DNA replication machinery prevents Rad52-dependent single-strand annealing that leads to gross chromosomal rearrangements at centromeres

Emerging roles of DNA repair factors in the stability of centromeres

Satellite DNA sequences are an integral part of centromeres, regions critical for faithful segregation of chromosomes during cell division. Because of their complex repetitive structure, satellite DNA may act as a barrier to DNA replication and other DNA based transactions ultimately resulting in chromosome breakage. Over the past two decades, several DNA repair proteins have been shown to bind and function at centromeres. While the importance of these repair factors is highlighted by various structural and numerical chromosome aberrations resulting from their inactivation, their roles in helping to maintain genome stability by solving the intrinsic difficulties of satellite DNA replication or promoting their repair are just starting to emerge. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on the role of DNA repair and DNA damage response proteins in maintaining the structure and function of centromeres in different contexts. We also report the recent connection between the roles of specific DNA repair factors at these genomic loci with age-related increase of chromosomal instability under physiological and pathological conditions.

Gross Chromosomal Rearrangement at Centromeres

Centromeres play essential roles in the faithful segregation of chromosomes. CENP-A, the centromere-specific histone H3 variant, and heterochromatin characterized by di- or tri-methylation of histone H3 9th lysine (H3K9) are the hallmarks of centromere chromatin. Contrary to the epigenetic marks, DNA sequences underlying the centromere region of chromosomes are not well conserved through evolution. However, centromeres consist of repetitive sequences in many eukaryotes, including animals, plants, and a subset of fungi, including fission yeast. Advances in long-read sequencing techniques have uncovered the complete sequence of human centromeres containing more than thousands of alpha satellite repeats and other types of repetitive sequences. Not only tandem but also inverted repeats are present at a centromere. DNA recombination between centromere repeats can result in gross chromosomal rearrangement (GCR), such as translocation and isochromosome formation. CENP-A chromatin and heterochromatin suppress the centromeric GCR. The key player of homologous recombination, Rad51, safeguards centromere integrity through conservative noncrossover recombination between centromere repeats. In contrast to Rad51-dependent recombination, Rad52-mediated single-strand annealing (SSA) and microhomology-mediated end-joining (MMEJ) lead to centromeric GCR. This review summarizes recent findings on the role of centromere and recombination proteins in maintaining centromere integrity and discusses how GCR occurs at centromeres.

Mitochondrial superoxide dismutase Sod2 suppresses nuclear genome instability during oxidative stress

Oxidative stress can damage DNA and thereby contribute to genome instability. To avoid an imbalance or overaccumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), cells are equipped with antioxidant enzymes that scavenge excess ROS. Cells lacking the RecQ-family DNA helicase Sgs1, which contributes to homology-dependent DNA break repair and chromosome stability, are known to accumulate ROS, but the origin and consequences of this oxidative stress phenotype are not fully understood. Here, we show that the sgs1 mutant exhibits elevated mitochondrial superoxide, increased mitochondrial mass, and accumulation of recombinogenic DNA lesions that can be suppressed by antioxidants. Increased mitochondrial mass in the sgs1Δ mutant is accompanied by increased mitochondrial branching, which was also inducible in wildtype cells by replication stress. Superoxide dismutase Sod2 genetically interacts with Sgs1 in the suppression of nuclear chromosomal rearrangements under paraquat (PQ)-induced oxidative stress. PQ-induced chromosome rearrangements in the absence of Sod2 are promoted by Rad51 recombinase and the polymerase subunit Pol32. Finally, the dependence of chromosomal rearrangements on the Rev1/Pol ζ mutasome suggests that under oxidative stress successful DNA synthesis during DNA break repair depends on translesion DNA synthesis.

Flexible Attachment and Detachment of Centromeres and Telomeres to and from Chromosomes

Accurate transmission of genomic information across multiple cell divisions and generations, without any losses or errors, is fundamental to all living organisms. To achieve this goal, eukaryotes devised chromosomes. Eukaryotic genomes are represented by multiple linear chromosomes in the nucleus, each carrying a centromere in the middle, a telomere at both ends, and multiple origins of replication along the chromosome arms. Although all three of these DNA elements are indispensable for chromosome function, centromeres and telomeres possess the potential to detach from the original chromosome and attach to new chromosomal positions, as evident from the events of telomere fusion, centromere inactivation, telomere healing, and neocentromere formation. These events seem to occur spontaneously in nature but have not yet been elucidated clearly, because they are relatively infrequent and sometimes detrimental. To address this issue, experimental setups have been developed using model organisms such as yeast. In this article, we review some of the key experiments that provide clues as to the extent to which these paradoxical and elusive features of chromosomally indispensable elements may become valuable in the natural context.

Fission yeast Srr1 and Skb1 promote isochromosome formation at the centromere

Rad51 maintains genome integrity, whereas Rad52 causes non-canonical homologous recombination leading to gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs). Here we find that fission yeast Srr1/Ber1 and Skb1/PRMT5 promote GCRs at centromeres. Genetic and physical analyses show that srr1 and skb1 mutations reduce isochromosome formation mediated by centromere inverted repeats. srr1 increases DNA damage sensitivity in rad51 cells but does not abolish checkpoint response, suggesting that Srr1 promotes Rad51-independent DNA repair. srr1 and rad52 additively, while skb1 and rad52 epistatically reduce GCRs. Unlike srr1 or rad52, skb1 does not increase damage sensitivity. Skb1 regulates cell morphology and cell cycle with Slf1 and Pom1, respectively, but neither Slf1 nor Pom1 causes GCRs. Mutating conserved residues in the arginine methyltransferase domain of Skb1 greatly reduces GCRs. These results suggest that, through arginine methylation, Skb1 forms aberrant DNA structures leading to Rad52-dependent GCRs. This study has uncovered roles for Srr1 and Skb1 in GCRs at centromeres.

Homologous recombination suppresses transgenerational DNA end resection and chromosomal instability in fission yeast

Chromosomal instability (CIN) drives cell-to-cell heterogeneity, and the development of genetic diseases, including cancer. Impaired homologous recombination (HR) has been implicated as a major driver of CIN, however, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Using a fission yeast model system, we establish a common role for HR genes in suppressing DNA double-strand break (DSB)-induced CIN. Further, we show that an unrepaired single-ended DSB arising from failed HR repair or telomere loss is a potent driver of widespread CIN. Inherited chromosomes carrying a single-ended DSB are subject to cycles of DNA replication and extensive end-processing across successive cell divisions. These cycles are enabled by Cullin 3-mediated Chk1 loss and checkpoint adaptation. Subsequent propagation of unstable chromosomes carrying a single-ended DSB continues until transgenerational end-resection leads to fold-back inversion of single-stranded centromeric repeats and to stable chromosomal rearrangements, typically isochromosomes, or to chromosomal loss. These findings reveal a mechanism by which HR genes suppress CIN and how DNA breaks that persist through mitotic divisions propagate cell-to-cell heterogeneity in the resultant progeny.

Therapeutic Opportunities of Disrupting Genome Integrity in Adult Diffuse Glioma

Adult diffuse glioma, particularly glioblastoma (GBM), is a devastating tumor of the central nervous system. The existential threat of this disease requires on-going treatment to counteract tumor progression. The present outcome is discouraging as most patients will succumb to this disease. The low cure rate is consistent with the failure of first-line therapy, radiation and temozolomide (TMZ). Even with their therapeutic mechanism of action to incur lethal DNA lesions, tumor growth remains undeterred. Delivering additional treatments only delays the inescapable development of therapeutic tolerance and disease recurrence. The urgency of establishing lifelong tumor control needs to be re-examined with a greater focus on eliminating resistance. Early genomic and transcriptome studies suggest each tumor subtype possesses a unique molecular network to safeguard genome integrity. Subsequent seminal work on post-therapy tumor progression sheds light on the involvement of DNA repair as the causative contributor for hypermutation and therapeutic failure. In this review, we will provide an overview of known molecular factors that influence the engagement of different DNA repair pathways, including targetable vulnerabilities, which can be exploited for clinical benefit with the use of specific inhibitors.

Immediate-Early, Early, and Late Responses to DNA Double Stranded Breaks

Loss or rearrangement of genetic information can result from incorrect responses to DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). The cellular responses to DSBs encompass a range of highly coordinated events designed to detect and respond appropriately to the damage, thereby preserving genomic integrity. In analogy with events occurring during viral infection, we appropriate the terms Immediate-Early, Early, and Late to describe the pre-repair responses to DSBs. A distinguishing feature of the Immediate-Early response is that the large protein condensates that form during the Early and Late response and are resolved upon repair, termed foci, are not visible. The Immediate-Early response encompasses initial lesion sensing, involving poly (ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs), KU70/80, and MRN, as well as rapid repair by so-called ‘fast-kinetic’ canonical non-homologous end joining (cNHEJ). Initial binding of PARPs and the KU70/80 complex to breaks appears to be mutually exclusive at easily ligatable DSBs that are repaired efficiently by fast-kinetic cNHEJ; a process that is PARP-, ATM-, 53BP1-, Artemis-, and resection-independent. However, at more complex breaks requiring processing, the Immediate-Early response involving PARPs and the ensuing highly dynamic PARylation (polyADP ribosylation) of many substrates may aid recruitment of both KU70/80 and MRN to DSBs. Complex DSBs rely upon the Early response, largely defined by ATM-dependent focal recruitment of many signalling molecules into large condensates, and regulated by complex chromatin dynamics. Finally, the Late response integrates information from cell cycle phase, chromatin context, and type of DSB to determine appropriate pathway choice. Critical to pathway choice is the recruitment of p53 binding protein 1 (53BP1) and breast cancer associated 1 (BRCA1). However, additional factors recruited throughout the DSB response also impact upon pathway choice, although these remain to be fully characterised. The Late response somehow channels DSBs into the appropriate high-fidelity repair pathway, typically either ‘slow-kinetic’ cNHEJ or homologous recombination (HR). Loss of specific components of the DSB repair machinery results in cells utilising remaining factors to effect repair, but often at the cost of increased mutagenesis. Here we discuss the complex regulation of the Immediate-Early, Early, and Late responses to DSBs proceeding repair itself.

Single-strand annealing: Molecular mechanisms and potential applications in CRISPR-Cas-based precision genome editing

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous double-stranded DNA breaks (DSBs) frequently occur within the genome of all living organisms and must be well repaired for survival. Recently, more important roles of the DSB repair pathways that were previously thought to be minor pathways, such as single-strand annealing (SSA), have been shown. Nevertheless, the biochemical mechanisms and applications of the SSA pathway in genome editing have not been updated.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

Understanding the molecular mechanism of SSA is important to design potential applications in gene editing. This review provides insights into the recent progress of SSA studies and establishes a model for their potential applications in precision genome editing.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The SSA mechanism involved in DNA DSB repair appears to be activated by a complex signaling cascade starting with broken end sensing and 5'-3' resection to reveal homologous repeats on the 3' ssDNA overhangs that flank the DSB. Annealing the repeats would help to amend the discontinuous ends and restore the intact genome, resulting in the missing of one repeat and the intervening sequence between the repeats. We proposed a model for CRISPR-Cas-based precision insertion or replacement of DNA fragments to take advantage of the characteristics. The proposed model can add a tool to extend the choice for precision gene editing. Nevertheless, the model needs to be experimentally validated and optimized with SSA-favorable conditions for practical applications.

Fission yeast Rad8/HLTF facilitates Rad52-dependent chromosomal rearrangements through PCNA lysine 107 ubiquitination

Gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs), including translocation, deletion, and inversion, can cause cell death and genetic diseases such as cancer in multicellular organisms. Rad51, a DNA strand exchange protein, suppresses GCRs by repairing spontaneous DNA damage through a conservative way of homologous recombination, gene conversion. On the other hand, Rad52 that catalyzes single-strand annealing (SSA) causes GCRs using homologous sequences. However, the detailed mechanism of Rad52-dependent GCRs remains unclear. Here, we provide genetic evidence that fission yeast Rad8/HLTF facilitates Rad52-dependent GCRs through the ubiquitination of lysine 107 (K107) of PCNA, a DNA sliding clamp. In rad51Δ cells, loss of Rad8 eliminated 75% of the isochromosomes resulting from centromere inverted repeat recombination, showing that Rad8 is essential for the formation of the majority of isochromosomes in rad51Δ cells. Rad8 HIRAN and RING finger mutations reduced GCRs, suggesting that Rad8 facilitates GCRs through 3’ DNA-end binding and ubiquitin ligase activity. Mms2 and Ubc4 but not Ubc13 ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes were required for GCRs. Consistent with this, mutating PCNA K107 rather than the well-studied PCNA K164 reduced GCRs. Rad8-dependent PCNA K107 ubiquitination facilitates Rad52-dependent GCRs, as PCNA K107R, rad8, and rad52 mutations epistatically reduced GCRs. In contrast to GCRs, PCNA K107R did not significantly change gene conversion rates, suggesting a specific role of PCNA K107 ubiquitination in GCRs. PCNA K107R enhanced temperature-sensitive growth defects of DNA ligase I cdc17-K42 mutant, implying that PCNA K107 ubiquitination occurs when Okazaki fragment maturation fails. Remarkably, K107 is located at the interface between PCNA subunits, and an interface mutation D150E bypassed the requirement of PCNA K107 and Rad8 ubiquitin ligase for GCRs. These data suggest that Rad8-dependent PCNA K107 ubiquitination facilitates Rad52-dependent GCRs by changing the PCNA clamp structure.

Gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs), including translocation, can alter gene dosage and activity, resulting in genetic diseases such as cancer. However, GCRs can occur by some enzymes, including Rad52 recombinase, and result in chromosomal evolution. Therefore, GCRs are not only pathological but also physiological phenomena from an evolutionary point of view. However, the detailed mechanism of GCRs remains unclear. Here, using fission yeast, we show that the homolog of human HLTF, Rad8 causes GCRs through noncanonical ubiquitination of proliferating cellular nuclear antigen (PCNA) at a lysine 107 (K107). Rad51, a DNA strand exchange protein, suppresses the formation of isochromosomes whose arms mirror each another and chromosomal truncation. We found that, like Rad52, Rad8 is required for isochromosome formation but not chromosomal truncation in rad51Δ cells, showing a specific role of Rad8 in homology-mediated GCRs. Mutations in Rad8 ubiquitin E3 ligase RING finger domain, Mms2-Ubc4 ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes, and PCNA K107 reduced GCRs in rad51Δ cells, suggesting that Rad8-Mms2-Ubc4-dependent PCNA K107 ubiquitination facilitates GCRs. PCNA trimers form a DNA sliding clamp. The K107 residue is located at the PCNA-PCNA interface, and an interface mutation D150E restored GCRs in PCNA K107R mutant cells. This study provides genetic evidence that Rad8-dependent PCNA K107 ubiquitination facilitates GCRs by changing the PCNA clamp structure.

BRCA2 Promotes Spontaneous Homologous Recombination In Vivo

BACKGROUND

BRCA2 is known to be a tumor suppressor involved in homologous recombination repair and presumed to prevent genome instability in normal tissues prior to the development of tumors. Typical assessment of BRCA2 deficiency on the genome involves cell-based models using cancer cells with mixed genetic contexts, but the role in normal tissue in vivo has not been clearly demonstrated.

METHODS

Using conditional deletion of Brca2 exon 11, the region containing all eight BRC repeats, in the retinal pigment epithelium and the pink-eyed unstable mouse model, we evaluate the frequency of DNA deletion events.

RESULTS

In the current study, we show that conditional loss of Brca2 exon 11 results in a decreased frequency of spontaneous homologous recombination compared to wild-type mice. Of note, we observe no apparent concomitant increase in events that indicate single-strand annealing by the pink-eyed unstable mouse model.

CONCLUSIONS

Therefore, our results demonstrate that BRCA2, as expected, is required for high-fidelity homologous recombination DNA repair in normal tissues, here in a tissue undergoing normal proliferation through normal development.

Behavior of dicentric chromosomes in budding yeast

DNA double-strand breaks arise in vivo when a dicentric chromosome (two centromeres on one chromosome) goes through mitosis with the two centromeres attached to opposite spindle pole bodies. Repair of the DSBs generates phenotypic diversity due to the range of monocentric derivative chromosomes that arise. To explore whether DSBs may be differentially repaired as a function of their spatial position in the chromosome, we have examined the structure of monocentric derivative chromosomes from cells containing a suite of dicentric chromosomes in which the distance between the two centromeres ranges from 6.5 kb to 57.7 kb. Two major classes of repair products, homology-based (homologous recombination (HR) and single-strand annealing (SSA)) and end-joining (non-homologous (NHEJ) and micro-homology mediated (MMEJ)) were identified. The distribution of repair products varies as a function of distance between the two centromeres. Genetic dependencies on double strand break repair (Rad52), DNA ligase (Lif1), and S phase checkpoint (Mrc1) are indicative of distinct repair pathway choices for DNA breaks in the pericentromeric chromatin versus the arms.

A challenge in chromosome biology is to integrate the linear code with spatial organization and chromosome dynamics within the nucleus. The major sub-division of function in the nucleus is the nucleolus, the site of ribosomal RNA synthesis. We report that the pericentromere DNA surrounding the centromere is another region of confined biochemistry. We have found that chromosome breaks between two centromeres that both lie within the pericentromeric region of the chromosomes are repaired via pathways that do not rely on sequence homology (MMEJ or NHEJ). Chromosome breaks in dicentric chromosomes whose centromeres are separated by > 20 kb are repaired via pathways that rely mainly on sequence homology (HR, SSA). The repair of breaks in the pericentromere versus breaks in the arms are differentially dependent on Rad52, Lif1, and Mrc1, further indicative of spatial control over DNA repair pathways.