DNA mismatch repair is central to the maintenance of genomic stability. It is initiated by the recognition of base-base mismatches and insertion͞deletion loops by the family of MutS proteins. Subsequently, ATP induces a unique conformational change in the MutS-mismatch complex but not in the MutS-homoduplex complex that sets off the cascade of events that leads to repair. To gain insight into the mechanism by which MutS discriminates between mismatch and homoduplex DNA, we have examined the conformations of specific and nonspecific MutS-DNA complexes by using atomic force microscopy. Interestingly, MutS-DNA complexes exhibit a single population of conformations, in which the DNA is bent at homoduplex sites, but two populations of conformations, bent and unbent, at mismatch sites. These results suggest that the specific recognition complex is one in which the DNA is unbent. Combining our results with existing biochemical and crystallographic data leads us to propose that MutS: (i) binds to DNA nonspecifically and bends it in search of a mismatch; (ii) on specific recognition of a mismatch, undergoes a conformational change to an initial recognition complex in which the DNA is kinked, with interactions similar to those in the published crystal structures; and (iii) finally undergoes a further conformational change to the ultimate recognition complex in which the DNA is unbent. Our results provide a structural explanation for the long-standing question of how MutS achieves mismatch repair specificity. D NA mismatch repair (MMR) is a highly conserved repair pathway targeting mismatched bases that arise through DNA replication errors and during homologous recombination (1-3). Inactivation of MMR genes results in a significant increase in the spontaneous mutation rate and, in humans, a predisposition to cancer (4). Escherichia coli provides the best-understood MMR system and serves as a prototype for the more complicated but homologous eukaryotic systems (5). In E. coli, the proteins MutS, MutL, and MutH are responsible for the initiation of MMR (6). MutS and MutL function as dimers and have intrinsic ATPase activities that are essential for MMR (7,8). MMR is initiated by the binding of MutS to either a mismatch or a short insertion͞deletion loop (IDL). Subsequently, ATP induces a conformational change in the MutS-mismatch complex and promotes its interaction with MutL. Assembly of the MutS-MutL-heteroduplex complex activates the endonuclease activity of MutH, which incises the newly synthesized (unmethylated) strand at a d(GATC) site. This incision confers strand specificity of MMR, directing repair exclusively to the newly synthesized strand containing the error. Excision repair completes the process.Crystal structures of E. coli and Thermus aquaticus (Taq) MutS dimers complexed with a G͞T base-base mismatch and a 1T-bulge, respectively, shed light on the structural components of mismatch recognition (9-11). Specific interactions include an aromatic ring stack of a conserved phenylalanine (Phe-39 in Taq or Phe-36 in...

The major DNA repair pathways operate on damage in double-strand DNA because they use the intact strand as a template after damage removal. Therefore, lesions in transient single-strand stretches of chromosomal DNA are expected to be especially threatening to genome stability. To test this hypothesis, we designed systems in budding yeast that could generate many kilobases of persistent single-strand DNA next to double-strand breaks or uncapped telomeres. The systems allowed controlled restoration to the double-strand state after applying DNA damage. We found that lesions induced by UV-light and methyl methanesulfonate can be tolerated in long single-strand regions and are hypermutagenic. The hypermutability required PCNA monoubiquitination and was largely attributable to translesion synthesis by the error-prone DNA polymerase ζ. In support of multiple lesions in single-strand DNA being a source of hypermutability, analysis of the UV-induced mutants revealed strong strand-specific bias and unexpectedly high frequency of alleles with widely separated multiple mutations scattered over several kilobases. Hypermutability and multiple mutations associated with lesions in transient stretches of long single-strand DNA may be a source of carcinogenesis and provide selective advantage in adaptive evolution.

Atomic force microscopy (AFM) is a powerful technique for examining the conformations of protein–DNA complexes and determining the stoichiometries and affinities of protein–protein complexes. We extend the capabilities of AFM to the determination of protein–DNA binding constants and specificities. The distribution of positions of the protein on the DNA fragments provides a direct measure of specificity and requires no knowledge of the absolute binding constants. The fractional occupancies of the protein at a given position in conjunction with the protein and DNA concentrations permit the determination of the absolute binding constants. We present the theoretical basis for this analysis and demonstrate its utility by characterizing the interaction of MutS with DNA fragments containing either no mismatch or a single mismatch. We show that MutS has significantly higher specificities for mismatches than was previously suggested from bulk studies and that the apparent low specificities are the result of high affinity binding to DNA ends. These results resolve the puzzle of the apparent low binding specificity of MutS with the expected high repair specificities. In conclusion, from a single set of AFM experiments, it is possible to determine the binding affinity, specificity and stoichiometry, as well as the conformational properties of the protein–DNA complexes.

No abstract

In mammals, the canonical histone H3 and the variant H3.3 are assembled into chromatin through replication-coupled and replication-independent (RI) histone deposition pathways, respectively, to play distinct roles in chromatin function. H3.3 is largely associated with transcriptionally active regions via the activity of RI histone chaperone, HIRA. However, the precise role of the RI pathway and HIRA in active transcription and the mechanisms by which H3.3 affects gene activity are not known. In this study, we show that HIRA is an essential factor for muscle development by establishing MyoD activation in myotubes. HIRA and Asf1a, but not CHD1 or Asf1b, mediate H3.3 incorporation in the promoter and the critical upstream regulatory regions of the MyoD gene. HIRA and H3.3 are required for epigenetic transition into the more permissive chromatin structure for polymerase II recruitment to the promoter, regardless of transcription-associated covalent modification of histones. Our results suggest distinct epigenetic management of the master regulator with RI pathway components for cellular differentiation.

No abstract

Localized hypermutability (LHM) can be important in evolution, immunity, and genetic diseases. We previously reported that single-strand DNA (ssDNA) can be an important source of damageinduced LHM in yeast. Here, we establish that the generation of LHM by methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) during repair of a chromosomal double-strand break (DSB) can result in over 0.2 mutations/kb, which is ~20,000 fold higher than the MMS-induced mutation density without a DSB. The MMS-induced mutations associated with DSB-repair were primarily due to substitutions via translesion DNA synthesis at damaged cytosines, even though there are nearly 10 times more MMS-induced lesions at other bases. Based on this mutation bias, the promutagenic lesion dominating LHM is likely 3-methylcytosine, which is single-strand specific. Thus, the dramatic increase in mutagenesis at a DSB is concluded to result primarily from the generation of nonrepairable lesions in ssDNA associated with DSB-repair along with efficient induction of highly mutagenic ssDNA-specific lesions. These findings with MMS-induced LHM have broad biological implications for unrepaired damage generated in ssDNA and possibly ssRNA.

Parafibromin, a component of the RNA polymerase II-associated PAF1 complex, is a tumor suppressor linked to hyperparathyroidism-jaw tumor syndrome and sporadic parathyroid carcinoma. Parafibromin induces cell cycle arrest by repressing cyclin D1 via an unknown mechanism. Here, we show that parafibromin interacts with the histone methyltransferase, SUV39H1, and functions as a transcriptional repressor. The central region (128–227 amino acids) of parafibromin is important for both the interaction with SUV39H1 and transcriptional repression. Parafibromin associated with the promoter and coding regions of cyclin D1 and was required for the recruitment of SUV39H1 and the induction of H3 K9 methylation but not H3 K4 methylation. RNA interference analysis showed that SUV39H1 was critical for cyclin D1 repression. These data suggest that parafibromin plays an unexpected role as a repressor in addition to its widely known activity associated with transcriptional activation. Parafibromin as a part of the PAF1 complex might downregulate cyclin D1 expression by integrating repressive H3 K9 methylation during transcription.