Mechanisms and principles of homology search during recombination

Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 369-383

  Renkawitz, Jörg ^a,b   Lademann, Claudio A ^a   Jentsch, Stefan ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE OF BIOCHEMISTRY   (Germany)

^b INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AUSTRIA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BINDING PROTEIN; COHESIN; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA; NUCLEOPROTEIN; PROTEIN; RAD54 PROTEIN;

BACTERIUM; CHROMATIN; DNA DAMAGE; EUKARYOTE; GENOMIC INSTABILITY; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; YEAST;

ANIMALS; CHROMOSOMES; DNA DAMAGE; DNA REPAIR; GENOMIC INSTABILITY; HUMANS; RECOMBINATION, GENETIC;

EID: 84901493127     PISSN: 14710072     EISSN: 14710080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrm3805     Document Type: Review

References (176)

1. Heyer, W. D., Ehmsen, K. T. & Liu, J. Regulation of homologous recombination in eukaryotes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 44, 113-139 (2010).
2. de Massy, B. Initiation of meiotic recombination: how and where? Conservation and specificities among eukaryotes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 47, 563-599 (2013).
3. Haber, J. E. Mating-type genes and MAT switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 191, 33-64 (2012).
4. Holliday, R. A mechanism for gene conversion in fungi. Genet. Res. 5, 282-304 (1964).
5. Weiner, A., Zauberman, N. & Minsky, A. Recombinational DNA repair in a cellular context: a search for the homology search. Nature Rev. Microbiol. 7, 748-755 (2009).
6. Barzel, A. & Kupiec, M. Finding a match: how do homologous sequences get together for recombination? Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 27-37 (2008). (Pubitemid 350277300)
7. Aylon, Y. & Kupiec, M. DSB repair: the yeast paradigm. DNA Repair 3, 797-815 (2004). (Pubitemid 38997923)
8. Candelli, A., Modesti, M., Peterman, E. J. G. & Wuite, G. J. L. Single-molecule views on homologous recombination. Q. Rev. Biophys. 46, 323-348 (2013).
9. Dion, V. & Gasser, S. M. Chromatin movement in the maintenance of genome stability. Cell 152, 1355-1364 (2013).
10. Miné-Hattab, J. & Rothstein, R. DNA in motion during double-strand break repair. Trends Cell Biol. 23, 529-536 (2013).
11. Camerini-Otero, R. D. & Hsieh, P. Homologous recombination proteins in prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 29, 509-552 (1995). (Pubitemid 26005352)
12. Symington, L. S. & Gautier, J. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu. Rev. Genet. 45, 247-271 (2011).
13. Cloud, V., Chan, Y.-L., Grubb, J., Budke, B. & Bishop, D. K. Rad51 is an accessory factor for Dmc1-mediated joint molecule formation during meiosis. Science 337, 1222-1225 (2012).
14. Mazin, A. V. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. The specificity of the secondary DNA binding site of RecA protein defines its role in DNA strand exchange. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93, 10673-10678 (1996). (Pubitemid 26333047)
15. Mazin, A. V. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. The function of the secondary DNA-binding site of RecA protein during DNA strand exchange. EMBO J. 17, 1161-1168 (1998). (Pubitemid 28077669)
16. De Vlaminck, I. et al. Mechanism of homology recognition in DNA recombination from dual-molecule experiments. Mol. Cell 46, 616-624 (2012).
17. Voloshin, O. N. & Camerini-Otero, R. D. Synaptic complex revisited; a homologous recombinase flips and switches bases. Mol. Cell 15, 846-847 (2004). (Pubitemid 39277981)
18. Folta-Stogniew, E., O'Malley, S., Gupta, R., Anderson, K. S. & Radding, C. M. Exchange of DNA base pairs that coincides with recognition of homology promoted by E. coli RecA protein. Mol. Cell 15, 965-975 (2004). (Pubitemid 39277992)
19. Gupta, R. C., Folta-Stogniew, E., O'Malley, S., Takahashi, M. & Radding, C. M. Rapid exchange of A:T base pairs is essential for recognition of DNA homology by human Rad51 recombination protein. Mol. Cell 4, 705-714 (1999).
20. Chen, Z., Yang, H. & Pavletich, N. P. Mechanism of homologous recombination from the RecA-ssDNA/dsDNA structures. Nature 453, 489-484 (2008).
21. Reymer, A., Frykholm, K., Morimatsu, K., Takahashi, M. & Nordén, B. Structure of human Rad51 protein filament from molecular modeling and site-specific linear dichroism spectroscopy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 13248-13253 (2009).
22. Savir, Y. & Tlusty, T. RecA-mediated homology search as a nearly optimal signal detection system. Mol. Cell 40, 388-396 (2010).
23. Danilowicz, C. et al. The differential extension in dsDNA bound to Rad51 filaments may play important roles in homology recognition and strand exchange. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, 526-533 (2014).
24. Danilowicz, C. et al. RecA homology search is promoted by mechanical stress along the scanned duplex DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 1717-1727 (2012).
25. Hsieh, P., Camerini-Otero, C. S. & Camerini-Otero, R. D. The synapsis event in the homologous pairing of DNAs: RecA recognizes and pairs less than one helical repeat of DNA. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 89, 6492-6496 (1992).
26. Sung, P., Krejci, L., van Komen, S. & Sehorn, M. G. Rad51 recombinase and recombination mediators. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 42729-42732 (2003). (Pubitemid 37345880)
27. Chi, P., van Komen, S., Sehorn, M. G., Sigurdsson, S. & Sung, P. Roles of ATP binding and ATP hydrolysis in human Rad51 recombinase function. DNA Repair 5, 381-391 (2006). (Pubitemid 43247603)
28. Menetski, J. P., Bear, D. G. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Stable DNA heteroduplex formation catalyzed by the Escherichia coli RecA protein in the absence of ATP hydrolysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 87, 21-25 (1990).
29. Sung, P. & Stratton, S. A. Yeast Rad51 recombinase mediates polar DNA strand exchange in the absence of ATP hydrolysis. J. Biol. Chem. 271, 27983-27986 (1996). (Pubitemid 26374597)
30. Peacock-Villada, A. et al. Complementary strand relocation may play vital roles in RecA-based homology recognition. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 10441-10451 (2012).
31. Ragunathan, K., Joo, C. & Ha, T. Real-time observation of strand exchange reaction with high spatiotemporal resolution. Structure 19, 1064-1073 (2011).
32. Holthausen, J. T., Wyman, C. & Kanaar, R. Regulation of DNA strand exchange in homologous recombination. DNA Repair 9, 1264-1272 (2010).
33. Kowalczykowski, S. C. Biochemistry of genetic recombination: energetics and mechanism of DNA strand exchange. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem. 20, 539-575 (1991).
34. Julin, D. A., Riddles, P. W. & Lehman, I. R. On the mechanism of pairing of single- and double-stranded DNA molecules by the recA and single-stranded DNA binding proteins of Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 261, 1025-1030 (1986). (Pubitemid 16144759)
35. Gonda, D. K. & Radding, C. M. By searching processively RecA protein pairs DNA molecules that share a limited stretch of homology. Cell 34, 647-654 (1983).
36. Berg, O. G. & Winter, R. B. & von Hippel, P. H. Diffusion-driven mechanisms of protein translocation on nucleic acids. 1. Models and theory. Biochemistry 20, 6929-6948 (1981).
37. Halford, S. E. An end to 40 years of mistakes in DNA-protein association kinetics? Biochem. Soc. Trans. 37, 343-348 (2009).
38. Adzuma, K. No sliding during homology search by RecA protein. J. Biol. Chem. 273, 31565-31573 (1998). (Pubitemid 28533180)
39. Ragunathan, K., Liu, C. & Ha, T. RecA filament sliding on DNA facilitates homology search. eLife 1, e00067 (2012).
40. van der Heijden, T. et al. Homologous recombination in real time: DNA strand exchange by RecA. Mol. Cell 30, 530-538 (2008).
41. Forget, A. L. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Single-molecule imaging of DNA pairing by RecA reveals a three-dimensional homology search. Nature 482, 423-427 (2012).
42. Zierhut, C. & Diffley, J. F. X. Break dosage, cell cycle stage and DNA replication influence DNA double strand break response. EMBO J. 27, 1875-1885 (2008). (Pubitemid 351960208)
43. White, C. I. & Haber, J. E. Intermediates of recombination during mating type switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO J. 9, 663-673 (1990).
44. Renkawitz, J., Lademann, C. A., Kalocsay, M. & Jentsch, S. Monitoring homology search during DNA double-strand break repair in vivo. Mol. Cell 50, 261-272 (2013).
45. San Filippo, J., Sung, P. & Klein, H. Mechanism of eukaryotic homologous recombination. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 77, 229-257 (2008).
46. Branzei, D. & Foiani, M. Maintaining genome stability at the replication fork. Naure. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 11, 208-219 (2010).
47. Loidl, J. The hidden talents of SPO11. Dev. Cell 24, 123-124 (2013).
48. Nasmyth, K. & Haering, C. H. Cohesin: its roles and mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Genet. 43, 525-558 (2009).
49. Glynn, E. F. et al. Genome-wide mapping of the cohesin complex in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS Biol. 2, E259 (2004).
50. Laloraya, S., Guacci, V. & Koshland, D. Chromosomal addresses of the cohesin component Mcd1p. J. Cell Biol. 151, 1047-1056 (2000).
51. Chen, B. et al. Dynamic imaging of genomic loci in living human cells by an optimized CRISPR/Cas system. Cell 155, 1479-1491 (2013).
52. Hoang, M. L. et al. Competitive repair by naturally dispersed repetitive DNA during non-allelic homologous recombination. PLoS Genet. 6, e1001228 (2010).
53. Argueso, J. L. et al. Double-strand breaks associated with repetitive DNA can reshape the genome. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 11845-11850 (2008).
54. Mieczkowski, P. A., Lemoine, F. J. & Petes, T. D. Recombination between retrotransposons as a source of chromosome rearrangements in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. DNA Repair 5, 1010-1020 (2006). (Pubitemid 44291618)
55. Haber, J. E. Transpositions and translocations induced by site-specific double-strand breaks in budding yeast. DNA Repair 5, 998-1009 (2006). (Pubitemid 44291615)
56. Agmon, N., Liefshitz, B., Zimmer, C., Fabre, E. & Kupiec, M. Effect of nuclear architecture on the efficiency of double-strand break repair. Nature Cell Biol. 15, 694-699 (2013).
57. Coïc, E., Richard, G.F. & Haber, J. E. Saccharomyces cerevisiae donor preference during mating-type switching is dependent on chromosome architecture and organization. Genetics 173, 1197-1206 (2006). (Pubitemid 44127629)
58. Aylon, Y., Liefshitz, B., Bitan-Banin, G. & Kupiec, M. Molecular dissection of mitotic recombination in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 1403-1417 (2003). (Pubitemid 36177048)
59. Burgess, S. M. & Kleckner, N. Collisions between yeast chromosomal loci In vivo are governed by three layers of organization. Genes Dev. 13, 1871-1883 (1999). (Pubitemid 29353053)
60. Inbar, O. & Kupiec, M. Homology search and choice of homologous partner during mitotic recombination. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19, 4134-4142 (1999). (Pubitemid 29241987)
61. Haber, J. E. & Leung, W. Y. Lack of chromosome territoriality in yeast: promiscuous rejoining of broken chromosome ends. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93, 13949-13954 (1996). (Pubitemid 26424226)
62. Lichten, M. & Haber, J. E. Position effects in ectopic and allelic mitotic recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 123, 261-268 (1989). (Pubitemid 19248673)
63. Sugawara, N., Wang, X. & Haber, J. E. In vivo roles of Rad52, Rad54, and Rad55 proteins in Rad51-mediated recombination. Mol. Cell 12, 209-219 (2003). (Pubitemid 36945046)
64. Misteli, T. & Soutoglou, E. The emerging role of nuclear architecture in DNA repair and genome maintenance. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 10, 243-254 (2009).
65. Roukos, V., Burman, B. & Misteli, T. The cellular etiology of chromosome translocations. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 25, 357-364 (2013).
66. Rocha, P. P. & Skok, J. A. The origin of recurrent translocations in recombining lymphocytes: a balance between break frequency and nuclear proximity. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 25, 365-371 (2013).
67. Roukos, V. et al. Spatial dynamics of chromosome translocations in living cells. Science 341, 660-664 (2013).
68. Zhang, Y. et al. Spatial organization of the mouse genome and its role in recurrent chromosomal translocations. Cell 148, 908-921 (2012).
69. Hakim, O. et al. DNA damage defines sites of recurrent chromosomal translocations in B lymphocytes. Nature 484, 69-74 (2012).
70. Rocha, P. P. et al. Close proximity to Igh is a contributing factor to AID-mediated translocations. Mol. Cell 47, 873-885 (2012).
71. Chiarle, R. et al. Genome-wide translocation sequencing reveals mechanisms of chromosome breaks and rearrangements in B cells. Cell 147, 107-119 (2011).
72. Klein, I. A. et al. Translocation-capture sequencing reveals the extent and nature of chromosomal rearrangements in B lymphocytes. Cell 147, 95-106 (2011).
73. Roix, J. J., McQueen, P. G., Munson, P. J., Parada, L. A. & Misteli, T. Spatial proximity of translocation-prone gene loci in human lymphomas. Nature Genet. 34, 287-291 (2003). (Pubitemid 36792860)
74. Agmon, N., Pur, S., Liefshitz, B. & Kupiec, M. Analysis of repair mechanism choice during homologous recombination. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, 5081-5092 (2009).
75. Duan, Z. et al. A three-dimensional model of the yeast genome. Nature 465, 363-367 (2010).
76. Haber, J. E. Mating-type gene switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Annu. Rev. Genet. 32, 561-599 (1998). (Pubitemid 29045325)
77. Sugawara, N. & Haber, J. E. Monitoring DNA recombination initiated by HO endonuclease. Methods Mol. Biol. 920, 349-370 (2012).
78. Li, J. et al. Regulation of budding yeast mating-type switching donor preference by the FHA domain of Fkh1. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002630 (2012).
79. Wu, X. & Haber, J. E. A 700 bp cis-acting region controls mating-type dependent recombination along the entire left arm of yeast chromosome III. Cell 87, 277-285 (1996). (Pubitemid 26359005)
80. Wu, X. & Haber, J. E. MATa donor preference in yeast mating-type switching: activation of a large chromosomal region for recombination. Genes Dev. 9, 1922-1932 (1995).
81. Zimmer, C. & Fabre, E. Principles of chromosomal organization: lessons from yeast. J. Cell Biol. 192, 723-733 (2011).
82. Jin, Q. W., Fuchs, J. & Loidl, J. Centromere clustering is a major determinant of yeast interphase nuclear organization. J. Cell. Sci. 113, 1903-1912 (2000). (Pubitemid 30386494)
83. Wong, H., Arbona, J.-M. & Zimmer, C. How to build a yeast nucleus. Nucleus 4, 361-366 (2013).
84. Gehlen, L. R., Gasser, S. M. & Dion, V. How broken DNA finds its template for repair: a computational approach. Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 191, 20-29 (2011).
85. Dion, V., Kalck, V., Horigome, C., Towbin, B. D. & Gasser, S. M. Increased mobility of double-strand breaks requires Mec1, Rad9 and the homologous recombination machinery. Nature Cell Biol. 14, 502-509 (2012).
86. Miné-Hattab, J. & Rothstein, R. Increased chromosome mobility facilitates homology search during recombination. Nature Cell Biol. 14, 510-517 (2012).
87. Seeber, A., Dion, V. & Gasser, S. M. Checkpoint kinases and the INO80 nucleosome remodeling complex enhance global chromatin mobility in response to DNA damage. Genes Dev. 27, 1999-2008 (2013).
88. Dion, V., Kalck, V., Seeber, A., Schleker, T. & Gasser, S. M. Cohesin and the nucleolus constrain the mobility of spontaneous repair foci. EMBO Rep. 14, 984-991 (2013).
89. Neumann, F. R. et al. Targeted INO80 enhances subnuclear chromatin movement and ectopic homologous recombination. Genes Dev. 26, 369-383 (2012).
90. Papamichos-Chronakis, M. & Peterson, C. L. Chromatin and the genome integrity network. Nature Rev. Genet. 14, 62-75 (2013).
91. Lesterlin, C., Ball, G., Schermelleh, L. & Sherratt, D. J. RecA bundles mediate homology pairing between distant sisters during DNA break repair. Nature 506, 249-253 (2014).
92. Ceballos, S. J. & Heyer, W.-D. Functions of the Snf2/Swi2 family Rad54 motor protein in homologous recombination. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1809, 509-523 (2011).
93. Mazin, A. V., Bornarth, C. J., Solinger, J. A., Heyer, W. D. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Rad54 protein is targeted to pairing loci by the Rad51 nucleoprotein filament. Mol. Cell 6, 583-592 (2000).
94. Petukhova, G., Stratton, S. & Sung, P. Catalysis of homologous DNA pairing by yeast Rad51 and Rad54 proteins. Nature 393, 91-94 (1998). (Pubitemid 28240262)
95. Amitani, I., Baskin, R. J. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Visualization of Rad54, a chromatin remodeling protein, translocating on single DNA molecules. Mol. Cell 23, 143-148 (2006). (Pubitemid 43963440)
96. Alexeev, A., Mazin, A. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Rad54 protein possesses chromatin-remodeling activity stimulated by the Rad51-ssDNA nucleoprotein filament. Nature Struct. Biol. 10, 182-186 (2003). (Pubitemid 36297987)
97. Zhang, Z., Fan, H. Y., Goldman, J. A. & Kingston, R. E. Homology-driven chromatin remodeling by human RAD54. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 397-405 (2007). (Pubitemid 46685877)
98. Jaskelioff, M., van Komen, S., Krebs, J. E., Sung, P. & Peterson, C. L. Rad54p is a chromatin remodeling enzyme required for heteroduplex DNA joint formation with chromatin. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 9212-9218 (2003). (Pubitemid 36800403)
99. Petukhova, G., Sung, P. & Klein, H. Promotion of Rad51-dependent D-loop formation by yeast recombination factor Rdh54/Tid1. Genes Dev. 14, 2206-2215 (2000).
100. Prasad, T. K. et al. A DNA-translocating Snf2 molecular motor: Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rdh54 displays processive translocation and extrudes DNA loops. J. Mol. Biol. 369, 940-953 (2007). (Pubitemid 46759523)
101. Nimonkar, A. V., Amitani, I., Baskin, R. J. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Single molecule imaging of Tid1/Rdh54, a Rad54 homolog that translocates on duplex DNA and can disrupt joint molecules. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 30776-30784 (2007). (Pubitemid 350035166)
102. Kwon, Y. et al. ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling by the Saccharomyces cerevisiae homologous recombination factor Rdh54. J. Biol. Chem. 283, 10445-10452 (2008).
103. Van Komen, S., Petukhova, G., Sigurdsson, S., Stratton, S. & Sung, P. Superhelicity-driven homologous DNA pairing by yeast recombination factors Rad51 and Rad54. Mol. Cell 6, 563-572 (2000).
104. Fulconis, R., Mine, J., Bancaud, A., Dutreix, M. & Viovy, J-L. Mechanism of RecA-mediated homologous recombination revisited by single molecule nanomanipulation. EMBO J. 25, 4293-4304 (2006). (Pubitemid 44435227)
105. Sinha, M. & Peterson, C. L. A Rad51 presynaptic filament is sufficient to capture nucleosomal homology during recombinational repair of a DNA double-strand break. Mol. Cell 30, 803-810 (2008). (Pubitemid 351815124)
106. Wolner, B. & Peterson, C. L. ATP-dependent and ATP-independent roles for the Rad54 chromatin remodeling enzyme during recombinational repair of a DNA double strand break. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 10855-10860 (2005). (Pubitemid 40395950)
107. Hicks, W. M., Yamaguchi, M. & Haber, J. E. Real-time analysis of double-strand DNA break repair by homologous recombination. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 3108-3115 (2011).
108. Wright, W. D. & Heyer, W.-D. Rad54 functions as a heteroduplex DNA pump modulated by its DNA substrates and Rad51 during D loop formation. Mol. Cell 53, 420-432 (2014).
109. Sinha, M., Watanabe, S., Johnson, A., Moazed, D. & Peterson, C. L. Recombinational repair within heterochromatin requires ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling. Cell 138, 1109-1121 (2009).
110. Tsabar, M. & Haber, J. E. Chromatin modifications and chromatin remodeling during DNA repair in budding yeast. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 23, 166-173 (2013).
111. Tsukuda, T. et al. INO80-dependent chromatin remodeling regulates early and late stages of mitotic homologous recombination. DNA Repair 8, 360-369 (2009).
112. Chai, B., Huang, J., Cairns, B. R. & Laurent, B. C. Distinct roles for the RSC and Swi/Snf ATP-dependent chromatin remodelers in DNA double-strand break repair. Genes Dev. 19, 1656-1661 (2005). (Pubitemid 41058359)
113. Iacovoni, J. S. et al. High-resolution profiling of γH2AX around DNA double strand breaks in the mammalian genome. EMBO J. 29, 1446-1457 (2010).
114. Strom, L., Lindroos, H. B., Shirahige, K. & Sjogren, C. Postreplicative recruitment of cohesin to double-strand breaks is required for DNA repair. Mol. Cell 16, 1003-1015 (2004). (Pubitemid 40018409)
115. Renkawitz, J., Lademann, C. A. & Jentsch, S. γH2AX spreading linked to homology search. Cell Cycle 12, 2526-2527 (2013).
116. Lee, C.-S., Lee, K., Legube, G. & Haber, J. E. Dynamics of yeast histone H2A and H2B phosphorylation in response to a double-strand break. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 21, 103-109 (2014).
117. Bennett, G., Papamichos-Chronakis, M. & Peterson, C. L. DNA repair choice defines a common pathway for recruitment of chromatin regulators. Nature Commun. 4, 2084 (2013).
118. Hirano, T. At the heart of the chromosome: SMC proteins in action. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7, 311-322 (2006).
119. Merkenschlager, M. & Odom, D. T. CTCF and cohesin: linking gene regulatory elements with their targets. Cell 152, 1285-1297 (2013).
120. Sjogren, C. & Nasmyth, K. Sister chromatid cohesion is required for postreplicative double-strand break repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Curr. Biol. 11, 991-995 (2001). (Pubitemid 32589193)
121. Unal, E., Heidinger-Pauli, J. M. & Koshland, D. DNA double-strand breaks trigger genome-wide sister-chromatid cohesion through Eco1 (Ctf7). Science 317, 245-248 (2007). (Pubitemid 47076200)
122. Strom, L. et al. Postreplicative formation of cohesion is required for repair and induced by a single DNA break. Science 317, 242-245 (2007). (Pubitemid 47076199)
123. Sonoda, E. et al. Scc1/Rad21/Mcd1 is required for sister chromatid cohesion and kinetochore function in vertebrate cells. Dev. Cell 1, 759-770 (2001). (Pubitemid 33586131)
124. Unal, E. et al. DNA damage response pathway uses histone modification to assemble a double-strand break-specific cohesin domain. Mol. Cell 16, 991-1002 (2004). (Pubitemid 40018408)
125. De Piccoli, G. et al. Smc5-Smc6 mediate DNA double-strand-break repair by promoting sister-chromatid recombination. Nature Cell Biol. 8, 1032-1034 (2006). (Pubitemid 44314736)
126. Potts, P. R., Porteus, M. H. & Yu, H. Human SMC5/6 complex promotes sister chromatid homologous recombination by recruiting the SMC1/3 cohesin complex to double-strand breaks. EMBO J. 25, 3377-3388 (2006). (Pubitemid 44141795)
127. Covo, S., Westmoreland, J. W., Gordenin, D. A. & Resnick, M. A. Cohesin is limiting for the suppression of DNA damage-induced recombination between homologous chromosomes. PLoS Genet. 6, e1001006 (2010).
128. Coïc, E. et al. Dynamics of homology searching during gene conversion in Saccharomyces cerevisiae revealed by donor competition. Genetics 189, 1225-1233 (2011).
129. Gibcus, J. H. & Dekker, J. The hierarchy of the 3D genome. Mol. Cell 49, 773-782 (2013).
130. White, R. R. et al. Double-strand break repair by interchromosomal recombination: an In vivo repair mechanism utilized by multiple somatic tissues in mammals. PLoS ONE 8, e84379 (2013).
131. Goldman, A. S. & Lichten, M. The efficiency of meiotic recombination between dispersed sequences in Saccharomyces cerevisiae depends upon their chromosomal location. Genetics 144, 43-55 (1996). (Pubitemid 26291916)
132. Chiolo, I. et al. Double-strand breaks in heterochromatin move outside of a dynamic HP1a domain to complete recombinational repair. Cell 144, 732-744 (2011).
133. 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. 39, 6489-6499 (2011).
134. Kim, J.A., Kruhlak, M., Dotiwala, F., Nussenzweig, A. & Haber, J. E. Heterochromatin is refractory to γ-H2AX modification in yeast and mammals. J. Cell Biol. 178, 209-218 (2007). (Pubitemid 47076458)
135. Torres-Rosell, J. et al. The Smc5-Smc6 complex and SUMO modification of Rad52 regulates recombinational repair at the ribosomal gene locus. Nature Cell Biol. 9, 923-931 (2007). (Pubitemid 47190447)
136. Shen, P. & Huang, H. V. Homologous recombination in Escherichia coli: dependence on substrate length and homology. Genetics 112, 441-457 (1986).
137. Ira, G. & Haber, J. E. Characterization of RAD51-independent break-induced replication that acts preferentially with short homologous sequences. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 6384-6392 (2002).
138. Shulman, M. J., Nissen, L. & Collins, C. Homologous recombination in hybridoma cells: dependence on time and fragment length. Mol. Cell. Biol. 10, 4466-4472 (1990).
139. Hasty, P., Rivera-Pérez, J. & Bradley, A. The length of homology required for gene targeting in embryonic stem cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 11, 5586-5591 (1991). (Pubitemid 21895325)
140. Mundia, M. M., Desai, V., Magwood, A. C. & Baker, M. D. Nascent DNA synthesis during homologous recombination is synergistically promoted by the Rad51 recombinase and DNA homology. Genetics http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/genetics. 114.161455 (2014).
141. Ira, G., Malkova, A., Liberi, G., Foiani, M. & Haber, J. E. Srs2 and Sgs1-Top3 suppress crossovers during double-strand break repair in yeast. Cell 115, 401-411 (2003). (Pubitemid 37456803)
142. Nagai, S. et al. Functional targeting of DNA damage to a nuclear pore-associated SUMO-dependent ubiquitin ligase. Science 322, 597-602 (2008).
143. Kalocsay, M., Hiller, N. J. & Jentsch, S. Chromosome-wide Rad51 spreading and SUMO-H2A.Z-dependent chromosome fixation in response to a persistent DNA double-strand break. Mol. Cell 33, 335-343 (2009).
144. Oza, P., Jaspersen, S. L., Miele, A., Dekker, J. & Peterson, C. L. Mechanisms that regulate localization of a DNA double-strand break to the nuclear periphery. Genes Dev. 23, 912-927 (2009).
145. Alt, F. W., Zhang, Y., Meng, F.-L., Guo, C. & Schwer, B. Mechanisms of programmed DNA lesions and genomic instability in the immune system. Cell 152, 417-429 (2013).
146. Schatz, D. G. & Ji, Y. Recombination centres and the orchestration of V(D)J recombination. Nature Rev. Immunol. 11, 251-263 (2011).
147. Brisson, D., Drecktrah, D., Eggers, C. H. & Samuels, D. S. Genetics of Borrelia burgdorferi. Annu. Rev. Genet. 46, 515-536 (2012).
148. Cahoon, L. A. & Seifert, H. S. Focusing homologous recombination: pilin antigenic variation in the pathogenic Neisseria. Mol. Microbiol. 81, 1136-1143 (2011).
149. Glover, L. et al. Antigenic variation in African trypanosomes: the importance of chromosomal and nuclear context in VSG expression control. Cell. Microbiol. 15, 1984-1993 (2013).
150. Guizetti, J. & Scherf, A. Silence, activate, poise and switch! Mechanisms of antigenic variation in Plasmodium falciparum. Cell. Microbiol. 15, 718-726 (2013).
151. Jurka, J., Kapitonov, V. V., Kohany, O. & Jurka, M. V. Repetitive sequences in complex genomes: structure and evolution. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 8, 241-259 (2007).
152. Stracker, T. H. & Petrini, J. H. The MRE11 complex: starting from the ends. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 12, 90-103 (2011).
153. Liu, J., Sneeden, J. & Heyer, W.-D. In vitro assays for DNA pairing and recombination-associated DNA synthesis. Methods Mol. Biol. 745, 363-383 (2011).
154. Bazemore, L. R., Takahashi, M. & Radding, C. M. Kinetic analysis of pairing and strand exchange catalyzed by RecA. Detection by fluorescence energy transfer. J. Biol. Chem. 272, 14672-14682 (1997). (Pubitemid 27251731)
155. Mani, A., Braslavsky, I., Arbel-Goren, R. & Stavans, J. Caught in the act: the lifetime of synaptic intermediates during the search for homology on DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, 2036-2043 (2010).
156. Forget, A. L. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Single-molecule imaging brings Rad51 nucleoprotein filaments into focus. Trends Cell Biol. 20, 269-276 (2010).
157. Rouet, P., Smih, F. & Jasin, M. Introduction of double-strand breaks into the genome of mouse cells by expression of a rare-cutting endonuclease. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 8096-8106 (1994). (Pubitemid 24373558)
158. Kramer, K. M., Brock, J. A., Bloom, K., Moore, J. K. & Haber, J. E. Two different types of double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae are repaired by similar RAD52-independent, nonhomologous recombination events. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 1293-1301 (1994). (Pubitemid 24036579)
159. Bickmore, W. A. & van Steensel, B. Genome architecture: domain organization of interphase chromosomes. Cell 152, 1270-1284 (2013).
160. Sharma, R. & Meister, P. Nuclear organization in the nematode C. elegans. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 25, 395-402 (2013).
161. Wang, X., Montero Llopis, P. & Rudner, D. Z. Organization and segregation of bacterial chromosomes. Nature Rev. Genet. 14, 191-203 (2013).
162. O'Sullivan, J. M. Yeast chromosomal interactions and nuclear architecture. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 22, 298-304 (2010).
163. Olsson, I. & Bjerling, P. Advancing our understanding of functional genome organisation through studies in the fission yeast. Curr. Genet. 57, 1-12 (2011).
164. Cremer, T. & Cremer, M. Chromosome territories. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2, a003889 (2010).
165. Cremer, T. & Cremer, C. Chromosome territories, nuclear architecture and gene regulation in mammalian cells. Nature Rev. Genet. 2, 292-301 (2001). (Pubitemid 33674777)
166. Schermelleh, L., Heintzmann, R. & Leonhardt, H. A guide to super-resolution fluorescence microscopy. J. Cell Biol. 190, 165-175 (2010).
167. Dekker, J., Marti-Renom, M. A. & Mirny, L. A. Exploring the three-dimensional organization of genomes: interpreting chromatin interaction data. Nature Rev. Genet. 14, 390-403 (2013).
168. van Steensel, B. & Dekker, J. Genomics tools for unraveling chromosome architecture. Nature Biotech. 28, 1089-1095 (2010).
169. Cavalli, G. & Misteli, T. Functional implications of genome topology. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 290-299 (2013).
170. Geyer, P. K., Vitalini, M. W. & Wallrath, L. L. Nuclear organization: taking a position on gene expression. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 23, 354-359 (2011).
171. Sexton, T., Schober, H., Fraser, P. & Gasser, S. M. Gene regulation through nuclear organization. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 1049-1055 (2007). (Pubitemid 350060340)
172. Fraser, P. & Bickmore, W. Nuclear organization of the genome and the potential for gene regulation. Nature 447, 413-417 (2007). (Pubitemid 46816747)
173. Berger, A. B. et al. High-resolution statistical mapping reveals gene territories in live yeast. Nature Methods 5, 1031-1037 (2008).
174. Bystricky, K., Laroche, T., van Houwe, G., Blaszczyk, M. & Gasser, S. M. Chromosome looping in yeast: telomere pairing and coordinated movement reflect anchoring efficiency and territorial organization. J. Cell Biol. 168, 375-387 (2005). (Pubitemid 40205061)
175. Wong, H. et al. A predictive computational model of the dynamic 3D interphase yeast nucleus. Curr. Biol. 22, 1881-1890 (2012).
176. Tjong, H., Gong, K., Chen, L. & Alber, F. Physical tethering and volume exclusion determine higher-order genome organization in budding yeast. Genome Res. 22, 1295-1305 (2012).