Genome-Wide Screen Reveals Replication Pathway for Quasi-Palindrome Fragility Dependent on Homologous Recombination

English version České info

Inverted repeats capable of forming hairpin and cruciform structures present a threat to chromosomal integrity. They induce double strand breaks, which lead to gross chromosomal rearrangements, the hallmarks of cancers and hereditary diseases. Secondary structure formation at this motif has been proposed to be the driving force for the instability, albeit the mechanisms leading to the fragility are not well-understood. We carried out a genome-wide screen to uncover the genetic players that govern fragility of homologous and homeologous Alu quasi-palindromes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We found that depletion or lack of components of the DNA replication machinery, proteins involved in Fe-S cluster biogenesis, the replication-pausing checkpoint pathway, the telomere maintenance complex or the Sgs1-Top3-Rmi1 dissolvasome augment fragility at Alu-IRs. Rad51, a component of the homologous recombination pathway, was found to be required for replication arrest and breakage at the repeats specifically in replication-deficient strains. These data demonstrate that Rad51 is required for the formation of breakage-prone secondary structures in situations when replication is compromised while another mechanism operates in DSB formation in replication-proficient strains.

Vyšlo v časopise: Genome-Wide Screen Reveals Replication Pathway for Quasi-Palindrome Fragility Dependent on Homologous Recombination. PLoS Genet 9(12): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003979
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003979

Souhrn

Zdroje

1. LeachDR (1994) Long DNA palindromes, cruciform structures, genetic instability and secondary structure repair. Bioessays 16: 893–900.

2. GordeninDA, LobachevKS, DegtyarevaNP, MalkovaAL, PerkinsE, et al. (1993) Inverted DNA repeats: a source of eukaryotic genomic instability. Mol Cell Biol 13: 5315–5322.

3. RuskinB, FinkGR (1993) Mutations in POL1 increase the mitotic instability of tandem inverted repeats in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 134: 43–56.

4. LobachevKS, ShorBM, TranHT, TaylorW, KeenJD, et al. (1998) Factors affecting inverted repeat stimulation of recombination and deletion in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 148: 1507–1524.

5. LobachevKS, GordeninDA, ResnickMA (2002) The Mre11 complex is required for repair of hairpin-capped double-strand breaks and prevention of chromosome rearrangements. Cell 108: 183–193.

6. NarayananV, MieczkowskiPA, KimHM, PetesTD, LobachevKS (2006) The pattern of gene amplification is determined by the chromosomal location of hairpin-capped breaks. Cell 125: 1283–1296.

7. LemoineFJ, DegtyarevaNP, LobachevK, PetesTD (2005) Chromosomal translocations in yeast induced by low levels of DNA polymerase a model for chromosome fragile sites. Cell 120: 587–598.

8. FarahJA, HartsuikerE, MizunoK, OhtaK, SmithGR (2002) A 160-bp palindrome is a Rad50.Rad32-dependent mitotic recombination hotspot in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genetics 161: 461–468.

9. LobachevKS, StengerJE, KozyrevaOG, JurkaJ, GordeninDA, et al. (2000) Inverted Alu repeats unstable in yeast are excluded from the human genome. EMBO J 19: 3822–3830.

10. AkgunE, ZahnJ, BaumesS, BrownG, LiangF, et al. (1997) Palindrome resolution and recombination in the mammalian germ line. Mol Cell Biol 17: 5559–5570.

11. WaldmanAS, TranH, GoldsmithEC, ResnickMA (1999) Long inverted repeats are an at-risk motif for recombination in mammalian cells. Genetics 153: 1873–1883.

12. CollickA, DrewJ, PenberthJ, BoisP, LuckettJ, et al. (1996) Instability of long inverted repeats within mouse transgenes. EMBO J 15: 1163–1171.

13. Kehrer-SawatzkiH, HausslerJ, KroneW, BodeH, JenneDE, et al. (1997) The second case of a t(17;22) in a family with neurofibromatosis type 1: sequence analysis of the breakpoint regions. Hum Genet 99: 237–247.

14. KurahashiH, ShaikhT, TakataM, TodaT, EmanuelBS (2003) The constitutional t(17;22): another translocation mediated by palindromic AT-rich repeats. Am J Hum Genet 72: 733–738.

15. NimmakayaluMA, GotterAL, ShaikhTH, EmanuelBS (2003) A novel sequence-based approach to localize translocation breakpoints identifies the molecular basis of a t(4;22). Hum Mol Genet 12: 2817–2825.

16. GotterAL, ShaikhTH, BudarfML, RhodesCH, EmanuelBS (2004) A palindrome-mediated mechanism distinguishes translocations involving LCR-B of chromosome 22q11.2. Hum Mol Genet 13: 103–115.

17. GotterAL, NimmakayaluMA, JalaliGR, HackerAM, VorstmanJ, et al. (2007) A palindrome-driven complex rearrangement of 22q11.2 and 8q24.1 elucidated using novel technologies. Genome Res 17: 470–481.

18. SheridanMB, KatoT, Haldeman-EnglertC, JalaliGR, MilunskyJM, et al. (2010) A palindrome-mediated recurrent translocation with 3∶1 meiotic nondisjunction: the t(8;22)(q24.13;q11.21). Am J Hum Genet 87: 209–218.

19. RooksH, ClarkB, BestS, RushtonP, OakleyM, et al. (2012) A novel 506 kb deletion causing epsilongammadeltabeta thalassemia. Blood Cells Mol Dis 49: 121–127.

20. ZhuH, ShangD, SunM, ChoiS, LiuQ, et al. (2011) X-linked congenital hypertrichosis syndrome is associated with interchromosomal insertions mediated by a human-specific palindrome near SOX3. Am J Hum Genet 88: 819–826.

21. TanakaH, BergstromDA, YaoMC, TapscottSJ (2005) Widespread and nonrandom distribution of DNA palindromes in cancer cells provides a structural platform for subsequent gene amplification. Nat Genet 37: 320–327.

22. TanakaH, BergstromDA, YaoMC, TapscottSJ (2006) Large DNA palindromes as a common form of structural chromosome aberrations in human cancers. Hum Cell 19: 17–23.

23. TanakaH, CaoY, BergstromDA, KooperbergC, TapscottSJ, et al. (2007) Intrastrand annealing leads to the formation of a large DNA palindrome and determines the boundaries of genomic amplification in human cancer. Mol Cell Biol 27: 1993–2002.

24. GuenthoerJ, DiedeSJ, TanakaH, ChaiX, HsuL, et al. (2012) Assessment of palindromes as platforms for DNA amplification in breast cancer. Genome Res 22: 232–245.

25. NeimanPE, KimmelR, IcreverziA, ElsaesserK, BowersSJ, et al. (2006) Genomic instability during Myc-induced lymphomagenesis in the bursa of Fabricius. Oncogene 25: 6325–6335.

26. NeimanPE, ElsaesserK, LoringG, KimmelR (2008) Myc oncogene-induced genomic instability: DNA palindromes in bursal lymphomagenesis. PLoS Genet 4: e1000132.

27. ManganoR, PiddiniE, CarramusaL, DuhigT, FeoS, et al. (1998) Chimeric amplicons containing the c-myc gene in HL60 cells. Oncogene 17: 2771–2777.

28. FordM, FriedM (1986) Large inverted duplications are associated with gene amplification. Cell 45: 425–430.

29. ConnellyJC, LeachDR (1996) The sbcC and sbcD genes of Escherichia coli encode a nuclease involved in palindrome inviability and genetic recombination. Genes Cells 1: 285–291.

30. LeachDR, OkelyEA, PinderDJ (1997) Repair by recombination of DNA containing a palindromic sequence. Mol Microbiol 26: 597–606.

31. CromieGA, MillarCB, SchmidtKH, LeachDR (2000) Palindromes as substrates for multiple pathways of recombination in Escherichia coli. Genetics 154: 513–522.

32. EykelenboomJK, BlackwoodJK, OkelyE, LeachDR (2008) SbcCD causes a double-strand break at a DNA palindrome in the Escherichia coli chromosome. Mol Cell 29: 644–651.

33. DarmonE, EykelenboomJK, LinckerF, JonesLH, WhiteM, et al. (2010) E. coli SbcCD and RecA control chromosomal rearrangement induced by an interrupted palindrome. Mol Cell 39: 59–70.

34. FarahJA, CromieG, SteinerWW, SmithGR (2005) A novel recombination pathway initiated by the Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 complex eliminates palindromes during meiosis in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genetics 169: 1261–1274.

35. CasperAM, GreenwellPW, TangW, PetesTD (2009) Chromosome aberrations resulting from double-strand DNA breaks at a naturally occurring yeast fragile site composed of inverted ty elements are independent of Mre11p and Sae2p. Genetics 183: 423–426SI, 423-439, 421SI-426SI.

36. CoteAG, LewisSM (2008) Mus81-dependent double-strand DNA breaks at in vivo-generated cruciform structures in S. cerevisiae. Mol Cell 31: 800–812.

37. KurahashiH, InagakiH, OhyeT, KogoH, KatoT, et al. (2006) Palindrome-mediated chromosomal translocations in humans. DNA Repair (Amst) 5: 1136–1145.

38. KogoH, InagakiH, OhyeT, KatoT, EmanuelBS, et al. (2007) Cruciform extrusion propensity of human translocation-mediating palindromic AT-rich repeats. Nucleic Acids Res 35: 1198–1208.

39. KurahashiH, EmanuelBS (2001) Unexpectedly high rate of de novo constitutional t(11;22) translocations in sperm from normal males. Nat Genet 29: 139–140.

40. InagakiH, OhyeT, KogoH, TsutsumiM, KatoT, et al. (2013) Two sequential cleavage reactions on cruciform DNA structures cause palindrome-mediated chromosomal translocations. Nat Commun 4: 1592.

41. StengerJE, LobachevKS, GordeninD, DardenTA, JurkaJ, et al. (2001) Biased distribution of inverted and direct Alus in the human genome: implications for insertion, exclusion, and genome stability. Genome Res 11: 12–27.

42. TongAH, EvangelistaM, ParsonsAB, XuH, BaderGD, et al. (2001) Systematic genetic analysis with ordered arrays of yeast deletion mutants. Science 294: 2364–2368.

43. ZhangY, ShishkinAA, NishidaY, Marcinkowski-DesmondD, SainiN, et al. (2012) Genome-wide screen identifies pathways that govern GAA/TTC repeat fragility and expansions in dividing and nondividing yeast cells. Mol Cell 48: 254–265.

44. BelliG, GariE, AldeaM, HerreroE (1998) Functional analysis of yeast essential genes using a promoter-substitution cassette and the tetracycline-regulatable dual expression system. Yeast 14: 1127–1138.

45. AlcasabasAA, OsbornAJ, BachantJ, HuF, WerlerPJ, et al. (2001) Mrc1 transduces signals of DNA replication stress to activate Rad53. Nat Cell Biol 3: 958–965.

46. OsbornAJ, ElledgeSJ (2003) Mrc1 is a replication fork component whose phosphorylation in response to DNA replication stress activates Rad53. Genes Dev 17: 1755–1767.

47. Navadgi-PatilVM, BurgersPM (2009) A tale of two tails: activation of DNA damage checkpoint kinase Mec1/ATR by the 9-1-1 clamp and by Dpb11/TopBP1. DNA Repair (Amst) 8: 996–1003.

48. StehlingO, VashishtAA, MascarenhasJ, JonssonZO, SharmaT, et al. (2012) MMS19 assembles iron-sulfur proteins required for DNA metabolism and genomic integrity. Science 337: 195–199.

49. GariK, Leon OrtizAM, BorelV, FlynnH, SkehelJM, et al. (2012) MMS19 links cytoplasmic iron-sulfur cluster assembly to DNA metabolism. Science 337: 243–245.

50. KerrestA, AnandRP, SundararajanR, BermejoR, LiberiG, et al. (2009) SRS2 and SGS1 prevent chromosomal breaks and stabilize triplet repeats by restraining recombination. Nat Struct Mol Biol 16: 159–167.

51. AshtonTM, HicksonID (2010) Yeast as a model system to study RecQ helicase function. DNA Repair (Amst) 9: 303–314.

52. MankouriHW, HicksonID (2007) The RecQ helicase-topoisomerase III-Rmi1 complex: a DNA structure-specific ‘dissolvasome’? Trends Biochem Sci 32: 538–546.

53. GrandinN, DamonC, CharbonneauM (2001) Ten1 functions in telomere end protection and length regulation in association with Stn1 and Cdc13. EMBO J 20: 1173–1183.

54. MimitouEP, SymingtonLS (2010) Ku prevents Exo1 and Sgs1-dependent resection of DNA ends in the absence of a functional MRX complex or Sae2. EMBO J 29: 3358–3369.

55. AylonY, KupiecM (2003) The checkpoint protein Rad24 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is involved in processing double-strand break ends and in recombination partner choice. Mol Cell Biol 23: 6585–6596.

56. LeeSE, MooreJK, HolmesA, UmezuK, KolodnerRD, et al. (1998) Saccharomyces Ku70, mre11/rad50 and RPA proteins regulate adaptation to G2/M arrest after DNA damage. Cell 94: 399–409.

57. SandellLL, ZakianVA (1993) Loss of a yeast telomere: arrest, recovery, and chromosome loss. Cell 75: 729–739.

58. GordeninDA, MalkovaAL, PeterzenA, KulikovVN, PavlovYI, et al. (1992) Transposon Tn5 excision in yeast: influence of DNA polymerases alpha, delta, and epsilon and repair genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 89: 3785–3789.

59. WuPY, NurseP (2009) Establishing the program of origin firing during S phase in fission Yeast. Cell 136: 852–864.

60. LetessierA, MillotGA, KoundrioukoffS, LachagesAM, VogtN, et al. (2011) Cell-type-specific replication initiation programs set fragility of the FRA3B fragile site. Nature 470: 120–123.

61. NetzDJ, StithCM, StumpfigM, KopfG, VogelD, et al. (2012) Eukaryotic DNA polymerases require an iron-sulfur cluster for the formation of active complexes. Nat Chem Biol 8: 125–132.

62. KatouY, KanohY, BandoM, NoguchiH, TanakaH, et al. (2003) S-phase checkpoint proteins Tof1 and Mrc1 form a stable replication-pausing complex. Nature 424: 1078–1083.

63. ZegermanP, DiffleyJF (2003) Lessons in how to hold a fork. Nat Struct Biol 10: 778–779.

64. TourriereH, VersiniG, Cordon-PreciadoV, AlabertC, PaseroP (2005) Mrc1 and Tof1 promote replication fork progression and recovery independently of Rad53. Mol Cell 19: 699–706.

65. BhattacharyyaS, LahueRS (2004) Saccharomyces cerevisiae Srs2 DNA helicase selectively blocks expansions of trinucleotide repeats. Mol Cell Biol 24: 7324–7330.

66. CejkaP, PlankJL, BachratiCZ, HicksonID, KowalczykowskiSC (2010) Rmi1 stimulates decatenation of double Holliday junctions during dissolution by Sgs1-Top3. Nat Struct Mol Biol 17: 1377–1382.

67. GrandinN, BaillyA, CharbonneauM (2005) Activation of Mrc1, a mediator of the replication checkpoint, by telomere erosion. Biol Cell 97: 799–814.

68. TsolouA, LydallD (2007) Mrc1 protects uncapped budding yeast telomeres from exonuclease EXO1. DNA Repair (Amst) 6: 1607–1617.

69. SunJ, YuEY, YangYT, ConferLA, SunSH, et al. (2009) Stn1-Ten1 is an Rpa2-Rpa3-like complex at telomeres. Genes Dev 23: 2900–2914.

70. MiyakeY, NakamuraM, NabetaniA, ShimamuraS, TamuraM, et al. (2009) RPA-like mammalian Ctc1-Stn1-Ten1 complex binds to single-stranded DNA and protects telomeres independently of the Pot1 pathway. Mol Cell 36: 193–206.

71. GrossiS, PuglisiA, DmitrievPV, LopesM, ShoreD (2004) Pol12, the B subunit of DNA polymerase alpha, functions in both telomere capping and length regulation. Genes Dev 18: 992–1006.

72. QiH, ZakianVA (2000) The Saccharomyces telomere-binding protein Cdc13p interacts with both the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase alpha and the telomerase-associated est1 protein. Genes Dev 14: 1777–1788.

73. KroghBO, SymingtonLS (2004) Recombination proteins in yeast. Annu Rev Genet 38: 233–271.

74. HashimotoY, Ray ChaudhuriA, LopesM, CostanzoV (2010) Rad51 protects nascent DNA from Mre11-dependent degradation and promotes continuous DNA synthesis. Nat Struct Mol Biol 17: 1305–1311.

75. SchlacherK, ChristN, SiaudN, EgashiraA, WuH, et al. (2011) Double-strand break repair-independent role for BRCA2 in blocking stalled replication fork degradation by MRE11. Cell 145: 529–542.

76. Gonzalez-PrietoR, Munoz-CabelloAM, Cabello-LobatoMJ, PradoF (2013) Rad51 replication fork recruitment is required for DNA damage tolerance. EMBO J 32: 1307–21.

77. SirbuBM, CouchFB, FeigerleJT, BhaskaraS, HiebertSW, et al. (2011) Analysis of protein dynamics at active, stalled, and collapsed replication forks. Genes Dev 25: 1320–1327.

78. PetermannE, OrtaML, IssaevaN, SchultzN, HelledayT (2010) Hydroxyurea-stalled replication forks become progressively inactivated and require two different RAD51-mediated pathways for restart and repair. Mol Cell 37: 492–502.

79. SchlacherK, WuH, JasinM (2012) A distinct replication fork protection pathway connects Fanconi anemia tumor suppressors to RAD51-BRCA1/2. Cancer Cell 22: 106–116.

80. MizunoK, LambertS, BaldacciG, MurrayJM, CarrAM (2009) Nearby inverted repeats fuse to generate acentric and dicentric palindromic chromosomes by a replication template exchange mechanism. Genes Dev 23: 2876–2886.

81. MizunoK, MiyabeI, SchalbetterSA, CarrAM, MurrayJM (2013) Recombination-restarted replication makes inverted chromosome fusions at inverted repeats. Nature 493: 246–249.

82. ZhangH, LawrenceCW (2005) The error-free component of the RAD6/RAD18 DNA damage tolerance pathway of budding yeast employs sister-strand recombination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102: 15954–15959.

83. BugreevDV, RossiMJ, MazinAV (2011) Cooperation of RAD51 and RAD54 in regression of a model replication fork. Nucleic Acids Res 39: 2153–2164.

84. GangavarapuV, PrakashS, PrakashL (2007) Requirement of RAD52 group genes for postreplication repair of UV-damaged DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol 27: 7758–7764.

85. ZhabinskayaD, BenhamCJ (2013) Competitive superhelical transitions involving cruciform extrusion. Nucleic Acids Res doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt733

86. WachA, BrachatA, PohlmannR, PhilippsenP (1994) New heterologous modules for classical or PCR-based gene disruptions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 10: 1793–1808.

87. GoldsteinAL, McCuskerJH (1999) Three new dominant drug resistance cassettes for gene disruption in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 15: 1541–1553.

88. AlaniE, CaoL, KlecknerN (1987) A method for gene disruption that allows repeated use of URA3 selection in the construction of multiply disrupted yeast strains. Genetics 116: 541–545.

89. DrakeJW (1991) A constant rate of spontaneous mutation in DNA-based microbes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 88: 7160–7164.

90. Dixon W.J., and Massey F.J. Jr. (1969) Introduction to statistical analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. p. 349.

91. OhSD, JessopL, LaoJP, AllersT, LichtenM, et al. (2009) Stabilization and electrophoretic analysis of meiotic recombination intermediates in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Methods Mol Biol 557: 209–234.

92. BrewerBJ, FangmanWL (1987) The localization of replication origins on ARS plasmids in S. cerevisiae. Cell 51: 463–471.

93. FriedmanKL, BrewerBJ (1995) Analysis of replication intermediates by two-dimensional agarose gel electrophoresis. Methods Enzymol 262: 613–627.