telomeres and camptothecin treatment, in a manner that suggests Exo1 phosphorylation inhibits its activity. We propose that Rad53-dependent Exo1 phosphorylation is involved in a negative feedback loop to limit ssDNA accumulation and DNA damage checkpoint activation.     

Processing by MRE11 is involved in the sensitivity of subtelomeric regions to DNA double-strand breaks

The caps on the ends of chromosomes, called telomeres, keep the ends of chromosomes from appearing as DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and prevent chromosome fusion. However, subtelomeric regions are sensitive to DSBs, which in normal cells is responsible for ionizing radiation-induced cell senescence and protection against oncogene-induced replication stress, but promotes chromosome instability in cancer cells that lack cell cycle checkpoints. We have previously reported that I-SceI endonuclease-induced DSBs near telomeres in a human cancer cell line are much more likely to generate large deletions and gross chromosome rearrangements (GCRs) than interstitial DSBs, but found no difference in the frequency of I-SceI-induced small deletions at interstitial and subtelomeric DSBs. We now show that inhibition of MRE11 3′–5′ exonuclease activity with Mirin reduces the frequency of large deletions and GCRs at both interstitial and subtelomeric DSBs, but has little effect on the frequency of small deletions. We conclude that large deletions and GCRs are due to excessive processing of DSBs, while most small deletions occur during classical nonhomologous end joining (C-NHEJ). The sensitivity of subtelomeric regions to DSBs is therefore because they are prone to undergo excessive processing, and not because of a deficiency in C-NHEJ in subtelomeric regions.     

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.     

Recombination-Mediated Telomere Maintenance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Is Not Dependent on the Shu Complex

In cells lacking telomerase, telomeres shorten progressively during each cell division due to incomplete end-replication. When the telomeres become very short, cells enter a state that blocks cell division, termed senescence. A subset of these cells can overcome senescence and maintain their telomeres using telomerase-independent mechanisms. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, these cells are called ‘survivors’ and are dependent on Rad52-dependent homologous recombination and Pol32-dependent break-induced replication. There are two main types of survivors: type I and type II. The type I survivors require Rad51 and maintain telomeres by amplification of subtelomeric elements, while the type II survivors are Rad51-independent, but require the MRX complex and Sgs1 to amplify the C_1–3A/TG_1–3 telomeric sequences. Rad52, Pol32, Rad51, and Sgs1 are also important to prevent accelerated senescence, indicating that recombination processes are important at telomeres even before the formation of survivors. The Shu complex, which consists of Shu1, Shu2, Psy3, and Csm2, promotes Rad51-dependent homologous recombination and has been suggested to be important for break-induced replication. It also promotes the formation of recombination intermediates that are processed by the Sgs1-Top3-Rmi1 complex, as mutations in the SHU genes can suppress various sgs1, top3, and rmi1 mutant phenotypes. Given the importance of recombination processes during senescence and survivor formation, and the involvement of the Shu complex in many of the same processes during DNA repair, we hypothesized that the Shu complex may also have functions at telomeres. Surprisingly, we find that this is not the case: the Shu complex does not affect the rate of senescence, does not influence survivor formation, and deletion of SHU1 does not suppress the rapid senescence and type II survivor formation defect of a telomerase-negative sgs1 mutant. Altogether, our data suggest that the Shu complex is not important for recombination processes at telomeres.     

End Resection at Double-Strand Breaks: Mechanism and Regulation

RecA/Rad51 catalyzed pairing of homologous DNA strands, initiated by polymerization of the recombinase on single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), is a universal feature of homologous recombination (HR). Generation of ssDNA from a double-strand break (DSB) requires nucleolytic degradation of the 5′-terminated strands to generate 3′-ssDNA tails, a process referred to as 5′–3′ end resection. The RecBCD helicase–nuclease complex is the main end-processing machine in Gram-negative bacteria. Mre11-Rad50 and Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2/Nbs1 can play a direct role in end resection in archaea and eukaryota, respectively, by removing end-blocking lesions and act indirectly by recruiting the helicases and nucleases responsible for extensive resection. In eukaryotic cells, the initiation of end resection has emerged as a critical regulatory step to differentiate between homology-dependent and end-joining repair of DSBs.DSBs can arise accidentally during normal cell metabolism or after exposure of cells to DNA-damaging agents, and also serve as intermediates in a number of programmed recombination events in eukaryotic cells (Mehta and Haber 2014). The repair of DSBs is critical for maintenance of genome integrity, and misrepair, or failure to repair, is associated with chromosome rearrangements, chromosome loss, or even cell death. Both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells have evolved elaborate mechanisms for the recognition and repair of DSBs. The two predominant repair mechanisms are HR and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ). HR relies on the presence of an intact homologous duplex to template repair of the broken strands, whereas NHEJ repairs DSBs by direct ligation of the DNA ends. For DSBs to be repaired by HR, the ends must first be degraded to generate long 3′-ssDNA tails, a process referred to as 5′–3′ end resection. The 3′-ssDNA tails are then bound by a member of the RecA/Rad51 family of proteins to initiate homologous pairing and serve as primers for DNA synthesis following strand invasion. Strand invasion intermediates are further processed by helicases and/or nucleases (Bizard and Hickson 2014; Wyatt and West 2014), and ultimately by gap-filling DNA synthesis and ligation, to generate mature recombinant products. The DNA end-resection step of HR is conserved in all domains of life, but the mechanisms used for generating ssDNA are distinct. Here, we review the basic machinery for DNA end resection in bacteria, archaea, and eukaryota and the regulation of end resection in eukaryotic cells.     

Break-Induced Replication Requires DNA Damage-Induced Phosphorylation of Pif1 and Leads to Telomere Lengthening

Broken replication forks result in DNA breaks that are normally repaired via homologous recombination or break induced replication (BIR). Mild insufficiency in the replicative ligase Cdc9 in budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae resulted in a population of cells with persistent DNA damage, most likely due to broken replication forks, constitutive activation of the DNA damage checkpoint and longer telomeres. This telomere lengthening required functional telomerase, the core DNA damage signaling cascade Mec1-Rad9-Rad53, and the components of the BIR repair pathway – Rad51, Rad52, Pol32, and Pif1. The Mec1-Rad53 induced phosphorylation of Pif1, previously found necessary for inhibition of telomerase at double strand breaks, was also important for the role of Pif1 in BIR and telomere elongation in cdc9-1 cells. Two other mutants with impaired DNA replication, cdc44-5 and rrm3Δ, were similar to cdc9-1: their long telomere phenotype was dependent on the Pif1 phosphorylation locus. We propose a model whereby the passage of BIR forks through telomeres promotes telomerase activity and leads to telomere lengthening.     

Tel1ATM dictates the replication timing of short yeast telomeres

Telomerase action is temporally linked to DNA replication. Although yeast telomeres are normally late replicating, telomere shortening leads to early firing of subtelomeric DNA replication origins. We show that double‐strand breaks flanked by short telomeric arrays cause origin firing early in S phase at late‐replicating loci and that this effect on origin firing time is dependent on the Tel1^ATM checkpoint kinase. The effect of Tel1^ATM on telomere replication timing extends to endogenous telomeres and is stronger than that elicited by Rif1 loss. These results establish that Tel1^ATM specifies not only the extent but also the timing of telomerase recruitment.     

Ctp1-dependent clipping and resection of DNA double-strand breaks by Mre11 endonuclease complex are not genetically separable

Homologous recombination (HR) repair of programmed meiotic double-strand breaks (DSBs) requires endonucleolytic clipping of Rec12^Spo11-oligonucleotides from 5′ DNA ends followed by resection to generate invasive 3′ single-stranded DNA tails. The Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN) endonuclease and Ctp1 (CtIP and Sae2 ortholog) are required for both activities in fission yeast but whether they are genetically separable is controversial. Here, we investigate the mitotic DSB repair properties of Ctp1 C-terminal domain (ctp1-CD) mutants that were reported to be specifically clipping deficient. These mutants are sensitive to many clastogens, including those that create DSBs devoid of covalently bound proteins. These sensitivities are suppressed by genetically eliminating Ku nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) protein, indicating that Ctp1-dependent clipping by MRN is required for Ku removal from DNA ends. However, this rescue requires Exo1 resection activity, implying that Ctp1-dependent resection by MRN is defective in ctp1-CD mutants. The ctp1-CD mutants tolerate one but not multiple broken replication forks, and they are highly reliant on the Chk1-mediated cell cycle checkpoint arrest, indicating that HR repair is inefficient. We conclude that the C-terminal domain of Ctp1 is required for both efficient clipping and resection of DSBs by MRN and these activities are mechanistically similar.     

Structure of the human RAD17–RFC clamp loader and 9–1–1 checkpoint clamp bound to a dsDNA–ssDNA junction

The RAD9–RAD1–HUS1 (9–1–1) clamp forms one half of the DNA damage checkpoint system that signals the presence of substantial regions of single-stranded DNA arising from replication fork collapse or resection of DNA double strand breaks. Loaded at the 5′-recessed end of a dsDNA–ssDNA junction by the RAD17–RFC clamp loader complex, the phosphorylated C-terminal tail of the RAD9 subunit of 9–1–1 engages with the mediator scaffold TOPBP1 which in turn activates the ATR kinase, localised through the interaction of its constitutive partner ATRIP with RPA-coated ssDNA. Using cryogenic electron microscopy (cryoEM) we have determined the structure of a complex of the human RAD17–RFC clamp loader bound to human 9–1–1, engaged with a dsDNA–ssDNA junction. The structure answers the key questions of how RAD17 confers specificity for 9–1–1 over PCNA, and how the clamp loader specifically recognises the recessed 5′ DNA end and fixes the orientation of 9–1–1 on the ssDNA.     

Short telomeres in yeast are highly recombinogenic

We report that recombination rates specifically increase by up to 10(3) near shortened telomeres in K. lactis cells. This occurs in cells lacking telomerase that undergo growth senescence as well as in cells with stably shortened telomeres that cause little effect on cell growth. The high rates of gene conversion allowed a subtelomeric marker, initially present at a single telomere, to efficiently spread to most or all other telomeres in the cell. We propose that short telomeres in K. lactis are not fully competent at capping chromosome ends and hence are occasionally processed by proteins that normally act to repair broken DNA ends through recombination. This helps explain how recombination can be frequent enough to permit maintenance of telomeres in yeast cells lacking telomerase.     

The 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp stimulates DNA resection by Dna2-Sgs1 and Exo1

Single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) at DNA ends is an important regulator of the DNA damage response. Resection, the generation of ssDNA, affects DNA damage checkpoint activation, DNA repair pathway choice, ssDNA-associated mutation and replication fork stability. In eukaryotes, extensive DNA resection requires the nuclease Exo1 and nuclease/helicase pair: Dna2 and Sgs1^BLM. How Exo1 and Dna2-Sgs1^BLM coordinate during resection remains poorly understood. The DNA damage checkpoint clamp (the 9-1-1 complex) has been reported to play an important role in stimulating resection but the exact mechanism remains unclear. Here we show that the human 9-1-1 complex enhances the cleavage of DNA by both DNA2 and EXO1 in vitro, showing that the resection-stimulatory role of the 9-1-1 complex is direct. We also show that in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the 9-1-1 complex promotes both Dna2-Sgs1 and Exo1-dependent resection in response to uncapped telomeres. Our results suggest that the 9-1-1 complex facilitates resection by recruiting both Dna2-Sgs1 and Exo1 to sites of resection. This activity of the 9-1-1 complex in supporting resection is strongly inhibited by the checkpoint adaptor Rad9^53BP1. Our results provide important mechanistic insights into how DNA resection is regulated by checkpoint proteins and have implications for genome stability in eukaryotes.     

Repair and Reconstruction of Telomeric and Subtelomeric Regions and Genesis of New Telomeres: Implications for Chromosome Evolution

DNA damage repair within telomeres are suppressed to maintain the integrity of linear chromosomes, but the accidental activation of repairs can lead to genome instability. This review develops the concept that mechanisms to repair DNA damage in telomeres contribute to genetic variability and karyotype evolution, rather than catastrophe. Spontaneous breaks in telomeres can be repaired by telomerase, but in some cases DNA repair pathways are activated, and can cause chromosomal rearrangements or fusions. The resultant changes can also affect subtelomeric regions that are adjacent to telomeres. Subtelomeres are actively involved in such chromosomal changes, and are therefore the most variable regions in the genome. The case of Caenorhabditis elegans in the context of changes of subtelomeric structures revealed by long-read sequencing is also discussed. Theoretical and methodological issues covered in this review will help to explore the mechanism of chromosome evolution by reconstruction of chromosomal ends in nature.     

Subsenescent telomere lengths in fibroblasts immortalized by limiting amounts of telomerase

Human fibroblasts expressing the catalytic component of human telomerase (hTERT) have been followed for 250-400 population doublings. As expected, telomerase activity declined in long term culture of stable transfectants. Surprisingly, however, clones with average telomere lengths several kilobases shorter than those of senescent parental cells continued to proliferate. Although the longest telomeres shortened, the size of the shortest telomeres was maintained. Cells with subsenescent telomere lengths proliferated for an additional 20 doublings after inhibiting telomerase activity with a dominant-negative hTERT mutant. These results indicate that, under conditions of limiting telomerase activity, cis-acting signals may recruit telomerase to act on the shortest telomeres, argue against the hypothesis that the mortality stage 1 mechanism of cellular senescence is regulated by telomere positional effects (in which subtelomeric loci silenced by long telomeres are expressed when telomeres become short), and suggest that catalytically active telomerase is not required to provide a protein-capping role at the end of very short telomeres.