Checkpoint regulation of replication forks: global or local?

A local ATR-dependent checkpoint pathway is activated by a site-specific replication fork block in human cells

When replication forks encounter DNA lesions that cause polymerase stalling, a checkpoint pathway is activated. The ATR-dependent intra-S checkpoint pathway mediates detection and processing of sites of replication fork stalling to maintain genomic integrity. Several factors involved in the global checkpoint pathway have been identified, but the response to a single replication fork barrier (RFB) is poorly understood. We utilized the Escherichia coli-based Tus-Ter system in human MCF7 cells and showed that the Tus protein binding to TerB sequences creates an efficient site-specific RFB. The single fork RFB was sufficient to activate a local, but not global, ATR-dependent checkpoint response that leads to phosphorylation and accumulation of DNA damage sensor protein γH2AX, confined locally to within a kilobase of the site of stalling. These data support a model of local management of fork stalling, which allows global replication at sites other than the RFB to continue to progress without delay.

A local ATR-dependent checkpoint pathway is activated by a site-specific replication fork block in human cells

When replication forks encounter DNA lesions that cause polymerase stalling a checkpoint pathway is activated. The ATR-dependent intra-S checkpoint pathway mediates detection and processing of sites of replication fork stalling to maintain genomic integrity. Several factors involved in the global checkpoint pathway have been identified, but the response to a single replication fork barrier (RFB) is poorly understood. We utilized the E.coli -based Tus- Ter system in human MCF7 cells and showed that the Tus protein binding to TerB sequences creates an efficient site-specific RFB. The single fork RFB was sufficient to activate a local, but not global, ATR-dependent checkpoint response that leads to phosphorylation and accumulation of DNA damage sensor protein γH2AX, confined locally to within a kilobase of the site of stalling. These data support a model of local management of fork stalling, which allows global replication at sites other than the RFB to continue to progress without delay.

DDK/Hsk1 phosphorylates and targets fission yeast histone deacetylase Hst4 for degradation to stabilize stalled DNA replication forks

In eukaryotes, paused replication forks are prone to collapse, which leads to genomic instability, a hallmark of cancer. Dbf4-dependent kinase (DDK)/Hsk1^Cdc7 is a conserved replication initiator kinase with conflicting roles in replication stress response. Here, we show that fission yeast DDK/Hsk1 phosphorylates sirtuin, Hst4 upon replication stress at C-terminal serine residues. Phosphorylation of Hst4 by DDK marks it for degradation via the ubiquitin ligase SCF^pof3. Phosphorylation-defective hst4 mutant (4SA-hst4) displays defective recovery from replication stress, faulty fork restart, slow S-phase progression and decreased viability. The highly conserved fork protection complex (FPC) stabilizes stalled replication forks. We found that the recruitment of FPC components, Swi1 and Mcl1 to the chromatin is compromised in the 4SA-hst4 mutant, although whole cell levels increased. These defects are dependent upon H3K56ac and independent of intra S-phase checkpoint activation. Finally, we show conservation of H3K56ac-dependent regulation of Timeless, Tipin, and And-1 in human cells. We propose that degradation of Hst4 via DDK increases H3K56ac, changing the chromatin state in the vicinity of stalled forks facilitating recruitment and function of FPC. Overall, this study identified a crucial role of DDK and FPC in the regulation of replication stress response with implications in cancer therapeutics.

Critical role of SMG7 in activation of the ATR-CHK1 axis in response to genotoxic stress

CHK1 is a crucial DNA damage checkpoint kinase and its activation, which requires ATR and RAD17, leads to inhibition of DNA replication and cell cycle progression. Recently, we reported that SMG7 stabilizes and activates p53 to induce G₁ arrest upon DNA damage; here we show that SMG7 plays a critical role in the activation of the ATR-CHK1 axis. Following genotoxic stress, SMG7-null cells exhibit deficient ATR signaling, indicated by the attenuated phosphorylation of CHK1 and RPA32, and importantly, unhindered DNA replication and fork progression. Through its 14-3-3 domain, SMG7 interacts directly with the Ser635-phosphorylated RAD17 and promotes chromatin retention of the 9-1-1 complex by the RAD17-RFC, an essential step to CHK1 activation. Furthermore, through maintenance of CHK1 activity, SMG7 controls G₂-M transition and facilitates orderly cell cycle progression during recovery from replication stress. Taken together, our data reveals SMG7 as an indispensable signaling component in the ATR-CHK1 pathway during genotoxic stress response.

The more the merrier: how homo-oligomerization alters the interactome and function of ribonucleotide reductase

Stereotyped as a nexus of dNTP synthesis, the dual-subunit enzyme - ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) - is coming into view as a paradigm of oligomerization and moonlighting behavior. In the present issue of 'omics', we discuss what makes the larger subunit of this enzyme (RNR-α) so interesting, highlighting its emerging cellular interactome based on its unique oligomeric dynamism that dictates its compartment-specific occupations. Linking the history of the field with the multivariable nature of this exceedingly sophisticated enzyme, we further discuss implications of new data pertaining to DNA-damage response, S-phase checkpoints, and ultimately tumor suppression. We hereby hope to provide ideas for those interested in these fields and exemplify conceptual frameworks and tools that are useful to study RNR's broader roles in biology.

Mrc1 and Rad9 cooperate to regulate initiation and elongation of DNA replication in response to DNA damage

The S-phase checkpoint maintains the integrity of the genome in response to DNA replication stress. In budding yeast, this pathway is initiated by Mec1 and is amplified through the activation of Rad53 by two checkpoint mediators: Mrc1 promotes Rad53 activation at stalled forks, and Rad9 is a general mediator of the DNA damage response. Here, we have investigated the interplay between Mrc1 and Rad9 in response to DNA damage and found that they control DNA replication through two distinct but complementary mechanisms. Mrc1 rapidly activates Rad53 at stalled forks and represses late-firing origins but is unable to maintain this repression over time. Rad9 takes over Mrc1 to maintain a continuous checkpoint signaling. Importantly, the Rad9-mediated activation of Rad53 slows down fork progression, supporting the view that the S-phase checkpoint controls both the initiation and the elongation of DNA replication in response to DNA damage. Together, these data indicate that Mrc1 and Rad9 play distinct functions that are important to ensure an optimal completion of S phase under replication stress conditions.

The CDK-PLK1 axis targets the DNA damage checkpoint sensor protein RAD9 to promote cell proliferation and tolerance to genotoxic stress

Genotoxic stress causes proliferating cells to activate the DNA damage checkpoint, to assist DNA damage recovery by slowing cell cycle progression. Thus, to drive proliferation, cells must tolerate DNA damage and suppress the checkpoint response. However, the mechanism underlying this negative regulation of checkpoint activation is still elusive. We show that human Cyclin-Dependent-Kinases (CDKs) target the RAD9 subunit of the 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp on Thr292, to modulate DNA damage checkpoint activation. Thr292 phosphorylation on RAD9 creates a binding site for Polo-Like-Kinase1 (PLK1), which phosphorylates RAD9 on Thr313. These CDK-PLK1-dependent phosphorylations of RAD9 suppress checkpoint activation, therefore maintaining high DNA synthesis rates during DNA replication stress. Our results suggest that CDK locally initiates a PLK1-dependent signaling response that antagonizes the ability of the DNA damage checkpoint to detect DNA damage. These findings provide a mechanism for the suppression of DNA damage checkpoint signaling, to promote cell proliferation under genotoxic stress conditions.

Replication fork slowing and stalling are distinct, checkpoint-independent consequences of replicating damaged DNA

In response to DNA damage during S phase, cells slow DNA replication. This slowing is orchestrated by the intra-S checkpoint and involves inhibition of origin firing and reduction of replication fork speed. Slowing of replication allows for tolerance of DNA damage and suppresses genomic instability. Although the mechanisms of origin inhibition by the intra-S checkpoint are understood, major questions remain about how the checkpoint regulates replication forks: Does the checkpoint regulate the rate of fork progression? Does the checkpoint affect all forks, or only those encountering damage? Does the checkpoint facilitate the replication of polymerase-blocking lesions? To address these questions, we have analyzed the checkpoint in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe using a single-molecule DNA combing assay, which allows us to unambiguously separate the contribution of origin and fork regulation towards replication slowing, and allows us to investigate the behavior of individual forks. Moreover, we have interrogated the role of forks interacting with individual sites of damage by using three damaging agents-MMS, 4NQO and bleomycin-that cause similar levels of replication slowing with very different frequency of DNA lesions. We find that the checkpoint slows replication by inhibiting origin firing, but not by decreasing fork rates. However, the checkpoint appears to facilitate replication of damaged templates, allowing forks to more quickly pass lesions. Finally, using a novel analytic approach, we rigorously identify fork stalling events in our combing data and show that they play a previously unappreciated role in shaping replication kinetics in response to DNA damage.

Role of Protein Phosphorylation in the Regulation of Cell Cycle and DNA-Related Processes in Bacteria

In all living organisms, the phosphorylation of proteins modulates various aspects of their functionalities. In eukaryotes, protein phosphorylation plays a key role in cell signaling, gene expression, and differentiation. Protein phosphorylation is also involved in the global control of DNA replication during the cell cycle, as well as in the mechanisms that cope with stress-induced replication blocks. Similar to eukaryotes, bacteria use Hanks-type kinases and phosphatases for signal transduction, and protein phosphorylation is involved in numerous cellular processes. However, it remains unclear whether protein phosphorylation in bacteria can also regulate the activity of proteins involved in DNA-mediated processes such as DNA replication or repair. Accumulating evidence supported by functional and biochemical studies suggests that phospho-regulatory mechanisms also take place during the bacterial cell cycle. Recent phosphoproteomics and interactomics studies identified numerous phosphoproteins involved in various aspect of DNA metabolism strongly supporting the existence of such level of regulation in bacteria. Similar to eukaryotes, bacterial scaffolding-like proteins emerged as platforms for kinase activation and signaling. This review reports the current knowledge on the phosphorylation of proteins involved in the maintenance of genome integrity and the regulation of cell cycle in bacteria that reveals surprising similarities to eukaryotes.

Mitotic fidelity requires transgenerational action of a testis-restricted HP1

Sperm-packaged DNA must undergo extensive reorganization to ensure its timely participation in embryonic mitosis. Whereas maternal control over this remodeling is well described, paternal contributions are virtually unknown. In this study, we show that Drosophila melanogaster males lacking Heterochromatin Protein 1E (HP1E) sire inviable embryos that undergo catastrophic mitosis. In these embryos, the paternal genome fails to condense and resolve into sister chromatids in synchrony with the maternal genome. This delay leads to a failure of paternal chromosomes, particularly the heterochromatin-rich sex chromosomes, to separate on the first mitotic spindle. Remarkably, HP1E is not inherited on mature sperm chromatin. Instead, HP1E primes paternal chromosomes during spermatogenesis to ensure faithful segregation post-fertilization. This transgenerational effect suggests that maternal control is necessary but not sufficient for transforming sperm DNA into a mitotically competent pronucleus. Instead, paternal action during spermiogenesis exerts post-fertilization control to ensure faithful chromosome segregation in the embryo.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07378.001

The genetic information of cells is packaged into structures called chromosomes, which are made up of long strands of DNA that are wrapped around proteins to form a structure called chromatin. The cells of most animals contain two copies of every chromosome, but the egg and sperm cells contain only one copy. This means that when an egg fuses with a sperm cell during fertilization, the resulting ‘zygote’ will contain two copies of each chromosome—one inherited from the mother, and one from the father. These chromosomes duplicate and divide many times within the developing embryo in a process known as mitosis.

The first division of the zygote is particularly complicated, as the egg and sperm chromosomes must go through extensive—and yet different—chromatin reorganization processes. For instance, paternal DNA is inherited via sperm, where specialized sperm proteins package the DNA more tightly than in the maternal DNA, which is packaged by histone proteins used throughout development. For paternal DNA to participate in mitosis in the embryo, it must first undergo a transition to a histone-packaged state. Despite these differences, both maternal and paternal chromosomes must undergo mitosis at the same time if the zygote is to successfully divide. Although it is known that the egg cell contributes essential proteins that are incorporated into the sperm chromatin to help it reorganize, the importance of paternal proteins in coordinating this process remains poorly understood.

Many members of a family of proteins called Heterochromatin Protein 1 (or HP1 for short) have previously been shown to control chromatin organization in plants and animals. In 2012, researchers found that several HP1 proteins are found only in the testes of the fruit fly species Drosophila melanogaster. They predicted that these proteins might help control the reorganization of the paternal chromosomes following fertilization.

Levine et al.—including researchers involved in the 2012 study—have now used genetic and cell-based techniques to show that one member of the HP1 family (called HP1E) ensures that the paternal chromosomes are ready for cell division at the same time as the maternal chromosomes. Male flies that are unable to produce this protein do not have any offspring because, while these flies' sperm can fertilize eggs, the resulting zygotes cannot divide as normal.

Further experiments revealed that HP1E is not inherited through the chromatin of mature sperm, but instead influences the structure of the chromosomes during the final stages of the development of the sperm cells in the fly testes.

This study shows that both maternal and paternal proteins are needed to control how the paternal chromosomes reorganize in fruit fly embryos. Although difficult to discover and decipher, this work re-emphasizes the importance of paternal epigenetic contributions—changes that alter how DNA is read, without changing the DNA sequence itself—for ensuring the viability of resulting offspring. Future work will reveal both the molecular mechanism of this epigenetic transfer of information, as well as why certain Drosophila species are able to naturally overcome the loss of the essential HP1E protein.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07378.002

Behavior of replication origins in Eukaryota - spatio-temporal dynamics of licensing and firing

Although every organism shares some common features of replication, this process varies greatly among eukaryotic species. Current data show that mathematical models of the organization of origins based on possibility theory may be applied (and remain accurate) in every model organism i.e. from yeast to humans. The major differences lie within the dynamics of origin firing and the regulation mechanisms that have evolved to meet new challenges throughout the evolution of the organism. This article elaborates on the relations between chromatin structure, organization of origins, their firing times and the impact that these features can have on genome stability, showing both differences and parallels inside the eukaryotic domain.