端粒结合蛋白TRF2的研究进展

端粒DNA结合蛋白TRF2(TTAGGG repeat binding factor-2)以二聚体形式通过Myb结构域与端粒重复序列TTAGGG结合,并与TRF1、TIN2、Rap1、TINT1及POT1蛋白组成Shelterin蛋白复合物,协同在端粒动态平衡维持过程中起关键作用,进而影响整个基因组的稳定性。此外,TRF2在细胞DNA损伤应答过程中可能发挥重要作用。本文将对TRF2结构和功能研究的最新进展进行综述。     

Epigenetic telomere protection by Drosophila DNA damage response pathways

Analysis of terminal deletion chromosomes indicates that a sequence-independent mechanism regulates protection of Drosophila telomeres. Mutations in Drosophila DNA damage response genes such as atm/tefu, mre11, or rad50 disrupt telomere protection and localization of the telomere-associated proteins HP1 and HOAP, suggesting that recognition of chromosome ends contributes to telomere protection. However, the partial telomere protection phenotype of these mutations limits the ability to test if they act in the epigenetic telomere protection mechanism. We examined the roles of the Drosophila atm and atr-atrip DNA damage response pathways and the nbs homolog in DNA damage responses and telomere protection. As in other organisms, the atm and atr-atrip pathways act in parallel to promote telomere protection. Cells lacking both pathways exhibit severe defects in telomere protection and fail to localize the protection protein HOAP to telomeres. Drosophila nbs is required for both atm- and atr-dependent DNA damage responses and acts in these pathways during DNA repair. The telomere fusion phenotype of nbs is consistent with defects in each of these activities. Cells defective in both the atm and atr pathways were used to examine if DNA damage response pathways regulate telomere protection without affecting telomere specific sequences. In these cells, chromosome fusion sites retain telomere-specific sequences, demonstrating that loss of these sequences is not responsible for loss of protection. Furthermore, terminally deleted chromosomes also fuse in these cells, directly implicating DNA damage response pathways in the epigenetic protection of telomeres. We propose that recognition of chromosome ends and recruitment of HP1 and HOAP by DNA damage response proteins is essential for the epigenetic protection of Drosophila telomeres. Given the conserved roles of DNA damage response proteins in telomere function, related mechanisms may act at the telomeres of other organisms.     

Factors that influence telomeric oxidative base damage and repair by DNA glycosylase OGG1

Telomeres are nucleoprotein complexes at the ends of linear chromosomes in eukaryotes, and are essential in preventing chromosome termini from being recognized as broken DNA ends. Telomere shortening has been linked to cellular senescence and human aging, with oxidative stress as a major contributing factor. 7,8-Dihydro-8-oxogaunine (8-oxodG) is one of the most abundant oxidative guanine lesions, and 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase (OGG1) is involved in its removal. In this study, we examined if telomeric DNA is particularly susceptible to oxidative base damage and if telomere-specific factors affect the incision of oxidized guanines by OGG1. We demonstrated that telomeric TTAGGG repeats were more prone to oxidative base damage and repaired less efficiently than non-telomeric TG repeats in vivo. We also showed that the 8-oxodG-incision activity of OGG1 is similar in telomeric and non-telomeric double-stranded substrates. In addition, telomere repeat binding factors TRF1 and TRF2 do not impair OGG1 incision activity. Yet, 8-oxodG in some telomere structures (e.g., fork-opening, 3'-overhang, and D-loop) were less effectively excised by OGG1, depending upon its position in these substrates. Collectively, our data indicate that the sequence context of telomere repeats and certain telomere configurations may contribute to telomere vulnerability to oxidative DNA damage processing.     

Posttranslational control of telomere maintenance and the telomere damage response

Telomeres help maintain genome integrity by protecting natural chromosome ends from being recognized as damaged DNA. When telomeres become dysfunctional, they limit replicative lifespan and prevent outgrowth of potentially cancerous cells by activating a DNA damage response that forces cells into senescence or apoptosis. On the other hand, chromosome ends devoid of proper telomere protection are subject to DNA repair activities that cause end-to-end fusions and, when cells divide, extensive genomic instability that can promote cancer. While telomeres represent unique chromatin structures with important roles in cancer and aging, we have limited understanding of the way telomeres and the response to their malfunction are controlled at the level of chromatin. Accumulating evidence indicates that different types of posttranslational modifications act in both telomere maintenance and the response to telomere uncapping. Here, we discuss the latest insights on posttranslational control of telomeric chromatin, with emphasis on ubiquitylation and SUMOylation events.     

When the caps fall off: Responses to telomere uncapping in yeast

Telomeres protect the ends of linear chromosomes from activities that cause sequence losses or challenge chromosome integrity. Furthermore, these ends must be hidden from detection by the DNA damage recognition and response pathways. In particular, they must not fuse with each other. These fundamental and very first functions attributed to telomeres are also summarized with the term ‘chromosome capping’. However, telomeres can become uncapped and the foremost cellular responses to such events aim to restore genome stability in the most conservative fashion possible. I will provide an outline of cellular responses to uncapping in budding yeast and briefly discuss the reverse, namely avoidance mechanisms that prevent telomere formation at inappropriate places.     

The Werner Syndrome Protein Suppresses Telomeric Instability Caused by Chromium (VI) Induced DNA Replication Stress

Telomeres protect the chromosome ends and consist of guanine-rich repeats coated by specialized proteins. Critically short telomeres are associated with disease, aging and cancer. Defects in telomere replication can lead to telomere loss, which can be prevented by telomerase-mediated telomere elongation or activities of the Werner syndrome helicase/exonuclease protein (WRN). Both telomerase and WRN attenuate cytotoxicity induced by the environmental carcinogen hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)), which promotes replication stress and DNA polymerase arrest. However, it is not known whether Cr(VI)-induced replication stress impacts telomere integrity. Here we report that Cr(VI) exposure of human fibroblasts induced telomeric damage as indicated by phosphorylated H2AX (γH2AX) at telomeric foci. The induced γH2AX foci occurred in S-phase cells, which is indicative of replication fork stalling or collapse. Telomere fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) of metaphase chromosomes revealed that Cr(VI) exposure induced an increase in telomere loss and sister chromatid fusions that were rescued by telomerase activity. Human cells depleted for WRN protein exhibited a delayed reduction in telomeric and non-telomeric damage, indicated by γH2AX foci, during recovery from Cr(VI) exposure, consistent with WRN roles in repairing damaged replication forks. Telomere FISH of chromosome spreads revealed that WRN protects against Cr(VI)-induced telomere loss and downstream chromosome fusions, but does not prevent chromosome fusions that retain telomere sequence at the fusion point. Our studies indicate that environmentally induced replication stress leads to telomere loss and aberrations that are suppressed by telomerase-mediated telomere elongation or WRN functions in replication fork restoration.     

Taming the tiger by the tail: modulation of DNA damage responses by telomeres

Telomeres are by definition stable and inert chromosome ends, whereas internal chromosome breaks are potent stimulators of the DNA damage response (DDR). Telomeres do not, as might be expected, exclude DDR proteins from chromosome ends but instead engage with many DDR proteins. However, the most powerful DDRs, those that might induce chromosome fusion or cell‐cycle arrest, are inhibited at telomeres. In budding yeast, many DDR proteins that accumulate most rapidly at double strand breaks (DSBs), have important functions in physiological telomere maintenance, whereas DDR proteins that arrive later tend to have less important functions. Considerable diversity in telomere structure has evolved in different organisms and, perhaps reflecting this diversity, different DDR proteins seem to have distinct roles in telomere physiology in different organisms. Drawing principally on studies in simple model organisms such as budding yeast, in which many fundamental aspects of the DDR and telomere biology have been established; current views on how telomeres harness aspects of DDR pathways to maintain telomere stability and permit cell‐cycle division are discussed.     

Chromosome fusions following telomere loss are mediated by single-strand annealing

Progressive telomere shortening eventually results in chromosome fusions and genome instability as the cell's ability to distinguish chromosome ends from DNA double-strand breaks is compromised. In fission yeast, such events frequently produce stable survivors with all circular chromosomes. To shed light on the repair pathways that mediate chromosome end fusions and generate circular chromosomes, we have examined a diverse array of DNA repair factors. We show that telomere attrition-induced chromosome fusions are dependent on the fission yeast homologs of Rad52, the ERCC1/XPF endonuclease, the single-stranded DNA-binding protein RPA, and the Srs2 and Werner/Bloom helicases, but not Ku and ligase 4. Consistent with a recombinational mechanism of single-strand annealing, cloned junctions map to four of five homology regions in subtelomeric DNA. A comparison with telomere uncapping caused by the absence of the double-stranded telomere-binding protein Taz1 demonstrates that the circumstances and cause of telomere dysfunction profoundly affect which DNA repair pathway is engaged.     

Telomeres and DNA damage checkpoints

In all eukaryotic organisms, interruptions in duplex DNA molecules elicit a DNA damage response, which includes activation of DNA repair machineries and surveillance mechanisms, known as DNA damage checkpoints. Telomeres and double-strand breaks (DSBs) share the common feature of being physical ends of chromosomes. However, unlike DSBs, telomeres do not activate the DNA damage checkpoints and are usually protected from end-to-end fusions and other processing events that normally promote repair of DNA breaks. This indicates that they are shielded from being recognized and processed as DSBs. On the other hand, chromosome ends resemble damaged DNA, as several factors required for DNA repair and checkpoint networks play important roles in telomere length maintenance. Due to the critical role of both DNA damage checkpoints and telomere homeostasis in maintaining genetic stability and in counteracting cancer development, the knowledge of their interconnections is essential for our understanding of these key cellular controls.     

The role of DNA damage response proteins at telomeres--an "integrative" model

Telomeres are specialized structures at chromosome ends which play the key role in chromosomal end protection. There is increasing evidence that many DNA damage response proteins are involved in telomere maintenance. For example, cells defective in DNA double strand break repair proteins including Ku, DNA-PKcs, RAD51D and the MRN (MRE11/RAD51/NBS1) complex show loss of telomere capping function. Similarly, mouse and human cells defective in ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) have defective telomeres. A total of 14 mammalian DNA damage response proteins have, so far, been implicated in telomere maintenance. Recent studies indicate that three more proteins, namely BRCA1, hRad9 and PARP1 are involved in telomere maintenance. The involvement of a wide range of DNA damage response proteins at telomeres raises an important question: do telomere maintenance mechanisms constitute an integral part of DNA damage response machinery? A model termed the "integrative" model is proposed here to argue in favour of telomere maintenance being an integral part of DNA damage response. The "integrative" model is supported by the observation that a telomeric protein, TRF2, is not confined to its local telomeric environment but it migrates to the sites of DNA breakage following exposure of cells to ionizing radiation. Furthermore, even if telomeres are maintained in a non-canonical way, as in the case of Drosophila, DNA damage response proteins are still involved in telomere maintenance suggesting integration of telomere maintenance mechanisms into the DNA damage response network.     

5′ C-rich telomeric overhangs are an outcome of rapid telomere truncation events

A subset of human tumors ensures indefinite telomere length maintenance by activating a telomerase-independent mechanism known as Alternative Lengthening of Telomeres (ALT). Most tumor cells of ALT origin share a constellation of unique characteristics, which include large stores of extra-chromosomal telomeric material, chronic telomere dysfunction and a peculiar enrichment in chromosome ends with 5′ C-rich overhangs. Here we demonstrate that acute telomere de-protection and the subsequent DNA damage signal are not sufficient to facilitate formation of 5′ C-overhangs at the chromosome end. Rather chromosome ends bearing 5′ C-overhangs are a by-product of rapid cleavage events, processing of which occurs independently of the DNA damage response and is partly mediated through the XRCC3 endonuclease.     

The Drosophila Mre11/Rad50 complex is required to prevent both telomeric fusion and chromosome breakage

The MRN complex consists of the two evolutionarily conserved components Mre11 and Rad50 and the third less-conserved component Nbs1/Xrs2. This complex mediates telomere maintenance in addition to a variety of functions in response to DNA double-strand breaks, including homologous recombination, nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ), and activation of DNA damage checkpoints. Mutations in the Mre11 gene cause the human ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder (ATDL). Here, we show that null mutations in the Drosophila mre11 and rad50 genes cause both telomeric fusion and chromosome breakage. Moreover, we demonstrate that these mutations are in the same epistasis group required for telomere capping and mitotic chromosome integrity. Using an antibody against Rad50, we show that this protein is uniformly distributed along mitotic chromosomes, and that Rad50 is unstable in the absence of its binding partner Mre11. To define the roles of rad50 and mre11 in telomere protection, mutant chromosome preparations were immunostained for both HP1 and HOAP, two proteins that protect Drosophila telomeres from fusion. Cytological analysis revealed that mutations in rad50 and mre11 drastically reduce accumulation of HOAP and HP1 at telomeres. This suggests that the MRN complex protects Drosophila telomeres by facilitating recruitment of HOAP and HP1 at chromosome ends.     

细胞DNA损伤检控系统在维持端粒稳定中的功能

真核生物的DNA损伤检控系统是维持细胞基因组稳定的一个重要机制,该系统能检测细胞在生命活动过程中出现的DNA损伤并引发细胞周期阻滞,对DNA损伤进行修复,以维持细胞遗传的稳定性。端粒是位于真核细胞染色体末端由重复DNA序列和蛋白质组成的复合物,具有保护染色体、介导染色体复制、引导减数分裂时的同源染色体配对和调节细胞衰老等作用。虽然端粒与DNA双链断裂都具有作为线性染色体末端的共同特点,但正常端粒并不像DNA双链断裂那样激活DNA损伤检控系统。另一方面,端粒又与DNA损伤相似,因为多种DNA损伤检控蛋白在端粒长度稳定中起重要作用。因此DNA损伤检控系统既参与了维持正常端粒的完整性,又可对端粒损伤作出应答。现就DNA损伤检控系统在维持端粒稳定中的作用及其对功能缺陷端粒的应答作一简要综述。     

Targeted DNA damage at individual telomeres disrupts their integrity and triggers cell death

Cellular DNA is organized into chromosomes and capped by a unique nucleoprotein structure, the telomere. Both oxidative stress and telomere shortening/dysfunction cause aging-related degenerative pathologies and increase cancer risk. However, a direct connection between oxidative damage to telomeric DNA, comprising <1% of the genome, and telomere dysfunction has not been established. By fusing the KillerRed chromophore with the telomere repeat binding factor 1, TRF1, we developed a novel approach to generate localized damage to telomere DNA and to monitor the real time damage response at the single telomere level. We found that DNA damage at long telomeres in U2OS cells is not repaired efficiently compared to DNA damage in non-telomeric regions of the same length in heterochromatin. Telomeric DNA damage shortens the average length of telomeres and leads to cell senescence in HeLa cells and cell death in HeLa, U2OS and IMR90 cells, when DNA damage at non-telomeric regions is undetectable. Telomere-specific damage induces chromosomal aberrations, including chromatid telomere loss and telomere associations, distinct from the damage induced by ionizing irradiation. Taken together, our results demonstrate that oxidative damage induces telomere dysfunction and underline the importance of maintaining telomere integrity upon oxidative damage.     

Give me a break: How telomeres suppress the DNA damage response

Linear organization of the genome requires mechanisms to protect and replicate chromosome ends. To this end eukaryotic cells evolved telomeres, specialized nucleoproteic complexes, and telomerase, the enzyme that maintains the telomeric DNA. Telomeres allow cells to distinguish chromosome ends from sites of DNA damage. In mammalian cells this is accomplished by a protein complex, termed shelterin, that binds to telomeric DNA and is able to shield chromosome ends from the DNA damage machinery. In recent years, we have seen major advances in our understanding of how this protein complex works due to the generation of mouse models carrying mutations of individual shelterin components. This review will focus on our current understanding of how the shelterin complex is able to suppress the DNA damage response pathways, and on the cellular and organismal outcomes of telomere dysfunction.     

Function, replication and structure of the mammalian telomere

Telomeres are specialized structures at the ends of linear chromosomes that were originally defined functionally based on observations first by Muller (1938) and subsequently by McClintock (1941) that naturally occurring chromosome ends do not behave as double-stranded DNA breaks, in spite of the fact that they are the physical end of a linear, duplex DNA molecule. Double-stranded DNA breaks are highly unstable entities, being susceptible to nucleolytic attack and giving rise to chromosome rearrangements through end-to-end fusions and recombination events. In contrast, telomeres confer stability upon chromosome termini, as evidenced by the fact that chromosomes are extraordinarily stable through multiple cell divisions and even across evolutionary time. This protective function of telomeres is due to the formation of a nucleoprotein complex that sequesters the end of the DNA molecule, rendering it inaccessible to nucleases and recombinases as well as preventing the telomere from activating the DNA damage checkpoint pathways. The capacity of a functional end-protective complex to form is dependent upon maintenance of sufficient telomeric DNA. We have learned a great deal about telomere structure and how this specialized nucleoprotein complex confers stability on chromosome ends since the original observations that defined telomeres were made. This review summarizes our current understanding of mammalian telomere replication, structure and function.     

Telomeres and the DNA damage response: why the fox is guarding the henhouse

DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) are repaired by an extensive network of proteins that recognize damaged DNA and catalyze its repair. By virtue of their similarity, the normal ends of linear chromosomes and internal DNA DSBs are both potential substrates for DSB repair enzymes. Thus, telomeres, specialized nucleo-protein complexes that cap chromosomal ends, serve a critical function to differentiate themselves from internal DNA strand breaks, and as a result prevent genomic instability that can result from their inappropriate involvement in repair reactions. Telomeres that become critically short due to failure of telomere maintenance mechanisms, or which become dysfunctional by loss of telomere binding proteins, elicit extensive checkpoint responses that in normal cells blocks proliferation. In this situation, the DNA DSB repair machinery plays a major role in responding to these "damaged" telomeres - creating chromosome fusions or capturing telomeres from other chromosomes in an effort to rid the cell of the perceived damage. However, a surprising aspect of telomere maintenance is that many of the same proteins that facilitate this repair of damaged telomeres are also necessary for their proper integrity. Here, we review recent work defining the roles for DSB repair machinery in telomere maintenance and in response to telomere dysfunction.     

The Drosophila Nbs protein functions in multiple pathways for the maintenance of genome stability

The Mre11/Rad50/Nbs (MRN) complex and the two protein kinases ATM and ATR play critical roles in the response to DNA damage and telomere maintenance in mammalian systems. It has been previously shown that mutations in the Drosophila mre11 and rad50 genes cause both telomere fusion and chromosome breakage. Here, we have analyzed the role of the Drosophila nbs gene in telomere protection and the maintenance of chromosome integrity. Larval brain cells of nbs mutants display telomeric associations (TAs) but the frequency of these TAs is lower than in either mre11 or rad50 mutants. Consistently, Rad50 accumulates in the nuclei of wild-type cells but not in those of nbs cells, indicating that Nbs mediates transport of the Mre11/Rad50 complex in the nucleus. Moreover, epistasis analysis revealed that rad50 nbs, tefu (ATM) nbs, and mei-41 (ATR) nbs double mutants have significantly higher frequencies of TAs than either of the corresponding single mutants. This suggests that Nbs and the Mre11/Rad50 complex play partially independent roles in telomere protection and that Nbs functions in both ATR- and ATM-controlled telomere protection pathways. In contrast, analysis of chromosome breakage indicated that the three components of the MRN complex function in a single pathway for the repair of the DNA damage leading to chromosome aberrations.