RnhP is a plasmid‐borne RNase HI that contributes to genome maintenance in the ancestral strain Bacillus subtilis NCIB 3610

RNA‐DNA hybrids form throughout the chromosome during normal growth and under stress conditions. When left unresolved, RNA‐DNA hybrids can slow replication fork progression, cause DNA breaks, and increase mutagenesis. To remove hybrids, all organisms use ribonuclease H (RNase H) to specifically degrade the RNA portion. Here we show that, in addition to chromosomally encoded RNase HII and RNase HIII, Bacillus subtilis NCIB 3610 encodes a previously uncharacterized RNase HI protein, RnhP, on the endogenous plasmid pBS32. Like other RNase HI enzymes, RnhP incises Okazaki fragments, ribopatches, and a complementary RNA‐DNA hybrid. We show that while chromosomally encoded RNase HIII is required for pBS32 hyper‐replication, RnhP compensates for the loss of RNase HIII activity on the chromosome. Consequently, loss of RnhP and RNase HIII impairs bacterial growth. We show that the decreased growth rate can be explained by laggard replication fork progression near the terminus region of the right replichore, resulting in SOS induction and inhibition of cell division. We conclude that all three functional RNase H enzymes are present in B. subtilis NCIB 3610 and that the plasmid‐encoded RNase HI contributes to chromosome stability, while the chromosomally encoded RNase HIII is important for chromosome stability and plasmid hyper‐replication.     

Looping‐out mechanism for resolution of replicative stress at telomeres

Repetitive DNA is prone to replication fork stalling, which can lead to genome instability. Here, we find that replication fork stalling at telomeres leads to the formation of t‐circle‐tails, a new extrachromosomal structure that consists of circular telomeric DNA with a single‐stranded tail. Structurally, the t‐circle‐tail resembles cyclized leading or lagging replication intermediates that are excised from the genome by topoisomerase II‐mediated cleavage. We also show that the DNA damage repair machinery NHEJ is required for the formation of t‐circle‐tails and for the resolution of stalled replication forks, suggesting that NHEJ, which is normally constitutively suppressed at telomeres, is activated in the context of replication stress. Inhibition of NHEJ or knockout of DNA‐PKcs impairs telomere replication, leading to multiple‐telomere sites (MTS) and telomere shortening. Collectively, our results support a “looping‐out” mechanism, in which the stalled replication fork is cut out and cyclized to form t‐circle‐tails, and broken DNA is religated. The telomere loss induced by replication stress may serve as a new factor that drives replicative senescence and cell aging.     

Topoisomerase I‐mediated cleavage at unrepaired ribonucleotides generates DNA double‐strand breaks

Ribonuclease activity of topoisomerase I (Top1) causes DNA nicks bearing 2′,3′‐cyclic phosphates at ribonucleotide sites. Here, we provide genetic and biochemical evidence that DNA double‐strand breaks (DSBs) can be directly generated by Top1 at sites of genomic ribonucleotides. We show that RNase H2‐deficient yeast cells displayed elevated frequency of Rad52 foci, inactivation of RNase H2 and RAD52 led to synthetic lethality, and combined loss of RNase H2 and RAD51 induced slow growth and replication stress. Importantly, these phenotypes were rescued upon additional deletion of TOP1, implicating homologous recombination for the repair of Top1‐induced damage at ribonuclelotide sites. We demonstrate biochemically that irreversible DSBs are generated by subsequent Top1 cleavage on the opposite strand from the Top1‐induced DNA nicks at ribonucleotide sites. Analysis of Top1‐linked DNA from pull‐down experiments revealed that Top1 is covalently linked to the end of DNA in RNase H2‐deficient yeast cells, supporting this model. Taken together, these results define Top1 as a source of DSBs and genome instability when ribonucleotides incorporated by the replicative polymerases are not removed by RNase H2.     

Proofreading of ribonucleotides inserted into DNA by yeast DNA polymerase ɛ

We have investigated the ability of the 3′ exonuclease activity of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA polymerase ? (Pol ?) to proofread newly inserted ribonucleotides (rNMPs). During DNA synthesis in vitro, Pol ? proofreads ribonucleotides with apparent efficiencies that vary from none at some locations to more than 90% at others, with rA and rU being more efficiently proofread than rC and rG. Previous studies show that failure to repair ribonucleotides in the genome of rnh201Δ strains that lack RNase H2 activity elevates the rate of short deletions in tandem repeat sequences. Here we show that this rate is increased by 2–4-fold in pol2-4 rnh201Δ strains that are also defective in Pol ? proofreading. In comparison, defective proofreading in these same strains increases the rate of base substitutions by more than 100-fold. Collectively, the results indicate that although proofreading of an ‘incorrect’ sugar is less efficient than is proofreading of an incorrect base, Pol ? does proofread newly inserted rNMPs to enhance genome stability.     

Rad51 replication fork recruitment is required for DNA damage tolerance

Homologous recombination (HR) is essential for genome integrity. Recombination proteins participate in tolerating DNA lesions that interfere with DNA replication, but can also generate toxic recombination intermediates and genetic instability when they are not properly regulated. Here, we have studied the role of the recombination proteins Rad51 and Rad52 at replication forks and replicative DNA lesions. We show that Rad52 loads Rad51 onto unperturbed replication forks, where they facilitate replication of alkylated DNA by non‐repair functions. The recruitment of Rad52 and Rad51 to chromatin during DNA replication is a prerequisite for the repair of the non‐DSB DNA lesions, presumably single‐stranded DNA gaps, which are generated during the replication of alkylated DNA. We also show that the repair of these lesions requires CDK1 and is not coupled to the fork but rather restricted to G2/M by the replicative checkpoint. We propose a new scenario for HR where Rad52 and Rad51 are recruited to the fork to promote DNA damage tolerance by distinct and cell cycle‐regulated replicative and repair functions.     

The Annealing Helicase and Branch Migration Activities of Drosophila HARP

HARP (SMARCAL1, MARCAL1) is an annealing helicase that functions in the repair and restart of damaged DNA replication forks through its DNA branch migration and replication fork regression activities. HARP is conserved among metazoans. HARP from invertebrates differs by the absence of one of the two HARP-specific domain repeats found in vertebrates. The annealing helicase and branch migration activity of invertebrate HARP has not been documented. We found that HARP from Drosophila melanogaster retains the annealing helicase activity of human HARP, the ability to disrupt D-loops and to branch migrate Holliday junctions, but fails to regress model DNA replication fork structures. A comparison of human and Drosophila HARP on additional substrates revealed that both HARPs are competent in branch migrating a bidirectional replication bubble composed of either DNA:DNA or RNA:DNA hybrid. Human, but not Drosophila, HARP is also capable of regressing a replication fork structure containing a highly stable poly rG:dC hybrid. Persistent RNA:DNA hybrids in vivo can lead to replication fork arrest and genome instability. The ability of HARP to strand transfer hybrids may signify a hybrid removal function for this enzyme, in vivo.     

Retroviral integrase superfamily: the structural perspective

The retroviral integrase superfamily (RISF) comprises numerous important nucleic acid‐processing enzymes, including transposases, integrases and various nucleases. These enzymes are involved in a wide range of processes such as transposition, replication and repair of DNA, homologous recombination, and RNA‐mediated gene silencing. Two out of the four enzymes that are encoded by the human immunodeficiency virus—RNase H1 and integrase—are members of this superfamily. RISF enzymes act on various substrates, and yet show remarkable mechanistic and structural similarities. All share a common fold of the catalytic core and the active site, which is composed primarily of carboxylate residues. Here, I present RISF proteins from a structural perspective, describing the individual members and the common and divergent elements of their structures, as well as the mechanistic insights gained from the structures of RNase H1 enzyme complexes with RNA/DNA hybrids.     

EEPD1 Rescues Stressed Replication Forks and Maintains Genome Stability by Promoting End Resection and Homologous Recombination Repair

Replication fork stalling and collapse is a major source of genome instability leading to neoplastic transformation or cell death. Such stressed replication forks can be conservatively repaired and restarted using homologous recombination (HR) or non-conservatively repaired using micro-homology mediated end joining (MMEJ). HR repair of stressed forks is initiated by 5’ end resection near the fork junction, which permits 3’ single strand invasion of a homologous template for fork restart. This 5’ end resection also prevents classical non-homologous end-joining (cNHEJ), a competing pathway for DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair. Unopposed NHEJ can cause genome instability during replication stress by abnormally fusing free double strand ends that occur as unstable replication fork repair intermediates. We show here that the previously uncharacterized Exonuclease/Endonuclease/Phosphatase Domain-1 (EEPD1) protein is required for initiating repair and restart of stalled forks. EEPD1 is recruited to stalled forks, enhances 5’ DNA end resection, and promotes restart of stalled forks. Interestingly, EEPD1 directs DSB repair away from cNHEJ, and also away from MMEJ, which requires limited end resection for initiation. EEPD1 is also required for proper ATR and CHK1 phosphorylation, and formation of gamma-H2AX, RAD51 and phospho-RPA32 foci. Consistent with a direct role in stalled replication fork cleavage, EEPD1 is a 5’ overhang nuclease in an obligate complex with the end resection nuclease Exo1 and BLM. EEPD1 depletion causes nuclear and cytogenetic defects, which are made worse by replication stress. Depleting 53BP1, which slows cNHEJ, fully rescues the nuclear and cytogenetic abnormalities seen with EEPD1 depletion. These data demonstrate that genome stability during replication stress is maintained by EEPD1, which initiates HR and inhibits cNHEJ and MMEJ.     

DNA double-strand breaks associated with replication forks are predominantly repaired by homologous recombination involving an exchange mechanism in mammalian cells

DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) represent a major disruption in the integrity of the genome. DSB can be generated when a replication fork encounters a DNA lesion. Recombinational repair is known to resolve such replication fork-associated DSB, but the molecular mechanism of this repair process is poorly understood in mammalian cells. In the present study, we investigated the molecular mechanism by which recombination resolves camptothecin (CPT)-induced DSB at DNA replication forks. The frequency of homologous recombination (HR) was measured using V79/SPD8 cells which contain a duplication in the endogenous hprt gene that is resolved by HR. We demonstrate that DSB associated with replication forks induce HR at the hprt gene in early S phase. Further analysis revealed that these HR events involve an exchange mechanism. Both the irs1SF and V3-3 cell lines, which are deficient in HR and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), respectively, were found to be more sensitive than wild-type cells to DSB associated with replication forks. The irs1SF cell line was more sensitive in this respect than V3-3 cells, an observation consistent with the hypothesis that DSB associated with replication forks are repaired primarily by HR. The frequency of formation of DSB associated with replication forks was not affected in HR and NHEJ deficient cells, indicating that the loss of repair, rather than the formation of DSB associated with replication forks is responsible for the increased sensitivity of the mutant strains. We propose that the presence of DSB associated with replication forks rapidly induces HR via an exchange mechanism and that HR plays a more prominent role in the repair of such DSB than does NHEJ.