Chk1 phosphorylation of Metnase enhances DNA repair but inhibits replication fork restart

Chk1 both arrests replication forks and enhances repair of DNA damage by phosphorylating downstream effectors. Although there has been a concerted effort to identify effectors of Chk1 activity, underlying mechanisms of effector action are still being identified. Metnase (also called SETMAR) is a SET and transposase domain protein that promotes both DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair and restart of stalled replication forks. In this study, we show that Metnase is phosphorylated only on Ser495 (S495) in vivo in response to DNA damage by ionizing radiation. Chk1 is the major mediator of this phosphorylation event. We had previously shown that wild-type (wt) Metnase associates with chromatin near DSBs and methylates histone H3 Lys36. Here we show that a Ser495Ala (S495A) Metnase mutant, which is not phosphorylated by Chk1, is defective in DSB-induced chromatin association. The S495A mutant also fails to enhance repair of an induced DSB when compared with wt Metnase. Interestingly, the S495A mutant demonstrated increased restart of stalled replication forks compared with wt Metnase. Thus, phosphorylation of Metnase S495 differentiates between these two functions, enhancing DSB repair and repressing replication fork restart. In summary, these data lend insight into the mechanism by which Chk1 enhances repair of DNA damage while at the same time repressing stalled replication fork restart. Oncogene (2012) 31, 4245-4254; doi:10.1038/onc.2011.586; published online 9 January 2012

Effects of consequenses on patterns of interlocked contingencies; A replication of a metacontingency experiment

The concept of metacontingency was taught to undergraduate students of Psychology by using a "game" simulation proposed originally by Vichi, Andery and Glenn (2009). Twenty-five students, distributed into three groups were exposed to six experimental sessions in which they had to make bets and divide the amounts gained. The three groups competed against each other for photocopies quotas. Two contingencies shifted over the sessions. Under Contingency B, the group would win points only if in the previous round each member had received the same amount of points and under Contingency A, winning was contingent on an unequal distribution of the points. We observed that proportional divisions predominated independent of the contingency in course. The manipulation of cultural consequences (winning or losing points) produced consistent modifications in two response categories: 1) choices of the value bet in each round, and 2) divisions of the points among group members. Controlling relations between cultural consequences and the behavior of dividing were statistically significant in one of the groups, whereas in the other two groups controlling relations were observed only in Contingency B. A review of the reinforcement criteria used in the original experiment is suggested.