Repair of hydantoins, one electron oxidation product of 8-oxoguanine, by DNA glycosylases of Escherichia coli

8-Oxoguanine (8-oxoG), induced by reactive oxygen species and arguably one of the most important mutagenic DNA lesions, is prone to further oxidation. Its one-electron oxidation products include potentially mutagenic guanidinohydantoin (Gh) and spiroiminodihydantoin (Sp) because of their mispairing with A or G. All three oxidized base-specific DNA glycosylases of Escherichia coli, namely endonuclease III (Nth), 8-oxoG-DNA glycosylase (MutM) and endonuclease VIII (Nei), excise Gh and Sp, when paired with C or G in DNA, although Nth is less active than the other two. MutM prefers Sp and Gh paired with C (kcat/Km of 0.24–0.26 min–1 nM–1), while Nei prefers G over C as the complementary base (kcat/Km – 0.15–0.17 min–1 nM–1). However, only Nei efficiently excises these paired with A. MutY, a 8-oxoG·A(G)-specific A(G)-DNA glycosylase, is inactive with Gh(Sp)·A/G-containing duplex oligonucleotide, in spite of specific affinity. It inhibits excision of lesions by MutM from the Gh·G or Sp·G pair, but not from Gh·C and Sp·C pairs. In contrast, MutY does not significantly inhibit Nei for any Gh(Sp) base pair. These results suggest a protective function for MutY in preventing mutation as a result of A (G) incorporation opposite Gh(Sp) during DNA replication.

Heat effects on DNA repair after ionising radiation: hyperthermia commonly increases the number of non-repaired double-strand breaks and structural rearrangements

After ionising radiation double-strand breaks (dsb) are lethal if not repaired or misrepaired. Cell killing is greatly enhanced by hyperthermia and it is questioned here whether heat not only affects dsb repair capacity but also fidelity in a chromosomal context. dsb repair experiments were designed so as to mainly score non-homologous end joining, while homologous recombination was largely precluded. Human male G0 fibroblasts were either preheated (45°C, 20 min) or not before X-irradiation. dsb induction and repair were measured by conventional gel electrophoresis and an assay combining restriction digestion using a rare cutting enzyme (NotI) and Southern hybridisation, which detects large chromosomal rearrangements (>100 kb). dsb induction rate in an X-chromosomal NotI fragment was 4.8 × 10–3 dsb/Gy/Mb. Similar values were found for the genome overall and also when cells were preheated. After 50 Gy, fibroblasts were competent to largely restore the original restriction fragment size. Five per cent of dsb remained non-rejoined and 14% were misrejoined. Correct restitution of restriction fragments occurred preferably during the first hour but continued at a slow rate for 12–16 h. In addition, dsb appeared to misrejoin throughout the entire repair period. After hyperthermia the fractions of non-rejoined and misrejoined dsb were similarly increased to 13 and 51%, respectively. It is suggested that heat increases the probability of dsb being incorrectly rejoined but it is not likely to interfere with one dsb repair pathway in particular.

Rad52 forms DNA repair and recombination centers during S phase

Maintenance of genomic integrity and stable transmission of genetic information depend on a number of DNA repair processes. Failure to faithfully perform these processes can result in genetic alterations and subsequent development of cancer and other genetic diseases. In the eukaryote Saccharomyces cerevisiae, homologous recombination is the major pathway for repairing DNA double-strand breaks. The key role played by Rad52 in this pathway has been attributed to its ability to seek out and mediate annealing of homologous DNA strands. In this study, we find that S. cerevisiae Rad52 fused to green fluorescent protein (GFP) is fully functional in DNA repair and recombination. After induction of DNA double-strand breaks by γ-irradiation, meiosis, or the HO endonuclease, Rad52-GFP relocalizes from a diffuse nuclear distribution to distinct foci. Interestingly, Rad52 foci are formed almost exclusively during the S phase of mitotic cells, consistent with coordination between recombinational repair and DNA replication. This notion is further strengthened by the dramatic increase in the frequency of Rad52 focus formation observed in a pol12-100 replication mutant and a mec1 DNA damage checkpoint mutant. Furthermore, our data indicate that each Rad52 focus represents a center of recombinational repair capable of processing multiple DNA lesions.

The tight linkage between DNA replication and double-strand break repair in bacteriophage T4

Double-strand break (DSB) repair and DNA replication are tightly linked in the life cycle of bacteriophage T4. Indeed, the major mode of phage DNA replication depends on recombination proteins and can be stimulated by DSBs. DSB-stimulated DNA replication is dramatically demonstrated when T4 infects cells carrying two plasmids that share homology. A DSB on one plasmid triggered extensive replication of the second plasmid, providing a useful model for T4 recombination-dependent replication (RDR). This system also provides a view of DSB repair in T4-infected cells and revealed that the DSB repair products had been replicated in their entirety by the T4 replication machinery. We analyzed the detailed structure of these products, which do not fit the simple predictions of any of three models for DSB repair. We also present evidence that the T4 RDR system functions to restart stalled or inactivated replication forks. First, we review experiments involving antitumor drug-stabilized topoisomerase cleavage complexes. The results suggest that forks blocked at cleavage complexes are resolved by recombinational repair, likely involving RDR. Second, we show here that the presence of a T4 replication origin on one plasmid substantially stimulated recombination events between it and a homologous second plasmid that did not contain a T4 origin. Furthermore, replication of the second plasmid was increased when the first plasmid contained the T4 origin. Our interpretation is that origin-initiated forks become inactivated at some frequency during replication of the first plasmid and are then restarted via RDR on the second plasmid.

Mediator proteins orchestrate enzyme-ssDNA assembly during T4 recombination-dependent DNA replication and repair

Studies of recombination-dependent replication (RDR) in the T4 system have revealed the critical roles played by mediator proteins in the timely and productive loading of specific enzymes onto single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) during phage RDR processes. The T4 recombination mediator protein, uvsY, is necessary for the proper assembly of the T4 presynaptic filament (uvsX recombinase cooperatively bound to ssDNA), leading to the recombination-primed initiation of leading strand DNA synthesis. In the lagging strand synthesis component of RDR, replication mediator protein gp59 is required for the assembly of gp41, the DNA helicase component of the T4 primosome, onto lagging strand ssDNA. Together, uvsY and gp59 mediate the productive coupling of homologous recombination events to the initiation of T4 RDR. UvsY promotes presynaptic filament formation on 3′ ssDNA-tailed chromosomes, the physiological primers for T4 RDR, and recent results suggest that uvsY also may serve as a coupling factor between presynapsis and the nucleolytic resection of double-stranded DNA ends. Other results indicate that uvsY stabilizes uvsX bound to the invading strand, effectively preventing primosome assembly there. Instead, gp59 directs primosome assembly to the displaced strand of the D loop/replication fork. This partitioning mechanism enforced by the T4 recombination/replication mediator proteins guards against antirecombination activity of the helicase component and ensures that recombination intermediates formed by uvsX/uvsY will efficiently be converted into semiconservative DNA replication forks. Although the major mode of T4 RDR is semiconservative, we present biochemical evidence that a conservative “bubble migration” mode of RDR could play a role in lesion bypass by the T4 replication machinery.

Managing DNA polymerases: Coordinating DNA replication, DNA repair, and DNA recombination

Two important and timely questions with respect to DNA replication, DNA recombination, and DNA repair are: (i) what controls which DNA polymerase gains access to a particular primer-terminus, and (ii) what determines whether a DNA polymerase hands off its DNA substrate to either a different DNA polymerase or to a different protein(s) for the completion of the specific biological process? These questions have taken on added importance in light of the fact that the number of known template-dependent DNA polymerases in both eukaryotes and in prokaryotes has grown tremendously in the past two years. Most notably, the current list now includes a completely new family of enzymes that are capable of replicating imperfect DNA templates. This UmuC-DinB-Rad30-Rev1 superfamily of DNA polymerases has members in all three kingdoms of life. Members of this family have recently received a great deal of attention due to the roles they play in translesion DNA synthesis (TLS), the potentially mutagenic replication over DNA lesions that act as potent blocks to continued replication catalyzed by replicative DNA polymerases. Here, we have attempted to summarize our current understanding of the regulation of action of DNA polymerases with respect to their roles in DNA replication, TLS, DNA repair, DNA recombination, and cell cycle progression. In particular, we discuss these issues in the context of the Gram-negative bacterium, Escherichia coli, that contains a DNA polymerase (Pol V) known to participate in most, if not all, of these processes.

Roles of DNA polymerases V and II in SOS-induced error-prone and error-free repair in Escherichia coli

DNA polymerase V, composed of a heterotrimer of the DNA damage-inducible UmuC and UmuD\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} \begin{equation*}{\mathrm{_{2}^{^{\prime}}}}\end{equation*}\end{document} proteins, working in conjunction with RecA, single-stranded DNA (ssDNA)-binding protein (SSB), β sliding clamp, and γ clamp loading complex, are responsible for most SOS lesion-targeted mutations in Escherichia coli, by catalyzing translesion synthesis (TLS). DNA polymerase II, the product of the damage-inducible polB (dinA ) gene plays a pivotal role in replication-restart, a process that bypasses DNA damage in an error-free manner. Replication-restart takes place almost immediately after the DNA is damaged (≈2 min post-UV irradiation), whereas TLS occurs after pol V is induced ≈50 min later. We discuss recent data for pol V-catalyzed TLS and pol II-catalyzed replication-restart. Specific roles during TLS for pol V and each of its accessory factors have been recently determined. Although the precise molecular mechanism of pol II-dependent replication-restart remains to be elucidated, it has recently been shown to operate in conjunction with RecFOR and PriA proteins.

Complex formation by the human RAD51C and XRCC3 recombination repair proteins

In vertebrates, the RAD51 protein is required for genetic recombination, DNA repair, and cellular proliferation. Five paralogs of RAD51, known as RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, XRCC2, and XRCC3, have been identified and also shown to be required for recombination and genome stability. At the present time, however, very little is known about their biochemical properties or precise biological functions. As a first step toward understanding the roles of the RAD51 paralogs in recombination, the human RAD51C and XRCC3 proteins were overexpressed and purified from baculovirus-infected insect cells. The two proteins copurify as a complex, a property that reflects their endogenous association observed in HeLa cells. Purified RAD51C–XRCC3 complex binds single-stranded, but not duplex DNA, to form protein–DNA networks that have been visualized by electron microscopy.

DNA replication meets genetic exchange: Chromosomal damage and its repair by homologous recombination

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Colloquium on the roles of homologous recombination in DNA replication are summarized. Current findings in experimental systems ranging from bacteriophages to mammalian cell lines substantiate the idea that homologous recombination is a system supporting DNA replication when either the template DNA is damaged or the replication machinery malfunctions. There are several lines of supporting evidence: (i) DNA replication aggravates preexisting DNA damage, which then blocks subsequent replication; (ii) replication forks abandoned by malfunctioning replisomes become prone to breakage; (iii) mutants with malfunctioning replisomes or with elevated levels of DNA damage depend on homologous recombination; and (iv) homologous recombination primes DNA replication in vivo and can restore replication fork structures in vitro. The mechanisms of recombinational repair in bacteriophage T4, Escherichia coli, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae are compared. In vitro properties of the eukaryotic recombinases suggest a bigger role for single-strand annealing in the eukaryotic recombinational repair.

Transcription factor TFIIH and DNA endonuclease Rad2 constitute yeast nucleotide excision repair factor 3: implications for nucleotide excision repair and Cockayne syndrome.

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) of ultraviolet light-damaged DNA in eukaryotes requires a large number of highly conserved protein factors. Recent studies in yeast have suggested that NER involves the action of distinct protein subassemblies at the damage site rather than the placement there of a "preformed repairosome" containing all the essential NER factors. Neither of the two endonucleases, Rad1-Rad10 and Rad2, required for dual incision, shows any affinity for ultraviolet-damaged DNA. Rad1-Rad10 forms a ternary complex with the DNA damage recognition protein Rad14, providing a means for targeting this nuclease to the damage site. It has remained unclear how the Rad2 nuclease is targeted to the DNA damage site and why mutations in the human RAD2 counterpart, XPG, result in Cockayne syndrome. Here we examine whether Rad2 is part of a higher order subassembly. Interestingly, we find copurification of Rad2 protein with TFIIH, such that TFIIH purified from a strain that overexpresses Rad2 contains a stoichiometric amount of Rad2. By several independent criteria, we establish that Rad2 is tightly associated with TFIIH, exhibiting an apparent dissociation constant < 3.3 x 10(-9) M. These results identify a novel subassembly consisting of TFIIH and Rad2, which we have designated as nucleotide excision repair factor 3. Association with TFIIH provides a means of targeting Rad2 to the damage site, where its endonuclease activity would mediate the 3' incision. Our findings are important for understanding the manner of assembly of the NER machinery and they have implications for Cockayne syndrome.

Mismatch repair in Xenopus egg extracts: DNA strand breaks act as signals rather than excision points.

In Xenopus egg extracts, DNA strand breaks (nicks) located 3' or 5' to a mismatch cause an overall 3-fold stimulation of the repair of the mismatch in circular heteroduplex DNA molecules. The increase in mismatch repair is almost entirely due to an increase in repair of the nicked strand, which is stimulated 5-fold. Repair synthesis is centered to the mismatch site, decreases symmetrically on both sides, and its position is not significantly altered by the presence of the nick. Therefore, it appears that in the Xenopus germ cells, the mismatch repair system utilizes nicks as signals for the induction and direction of mismatch repair, but not as the start or end point for excision and resynthesis.