A key function of the cellular DNA damage response is to facilitate the bypass of replication fork-stalling DNA lesions. Template switch reactions allow such a bypass and involve the formation of DNA joint molecules (JMs) between sister chromatids. These JMs need to be resolved before cell division; however, the regulation of this process is only poorly understood. Here, we identify a regulatory mechanism in yeast that critically controls JM resolution by the Mus81-Mms4 endonuclease. Central to this regulation is a conserved complex comprising the scaffold proteins Dpb11 and Slx4 that is under stringent control. Cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation of Slx4 by Cdk1 promotes the Dpb11-Slx4 interaction, while in mitosis, phosphorylation of Mms4 by Polo-like kinase Cdc5 promotes the additional association of Mus81-Mms4 with the complex, thereby promoting JM resolution. Finally, the DNA damage checkpoint counteracts Mus81-Mms4 binding to the Dpb11-Slx4 complex. Thus, Dpb11-Slx4 integrates several cellular inputs and participates in the temporal program for activation of the JM-resolving nuclease Mus81. Intrinsically and extrinsically induced DNA lesions can compromise the integrity of the genetic information and threaten cell viability. DNA lesions are particularly dangerous during S phase, when faithful DNA replication relies on two intact DNA strands. DNA lesions hamper the progression of replication forks and thereby the complete duplication of chromosomes. Moreover, replication forks that are stalled at DNA lesion sites can collapse and cause chromosome breaks and genome instability (Branzei and Foiani 2010).Eukaryotes possess two fundamentally different mechanisms to bypass DNA lesions that affect one of the parental DNA strands: translesion synthesis (TLS) and template switching. TLS employs specialized polymerases (translesion polymerases) that in many cases are able to replicate the damaged strand but with a reduced fidelity (Prakash et al. 2005). On the other hand, during template switching, the genetic information is copied from the newly synthesized, undamaged sister chromatid. This mechanism is therefore error-free in principle, yet its precise mechanism remains poorly understood. Template switching is a complex process that can be initiated by different recombination-based mechanisms (homologous recombination [HR] and error-free post-replicative repair [PRR]) (Branzei et al. 2008). The choice between the different bypass mechanisms is regulated by ubiquitin and SUMO modifications Ó 2014 Gritenaite et al. This article is distributed exclusively by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press for the first six months after the full-issue publication date (see http://genesdev.cshlp.org/site/misc/terms.xhtml).
DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) can be repaired by either recombination-based or direct ligation-based mechanisms. Pathway choice is made at the level of DNA end resection, a nucleolytic processing step, which primes DSBs for repair by recombination. Resection is thus under cell cycle control, but additionally regulated by chromatin and nucleosome remodellers. Here, we show that both layers of control converge in the regulation of resection by the evolutionarily conserved Fun30/SMARCAD1 remodeller. Budding yeast Fun30 and human SMARCAD1 are cell cycle-regulated by interaction with the DSB-localized scaffold protein Dpb11/TOPBP1, respectively. In yeast, this protein assembly additionally comprises the 9-1-1 damage sensor, is involved in localizing Fun30 to damaged chromatin, and thus is required for efficient long-range resection of DSBs. Notably, artificial targeting of Fun30 to DSBs is sufficient to bypass the cell cycle regulation of long-range resection, indicating that chromatin remodelling during resection is underlying DSB repair pathway choice.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21687.001
The DNA damage checkpoint senses the presence of DNA lesions and controls the cellular response thereto. A crucial DNA damage signal is single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), which is frequently found at sites of DNA damage and recruits the sensor checkpoint kinase Mec1-Ddc2. However, how this signal – and therefore the cell's DNA damage load – is quantified, is poorly understood. Here, we use genetic manipulation of DNA end resection to induce quantitatively different ssDNA signals at a site-specific double strand break in budding yeast and identify two distinct signalling circuits within the checkpoint. The local checkpoint signalling circuit leading to γH2A phosphorylation is unresponsive to increased amounts of ssDNA, while the global checkpoint signalling circuit, which triggers Rad53 activation, integrates the ssDNA signal quantitatively. The global checkpoint signal critically depends on the 9-1-1 and its downstream acting signalling axis, suggesting that ssDNA quantification depends on at least two sensor complexes.
The nucleosomal landscape of chromatin depends on the concerted action of chromatin remodelers. The INO80 remodeler specifically places nucleosomes at the boundary of gene regulatory elements, which is proposed to be the result of an ATP-dependent nucleosome sliding activity that is regulated by extranucleosomal DNA features. Here, we use cryo–electron microscopy and functional assays to reveal how INO80 binds and is regulated by extranucleosomal DNA. Structures of the regulatory A-module bound to DNA clarify the mechanism of linker DNA binding. The A-module is connected to the motor unit via an HSA/post-HSA lever element to chemomechanically couple the motor and linker DNA sensing. Two notable sites of curved DNA recognition by coordinated action of the four actin/actin-related proteins and the motor suggest how sliding by INO80 can be regulated by extranucleosomal DNA features. Last, the structures clarify the recruitment of YY1/Ies4 subunits and reveal deep architectural similarities between the regulatory modules of INO80 and SWI/SNF complexes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.