Proficient repair in chromatin remodeling defective ino80 mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae highlights replication defects as the main contributor to DNA damage sensitivity

DNA Repair

Volumn 9, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 976-984

  Czaja, Wioletta ^a   Bespalov, Vyacheslav A ^a   Hinz, John M ^a   Smerdon, Michael J ^a  

^a WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

DNA repair; INO80; Ionizing radiation; Methyl methanesulfonate; Ultraviolet light

Indexed keywords

CAMPTOTHECIN; HELICASE; INO80 PROTEIN; MESYLIC ACID METHYL ESTER; PROTEIN; PYRIMIDINE DIMER; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; CHROMATIN; CHROMATIN ASSEMBLY AND DISASSEMBLY; DNA DAMAGE; DNA METHYLATION; DNA REPAIR; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; EUKARYOTE; FUNGUS MUTANT; IONIZING RADIATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FUNCTION; RNA REPLICATION; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION;

BLOTTING, SOUTHERN; CHROMATIN; DNA REPAIR; DNA REPLICATION; ELECTROPHORESIS; MUTATION; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE PROTEINS;

EUKARYOTA; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE;

EID: 77955982287     PISSN: 15687864     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2010.06.010     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Fischle W., Wang Y., Allis C.D. Binary switches and modification cassettes in histone biology and beyond. Nature 2003, 425:475-479.
2. Saha A., Wittmeyer J., Cairns B.R. Chromatin remodelling: the industrial revolution of DNA around histones. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2006, 7:437-447.
3. Becker P.B., Horz W. ATP-dependent nucleosome remodeling. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2002, 71:247-273.
4. Osley M.A., Tsukuda T., Nickoloff J.A. ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling factors and DNA damage repair. Mutat. Res. 2007, 618:65-80.
5. Ebbert R., Birkmann A., Schuller H.J. The product of the SNF2/SWI2 paralogue INO80 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae required for efficient expression of various yeast structural genes is part of a high-molecular-weight protein complex. Mol. Microbiol. 1999, 32:741-751.
6. Vance J.R., Wilson T.E. Yeast Tdp1 and Rad1-Rad10 function as redundant pathways for repairing Top1 replicative damage. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99:13669-13674.
7. Mizuguchi G., Shen X., Landry J., Wu W.H., Sen S., Wu C. ATP-driven exchange of histone H2AZ variant catalyzed by SWR1 chromatin remodeling complex. Science 2004, 303:343-348.
8. Jonsson Z.O., Jha S., Wohlschlegel J.A., Dutta A. Rvb1p/Rvb2p recruit Arp5p and assemble a functional Ino80 chromatin remodeling complex. Mol. Cell 2004, 16:465-477.
9. van Attikum H., Fritsch O., Hohn B., Gasser S.M. Recruitment of the INO80 complex by H2A phosphorylation links ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling with DNA double-strand break repair. Cell 2004, 119:777-788.
10. Shen X., Mizuguchi G., Hamiche A., Wu C. A chromatin remodelling complex involved in transcription and DNA processing. Nature 2000, 406:541-544.
11. Shen X., Ranallo R., Choi E., Wu C. Involvement of actin-related proteins in ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling. Mol. Cell 2003, 12:147-155.
12. Conaway R.C., Conaway J.W. The INO80 chromatin remodeling complex in transcription, replication and repair. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2009, 34:71-77.
13. Jin J., Cai Y., Yao T., et al. A mammalian chromatin remodeling complex with similarities to the yeast INO80 complex. J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280:41207-41212.
14. Patel S.S., Picha K.M. Structure and function of hexameric helicases. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2000, 69:651-697.
15. Harata M., Oma Y., Mizuno S., Jiang Y.W., Stillman D.J., Wintersberger U. The nuclear actin-related protein of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Act3p/Arp4, interacts with core histones. Mol. Biol. Cell 1999, 10:2595-2605.
16. Hanson P.I, Whiteheart S.W. AAA+ proteins: have engine, will work. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2005, 6:519-529.
17. Wood M.A., McMahon S.B., Cole M.D. An ATPase/helicase complex is an essential cofactor for oncogenic transformation by c-Myc. Mol. Cell 2000, 5:321-330.
18. West S.C. Processing of recombination intermediates by the RuvABC proteins. Annu. Rev. Genet. 1997, 31:213-244.
19. Michel B., Grompone G., Flores M.J., Bidnenko V. Multiple pathways process stalled replication forks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101:12783-12788.
20. Shroff R., Arbel-Eden A., Pilch D., et al. Distribution and dynamics of chromatin modification induced by a defined DNA double-strand break. Curr. Biol. 2004, 14:1703-1711.
21. Morrison A.J., Highland J., Krogan N.J., et al. INO80 and gamma-H2AX interaction links ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling to DNA damage repair. Cell 2004, 119:767-775.
22. Downs J.A., Allard S., Jobin-Robitaille O., et al. Binding of chromatin-modifying activities to phosphorylated histone H2A at DNA damage sites. Mol. Cell 2004, 16:979-990.
23. van Attikum H., Fritsch O., Gasser S.M. Distinct roles for SWR1 and INO80 chromatin remodeling complexes at chromosomal double-strand breaks. EMBO J. 2007, 26:4113-4125.
24. Tsukuda T., Fleming A.B., Nickoloff J.A., Osley M.A. Chromatin remodelling at a DNA double-strand break site in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 2005, 438:379-383.
25. Papamichos-Chronakis M., Krebs J.E., Peterson C.L. Interplay between Ino80 and Swr1 chromatin remodeling enzymes regulates cell cycle checkpoint adaptation in response to DNA damage. Genes Dev. 2006, 20:2437-2449.
26. Papamichos-Chronakis M., Peterson C.L. The Ino80 chromatin-remodeling enzyme regulates replisome function and stability. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2008, 15:338-345.
27. Shimada K., Oma Y., Schleker T., et al. Ino80 chromatin remodeling complex promotes recovery of stalled replication forks. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:566-575.
28. Ogiwara H., Enomoto T., Seki M. The INO80 chromatin remodeling complex functions in sister chromatid cohesion. Cell Cycle 2007, 6:1090-1095.
29. Vincent J.A., Kwong T.J., Tsukiyama T. ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling shapes the DNA replication landscape. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2008, 15:477-484.
30. Brachmann C.B., Davies A., Cost G.J., et al. Designer deletion strains derived from Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288C: a useful set of strains and plasmids for PCR-mediated gene disruption and other applications. Yeast 1998, 14:115-132.
31. Bespalov V.A., Conconi A., Zhang X., Fahy D., Smerdon M.J. Improved method for measuring the ensemble average of strand breaks in genomic DNA. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 2001, 38:166-174.
32. Alseth I., Osman F., Korvald H., et al. Biochemical characterization and DNA repair pathway interactions of Mag1-mediated base excision repair in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005, 33:1123-1131.
33. Conconi A., Bespalov V.A., Smerdon M.J. Transcription-coupled repair in RNA polymerase I-transcribed genes of yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99:649-654.
34. Sutherland B.M., Shih A.G. Quantitation of pyrimidine dimer contents of nonradioactive deoxyribonucleic acid by electrophoresis in alkaline agarose gels. Biochemistry 1983, 22:745-749.
35. Lim C.R., Kimata Y., Ohdate H., et al. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae RuvB-like protein, Tih2p, is required for cell cycle progression and RNA polymerase II-directed transcription. J. Biol. Chem. 2000, 275:22409-22417.
36. Berger C.A, Edenberg H.J. Pyrimidine dimers block simian virus 40 replication forks. Mol. Cell Biol. 1986, 6:3443-3450.
37. Beranek D.T. Distribution of methyl and ethyl adducts following alkylation with monofunctional alkylating agents. Mutat. Res. 1990, 231:11-30.
38. Tercero J.A., Diffley J.F. Regulation of DNA replication fork progression through damaged DNA by the Mec1/Rad53 checkpoint. Nature 2001, 412:553-557.
39. Pribush A., Agam G., Yermiahu T., Dvilansky A., Meyerstein D., Meyerstein N. Radiation damage to the erythrocyte membrane: the effects of medium and cell concentrations. Free Radic. Res. 1994, 21:135-146.
40. Fung C.W., Mozlin A.M., Symington L.S. Suppression of the double-strand-break-repair defect of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae rad57 mutant. Genetics 2009, 181:1195-1206.
41. Sogo J.M., Lopes M., Foiani M. Fork reversal and ssDNA accumulation at stalled replication forks owing to checkpoint defects. Science 2002, 297:599-602.
42. Lundin C., North M., Erixon K., et al. Methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) produces heat-labile DNA damage but no detectable in vivo DNA double-strand breaks. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005, 33:3799-3811.
43. Lindahl T., Wood R.D. Quality control by DNA repair. Science 1999, 286:1897-1905.
44. O'Brien P.J., Ellenberger T. Dissecting the broad substrate specificity of human 3-methyladenine-DNA glycosylase. J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279:9750-9757.
45. Chen J., Derfler B., Maskati A., Samson L. Cloning a eukaryotic DNA glycosylase repair gene by the suppression of a DNA repair defect in Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1989, 86:7961-7965.
46. Xiao W., Samson L. In vivo evidence for endogenous DNA alkylation damage as a source of spontaneous mutation in eukaryotic cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90:2117-2121.
47. Sinha R.P., Hader D.P. UV-induced DNA damage and repair: a review. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2002, 1:225-236.
48. Jansen L.E., Verhage R.A., Brouwer J. Preferential binding of yeast Rad4.Rad23 complex to damaged DNA. J. Biol. Chem. 1998, 273:33111-33114.
49. Shrivastav M., De Haro L.P., Nickoloff J.A. Regulation of DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice. Cell Res. 2008, 18:134-147.
50. Toh G.W., O'Shaughnessy A.M., Jimeno S., et al. Histone H2A phosphorylation and H3 methylation are required for a novel Rad9 DSB repair function following checkpoint activation. DNA Rep. (Amst.) 2006, 5:693-703.
51. Shinohara A., Ogawa H., Ogawa T. Rad51 protein involved in repair and recombination in S. cerevisiae is a RecA-like protein. Cell 1992, 69:457-470.
52. Bao Y., Shen X. INO80 subfamily of chromatin remodeling complexes. Mutat. Res. 2007, 618:18-29.
53. Liu L., Maguire K.K., Kmiec E.B. Genetic re-engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae RAD51 leads to a significant increase in the frequency of gene repair in vivo. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32:2093-2101.
54. Gangavarapu V., Prakash S., Prakash L. Requirement of RAD52 group genes for postreplication repair of UV-damaged DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell Biol. 2007, 27:7758-7764.
55. McGlynn P. Links between DNA replication and recombination in prokaryotes. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2004, 14:107-112.
56. Liberi G., Maffioletti G., Lucca C., et al. Rad51-dependent DNA structures accumulate at damaged replication forks in sgs1 mutants defective in the yeast ortholog of BLM RecQ helicase. Genes Dev. 2005, 19:339-350.
57. Lopes M., Cotta-Ramusino C., Liberi G., Foiani M. Branch migrating sister chromatid junctions form at replication origins through Rad51/Rad52-independent mechanisms. Mol. Cell 2003, 12:1499-1510.
58. Degrassi F., Fiore M., Palitti F. Chromosomal aberrations and genomic instability induced by topoisomerase-targeted antitumour drugs. Curr. Med. Chem. Anticancer Agents 2004, 4:317-325.
59. Gong F., Fahy D., Smerdon M.J. Rad4-Rad23 interaction with SWI/SNF links ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling with nucleotide excision repair. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2006, 13:902-907.
60. Wu S., Shi Y., Mulligan P., et al. A YY1-INO80 complex regulates genomic stability through homologous recombination-based repair. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2007, 14:1165-1172.
61. Fritsch O., Benvenuto G., Bowler C., Molinier J., Hohn B. The INO80 protein controls homologous recombination in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol. Cell 2004, 16:479-485.