DNA in motion during double-strand break repair

Trends in Cell Biology

Volumn 23, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 529-536

  Miné Hattab, Judith ^a,b   Rothstein, Rodney ^b  

^a PSL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY   (France)

^b NewYork Presbyterian Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

DNA mobility; DNA repair; Double strand break repair; Homologous recombination

Indexed keywords

CHROMOSOME; DNA REPAIR; DNA STRUCTURE; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; GENE CONTROL; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; HUMAN; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOTION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGULATORY MECHANISM; REVIEW; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE;

SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE;

DNA MOBILITY; DNA REPAIR; DOUBLE-STRAND BREAK REPAIR; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION;

ANIMALS; DNA; DNA BREAKS, DOUBLE-STRANDED; DNA REPAIR; HUMANS; MOVEMENT; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE;

EID: 84886751857     PISSN: 09628924     EISSN: 18793088     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2013.05.006     Document Type: Review

References (72)

1. Strickfaden H., et al. 4D chromatin dynamics in cycling cells: Theodor Boveri's hypotheses revisited. Nucleus 2010, 1:284-297.
2. Cremer C., et al. Detection of laser--UV microirradiation-induced DNA photolesions by immunofluorescent staining. Hum. Genet. 1980, 54:107-110.
3. Marshall W.F., et al. Interphase chromosomes undergo constrained diffusional motion in living cells. Curr. Biol. 1997, 7:930-939.
4. Heun P., et al. Chromosome dynamics in the yeast interphase nucleus. Science 2001, 294:2181-2186.
5. Berger A.B., et al. High-resolution statistical mapping reveals gene territories in live yeast. Nat. Methods 2008, 5:1031-1037.
6. Chiolo I., et al. Double-strand breaks in heterochromatin move outside of a dynamic HP1a domain to complete recombinational repair. Cell 2011, 144:732-744.
7. Soutoglou E., et al. Positional stability of single double-strand breaks in mammalian cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 2007, 9:675-682.
8. Dimitrova N., et al. 53BP1 promotes non-homologous end joining of telomeres by increasing chromatin mobility. Nature 2008, 456:524-528.
9. Dostie J., Bickmore W.A. Chromosome organization in the nucleus - charting new territory across the Hi-Cs. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2012, 22:125-131.
10. Meaburn K.J., Misteli T. Cell biology: chromosome territories. Nature 2007, 445:379-781.
11. Cremer T., Cremer C. Chromosome territories, nuclear architecture and gene regulation in mammalian cells. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2001, 2:292-301.
12. Misteli T. Beyond the sequence: cellular organization of genome function. Cell 2007, 128:787-800.
13. Meshorer E., et al. Hyperdynamic plasticity of chromatin proteins in pluripotent embryonic stem cells. Dev. Cell 2006, 10:105-116.
14. Masui O., et al. Live-cell chromosome dynamics and outcome of X chromosome pairing events during ES cell differentiation. Cell 2011, 145:447-458.
15. Hinde E., et al. Tracking the mechanical dynamics of human embryonic stem cell chromatin. Epigenetics Chromatin 2012, 5:20.
16. Roix J.J., et al. Spatial proximity of translocation-prone gene loci in human lymphomas. Nat. Genet. 2003, 34:287-291.
17. Meaburn K.J., et al. Spatial genome organization in the formation of chromosomal translocations. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2007, 17:80-90.
18. Zhang Y., et al. Spatial organization of the mouse genome and its role in recurrent chromosomal translocations. Cell 2012, 148:908-921.
19. Misteli T. The inner life of the genome. Sci. Am. 2011, 304:66-73.
20. Meister P., et al. Visualizing yeast chromosomes and nuclear architecture. Methods Enzymol. 2010, 470:535-567.
21. Chuang C.H., et al. Long-range directional movement of an interphase chromosome site. Curr. Biol. 2006, 16:825-831.
22. Kitamura E., et al. Live-cell imaging reveals replication of individual replicons in eukaryotic replication factories. Cell 2006, 125:1297-1308.
23. Aten J.A., et al. Dynamics of DNA double-strand breaks revealed by clustering of damaged chromosome domains. Science 2004, 303:92-95.
24. Mine-Hattab J., Rothstein R. Increased chromosome mobility facilitates homology search during recombination. Nat. Cell Biol. 2012, 14:510-517.
25. Dion V., et al. Increased mobility of double-strand breaks requires Mec1, Rad9 and the homologous recombination machinery. Nat. Cell Biol. 2012, 14:502-509.
26. Neumann F.R., et al. Targeted INO80 enhances subnuclear chromatin movement and ectopic homologous recombination. Genes Dev. 2012, 26:369-383.
27. Jakob B., et al. DNA double-strand breaks in heterochromatin elicit fast repair protein recruitment, histone H2AX phosphorylation and relocation to euchromatin. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39:6489-6499.
28. Krawczyk P.M., et al. Chromatin mobility is increased at sites of DNA double-strand breaks. J. Cell Sci. 2012, 125:2127-2133.
29. Nelms B.E., et al. In situ visualization of DNA double-strand break repair in human fibroblasts. Science 1998, 280:590-592.
30. Jakob B., et al. Live cell microscopy analysis of radiation-induced DNA double-strand break motion. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:3172-3177.
31. Kruhlak M.J., et al. Changes in chromatin structure and mobility in living cells at sites of DNA double-strand breaks. J. Cell Biol. 2006, 172:823-834.
32. Falk M., et al. Chromatin dynamics during DSB repair. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2007, 1773:1534-1545.
33. Strukov Y.G., Belmont A.S. Development of mammalian cell lines with lac operator-tagged chromosomes. CHS Protoc. 2008, 10.1101/pdb.prot4903.
34. Qian H., et al. Single particle tracking. Analysis of diffusion and flow in two-dimensional systems. Biophys. J. 1991, 60:910-921.
35. Mazsuzawa N., et al. Constrained, random, and independent motion of Texas-red labeled chromatin in living interphase PtK2 cells. Acta Histochem. Cytochem. 2000, 33:419-427.
36. Vazquez J., et al. Multiple regimes of constrained chromosome motion are regulated in the interphase Drosophila nucleus. Curr. Biol. 2001, 11:1227-1239.
37. Edelmann P., et al. Morphology and dynamics of chromosome territories in living cells. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2001, 1551:M29-M40.
38. Chubb J.R., et al. Chromatin motion is constrained by association with nuclear compartments in human cells. Curr. Biol. 2002, 12:439-445.
39. Gorisch S.M., et al. Mobility of multi-subunit complexes in the nucleus: accessibility and dynamics of chromatin subcompartments. Histochem. Cell Biol. 2005, 123:217-228.
40. Jegou T., et al. Dynamics of telomeres and promyelocytic leukemia nuclear bodies in a telomerase-negative human cell line. Mol. Biol. Cell 2009, 20:2070-2082.
41. Molenaar C., et al. Visualizing telomere dynamics in living mammalian cells using PNA probes. EMBO J. 2003, 22:6631-6641.
42. Heun P., et al. The positioning and dynamics of origins of replication in the budding yeast nucleus. J. Cell Biol. 2001, 152:385-400.
43. Gasser S.M. Visualizing chromatin dynamics in interphase nuclei. Science 2002, 296:1412-1416.
44. Abney J.R., et al. Chromatin dynamics in interphase nuclei and its implications for nuclear structure. J. Cell Biol. 1997, 137:1459-1468.
45. Levi V., et al. Chromatin dynamics in interphase cells revealed by tracking in a two-photon excitation microscope. Biophys. J. 2005, 89:4275-4285.
46. Weber S.C., et al. Nonthermal ATP-dependent fluctuations contribute to the in vivo motion of chromosomal loci. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:7338-7343.
47. Lisby M., et al. Colocalization of multiple DNA double-strand breaks at a single Rad52 repair centre. Nat. Cell Biol. 2003, 5:572-577.
48. Difilippantonio S., et al. 53BP1 facilitates long-range DNA end-joining during V(D)J recombination. Nature 2008, 456:529-533.
49. Lisby M., et al. Cell cycle-regulated centers of DNA double-strand break repair. Cell Cycle 2003, 2:479-483.
50. Lobachev K., et al. Chromosome fragmentation after induction of a double-strand break is an active process prevented by the RMX repair complex. Curr. Biol. 2004, 14:2107-2112.
51. Kaye J.A., et al. DNA breaks promote genomic instability by impeding proper chromosome segregation. Curr. Biol. 2004, 14:2096-2106.
52. Guasconi V., Ait-Si-Ali S. Chromatin dynamics and cancer. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2004, 3:825-830.
53. van Attikum H., Gasser S.M. ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling and DNA double-strand break repair. Cell Cycle 2005, 4:1011-1014.
54. Saha A., et al. Chromatin remodelling: the industrial revolution of DNA around histones. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2006, 7:437-447.
55. van Attikum H., et al. Recruitment of the INO80 complex by H2A phosphorylation links ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling with DNA double-strand break repair. Cell 2004, 119:777-788.
56. Morrison A.J., et al. INO80 and gamma-H2AX interaction links ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling to DNA damage repair. Cell 2004, 119:767-775.
57. Torres-Rosell J., et al. The Smc5-Smc6 complex and SUMO modification of Rad52 regulates recombinational repair at the ribosomal gene locus. Nat. Cell Biol. 2007, 9:923-931.
58. Oza P., et al. Mechanisms that regulate localization of a DNA double-strand break to the nuclear periphery. Genes Dev. 2009, 23:912-927.
59. Kalocsay M., et al. Chromosome-wide Rad51 spreading and SUMO-H2A.Z-dependent chromosome fixation in response to a persistent DNA double-strand break. Mol. Cell 2009, 33:335-343.
60. Houston P.L., Broach J.R. The dynamics of homologous pairing during mating type interconversion in budding yeast. PLoS Genet. 2006, 2:e98.
61. Symington L.S., Gautier J. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2011, 45:247-271.
62. Lisby M., et al. Choreography of the DNA damage response: spatiotemporal relationships among checkpoint and repair proteins. Cell 2004, 118:699-713.
63. Finn K., et al. Eukaryotic DNA damage checkpoint activation in response to double-strand breaks. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2012, 69:1447-1473.
64. Stucki M., Jackson S.P. MDC1/NFBD1: a key regulator of the DNA damage response in higher eukaryotes. DNA Repair (Amst.) 2004, 3:953-957.
65. Mochan T.A., et al. 53BP1, an activator of ATM in response to DNA damage. DNA Repair (Amst.) 2004, 3:945-952.
66. Dewar J.M., Lydall D. Similarities and differences between "uncapped" telomeres and DNA double-strand breaks. Chromosoma 2012, 121:117-130.
67. Dion V., Gasser S.M. Chromatin movement in the maintenance of genome stability. Cell 2013, 152:1355-1364.
68. Alexeev A., et al. Rad54 protein possesses chromatin-remodeling activity stimulated by the Rad51-ssDNA nucleoprotein filament. Nat. Struct. Biol. 2003, 10:182-186.
69. Mazin A.V., et al. Rad54 protein is targeted to pairing loci by the Rad51 nucleoprotein filament. Mol. Cell 2000, 6:583-592.
70. Kawamura R., et al. Mitotic chromosomes are constrained by topoisomerase II-sensitive DNA entanglements. J. Cell Biol. 2010, 188:653-663.
71. Maul G.G., Deaven L. Quantitative determination of nuclear pore complexes in cycling cells with differing DNA content. J. Cell Biol. 1977, 73:748-760.
72. Mine-Hattab J., Rothstein R. DNA repair: finding the perfect match. Med. Sci. (Paris) 2012, 28:714-716. (in French).