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.     

14-3-3 Proteins regulate exonuclease 1-dependent processing of stalled replication forks

Replication fork integrity, which is essential for the maintenance of genome stability, is monitored by checkpoint-mediated phosphorylation events. 14-3-3 proteins are able to bind phosphorylated proteins and were shown to play an undefined role under DNA replication stress. Exonuclease 1 (Exo1) processes stalled replication forks in checkpoint-defective yeast cells. We now identify 14-3-3 proteins as in vivo interaction partners of Exo1, both in yeast and mammalian cells. Yeast 14-3-3-deficient cells fail to induce Mec1-dependent Exo1 hyperphosphorylation and accumulate Exo1-dependent ssDNA gaps at stalled forks, as revealed by electron microscopy. This leads to persistent checkpoint activation and exacerbated recovery defects. Moreover, using DNA bi-dimensional electrophoresis, we show that 14-3-3 proteins promote fork progression under limiting nucleotide concentrations. We propose that 14-3-3 proteins assist in controlling the phosphorylation status of Exo1 and additional unknown targets, promoting fork progression, stability, and restart in response to DNA replication stress.     

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.     

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.     

FANCM regulates DNA chain elongation and is stabilized by S‐phase checkpoint signalling

FANCM binds and remodels replication fork structures in vitro. We report that in vivo, FANCM controls DNA chain elongation in an ATPase‐dependent manner. In the presence of replication inhibitors that do not damage DNA, FANCM counteracts fork movement, possibly by remodelling fork structures. Conversely, through damaged DNA, FANCM promotes replication and recovers stalled forks. Hence, the impact of FANCM on fork progression depends on the underlying hindrance. We further report that signalling through the checkpoint effector kinase Chk1 prevents FANCM from degradation by the proteasome after exposure to DNA damage. FANCM also acts in a feedback loop to stabilize Chk1. We propose that FANCM is a ringmaster in the response to replication stress by physically altering replication fork structures and by providing a tight link to S‐phase checkpoint signalling.     

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.     

DNA polymerase κ‐dependent DNA synthesis at stalled replication forks is important for CHK1 activation

Formation of primed single‐stranded DNA at stalled replication forks triggers activation of the replication checkpoint signalling cascade resulting in the ATR‐mediated phosphorylation of the Chk1 protein kinase, thus preventing genomic instability. By using siRNA‐mediated depletion in human cells and immunodepletion and reconstitution experiments in Xenopus egg extracts, we report that the Y‐family translesion (TLS) DNA polymerase kappa (Pol κ) contributes to the replication checkpoint response and is required for recovery after replication stress. We found that Pol κ is implicated in the synthesis of short DNA intermediates at stalled forks, facilitating the recruitment of the 9‐1‐1 checkpoint clamp. Furthermore, we show that Pol κ interacts with the Rad9 subunit of the 9‐1‐1 complex. Finally, we show that this novel checkpoint function of Pol κ is required for the maintenance of genomic stability and cell proliferation in unstressed human cells.     

Minding the gap: the underground functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 at stalled replication forks

The hereditary breast and ovarian cancer predisposition genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, participate in the repair of DNA double strand breaks by homologous recombination. Circumstantial evidence implicates these genes in recombinational responses to DNA polymerase stalling during the S phase of the cell cycle. These responses play a key role in preventing genomic instability and cancer. Here, we review the current literature implicating the BRCA pathway in HR at stalled replication forks and explore the hypothesis that BRCA1 and BRCA2 participate in the recombinational resolution of single stranded DNA lesions termed "daughter strand gaps", generated during replication across a damaged DNA template.     

Cleavage of stalled forks by fission yeast Mus81/Eme1 in absence of DNA replication checkpoint

During replication arrest, the DNA replication checkpoint plays a crucial role in the stabilization of the replisome at stalled forks, thus preventing the collapse of active forks and the formation of aberrant DNA structures. How this checkpoint acts to preserve the integrity of replication structures at stalled fork is poorly understood. In Schizosaccharomyces pombe, the DNA replication checkpoint kinase Cds1 negatively regulates the structure-specific endonuclease Mus81/Eme1 to preserve genomic integrity when replication is perturbed. Here, we report that, in response to hydroxyurea (HU) treatment, the replication checkpoint prevents S-phase-specific DNA breakage resulting from Mus81 nuclease activity. However, loss of Mus81 regulation by Cds1 is not sufficient to produce HU-induced DNA breaks. Our results suggest that unscheduled cleavage of stalled forks by Mus81 is permitted when the replisome is not stabilized by the replication checkpoint. We also show that HU-induced DNA breaks are partially dependent on the Rqh1 helicase, the fission yeast homologue of BLM, but are independent of its helicase activity. This suggests that efficient cleavage of stalled forks by Mus81 requires Rqh1. Finally, we identified an interplay between Mus81 activity at stalled forks and the Chk1-dependent DNA damage checkpoint during S-phase when replication forks have collapsed.     

PARP is activated at stalled forks to mediate Mre11‐dependent replication restart and recombination

If replication forks are perturbed, a multifaceted response including several DNA repair and cell cycle checkpoint pathways is activated to ensure faithful DNA replication. Here, we show that poly(ADP‐ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) binds to and is activated by stalled replication forks that contain small gaps. PARP1 collaborates with Mre11 to promote replication fork restart after release from replication blocks, most likely by recruiting Mre11 to the replication fork to promote resection of DNA. Both PARP1 and PARP2 are required for hydroxyurea‐induced homologous recombination to promote cell survival after replication blocks. Together, our data suggest that PARP1 and PARP2 detect disrupted replication forks and attract Mre11 for end processing that is required for subsequent recombination repair and restart of replication forks.     

Response of the Bacteriophage T4 Replisome to Noncoding Lesions and Regression of a Stalled Replication Fork

DNA is constantly damaged by endogenous and exogenous agents. The resulting DNA lesions have the potential to halt the progression of the replisome, possibly leading to replication fork collapse. Here, we examine the effect of a noncoding DNA lesion in either leading strand template or lagging strand template on the bacteriophage T4 replisome. A damaged base in the lagging strand template does not affect the progression of the replication fork. Instead, the stalled lagging strand polymerase recycles from the lesion and initiates the synthesis of a new Okazaki fragment upstream of the damaged base. In contrast, when the replisome encounters a blocking lesion in the leading strand template, the replication fork only travels approximately 1 kb beyond the point of the DNA lesion before complete replication fork collapse. The primosome and the lagging strand polymerase remain active during this period, and an Okazaki fragment is synthesized beyond the point of the leading strand lesion. There is no evidence for a new priming event on the leading strand template. Instead, the DNA structure that is produced by the stalled replication fork is a substrate for the DNA repair helicase UvsW. UvsW catalyzes the regression of a stalled replication fork into a “chicken-foot” structure that has been postulated to be an intermediate in an error-free lesion bypass pathway.     

Exo1 processes stalled replication forks and counteracts fork reversal in checkpoint-defective cells

The replication checkpoint coordinates the cell cycle with DNA replication and recombination, preventing genome instability and cancer. The budding yeast Rad53 checkpoint kinase stabilizes stalled forks and replisome-fork complexes, thus preventing the accumulation of ss-DNA regions and reversed forks at collapsed forks. We searched for factors involved in the processing of stalled forks in HU-treated rad53 cells. Using the neutral-neutral two-dimensional electrophoresis technique (2D gel) and psoralen crosslinking combined with electron microscopy (EM), we found that the Exo1 exonuclease is recruited to stalled forks and, in rad53 mutants, counteracts reversed fork accumulation by generating ss-DNA intermediates. Hence, Exo1-mediated fork processing resembles the action of E. coli RecJ nuclease at damaged forks. Fork stability and replication restart are influenced by both DNA polymerase-fork association and Exo1-mediated processing. We suggest that Exo1 counteracts fork reversal by resecting newly synthesized chains and resolving the sister chromatid junctions that cause regression of collapsed forks.     

Building up and breaking down: mechanisms controlling recombination during replication

The complete and faithful duplication of the genome is an essential prerequisite for proliferating cells to maintain genome integrity. This objective is greatly challenged by DNA damage encountered during replication, which causes fork stalling and in certain cases, fork breakage. DNA damage tolerance (DDT) pathways mitigate the effects on fork stability induced by replication fork stalling by mediating damage-bypass and replication fork restart. These DDT mechanisms, largely relying on homologous recombination (HR) and specialized polymerases, can however contribute to genome rearrangements and mutagenesis. There is a profound connection between replication and recombination: recombination proteins protect replication forks from nuclease-mediated degradation of the nascent DNA strands and facilitate replication completion in cells challenged by DNA damage. Moreover, in case of fork collapse and formation of double strand breaks (DSBs), the recombination factors present or recruited to the fork facilitate HR-mediated DSB repair, which is primarily error-free. Disruption of HR is inexorably linked to genome instability, but the premature activation of HR during replication often leads to genome rearrangements. Faithful replication necessitates the downregulation of HR and disruption of active RAD51 filaments at replication forks, but upon persistent fork stalling, building up of HR is critical for the reorganization of the replication fork and for filling-in of the gaps associated with discontinuous replication induced by DNA lesions. Here we summarize and reflect on our understanding of the mechanisms that either suppress recombination or locally enhance it during replication, and the principles that underlie this regulation.     

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.     

And‐1 coordinates with Claspin for efficient Chk1 activation in response to replication stress

The replisome is important for DNA replication checkpoint activation, but how specific components of the replisome coordinate with ATR to activate Chk1 in human cells remains largely unknown. Here, we demonstrate that And‐1, a replisome component, acts together with ATR to activate Chk1. And‐1 is phosphorylated at T826 by ATR following replication stress, and this phosphorylation is required for And‐1 to accumulate at the damage sites, where And‐1 promotes the interaction between Claspin and Chk1, thereby stimulating efficient Chk1 activation by ATR. Significantly, And‐1 binds directly to ssDNA and facilitates the association of Claspin with ssDNA. Furthermore, And‐1 associates with replication forks and is required for the recovery of stalled forks. These studies establish a novel ATR–And‐1 axis as an important regulator for efficient Chk1 activation and reveal a novel mechanism of how the replisome regulates the replication checkpoint and genomic stability.     

Rad9/53BP1 protects stalled replication forks from degradation in Mec1/ATR‐defective cells

Nucleolytic processing by nucleases can be a relevant mechanism to allow repair/restart of stalled replication forks. However, nuclease action needs to be controlled to prevent overprocessing of damaged replication forks that can be detrimental to genome stability. The checkpoint protein Rad9/53BP1 is known to limit nucleolytic degradation (resection) of DNA double‐strand breaks (DSBs) in both yeast and mammals. Here, we show that loss of the inhibition that Rad9 exerts on resection exacerbates the sensitivity to replication stress of Mec1/ATR‐defective yeast cells by exposing stalled replication forks to Dna2‐dependent degradation. This Rad9 protective function is independent of checkpoint activation and relies mainly on Rad9‐Dpb11 interaction. We propose that Rad9/53BP1 supports cell viability by protecting stalled replication forks from extensive resection when the intra‐S checkpoint is not fully functional.     

The MMS22L–TONSL heterodimer directly promotes RAD51‐dependent recombination upon replication stress

Homologous recombination (HR) is a key pathway that repairs DNA double‐strand breaks (DSBs) and helps to restart stalled or collapsed replication forks. How HR supports replication upon genotoxic stress is not understood. Using in vivo and in vitro approaches, we show that the MMS22L–TONSL heterodimer localizes to replication forks under unperturbed conditions and its recruitment is increased during replication stress in human cells. MMS22L–TONSL associates with replication protein A (RPA)‐coated ssDNA, and the MMS22L subunit directly interacts with the strand exchange protein RAD51. MMS22L is required for proper RAD51 assembly at DNA damage sites in vivo, and HR‐mediated repair of stalled forks is abrogated in cells expressing a MMS22L mutant deficient in RAD51 interaction. Similar to the recombination mediator BRCA2, recombinant MMS22L–TONSL limits the assembly of RAD51 on dsDNA, which stimulates RAD51‐ssDNA nucleoprotein filament formation and RAD51‐dependent strand exchange activity in vitro. Thus, by specifically regulating RAD51 activity at uncoupled replication forks, MMS22L–TONSL stabilizes perturbed replication forks by promoting replication fork reversal and stimulating their HR‐mediated restart in vivo.     

Role of replication protein A as sensor in activation of the S-phase checkpoint in Xenopus egg extracts

Uncoupling between DNA polymerases and helicase activities at replication forks, induced by diverse DNA lesions or replication inhibitors, generate long stretches of primed single-stranded DNA that is implicated in activation of the S-phase checkpoint. It is currently unclear whether nucleation of the essential replication factor RPA onto this substrate stimulates the ATR-dependent checkpoint response independently of its role in DNA synthesis. Using Xenopus egg extracts to investigate the role of RPA recruitment at uncoupled forks in checkpoint activation we have surprisingly found that in conditions in which DNA synthesis occurs, RPA accumulation at forks stalled by either replication stress or UV irradiation is dispensable for Chk1 phosphorylation. In contrast, when both replication fork uncoupling and RPA hyperloading are suppressed, Chk1 phosphorylation is inhibited. Moreover, we show that extracts containing reduced levels of RPA accumulate ssDNA and induce spontaneous, caffeine-sensitive, Chk1 phosphorylation in S-phase. These results strongly suggest that disturbance of enzymatic activities of replication forks, rather than RPA hyperloading at stalled forks, is a critical determinant of ATR activation.     

Orchestration of the S-phase and DNA damage checkpoint pathways by replication forks from early origins

The S-phase checkpoint activated at replication forks coordinates DNA replication when forks stall because of DNA damage or low deoxyribonucleotide triphosphate pools. We explore the involvement of replication forks in coordinating the S-phase checkpoint using dun1Delta cells that have a defect in the number of stalled forks formed from early origins and are dependent on the DNA damage Chk1p pathway for survival when replication is stalled. We show that providing additional origins activated in early S phase and establishing a paused fork at a replication fork pause site restores S-phase checkpoint signaling to chk1Delta dun1Delta cells and relieves the reliance on the DNA damage checkpoint pathway. Origin licensing and activation are controlled by the cyclin-Cdk complexes. Thus, oncogene-mediated deregulation of cyclins in the early stages of cancer development could contribute to genomic instability through a deficiency in the forks required to establish the S-phase checkpoint.     

Rad52 recruitment is DNA replication independent and regulated by Cdc28 and the Mec1 kinase

Recruitment of the homologous recombination machinery to sites of double‐strand breaks is a cell cycle‐regulated event requiring entry into S phase and CDK1 activity. Here, we demonstrate that the central recombination protein, Rad52, forms foci independent of DNA replication, and its recruitment requires B‐type cyclin/CDK1 activity. Induction of the intra‐S‐phase checkpoint by hydroxyurea (HU) inhibits Rad52 focus formation in response to ionizing radiation. This inhibition is dependent upon Mec1/Tel1 kinase activity, as HU‐treated cells form Rad52 foci in the presence of the PI3 kinase inhibitor caffeine. These Rad52 foci colocalize with foci formed by the replication clamp PCNA. These results indicate that Mec1 activity inhibits the recruitment of Rad52 to both sites of DNA damage and stalled replication forks during the intra‐S‐phase checkpoint. We propose that B‐type cyclins promote the recruitment of Rad52 to sites of DNA damage, whereas Mec1 inhibits spurious recombination at stalled replication forks.