A short G1 phase imposes constitutive replication stress and fork remodelling in mouse embryonic stem cells

Nature Communications

Volumn 7, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Ahuja, Akshay K ^a   Jodkowska, Karolina ^b   Teloni, Federico ^a   Bizard, Anna H ^c   Zellweger, Ralph ^a   Herrador, Raquel ^a   Ortega, Sagrario ^b   Hickson, Ian D ^c   Altmeyer, Matthias ^a   Mendez, Juan ^b   Lopes, Massimo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b Structural Biology and Biocomputing Programme   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATR PROTEIN; DNA; GAP JUNCTION PROTEIN; HISTONE H2AX; RAD51 PROTEIN; ATM PROTEIN; ATR PROTEIN, MOUSE; CHROMATIN; DNA BINDING PROTEIN; H2AX PROTEIN, MOUSE; HISTONE; NICOTINAMIDE ADENINE DINUCLEOTIDE ADENOSINE DIPHOSPHATE RIBOSYLTRANSFERASE; NONHISTONE PROTEIN; RAD51 PROTEIN, MOUSE; REPLICATION FACTOR A; RPA32 PROTEIN, MOUSE; SINGLE STRANDED DNA; TRP53BP1 PROTEIN, MOUSE; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR P53 BINDING PROTEIN 1;

BIOACCUMULATION; CELLS AND CELL COMPONENTS; CHROMOSOME; DIFFERENTIATION; EMBRYO; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENOME; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; RODENT; STRESS;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; ATAXIA TELANGIECTASIA; CELL CYCLE G1 PHASE; CELL CYCLE S PHASE; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL NUCLEUS INCLUSION BODY; CELL STRESS; CHROMATIN; CHROMOSOME BREAKAGE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNA DAMAGE CHECKPOINT; DNA REPLICATION; EMBRYO; G1 PHASE CELL CYCLE CHECKPOINT; GENE INACTIVATION; GENE REPRESSION; MITOSIS; MOUSE; MOUSE EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; NONHUMAN; PROTEIN PHOSPHORYLATION; VELOCITY; ANIMAL; BLASTOCYST; CONFOCAL MICROSCOPY; DNA DAMAGE; ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; FLOW CYTOMETRY; FLUORESCENCE MICROSCOPY; METABOLISM; MORULA; PHOSPHORYLATION; PULSED FIELD GEL ELECTROPHORESIS; WESTERN BLOTTING;

ANIMALS; ATAXIA TELANGIECTASIA MUTATED PROTEINS; BLASTOCYST; BLOTTING, WESTERN; CHROMATIN; CHROMOSOMAL PROTEINS, NON-HISTONE; DNA DAMAGE; DNA REPLICATION; DNA, SINGLE-STRANDED; DNA-BINDING PROTEINS; ELECTROPHORESIS, GEL, PULSED-FIELD; FLOW CYTOMETRY; G1 PHASE; G1 PHASE CELL CYCLE CHECKPOINTS; HISTONES; MICE; MICROSCOPY, CONFOCAL; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON; MICROSCOPY, FLUORESCENCE; MITOSIS; MORULA; MOUSE EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; PHOSPHORYLATION; POLY(ADP-RIBOSE) POLYMERASES; RAD51 RECOMBINASE; REPLICATION PROTEIN A; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR P53-BINDING PROTEIN 1;

EID: 84958530589     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms10660     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Lanner, F. Lineage specification in the early mouse embryo. Exp. Cell. Res. 321, 32-39 (2014).
2. Aladjem, M. I. et al. ES cells do not activate p53-dependent stress responses and undergo p53-independent apoptosis in response to DNA damage. Curr. Biol. 8, 145-155 (1998).
3. Hong, Y., Stambrook, P. J. Restoration of an absent G1 arrest and protection from apoptosis in embryonic stem cells after ionizing radiation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 14443-14448 (2004).
4. Tichy, E. D., Stambrook, P. J. DNA repair in murine embryonic stem cells and differentiated cells. Exp. Cell. Res. 314, 1929-1936 (2008).
5. van der Laan, S., Tsanov, N., Crozet, C., Maiorano, D. High Dub3 expression in mouse ESCs couples the G1/S checkpoint to pluripotency. Mol. Cell. 52, 366-379 (2013).
6. Banath, J. P. et al. Explanation for excessive DNA single-strand breaks and endogenous repair foci in pluripotent mouse embryonic stem cells. Exp. Cell. Res. 315, 1505-1520 (2009).
7. Chuykin, I. A., Lianguzova, M. S., Pospelova, T. V., Pospelov, V. A. Activation of DNA damage response signalling in mouse embryonic stem cells. Cell Cycle 7, 2922-2928 (2008).
8. Turinetto, V. et al. High basal gammaH2AX levels sustain self-renewal of mouse embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cells 30, 1414-1423 (2012).
9. Ziegler-Birling, C., Helmrich, A., Tora, L., Torres-Padilla, M. E. Distribution of p53 binding protein 1 (53BP1) and phosphorylated H2A.X during mouse preimplantation development in the absence of DNA damage. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 53, 1003-1011 (2009).
10. Ballabeni, A. et al. Cell cycle adaptations of embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 19252-19257 (2011).
11. White, J. et al. Developmental activation of the Rb-E2F pathway and establishment of cell cycle-regulated cyclin-dependent kinase activity during embryonic stem cell differentiation. Mol. Biol. Cell 16, 2018-2027 (2005).
12. Li, V. C., Ballabeni, A., Kirschner, M. W. Gap 1 phase length and mouse embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 12550-12555 (2012).
13. Tichy, E. D. et al. The abundance of Rad51 protein in mouse embryonic stem cells is regulated at multiple levels. Stem Cell Res. 9, 124-134 (2012).
14. Fujii-Yamamoto, H., Kim, J. M., Arai, K., Masai, H. Cell cycle and developmental regulations of replication factors in mouse embryonic stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 12976-12987 (2005).
15. Zhang, X. et al. A role for NANOG in G1 to S transition in human embryonic stem cells through direct binding of CDK6 and CDC25A. J. Cell Biol. 184, 67-82 (2009).
16. Becker, K. A. et al. Self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells is supported by a shortened G1 cell cycle phase. J. Cell. Physiol. 209, 883-893 (2006).
17. Li, V. C., Kirschner, M. W. Molecular ties between the cell cycle and differentiation in embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 9503-9508 (2014).
18. Stambrook, P. J., Tichy, E. D. Preservation of genomic integrity in mouse embryonic stem cells. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 695, 59-75 (2010).
19. Savatier, P., Huang, S., Szekely, L., Wiman, K. G., Samarut, J. Contrasting patterns of retinoblastoma protein expression in mouse embryonic stem cells and embryonic fibroblasts. Oncogene 9, 809-818 (1994).
20. Tomasetti, C., Vogelstein, B. Cancer etiology. Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions. Science 347, 78-81 (2015).
21. Walter, D. et al. Exit from dormancy provokes DNA-damage-induced attrition in haematopoietic stem cells. Nature 520, 549-552 (2015).
22. Carr, A. M., Lambert, S. Replication stress-induced genome instability: the dark side of replication maintenance by homologous recombination. J. Mol. Biol. 425, 4733-4744 (2013).
23. Posfai, E., Tam, O. H., Rossant, J. Mechanisms of pluripotency in vivo and in vitro. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 107, 1-37 (2014).
24. Neelsen, K. J., Chaudhuri, A. R., Follonier, C., Herrador, R., Lopes, M. Visualization and interpretation of eukaryotic DNA replication intermediates in vivo by electron microscopy. Methods Mol. Biol. 1094, 177-208 (2014).
25. Neelsen, K. J. et al. Deregulated origin licensing leads to chromosomal breaks by rereplication of a gapped DNA template. Genes Dev. 27, 2537-2542 (2013).
26. Ray Chaudhuri, A. et al. Topoisomerase I poisoning results in PARP-mediated replication fork reversal. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 417-423 (2012).
27. Neelsen, K. J., Lopes, M. Replication fork reversal in eukaryotes: from dead end to dynamic response. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 207-220 (2015).
28. Zellweger, R. et al. Rad51-mediated replication fork reversal is a global response to genotoxic treatments in human cells. J. Cell Biol. 208, 563-579 (2015).
29. Hiratani, I. et al. Global reorganization of replication domains during embryonic stem cell differentiation. PLoS Biol. 6, e245 (2008).
30. Bermejo, R., Lai, M. S., Foiani, M. Preventing replication stress to maintain genome stability: resolving conflicts between replication and transcription. Mol. Cell 45, 710-718 (2012).
31. Berquist, B. R., Wilson, 3rd D. M. Pathways for repairing and tolerating the spectrum of oxidative DNA lesions. Cancer Lett. 327, 61-72 (2012).
32. Bester, A. C. et al. Nucleotide deficiency promotes genomic instability in early stages of cancer development. Cell 145, 435-446 (2011).
33. Kohli, R. M., Zhang, Y. TET enzymes, TDG and the dynamics of DNA demethylation. Nature 502, 472-479 (2013).
34. Mankouri, H. W., Huttner, D., Hickson, I. D. How unfinished business from S-phase affects mitosis and beyond. EMBO J. 32, 2661-2671 (2013).
35. Lukas, C. et al. 53BP1 nuclear bodies form around DNA lesions generated by mitotic transmission of chromosomes under replication stress. Nat. Cell Biol. 13, 243-253 (2011).
36. Toledo, L. I. et al. A cell-based screen identifies ATR inhibitors with synthetic lethal properties for cancer-associated mutations. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 18, 721-727 (2011).
37. Altmeyer, M. et al. The chromatin scaffold protein SAFB1 renders chromatin permissive for DNA damage signaling. Mol. Cell 52, 206-220 (2013).
38. Gudjonsson, T. et al. TRIP12 and UBR5 suppress spreading of chromatin ubiquitylation at damaged chromosomes. Cell 150, 697-709 (2012).
39. Sigl, R. et al. Loss of the mammalian APC/C activator FZR1 shortens G1 and lengthens S phase but has little effect on exit from mitosis. J. Cell Sci. 122, 4208-4217 (2009).
40. Sugimura, K., Takebayashi, S., Taguchi, H., Takeda, S., Okumura, K. PARP-1 ensures regulation of replication fork progression by homologous recombination on damaged DNA. J. Cell Biol. 183, 1203-1212 (2008).
41. Yoon, S. W., Kim, D. K., Kim, K. P., Park, K. S. Rad51 regulates cell cycle progression by preserving G2/M transition in mouse embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells Dev. 23, 2700-2711 (2014).
42. Letessier, A. et al. Cell-type-specific replication initiation programs set fragility of the FRA3B fragile site. Nature 470, 120-123 (2011).
43. Ryba, T. et al. Evolutionarily conserved replication timing profiles predict longrange chromatin interactions and distinguish closely related cell types. Genome Res. 20, 761-770 (2010).
44. Yoshida, K. et al. The histone deacetylases sir2 and rpd3 act on ribosomal DNA to control the replication program in budding yeast. Mol. Cell 54, 691-697 (2014).
45. Tsuzuki, T. et al. Targeted disruption of the Rad51 gene leads to lethality in embryonic mice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93, 6236-6240 (1996).
46. Ekholm-Reed, S. et al. Deregulation of cyclin E in human cells interferes with prereplication complex assembly. J. Cell Biol. 165, 789-800 (2004).
47. Neelsen, K. J., Zanini, I. M., Herrador, R., Lopes, M. Oncogenes induce genotoxic stress by mitotic processing of unusual replication intermediates. J. Cell Biol. 200, 699-708 (2013).
48. Wilson, A., Laurenti, E., Trumpp, A. Balancing dormant and self-renewing hematopoietic stem cells. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 19, 461-468 (2009).
49. Flach, J. et al. Replication stress is a potent driver of functional decline in ageing haematopoietic stem cells. Nature 512, 198-202 (2014).
50. Momcilovic, O. et al. DNA damage responses in human induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells. PLoS ONE 5, e13410 (2010).
51. Pasi, C. E. et al. Genomic instability in induced stem cells. Cell Death Differ. 18, 745-753 (2011).
52. Pera, M. F. Stem cells: The dark side of induced pluripotency. Nature 471, 46-47 (2011).
53. Ruiz, S. et al. Limiting replication stress during somatic cell reprogramming reduces genomic instability in induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Commun. 6, 8036 (2015).
54. Mendez, J., Stillman, B. Chromatin association of human origin recognition complex, cdc6, and minichromosome maintenance proteins during the cell cycle: assembly of prereplication complexes in late mitosis. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20, 8602-8612 (2000).