2008
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2008.06423.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Overproduction of Escherichia coli DNA polymerase DinB (Pol IV) inhibits replication fork progression and is lethal

Abstract: SummaryEscherichia coli dinB encodes the specialized DNA polymerase DinB (Pol IV), which is induced as part of the SOS stress-response system and functions in translesion synthesis (TLS) to relieve the replicative Pol III that is stalled at DNA lesions. As the number of DinB molecules, even in unstressed cells, is greater than that required to accomplish TLS, it is thought that dinB plays some additional physiological role. Here, we overexpressed dinB under the tightly regulable arabinose promoter and looked f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

21
129
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(151 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
(96 reference statements)
21
129
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These contacts, however, do not seem to prevent Pol IV from accessing β; previous biochemical experiments with a fully reconstituted replisome have shown that Pol IV can replace Pol III (35). Furthermore, overexpression of Pol IV beyond SOS levels in cells has been shown to arrest replication and induce toxicity because of unregulated access of Pol IV to the replication fork (15,35,36). Removing the CBM residues alleviates Pol IV toxicity, whereas mutating the rim-contacting residues partially alleviates it (16).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…These contacts, however, do not seem to prevent Pol IV from accessing β; previous biochemical experiments with a fully reconstituted replisome have shown that Pol IV can replace Pol III (35). Furthermore, overexpression of Pol IV beyond SOS levels in cells has been shown to arrest replication and induce toxicity because of unregulated access of Pol IV to the replication fork (15,35,36). Removing the CBM residues alleviates Pol IV toxicity, whereas mutating the rim-contacting residues partially alleviates it (16).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Since the first described cases of MMR saturation and error catastrophe (20,22), new insight has emerged into the physiology of stressed bacteria, including stress due to carbon source deprivation (37), antibiotic exposure (38)(39)(40), impaired replication fork progress (38,41), and dNTP pool depletion by the RNR inhibitor, hydroxyurea (42,43). Some of these stresses have been reported to result in the production of oxygen radicals or a mutator phenotype (38,39,42,44).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have previously reported that replication fork progression was impeded when DinB was rapidly overproduced, upon arabinose addition, from the dinB gene under the control of the P BAD promoter (P BAD -dinB) on a multi-copy plasmid (Uchida et al, 2008). On the other hand, in E. coli cells that accumulate DinB more moderately from a single P BAD -dinB on the chromosome, DNA synthesis slowed gradually (Uchida et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beyond its established TLS function at replication forks, these large amounts of DinB have led to proposals for additional biological roles that include error-free processing of endogenously formed lesions such as alkylation (Bjedov et al, 2007) and glycation (Yuan et al, 2008), adaptive mutagenesis (McKenzie et al, 2001;Slechta et al, 2003;Tompkins et al, 2003), error-prone double-strand break repair (Ponder et al, 2005) and longterm survival during stationary phase (Yeiser et al, 2002). Recently, based on the suppression of replication fork progression by ectopic dinB overexpression, it has also been proposed that DinB plays a role as a molecular brake in eukaryotic checkpoint-like regulation of replication fork progression in E. coli (Uchida et al, 2008;Indiani et al, 2009;Langston et al, 2009). This fork-brake activity would provide extra time for a DNA lesion to be repaired before the fork encounters another lesion ahead.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%