Regulation of repair choice: Cdk1 suppresses recruitment of end joining factors at DNA breaks

DNA Repair in Haploid Context

DNA repair is a well-covered topic as alteration of genetic integrity underlies many pathological conditions and important transgenerational consequences. Surprisingly, the ploidy status is rarely considered although the presence of homologous chromosomes dramatically impacts the repair capacities of cells. This is especially important for the haploid gametes as they must transfer genetic information to the offspring. An understanding of the different mechanisms monitoring genetic integrity in this context is, therefore, essential as differences in repair pathways exist that differentiate the gamete’s role in transgenerational inheritance. Hence, the oocyte must have the most reliable repair capacity while sperm, produced in large numbers and from many differentiation steps, are expected to carry de novo variations. This review describes the main DNA repair pathways with a special emphasis on ploidy. Differences between Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe are especially useful to this aim as they can maintain a diploid and haploid life cycle respectively.

CDK-mediated Yku80 Phosphorylation Regulates the Balance Between Non-homologous End Joining (NHEJ) and Homologous Directed Recombination (HDR)

There are two major pathways for repairing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs): homologous directed recombination (HDR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). While NHEJ functions throughout the cell cycle, HDR is only possible during S/G₂ phases, suggesting that there are cell cycle-specific mechanisms regulating the balance between the two repair systems. The regulation exerted by CDKs on HDR has been extensively demonstrated, and here we present evidence that the CDK Pho85, in association with the G₁ cyclin Pcl1, phosphorylates Yku80 on Ser 623 to regulate NHEJ activity. Cells bearing a non-phosphorylatable version of Yku80 show increased NHEJ and reduced HDR activity. Accordingly, yku80^S623A cells present diminished viability upon treatment with the DSB-producer bleomycin, specifically in the G₂ phase of the cell cycle. Interestingly, the mutation of the equivalent residue in human Ku80 increases sensitivity to bleomycin in several cancer cell lines, suggesting that this mechanism is conserved in humans. Altogether, our results reveal a new mechanism whereby G₁-CDKs mediate the choice between HDR and NHEJ repair pathways, putting the error prone NHEJ on a leash and enabling error free HDR in G₂ when homologous sequences are available.

Regulation of Error-Prone DNA Double-Strand Break Repair and Its Impact on Genome Evolution

Double-strand breaks are one of the most deleterious DNA lesions. Their repair via error-prone mechanisms can promote mutagenesis, loss of genetic information, and deregulation of the genome. These detrimental outcomes are significant drivers of human diseases, including many cancers. Mutagenic double-strand break repair also facilitates heritable genetic changes that drive organismal adaptation and evolution. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of various error-prone DNA double-strand break repair processes and the cellular conditions that regulate them, with a focus on alternative end joining. We provide examples that illustrate how mutagenic double-strand break repair drives genome diversity and evolution. Finally, we discuss how error-prone break repair can be crucial to the induction and progression of diseases such as cancer.

Microhomology-mediated end joining: Good, bad and ugly

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are induced by a variety of genotoxic agents, including ionizing radiation and chemotherapy drugs for treating cancers. The elimination of DSBs proceeds via distinctive error-free and error-prone pathways. Repair by homologous recombination (HR) is largely error-free and mediated by RAD51/BRCA2 gene products. Classical non-homologous end joining (C-NHEJ) requires the Ku heterodimer and can efficiently rejoin breaks, with occasional loss or gain of DNA information. Recently, evidence has unveiled another DNA end-joining mechanism that is independent of recombination factors and Ku proteins, termed alternative non-homologous end joining (A-NHEJ). While A-NHEJ-mediated repair does not require homology, in a subtype of A-NHEJ, DSB breaks are sealed by microhomology (MH)-mediated base-pairing of DNA single strands, followed by nucleolytic trimming of DNA flaps, DNA gap filling, and DNA ligation, yielding products that are always associated with DNA deletion. This highly error-prone DSB repair pathway is termed microhomology-mediated end joining (MMEJ). Dissecting the mechanisms of MMEJ is of great interest because of its potential to destabilize the genome through gene deletions and chromosomal rearrangements in cells deficient in canonical repair pathways, including HR and C-NHEJ. In addition, evidence now suggests that MMEJ plays a physiological role in normal cells.

Cell Cycle-Dependent Expression of Adeno-Associated Virus 2 (AAV2) Rep in Coinfections with Herpes Simplex Virus 1 (HSV-1) Gives Rise to a Mosaic of Cells Replicating either AAV2 or HSV-1

Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) depends on the simultaneous presence of a helper virus such as herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) for productive replication. At the same time, AAV2 efficiently blocks the replication of HSV-1, which would eventually limit its own replication by diminishing the helper virus reservoir. This discrepancy begs the question of how AAV2 and HSV-1 can coexist in a cell population. Here we show that in coinfected cultures, AAV2 DNA replication takes place almost exclusively in S/G₂-phase cells, while HSV-1 DNA replication is restricted to G₁ phase. Live microscopy revealed that not only wild-type AAV2 (wtAAV2) replication but also reporter gene expression from both single-stranded and double-stranded (self-complementary) recombinant AAV2 vectors preferentially occurs in S/G₂-phase cells, suggesting that the preference for S/G₂ phase is independent of the nature of the viral genome. Interestingly, however, a substantial proportion of S/G₂-phase cells transduced by the double-stranded but not the single-stranded recombinant AAV2 vectors progressed through mitosis in the absence of the helper virus. We conclude that cell cycle-dependent AAV2 rep expression facilitates cell cycle-dependent AAV2 DNA replication and inhibits HSV-1 DNA replication. This may limit competition for cellular and viral helper factors and, hence, creates a biological niche for either virus to replicate.IMPORTANCE Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) differs from most other viruses, as it requires not only a host cell for replication but also a helper virus such as an adenovirus or a herpesvirus. This situation inevitably leads to competition for cellular resources. AAV2 has been shown to efficiently inhibit the replication of helper viruses. Here we present a new facet of the interaction between AAV2 and one of its helper viruses, herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1). We observed that AAV2 rep gene expression is cell cycle dependent and gives rise to distinct time-controlled windows for HSV-1 replication. High Rep protein levels in S/G₂ phase support AAV2 replication and inhibit HSV-1 replication. Conversely, low Rep protein levels in G₁ phase permit HSV-1 replication but are insufficient for AAV2 replication. This allows both viruses to productively replicate in distinct sets of dividing cells.

The non-homologous end-joining factor Nej1 inhibits resection mediated by Dna2-Sgs1 nuclease-helicase at DNA double strand breaks

Double strand breaks (DSBs) represent highly deleterious DNA damage and need to be accurately repaired. Homology-directed repair and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) are the two major DSB repair pathways that are highly conserved from yeast to mammals. The choice between these pathways is largely based on 5' to 3' DNA resection, and NHEJ proceeds only if resection has not been initiated. In yeast, yKu70/80 rapidly localizes to the break, protecting DNA ends from nuclease accessibility, and recruits additional NHEJ factors, including Nej1 and Lif1. Cells harboring the nej1-V338A mutant exhibit NHEJ-mediated repair deficiencies and hyper-resection 0.15 kb from the DSB that was dependent on the nuclease activity of Dna2-Sgs1. The integrity of Nej1 is also important for inhibiting long-range resection, 4.8 kb from the break, and for preventing the formation of large genomic deletions at sizes >700 bp around the break. Nej1^V338A localized to a DSB similarly to WT Nej1, indicating that the Nej1-Lif1 interaction becomes critical for blocking hyper-resection mainly after their recruitment to the DSB. This work highlights that Nej1 inhibits 5' DNA hyper-resection mediated by Dna2-Sgs1, a function distinct from its previously reported role in supporting Dnl4 ligase activity, and has implications for repair pathway choice and resection regulation upon DSB formation.

Targeting of the Fun30 nucleosome remodeller by the Dpb11 scaffold facilitates cell cycle-regulated DNA end resection

DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) can be repaired by either recombination-based or direct ligation-based mechanisms. Pathway choice is made at the level of DNA end resection, a nucleolytic processing step, which primes DSBs for repair by recombination. Resection is thus under cell cycle control, but additionally regulated by chromatin and nucleosome remodellers. Here, we show that both layers of control converge in the regulation of resection by the evolutionarily conserved Fun30/SMARCAD1 remodeller. Budding yeast Fun30 and human SMARCAD1 are cell cycle-regulated by interaction with the DSB-localized scaffold protein Dpb11/TOPBP1, respectively. In yeast, this protein assembly additionally comprises the 9-1-1 damage sensor, is involved in localizing Fun30 to damaged chromatin, and thus is required for efficient long-range resection of DSBs. Notably, artificial targeting of Fun30 to DSBs is sufficient to bypass the cell cycle regulation of long-range resection, indicating that chromatin remodelling during resection is underlying DSB repair pathway choice.

Stabilization of the metaphase spindle by Cdc14 is required for recombinational DNA repair

Cells are constantly threatened by multiple sources of genotoxic stress that cause DNA damage. To maintain genome integrity, cells have developed a coordinated signalling network called DNA damage response (DDR). While multiple kinases have been thoroughly studied during DDR activation, the role of protein dephosphorylation in the damage response remains elusive. Here, we show that the phosphatase Cdc14 is essential to fulfil recombinational DNA repair in budding yeast. After DNA double‐strand break (DSB) generation, Cdc14 is transiently released from the nucleolus and activated. In this state, Cdc14 targets the spindle pole body (SPB) component Spc110 to counterbalance its phosphorylation by cyclin‐dependent kinase (Cdk). Alterations in the Cdk/Cdc14‐dependent phosphorylation status of Spc110, or its inactivation during the induction of a DNA lesion, generate abnormal oscillatory SPB movements that disrupt DSB‐SPB interactions. Remarkably, these defects impair DNA repair by homologous recombination indicating that SPB integrity is essential during the repair process. Together, these results show that Cdc14 promotes spindle stability and DSB‐SPB tethering during DNA repair, and imply that metaphase spindle maintenance is a critical feature of the repair process.

The Exonuclease Homolog OsRAD1 Promotes Accurate Meiotic Double-Strand Break Repair by Suppressing Nonhomologous End Joining

During meiosis, programmed double-strand breaks (DSBs) are generated to initiate homologous recombination, which is crucial for faithful chromosome segregation. In yeast, Radiation sensitive1 (RAD1) acts together with Radiation sensitive9 (RAD9) and Hydroxyurea sensitive1 (HUS1) to facilitate meiotic recombination via cell-cycle checkpoint control. However, little is known about the meiotic functions of these proteins in higher eukaryotes. Here, we characterized a RAD1 homolog in rice (Oryza sativa) and obtained evidence that O. sativa RAD1 (OsRAD1) is important for meiotic DSB repair. Loss of OsRAD1 led to abnormal chromosome association and fragmentation upon completion of homologous pairing and synapsis. These aberrant chromosome associations were independent of OsDMC1. We found that classical nonhomologous end-joining mediated by Ku70 accounted for most of the ectopic associations in Osrad1 In addition, OsRAD1 interacts directly with OsHUS1 and OsRAD9, suggesting that these proteins act as a complex to promote DSB repair during rice meiosis. Together, these findings suggest that the 9-1-1 complex facilitates accurate meiotic recombination by suppressing nonhomologous end-joining during meiosis in rice.

The plant-specific CDKB1-CYCB1 complex mediates homologous recombination repair in Arabidopsis

Upon DNA damage, cyclin‐dependent kinases (CDKs) are typically inhibited to block cell division. In many organisms, however, it has been found that CDK activity is required for DNA repair, especially for homology‐dependent repair (HR), resulting in the conundrum how mitotic arrest and repair can be reconciled. Here, we show that Arabidopsis thaliana solves this dilemma by a division of labor strategy. We identify the plant‐specific B1‐type CDKs (CDKB1s) and the class of B1‐type cyclins (CYCB1s) as major regulators of HR in plants. We find that RADIATION SENSITIVE 51 (RAD51), a core mediator of HR, is a substrate of CDKB1‐CYCB1 complexes. Conversely, mutants in CDKB1 and CYCB1 fail to recruit RAD51 to damaged DNA. CYCB1;1 is specifically activated after DNA damage and we show that this activation is directly controlled by SUPPRESSOR OF GAMMA RESPONSE 1 (SOG1), a transcription factor that acts similarly to p53 in animals. Thus, while the major mitotic cell‐cycle activity is blocked after DNA damage, CDKB1‐CYCB1 complexes are specifically activated to mediate HR.

Risky business: Microhomology-mediated end joining

Prevalence of microhomology (MH) at the breakpoint junctions in somatic and germ-line chromosomal rearrangements and in the programmed immune receptor rearrangements from cells deficient in classical end joining reveals an enigmatic process called MH-mediated end joining (MMEJ). MMEJ repairs DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) by annealing flanking MH and deleting genetic information at the repair junctions from yeast to humans. Being genetically distinct from canonical DNA DSB pathways, MMEJ is involved with the fusions of eroded/uncapped telomeres as well as with the assembly of chromosome fragments in chromothripsis. In this review article, we will discuss an up-to-date model representing the MMEJ process and the mechanism by which cells regulate MMEJ to limit repair-associated mutagenesis. We will also describe the possible therapeutic gains resulting from the inhibition of MMEJ in recombination deficient cancers. Lastly, we will embark on two contentious issues associated with MMEJ such as the significance of MH at the repair junction to be the hallmark of MMEJ and the relationship of MMEJ to other mechanistically related DSB repair pathways.

Mechanisms and regulation of mitotic recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Homology-dependent exchange of genetic information between DNA molecules has a profound impact on the maintenance of genome integrity by facilitating error-free DNA repair, replication, and chromosome segregation during cell division as well as programmed cell developmental events. This chapter will focus on homologous mitotic recombination in budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. However, there is an important link between mitotic and meiotic recombination (covered in the forthcoming chapter by Hunter et al. 2015) and many of the functions are evolutionarily conserved. Here we will discuss several models that have been proposed to explain the mechanism of mitotic recombination, the genes and proteins involved in various pathways, the genetic and physical assays used to discover and study these genes, and the roles of many of these proteins inside the cell.

Genetic instability in budding and fission yeast-sources and mechanisms

Cells are constantly confronted with endogenous and exogenous factors that affect their genomes. Eons of evolution have allowed the cellular mechanisms responsible for preserving the genome to adjust for achieving contradictory objectives: to maintain the genome unchanged and to acquire mutations that allow adaptation to environmental changes. One evolutionary mechanism that has been refined for survival is genetic variation. In this review, we describe the mechanisms responsible for two biological processes: genome maintenance and mutation tolerance involved in generations of genetic variations in mitotic cells of both Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe. These processes encompass mechanisms that ensure the fidelity of replication, DNA lesion sensing and DNA damage response pathways, as well as mechanisms that ensure precision in chromosome segregation during cell division. We discuss various factors that may influence genome stability, such as cellular ploidy, the phase of the cell cycle, transcriptional activity of a particular region of DNA, the proficiency of DNA quality control systems, the metabolic stage of the cell and its respiratory potential, and finally potential exposure to endogenous or environmental stress.

The stability of budding and fission yeast genomes is influenced by two contradictory factors: (1) the need to be fully functional, which is ensured through the replication fidelity pathways of nuclear and mitochondrial genomes through sensing and repairing DNA damage, through precise chromosome segregation during cell division; and (2) the need to acquire changes for adaptation to environmental challenges.

Sumoylation influences DNA break repair partly by increasing the solubility of a conserved end resection protein

Protein modifications regulate both DNA repair levels and pathway choice. How each modification achieves regulatory effects and how different modifications collaborate with each other are important questions to be answered. Here, we show that sumoylation regulates double-strand break repair partly by modifying the end resection factor Sae2. This modification is conserved from yeast to humans, and is induced by DNA damage. We mapped the sumoylation site of Sae2 to a single lysine in its self-association domain. Abolishing Sae2 sumoylation by mutating this lysine to arginine impaired Sae2 function in the processing and repair of multiple types of DNA breaks. We found that Sae2 sumoylation occurs independently of its phosphorylation, and the two modifications act in synergy to increase soluble forms of Sae2. We also provide evidence that sumoylation of the Sae2-binding nuclease, the Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 complex, further increases end resection. These findings reveal a novel role for sumoylation in DNA repair by regulating the solubility of an end resection factor. They also show that collaboration between different modifications and among multiple substrates leads to a stronger biological effect.

Proper repair of DNA lesions is crucial for cell growth and organism development. Both the choice and capacity of DNA repair pathways are tightly regulated in response to environmental cues and cell cycle phase. Recent work has uncovered the importance of protein modifications, such as phosphorylation and sumoylation, in this regulation. Sumoylation is known to be critical for the efficient repair of highly toxic DNA double-strand breaks in both yeast and humans, and this is partly mediated by influencing DNA end resection. However, it has been unclear for which resection factor sumoylation is important, how sumoylation influences specific attributes of the relevant targets, and how this modification is coordinated with phosphorylation-based regulation. Here, we provide exciting new insights into these issues by revealing that 1) a conserved end resection factor is a SUMO target relevant to this process, 2) this regulation favors a specific repair pathway, 3) sumoylation collaborates with phosphorylation to promote protein solubility, and 4) sumoylation influences DNA repair via an “ensemble effect” that entails simultaneous small alterations of multiple substrates. Our work reveals both a novel mechanism and a general principle for SUMO-mediated regulation of DNA repair.

Cdk1 restrains NHEJ through phosphorylation of XRCC4-like factor Xlf1

Eukaryotic cells use two principal mechanisms for repairing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs): homologous recombination (HR) and nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ). DSB repair pathway choice is strongly regulated during the cell cycle. Cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (Cdk1) activates HR by phosphorylation of key recombination factors. However, a mechanism for regulating the NHEJ pathway has not been established. Here, we report that Xlf1, a fission yeast XLF ortholog, is a key regulator of NHEJ activity in the cell cycle. We show that Cdk1 phosphorylates residues in the C terminus of Xlf1 over the course of the cell cycle. Mutation of these residues leads to the loss of Cdk1 phosphorylation, resulting in elevated levels of NHEJ repair in vivo. Together, these data establish that Xlf1 phosphorylation by Cdc2^Cdk1 provides a molecular mechanism for downregulation of NHEJ in fission yeast and indicates that XLF is a key regulator of end-joining processes in eukaryotic organisms.

•

Cdc2^Cdk1 phosphorylates the core NHEJ factor Xlf1 in fission yeast

•

Phosphorylation of Xlf1 inhibits nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ)

•

Cells with phospho-null Xlf1 have elevated levels of NHEJ repair

•

NHEJ repair can predominate over HR when Cdc2^Cdk1 regulation of Xlf1 is lost

High levels of BRC4 induced by a Tet-On 3G system suppress DNA repair and impair cell proliferation in vertebrate cells

•

The Tet-On 3G system is useful for conditional gene overexpression studies in DT40.

•

The Tet-On-I-SceI effectively induces DSB formation in vertebrate cells.

•

BRC4 overexpression induces chromosomal breaks and G2-arrest.

•

BRC4 cytotoxicity is mediated by endogenous BRCA2, but independent of NHEJ.

•

BRC4 inhibits cancer cell proliferation and exacerbates the effects of chemotherapy.

Transient induction or suppression of target genes is useful to study the function of toxic or essential genes in cells. Here we apply a Tet-On 3G system to DT40 lymphoma B cell lines, validating it for three different genes. Using this tool, we then show that overexpression of the chicken BRC4 repeat of the tumor suppressor BRCA2 impairs cell proliferation and induces chromosomal breaks. Mechanistically, high levels of BRC4 suppress double strand break-induced homologous recombination, inhibit the formation of RAD51 recombination repair foci, reduce cellular resistance to DNA damaging agents and induce a G2 damage checkpoint-mediated cell-cycle arrest. The above phenotypes are mediated by BRC4 capability to bind and inhibit RAD51. The toxicity associated with BRC4 overexpression is exacerbated by chemotherapeutic agents and reversed by RAD51 overexpression, but it is neither aggravated nor suppressed by a deficit in the non-homologous end-joining pathway of double strand break repair. We further find that the endogenous BRCA2 mediates the cytotoxicity associated with BRC4 induction, thus underscoring the possibility that BRC4 or other domains of BRCA2 cooperate with ectopic BRC4 in regulating repair activities or mitotic cell division. In all, the results demonstrate the utility of the Tet-On 3G system in DT40 research and underpin a model in which BRC4 role on cell proliferation and chromosome repair arises primarily from its suppressive role on RAD51 functions.

End resection at double-strand breaks: mechanism and regulation

RecA/Rad51 catalyzed pairing of homologous DNA strands, initiated by polymerization of the recombinase on single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), is a universal feature of homologous recombination (HR). Generation of ssDNA from a double-strand break (DSB) requires nucleolytic degradation of the 5'-terminated strands to generate 3'-ssDNA tails, a process referred to as 5'-3' end resection. The RecBCD helicase-nuclease complex is the main end-processing machine in Gram-negative bacteria. Mre11-Rad50 and Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2/Nbs1 can play a direct role in end resection in archaea and eukaryota, respectively, by removing end-blocking lesions and act indirectly by recruiting the helicases and nucleases responsible for extensive resection. In eukaryotic cells, the initiation of end resection has emerged as a critical regulatory step to differentiate between homology-dependent and end-joining repair of DSBs.

The Ku heterodimer: function in DNA repair and beyond

Ku is an abundant, highly conserved DNA binding protein found in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes that plays essential roles in the maintenance of genome integrity. In eukaryotes, Ku is a heterodimer comprised of two subunits, Ku70 and Ku80, that is best characterized for its central role as the initial DNA end binding factor in the "classical" non-homologous end joining (C-NHEJ) pathway, the main DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair pathway in mammals. Ku binds double-stranded DNA ends with high affinity in a sequence-independent manner through a central ring formed by the intertwined strands of the Ku70 and Ku80 subunits. At the break, Ku directly and indirectly interacts with several C-NHEJ factors and processing enzymes, serving as the scaffold for the entire DNA repair complex. There is also evidence that Ku is involved in signaling to the DNA damage response (DDR) machinery to modulate the activation of cell cycle checkpoints and the activation of apoptosis. Interestingly, Ku is also associated with telomeres, where, paradoxically to its DNA end-joining functions, it protects the telomere ends from being recognized as DSBs, thereby preventing their recombination and degradation. Ku, together with the silent information regulator (Sir) complex is also required for transcriptional silencing through telomere position effect (TPE). How Ku associates with telomeres, whether it is through direct DNA binding, or through protein-protein interactions with other telomere bound factors remains to be determined. Ku is central to the protection of organisms through its participation in C-NHEJ to repair DSBs generated during V(D)J recombination, a process that is indispensable for the establishment of the immune response. Ku also functions to prevent tumorigenesis and senescence since Ku-deficient mice show increased cancer incidence and early onset of aging. Overall, Ku function is critical to the maintenance of genomic integrity and to proper cellular and organismal development.

DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice and cancer

Since DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) contribute to the genomic instability that drives cancer development, DSB repair pathways serve as important mechanisms for tumor suppression. Thus, genetic lesions, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, that disrupt DSB repair are often associated with cancer susceptibility. In addition, recent evidence suggests that DSB "mis-repair", in which DSBs are resolved by an inappropriate repair pathway, can also promote genomic instability and presumably tumorigenesis. This notion has gained currency from recent cancer genome sequencing studies which have uncovered numerous chromosomal rearrangements harboring pathological DNA repair signatures. In this perspective, we discuss the factors that regulate DSB repair pathway choice and their consequences for genome stability and cancer.

Cdk1-dependent regulation of the Mre11 complex couples DNA repair pathways to cell cycle progression

Homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) are the main pathways ensuring the repair of DNA double-stranded breaks (DSBs) in eukaryotes. It has long been known that cell cycle stage is a major determinant of the type of pathway used to repair DSBs in vivo. However, the mechanistic basis for the cell cycle regulation of the DNA damage response is still unclear. Here we show that a major DSB sensor, the Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 (MRX) complex, is regulated by cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation specifically in mitosis. This modification depends on the cyclin-dependent kinase Cdc28/Cdk1, and abrogation of Xrs2 and Mre11 phosphorylation results in a marked preference for DSB repair through NHEJ. Importantly, we show that phosphorylation of the MRX complex after DNA damage and during mitosis are regulated independently of each other by Tel1/ATM and Cdc28/Cdk1 kinases. Collectively, our results unravel an intricate network of phosphoregulatory mechanisms that act through the MRX complex to modulate DSB repair efficiency during mitosis.

Phosphatase complex Pph3/Psy2 is involved in regulation of efficient non-homologous end-joining pathway in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

One of the main mechanisms for double stranded DNA break (DSB) repair is through the non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) pathway. Using plasmid and chromosomal repair assays, we showed that deletion mutant strains for interacting proteins Pph3p and Psy2p had reduced efficiencies in NHEJ. We further observed that this activity of Pph3p and Psy2p appeared linked to cell cycle Rad53p and Chk1p checkpoint proteins. Pph3/Psy2 is a phosphatase complex, which regulates recovery from the Rad53p DNA damage checkpoint. Overexpression of Chk1p checkpoint protein in a parallel pathway to Rad53p compensated for the deletion of PPH3 or PSY2 in a chromosomal repair assay. Double mutant strains Δpph3/Δchk1 and Δpsy2/Δchk1 showed additional reductions in the efficiency of plasmid repair, compared to both single deletions which is in agreement with the activity of Pph3p and Psy2p in a parallel pathway to Chk1p. Genetic interaction analyses also supported a role for Pph3p and Psy2p in DNA damage repair, the NHEJ pathway, as well as cell cycle progression. Collectively, we report that the activity of Pph3p and Psy2p further connects NHEJ repair to cell cycle progression.

DNA repair choice defines a common pathway for recruitment of chromatin regulators

DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair is essential for maintenance of genome stability. Recent work has implicated a host of chromatin regulators in the DNA damage response, and although several functional roles have been defined, the mechanisms that control their recruitment to DNA lesions remain unclear. Here, we find that efficient DSB recruitment of the INO80, SWR-C, NuA4, SWI/SNF, and RSC enzymes is inhibited by the non-homologous end joining machinery, and that their recruitment is controlled by early steps of homologous recombination. Strikingly, we find no significant role for H2A.X phosphorylation (γH2AX) in the recruitment of chromatin regulators, but rather their recruitment coincides with reduced levels of γH2AX. Our work indicates that cell cycle position plays a key role in DNA repair pathway choice and that recruitment of chromatin regulators is tightly coupled to homologous recombination.

MRE11 is required for homologous synapsis and DSB processing in rice meiosis

Mre11, a conserved protein found in organisms ranging from yeast to multicellular organisms, is required for normal meiotic recombination. Mre11 interacts with Rad50 and Nbs1/Xrs2 to form a complex (MRN/X) that participates in double-strand break (DSB) ends processing. In this study, we silenced the MRE11 gene in rice and detailed its function using molecular and cytological methods. The OsMRE11-deficient plants exhibited normal vegetative growth but could not set seed. Cytological analysis indicated that in the OsMRE11-deficient plants, homologous pairing was totally inhibited, and the chromosomes were completely entangled as a formation of multivalents at metaphase I, leading to the consequence of serious chromosome fragmentation during anaphase I. Immunofluorescence studies further demonstrated that OsMRE11 is required for homologous synapsis and DSB processing but is dispensable for meiotic DSB formation. We found that OsMRE11 protein was located on meiotic chromosomes from interphase to late pachytene. This protein showed normal localization in zep1, Oscom1 and Osmer3, as well as in OsSPO11-1(RNAi) plants, but not in pair2 and pair3 mutants. Taken together, our results provide evidence that OsMRE11 performs a function essential for maintaining the normal HR process and inhibiting non-homologous recombination during meiosis.

Controlling DNA-end resection: a new task for CDKs

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are repaired by two major pathways: homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). The choice between HR and NHEJ is highly regulated during the cell cycle. DNA-end resection, an evolutionarily conserved process that generates long stretches of single-stranded DNA, plays a critical role in pathway choice, as it commits cells to HR, while, at the same time, suppressing NHEJ. As erroneous DSB repair is a major source of genomic instability-driven tumorigenesis, DNA-end resection factors, and in particular their regulation by post-translational modifications, have become the subject of extensive research over the past few years. Recent work has implicated phosphorylation at S/T-P motifs by cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) as a major regulatory mechanism of DSB repair. Intriguingly, CDK activity was found to be critically important for the coordinated and timely execution of DNA-end resection, and key players in this process were subsequently identified as CDK substrates. In this mini review, we provide an overview of the current understanding of how the DNA-end resection machinery in yeast and human cells is controlled by CDK-mediated phosphorylation.

To trim or not to trim: progression and control of DSB end resection

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are the most cytotoxic form of DNA damage, since they can lead to genome instability and chromosome rearrangements, which are hallmarks of cancer cells. To face this kind of lesion, eukaryotic cells developed two alternative repair pathways, homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ). Repair pathway choice is influenced by the cell cycle phase and depends upon the 5'-3' nucleolytic processing of the break ends, since the generation of ssDNA tails strongly stimulates HR and inhibits NHEJ. A large amount of work has elucidated the key components of the DSBs repair machinery and how this crucial process is finely regulated. The emerging view suggests that besides endo/exonucleases and helicases activities required for end resection, molecular barrier factors are specifically loaded in the proximity of the break, where they physically or functionally limit DNA degradation, preventing excessive accumulation of ssDNA, which could be threatening for cell survival.

Repair of double-strand breaks by end joining

Nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) refers to a set of genome maintenance pathways in which two DNA double-strand break (DSB) ends are (re)joined by apposition, processing, and ligation without the use of extended homology to guide repair. Canonical NHEJ (c-NHEJ) is a well-defined pathway with clear roles in protecting the integrity of chromosomes when DSBs arise. Recent advances have revealed much about the identity, structure, and function of c-NHEJ proteins, but many questions exist regarding their concerted action in the context of chromatin. Alternative NHEJ (alt-NHEJ) refers to more recently described mechanism(s) that repair DSBs in less-efficient backup reactions. There is great interest in defining alt-NHEJ more precisely, including its regulation relative to c-NHEJ, in light of evidence that alt-NHEJ can execute chromosome rearrangements. Progress toward these goals is reviewed.

Regulation of the DNA damage response by cyclin-dependent kinases

The eukaryotic cell cycle comprises a series of events, whose ordering and correct progression depends on the oscillating activity of cyclin-dependent kinases (Cdks), which safeguard timely duplication and segregation of the genome. Cell division is intimately connected to an evolutionarily conserved DNA damage response (DDR), which involves DNA repair pathways that reverse DNA lesions, as well as checkpoint pathways that inhibit cell cycle progression while repair occurs. There is increasing evidence that Cdks are involved in the DDR, in particular in DNA repair by homologous recombination and in activation of the checkpoint response. However, Cdks have to be carefully regulated, because even an excess of their activity can affect genome stability. In this review, we consider the physiological role of Cdks in the DDR.

CDK1 regulates mediator of DNA damage checkpoint 1 during mitotic DNA damage

Cells engage sophisticated programs of DNA damage response (DDR) and repair to guard against genetic mutations. Although there is significant knowledge concerning DDR in interphase cells, much less is known about these processes in mitosis. Direct interaction between MDC1, a master DDR organizer, and a marker of DNA damage, histone γH2AX, is required to trigger robust repair. Here we show that the DNA damage-induced interaction between MDC1 and γH2AX is attenuated in mitosis. Furthermore, inhibition in the activity of the core mitotic regulator CDK1, either by pharmacologic inhibition or siRNA attenuation, enhances MDC1-γH2AX colocalization in mitosis. Our findings offer key new insights into how DDR is controlled during mitosis.

Eukaryotic DNA damage checkpoint activation in response to double-strand breaks

Double-strand breaks (DSBs) are the most detrimental form of DNA damage. Failure to repair these cytotoxic lesions can result in genome rearrangements conducive to the development of many diseases, including cancer. The DNA damage response (DDR) ensures the rapid detection and repair of DSBs in order to maintain genome integrity. Central to the DDR are the DNA damage checkpoints. When activated by DNA damage, these sophisticated surveillance mechanisms induce transient cell cycle arrests, allowing sufficient time for DNA repair. Since the term "checkpoint" was coined over 20 years ago, our understanding of the molecular mechanisms governing the DNA damage checkpoint has advanced significantly. These pathways are highly conserved from yeast to humans. Thus, significant findings in yeast may be extrapolated to vertebrates, greatly facilitating the molecular dissection of these complex regulatory networks. This review focuses on the cellular response to DSBs in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, providing a comprehensive overview of how these signalling pathways function to orchestrate the cellular response to DNA damage and preserve genome stability in eukaryotic cells.

Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are cytotoxic lesions that can result in mutagenic events or cell death if left unrepaired or repaired inappropriately. Cells use two major pathways for DSB repair: nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR). The choice between these pathways depends on the phase of the cell cycle and the nature of the DSB ends. A critical determinant of repair pathway choice is the initiation of 5'-3' resection of DNA ends, which commits cells to homology-dependent repair, and prevents repair by classical NHEJ. Here, we review the components of the end resection machinery, the role of end structure, and the cell-cycle phase on resection and the interplay of end processing with NHEJ.

Induction and repair of DNA double strand breaks: the increasing spectrum of non-homologous end joining pathways

A defining characteristic of damage induced in the DNA by ionizing radiation (IR) is its clustered character that leads to the formation of complex lesions challenging the cellular repair mechanisms. The most widely investigated such complex lesion is the DNA double strand break (DSB). DSBs undermine chromatin stability and challenge the repair machinery because an intact template strand is lacking to assist restoration of integrity and sequence in the DNA molecule. Therefore, cells have evolved a sophisticated machinery to detect DSBs and coordinate a response on the basis of inputs from various sources. A central function of cellular responses to DSBs is the coordination of DSB repair. Two conceptually different mechanisms can in principle remove DSBs from the genome of cells of higher eukaryotes. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) uses as template a homologous DNA molecule and is therefore error-free; it functions preferentially in the S and G2 phases. Non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), on the other hand, simply restores DNA integrity by joining the two ends, is error prone as sequence is only fortuitously preserved and active throughout the cell cycle. The basis of DSB repair pathway choice remains unknown, but cells of higher eukaryotes appear programmed to utilize preferentially NHEJ. Recent work suggests that when the canonical DNA-PK dependent pathway of NHEJ (D-NHEJ), becomes compromised an alternative NHEJ pathway and not HRR substitutes in a quasi-backup function (B-NHEJ). Here, we outline aspects of DSB induction by IR and review the mechanisms of their processing in cells of higher eukaryotes. We place particular emphasis on backup pathways of NHEJ and summarize their increasing significance in various cellular processes, as well as their potential contribution to carcinogenesis.

Making the best of the loose ends: Mre11/Rad50 complexes and Sae2 promote DNA double-strand break resection

Double-strand breaks in chromosomal DNA are repaired efficiently in eukaryotic cells through pathways that involve direct religation of broken ends, or through pathways that utilize an unbroken, homologous DNA molecule as a template for replication. Pathways of repair that require homology initiate with the resection of the 5' strand at the break site, to uncover the 3' single-stranded DNA that becomes a critical intermediate in single-strand annealing and in homologous strand exchange. Resection of the 5' strand is regulated to occur most efficiently in S and G(2) phases of the cell cycle when sister chromatids are present as recombination templates. The mechanisms governing resection in eukaryotes have been elusive for many years, but recent work has identified the major players in short-range processing of DNA ends as well as the extensive resection of breaks that has been observed in vivo. This review focuses on the Mre11/Rad50/Xrs2(Nbs1) complex and the Sae2(CtIP) protein and their roles in initiating both short-range and long-range resection, the effects of topoisomerase-DNA conjugates on resection in vivo, and the relationship between these factors and NHEJ proteins in regulating 5' strand resection in eukaryotic cells.

The MRN complex in double-strand break repair and telomere maintenance

Genomes are subject to constant threat by damaging agents that generate DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). The ends of linear chromosomes need to be protected from DNA damage recognition and end-joining, and this is achieved through protein-DNA complexes known as telomeres. The Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN) complex plays important roles in detection and signaling of DSBs, as well as the repair pathways of homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). In addition, MRN associates with telomeres and contributes to their maintenance. Here, we provide an overview of MRN functions at DSBs, and examine its roles in telomere maintenance and dysfunction.

Mechanisms and regulation of DNA end resection

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are highly hazardous for genome integrity, because failure to repair these lesions can lead to genomic instability. DSBs can arise accidentally at unpredictable locations into the genome, but they are also normal intermediates in meiotic recombination. Moreover, the natural ends of linear chromosomes resemble DSBs. Although intrachromosomal DNA breaks are potent stimulators of the DNA damage response, the natural ends of linear chromosomes are packaged into protective structures called telomeres that suppress DNA repair/recombination activities. Although DSBs and telomeres are functionally different, they both undergo 5'-3' nucleolytic degradation of DNA ends, a process known as resection. The resulting 3'-single-stranded DNA overhangs enable repair of DSBs by homologous recombination (HR), whereas they allow the action of telomerase at telomeres. The molecular activities required for DSB and telomere end resection are similar, indicating that the initial steps of HR and telomerase-mediated elongation are related. Resection of both DSBs and telomeres must be tightly regulated in time and space to ensure genome stability and cell survival.