Mcm2-7 is an active player in the DNA replication checkpoint signaling cascade via proposed modulation of its DNA gate

Molecular and Cellular Biology

Volumn 35, Issue 12, 2015, Pages 2131-2143

  Tsai, Feng Ling ^a,c   Vijayraghavan, Sriram ^a,b   Prinz, Joseph ^b   MacAlpine, Heather K ^b   MacAlpine, David M ^b   Schwacha, Anthony ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE TRIPHOSPHATASE; CHECKPOINT KINASE 2; HELICASE; PROTEIN MCM2 7; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; CDC45 PROTEIN, S CEREVISIAE; CELL CYCLE PROTEIN; DNA BINDING PROTEIN; FUNGAL DNA; MCM2 PROTEIN, S CEREVISIAE; MINICHROMOSOME MAINTENANCE PROTEIN; NUCLEAR PROTEIN; RAD53 PROTEIN, S CEREVISIAE; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE PROTEIN;

ALLELE; ALLOSTERISM; ARTICLE; CONFORMATIONAL TRANSITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNA DAMAGE; DNA DAMAGE CHECKPOINT; DNA REPLICATION; ENZYME ACTIVE SITE; ENZYME CONFORMATION; IN VITRO STUDY; MUTANT; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; PROTEIN PHOSPHORYLATION; PROTEIN STABILITY; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; SISTER CHROMATID; CHEMISTRY; CYTOLOGY; GENETICS; METABOLISM; MUTATION; PROTEIN MULTIMERIZATION; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE;

CATALYTIC DOMAIN; CELL CYCLE PROTEINS; CHECKPOINT KINASE 2; DNA REPLICATION; DNA, FUNGAL; DNA-BINDING PROTEINS; MINICHROMOSOME MAINTENANCE PROTEINS; MUTATION; NUCLEAR PROTEINS; PROTEIN MULTIMERIZATION; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE PROTEINS; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 84929397329     PISSN: 02707306     EISSN: 10985549     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/MCB.01357-14     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Savitsky K, Bar-Shira A, Gilad S, Rotman G, Ziv Y, Vanagaite L, Tagle D, Smith S, Uziel T, Sfez S, Ashkenazi M, Pecker I, Frydman M, Harnik R, Patanjali SR, Simmons A, Clines GA, Sartiel A, Gatti RA, Chessa L, Sanal O, Lavin MF, Jaspers NG, Taylor AM, Arlett CF, Miki T, Weissman SM, Lovett M, Collins FS, Shiloh Y. 1995. A single ataxia telangiectasia gene with a product similar to PI-3 kinase. Science 268:1749-1753. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.7792600.
2. Zhou BB, Elledge SJ. 2000. The DNA damage response: putting checkpoints in perspective. Nature 408:433-439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35044005.
3. Alcasabas AA, Osborn AJ, Bachant J, Hu F, Werler PJ, Bousset K, Furuya K, Diffley JF, Carr AM, Elledge SJ. 2001. Mrc1 transduces signals ofDNAreplication stress to activate Rad53. Nat Cell Biol 3:958-965. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb1101-958.
4. Osborn AJ, Elledge SJ. 2003. Mrc1 is a replication fork component whose phosphorylation in response to DNA replication stress activates Rad53. Genes Dev 17:1755-1767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gad.1098303.
5. Branzei D, Foiani M. 2005. The DNA damage response during DNA replication. Curr Opin Cell Biol 17:568-575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2005.09.003.
6. Santocanale C, Diffley JF. 1998. A Mec1-and Rad53-dependent checkpoint controls late-firing origins of DNA replication. Nature 395:615-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/27001.
7. Zegerman P, Diffley JF. 2010. Checkpoint-dependent inhibition of DNA replication initiation by Sld3 and Dbf4 phosphorylation. Nature 467:474-478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature09373.
8. Alabert C, Bianco JN, Pasero P. 2009. Differential regulation of homologous recombination at DNA breaks and replication forks by the Mrc1 branch of the S-phase checkpoint. EMBO J 28:1131-1141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2009.75.
9. Meister P, Taddei A, Vernis L, Poidevin M, Gasser SM, Baldacci G. 2005. Temporal separation of replication and recombination requires the intra-S checkpoint. J Cell Biol 168:537-544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200410006.
10. Yekezare M, Gomez-Gonzalez B, Diffley JF. 2013. Controlling DNA replication origins in response to DNA damage-inhibit globally, activate locally. J Cell Sci 126:1297-1306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1242/jcs.096701.
11. Finn K, Lowndes NF, Grenon M. 2012. Eukaryotic DNA damage checkpoint activation in response to double-strand breaks. Cell Mol Life Sci 69:1447-1473. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00018-011-0875-3.
12. Zou L, Elledge SJ. 2003. Sensing DNA damage through ATRIP recognition of RPA-ssDNA complexes. Science 300:1542-1548. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1083430.
13. Recolin B, Van der Laan S, Maiorano D. 2012. Role of replication protein A as sensor in activation of the S-phase checkpoint in Xenopus egg extracts. Nucleic Acids Res 40:3431-3442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr1241.
14. Byun TS, Pacek M, Yee M-C, Walter JC, Cimprich KA. 2005. Functional uncoupling ofMCMhelicase and DNA polymerase activities activates the ATR-dependent checkpoint. Genes Dev 19:1040-1052. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gad.1301205.
15. Tercero JA, Longhese MP, Diffley JF. 2003. A central role for DNA replication forks in checkpoint activation and response. Mol Cell 11: 1323-1336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(03)00169-2.
16. Recolin B, van der Laan S, Tsanov N, Maiorano D. 2014. Molecular mechanisms of DNA replication checkpoint activation. Genes (Basel) 5:147-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes5010147.
17. Wang Y, Putnam CD, Kane MF, Zhang W, Edelmann L, Russell R, Carrion DV, Chin L, Kucherlapati R, Kolodner RD, Edelmann W. 2005. Mutation in Rpa1 results in defective DNA double-strand break repair, chromosomal instability and cancer in mice. Nat Genet 37:750-755. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng1587.
18. Zeman MK, Cimprich KA. 2014. Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat Cell Biol 16:2-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb2897.
19. Bando M, Katou Y, Komata M, Tanaka H, Itoh T, Sutani T, Shirahige K. 2009. Csm3, Tof1, and Mrc1 form a heterotrimeric mediator complex that associates withDNAreplication forks. J Biol Chem 284:34355-34365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M109.065730.
20. Nedelcheva MN, Roguev A, Dolapchiev LB, Shevchenko A, Taskov HB, Shevchenko A, Stewart AF, Stoynov SS. 2005. Uncoupling of unwinding from DNA synthesis implies regulation of MCM helicase by Tof1/Mrc1/Csm3 checkpoint complex. J Mol Biol 347:509-521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2005.01.041.
21. Katou Y, Kanoh Y, Bando M, Noguchi H, Tanaka H, Ashikari T, Sugimoto K, Shirahige K. 2003. S-phase checkpoint proteins Tof1 and Mrc1 form a stable replication-pausing complex. Nature 424:1078-1083. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature01900.
22. Chou DM, Elledge SJ. 2006. Tipin and Timeless form a mutually protective complex required for genotoxic stress resistance and checkpoint function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:18143-18147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0609251103.
23. Lou H, Komata M, Katou Y, Guan Z, Reis CC, Budd M, Shirahige K, Campbell JL. 2008. Mrc1 and DNA polymerase epsilon function together in linking DNA replication and the S phase checkpoint. Mol Cell 32:106-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2008.08.020.
24. Leman AR, Noguchi E. 2012. Local and global functions of Timeless and Tipin in replication fork protection. Cell Cycle 11:3945-3955. http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/cc.21989.
25. Komata M, Bando M, Araki H, Shirahige K. 2009. The direct binding of Mrc1, a checkpoint mediator, to Mcm6, a replication helicase, is essential for the replication checkpoint against methyl methanesulfonate-induced stress. Mol Cell Biol 29:5008-5019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01934-08.
26. Tsao CC, Geisen C, Abraham RT. 2004. Interaction between human MCM7 and Rad17 proteins is required for replication checkpoint signaling. EMBO J 23:4660-4669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7600463.
27. Bochman ML, Schwacha A. 2009. The Mcm complex: unwinding the mechanism of a replicative helicase. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 73:652-683. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.00019-09.
28. Renard-Guillet C, Kanoh Y, Shirahige K, Masai H. 2014. Temporal and spatial regulation of eukaryotic DNA replication: from regulated initiation to genome-scale timing program. Semin Cell Dev Biol 30:110-120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.semcdb.2014.04.014.
29. Samel SA, Fernandez-Cid A, Sun J, Riera A, Tognetti S, Herrera MC, Li H, Speck C. 2014. A unique DNA entry gate serves for regulated loading of the eukaryotic replicative helicase MCM2-7 onto DNA. Genes Dev 28:1653-1666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gad.242404.114.
30. Bochman ML, Schwacha A. 2008. The Mcm2-7 complex has in vitro helicase activity. Mol Cell 31:287-293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2008.05.020.
31. Costa A, Ilves I, Tamberg N, Petojevic T, Nogales E, Botchan MR, Berger JM. 2011. The structural basis for MCM2-7 helicase activation by GINS and Cdc45. Nat Struct Mol Biol 18:471-477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.2004.
32. Bochman ML, Schwacha A. 2010. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mcm6/2 and Mcm5/3 ATPase active sites contribute to the function of the putative Mcm2-7 'gate.' Nucleic Acids Res 38:6078-6088. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkq422.
33. Bochman ML, Bell SP, Schwacha A. 2008. Subunit organization of Mcm2-7 and the unequal role of active sites in ATP hydrolysis and viability. Mol Cell Biol 28:5865-5873. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MCB.00161-08.
34. Aparicio OM, Weinstein DM, Bell SP. 1997. Components and dynamics of DNA replication complexes in S. cerevisiae: redistribution of MCM proteins and Cdc45p during S phase. Cell 91:59-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(01)80009-X.
35. Kilmartin JV, Adams AE. 1984. Structural rearrangements of tubulin and actin during the cell cycle of the yeast Saccharomyces. J Cell Biol 98:922-933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.98.3.922.
36. Bhamidipati A, Denic V, Quan EM, Weissman JS. 2005. Exploration of the topological requirements ofERADidentifies Yos9p as a lectin sensor of misfolded glycoproteins in the ER lumen. Mol Cell 19:741-751. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2005.07.027.
37. van Deursen F, Sengupta S, De Piccoli G, Sanchez-Diaz A, Labib K. 2012. Mcm10 associates with the loaded DNA helicase at replication origins and defines a novel step in its activation. EMBO J 31:2195-2206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2012.69.
38. Pucci B, De Felice M, Rocco M, Esposito F, De Falco M, Esposito L, Rossi M, Pisani FM. 2007. Modular organization of the Sulfolobus solfataricus mini-chromosome maintenance protein. J Biol Chem 282: 12574-12582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M610953200.
39. Straight AF, Belmont AS, Robinett CC, Murray AW. 1996. GFP tagging of budding yeast chromosomes reveals that protein protein interactions can mediate sister chromatid cohesion. Curr Biol 6:1599-1608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(02)70783-5.
40. Vernis L, Piskur J, Diffley JFX. 2003. Reconstitution of an efficient thymidine salvage pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nucleic Acids Res 31:e120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gng121.
41. Shima N, Alcaraz A, Liachko I, Buske TR, Andrews CA, Munroe RJ, Hartford SA, Tye BK, Schimenti JC. 2007. A viable allele of Mcm4 causes chromosome instability and mammary adenocarcinomas in mice. Nat Genet 39:93-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng1936.
42. Kawabata T, Luebben SW, Yamaguchi S, Ilves I, Matise I, Buske T, Botchan MR, Shima N. 2011. Stalled fork rescue via dormant replication origins in unchallenged S phase promotes proper chromosome segregation and tumor suppression. Mol Cell 41:543-553. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2011.02.006.
43. Li XC, Schimenti JC, Tye BK. 2009. Aneuploidy and improved growth are coincident but not causal in a yeast cancer model. PLoS Biol 7:e1000161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000161.
44. Branzei D, Foiani M. 2009. The checkpoint response to replication stress. DNA Repair (Amst) 8:1038-1046. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dnarep.2009.04.014.
45. Pellicioli A, Lucca C, Liberi G, Marini F, Lopes M, Plevani P, Romano A, Di Fiore PP, Foiani M. 1999. Activation of Rad53 kinase in response to DNA damage and its effect in modulating phosphorylation of the lagging strand DNA polymerase. EMBO J 18:6561-6572. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/emboj/18.22.6561.
46. Schwartz MF, Duong JK, Sun Z, Morrow JS, Pradhan D, Stern DF. 2002. Rad9 phosphorylation sites couple Rad53 to the Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA damage checkpoint. Mol Cell 9:1055-1065. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(02)00532-4.
47. Zou L, Elledge SJ. 2001. Sensing and signaling DNA damage: roles of Rad17 and Rad9 complexes in the cellular response to DNA damage. Harvey Lect 97:1-15.
48. Tercero JA, Diffley JFX. 2001. Regulation of DNA replication fork progression through damaged DNA by the Mec1/Rad53 checkpoint. Nature 412:553-557. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35087607.
49. Weinert TA, Kiser GL, Hartwell LH. 1994. Mitotic checkpoint genes in budding yeast and the dependence of mitosis on DNA replication and repair. Genes Dev 8:652-665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gad.8.6.652.
50. Zhao X, Muller EG, Rothstein R. 1998. A suppressor of two essential checkpoint genes identifies a novel protein that negatively affects dNTP pools. Mol Cell 2:329-340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80277-4.
51. Zhao X, Chabes A, Domkin V, Thelander L, Rothstein R. 2001. The ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor Sml1 is a new target of the Mec1/Rad53 kinase cascade during growth and in response to DNA damage. EMBO J 20:3544-3553. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/emboj/20.13.3544.
52. Nyberg KA, Michelson RJ, Putnam CW, Weinert TA. 2002. Toward maintaining the genome: DNA damage and replication checkpoints. Annu Rev Genet 36:617-656. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.36.060402.113540.
53. Crabbe L, Thomas A, Pantesco V, De Vos J, Pasero P, Lengronne A. 2010. Analysis of replication profiles reveals key role of RFC-Ctf18 in yeast replication stress response. Nat Struct Mol Biol 17:1391-1397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.1932.
54. Bell SP, Dutta A. 2002. DNA replication in eukaryotic cells. Annu Rev Biochem 71:333-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biochem.71.110601.135425.
55. Nieduszynski CA, Hiraga S-I, Ak P, Benham CJ, Donaldson AD. 2007. OriDB: a DNA replication origin database. Nucleic Acids Res 35:D40-D46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl758.
56. Muller CA, Hawkins M, Retkute R, Malla S, Wilson R, Blythe MJ, Nakato R, Komata M, Shirahige K, de Moura AP, Nieduszynski CA. 2014. The dynamics of genome replication using deep sequencing. Nucleic Acids Res 42:e3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt878.
57. Vialard JE, Gilbert CS, Green CM, Lowndes NF. 1998. The budding yeast Rad9 checkpoint protein is subjected to Mec1/Tel1-dependent hyperphosphorylation and interacts with Rad53 after DNA damage. EMBO J 17:5679-5688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/emboj/17.19.5679.
58. Sanchez Y, Desany BA, Jones WJ, Liu Q, Wang B, Elledge SJ. 1996. Regulation of RAD53 by the ATM-like kinases MEC1 and TEL1 in yeast cell cycle checkpoint pathways. Science 271:357-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.271.5247.357.
59. Zhao H, Tanaka K, Nogochi E, Nogochi C, Russell P. 2003. Replication checkpoint protein Mrc1 is regulated by Rad3 and Tel1 in fission yeast. Mol Cell Biol 23:8395-8403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MCB.23.22.8395-8403.2003.
60. Randell JCW, Fan A, Chan C, Francis LI, Heller RC, Galani K, Bell SP. 2010. Mec1 is one of multiple kinases that prime the Mcm2-7 helicase for phosphorylation by Cdc7. Mol Cell 40:353-363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2010.10.017.
61. Cortez D, Glick G, Elledge SJ. 2004. Minichromosome maintenance proteins are direct targets of the ATM and ATR checkpoint kinases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101:10078-10083. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403410101.
62. Gambus A, Jones RC, Sanchez-Diaz A, Kanemaki M, van Deursen F, Edmondson RD, Labib K. 2006. GINS maintains association of Cdc45 with MCM in replisome progression complexes at eukaryotic DNA replication forks. Nat Cell Biol 8:358-366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncb1382.
63. Nasmyth K, Haering CH. 2009. Cohesin: its roles and mechanisms. Annu Rev Genet 43:525-558. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genet-102108-134233.
64. Warren CD, Eckley DM, Lee MS, Hanna JS, Hughes A, Peyser B, Jie C, Irizarry R, Spencer FA. 2004. S-phase checkpoint genes safeguard highfidelity sister chromatid cohesion. Mol Biol Cell 15:1724-1735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E03-09-0637.
65. Xu H, Boone C, Klein HL. 2004. Mrc1 is required for sister chromatid cohesion to aid in recombination repair of spontaneous damage. Mol Cell Biol 24:7082-7090. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MCB.24.16.7082-7090.2004.
66. Tóth A, Ciosk R, Uhlmann F, Galova M, Schleiffer A, Nasmyth K. 1999. Yeast cohesin complex requires a conserved protein, Eco1p(Ctf7), to establish cohesion between sister chromatids during DNA replication. Genes Dev 13:320-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gad.13.3.320.
67. Tokuriki N, Tawfik DS. 2009. Stability effects of mutations and protein evolvability. Curr Opin Struct Biol 19:596-604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbi.2009.08.003.
68. Stead BE, Brandl CJ, Davey MJ. 2011. Phosphorylation of Mcm2 modulates Mcm2-7 activity and affects the cell's response to DNA damage. Nucleic Acids Res 39:6998-7008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr371.
69. Stead BE, Sorbara CD, Brandl CJ, Davey MJ. 2009. ATP binding and hydrolysis by Mcm2 regulateDNAbinding byMcmcomplexes. J Mol Biol 391:301-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2009.06.038.
70. Negrini S, Gorgoulis VG, Halazonetis TD. 2010. Genomic instability-an evolving hallmark of cancer. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 11:220-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrm2858.
71. Ishimi Y. 1997. A DNA helicase activity is associated with an MCM4,-6, and-7 protein complex. J Biol Chem 272:24508-24513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/jbc.272.39.24508.
72. Ishimi Y, Komamura Y, You Z, Kimura H. 1998. Biochemical function of mouse minichromosome maintenance 2 protein. J Biol Chem 273: 8369-8375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/jbc.273.14.8369.
73. Chen S-H, Zhou H. 2009. Reconstitution of Rad53 activation by Mec1 through adaptor protein Mrc1. J Biol Chem 284:18593-18604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M109.018242.
74. Berens TJ, Toczyski DP. 2012. Colocalization of Mec1 and Mrc1 is sufficient for Rad53 phosphorylation in vivo. Mol Biol Cell 23:1058-1067. http://dx.doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E11-10-0852.
75. Furniss KL, Tsai HJ, Byl JA, Lane AB, Vas AC, Hsu WS, Osheroff N, Clarke DJ. 2013. Direct monitoring of the strand passage reaction of DNA topoisomerase II triggers checkpoint activation. PLoS Genet 9:e1003832. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003832.
76. Cho WH, Kang YH, An YY, Tappin I, Hurwitz J, Lee JK. 2013. Human Tim-Tipin complex affects the biochemical properties of the replicative DNA helicase and DNA polymerases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:2523-2527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222494110.