The RAD5-dependent postreplication repair pathway is important to suppress gross chromosomal rearrangements

PCNA antagonizes cohesin-dependent roles in genomic stability

PCNA sliding clamp binds factors through which histone deposition, chromatin remodeling, and DNA repair are coupled to DNA replication. PCNA also directly binds Eco1/Ctf7 acetyltransferase, which in turn activates cohesins and establishes cohesion between nascent sister chromatids. While increased recruitment thus explains the mechanism through which elevated levels of chromatin-bound PCNA rescue eco1 mutant cell growth, the mechanism through which PCNA instead worsens cohesin mutant cell growth remains unknown. Possibilities include that elevated levels of long-lived chromatin-bound PCNA reduce either cohesin deposition onto DNA or cohesin acetylation. Instead, our results reveal that PCNA increases the levels of both chromatin-bound cohesin and cohesin acetylation. Beyond sister chromatid cohesion, PCNA also plays a critical role in genomic stability such that high levels of chromatin-bound PCNA elevate genotoxic sensitivities and recombination rates. At a relatively modest increase of chromatin-bound PCNA, however, fork stability and progression appear normal in wildtype cells. Our results reveal that even a moderate increase of PCNA indeed sensitizes cohesin mutant cells to DNA damaging agents and in a process that involves the DNA damage response kinase Mec1(ATR), but not Tel1(ATM). These and other findings suggest that PCNA mis-regulation results in genome instabilities that normally are resolved by cohesin. Elevating levels of chromatin-bound PCNA may thus help target cohesinopathic cells linked that are linked to cancer.

Both RAD5-dependent and independent pathways are involved in DNA damage-associated sister chromatid exchange in budding yeast

Sister chromatids are preferred substrates for recombinational repair after cells are exposed to DNA damage. While some agents directly cause double-strand breaks (DSBs), others form DNA base adducts which stall or impede the DNA replication fork. We asked which types of DNA damage can stimulate SCE in budding yeast mutants defective in template switch mechanisms and whether PCNA polyubiquitination functions are required for DNA damage-associated SCE after exposure to potent recombinagens. We measured spontaneous and DNA damage-associated unequal sister chromatid exchange (uSCE) in yeast strains containing two fragments of his3 after exposure to MMS, 4-NQO, UV, X rays, and HO endonuclease-induced DSBs. We determined whether other genes in the pathway for template switching, including UBC13, MMS2, SGS1, and SRS2 were required for DNA damage-associated SCE. RAD5 was required for DNA damage-associated SCE after exposure to UV, MMS, and 4-NQO, but not for spontaneous, X-ray-associated, or HO endonuclease-induced SCE. While UBC13, MMS2, and SGS1 were required for MMS and 4NQO-associated SCE, they were not required for UV-associated SCE. DNA damage-associated recombination between his3 recombination substrates on non-homologous recombination was enhanced in rad5 mutants. These results demonstrate that DNA damaging agents that cause DSBs stimulate SCE by RAD5-independent mechanisms, while several potent agents that generate bulky DNA adducts stimulate SCE by multiple RAD5-dependent mechanisms. We suggest that DSB-associated recombination that occurs in G2 is RAD5-independent.

Homologous recombination maintenance of genome integrity during DNA damage tolerance

The DNA strand exchange protein Rad51 provides a safe mechanism for the repair of DNA breaks using the information of a homologous DNA template. Homologous recombination (HR) also plays a key role in the response to DNA damage that impairs the advance of the replication forks by providing mechanisms to circumvent the lesion and fill in the tracks of single-stranded DNA that are generated during the process of lesion bypass. These activities postpone repair of the blocking lesion to ensure that DNA replication is completed in a timely manner. Experimental evidence generated over the last few years indicates that HR participates in this DNA damage tolerance response together with additional error-free (template switch) and error-prone (translesion synthesis) mechanisms through intricate connections, which are presented here. The choice between repair and tolerance, and the mechanism of tolerance, is critical to avoid increased mutagenesis and/or genome rearrangements, which are both hallmarks of cancer.

A saccharomyces cerevisiae RNase H2 interaction network functions to suppress genome instability

Errors during DNA replication are one likely cause of gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs). Here, we analyze the role of RNase H2, which functions to process Okazaki fragments, degrade transcription intermediates, and repair misincorporated ribonucleotides, in preventing genome instability. The results demonstrate that rnh203 mutations result in a weak mutator phenotype and cause growth defects and synergistic increases in GCR rates when combined with mutations affecting other DNA metabolism pathways, including homologous recombination (HR), sister chromatid HR, resolution of branched HR intermediates, postreplication repair, sumoylation in response to DNA damage, and chromatin assembly. In some cases, a mutation in RAD51 or TOP1 suppressed the increased GCR rates and/or the growth defects of rnh203Δ double mutants. This analysis suggests that cells with RNase H2 defects have increased levels of DNA damage and depend on other pathways of DNA metabolism to overcome the deleterious effects of this DNA damage.

Strand invasion by HLTF as a mechanism for template switch in fork rescue

Stalling of replication forks at unrepaired DNA lesions can result in discontinuities opposite the damage in the newly synthesized DNA strand. Translesion synthesis or facilitating the copy from the newly synthesized strand of the sister duplex by template switching can overcome such discontinuities. During template switch, a new primer–template junction has to be formed and two mechanisms, including replication fork reversal and D-loop formation have been suggested. Genetic evidence indicates a major role for yeast Rad5 in template switch and that both Rad5 and its human orthologue, Helicase-like transcription factor (HLTF), a potential tumour suppressor can facilitate replication fork reversal. This study demonstrates the ability of HLTF and Rad5 to form a D-loop without requiring ATP binding and/or hydrolysis. We also show that this strand-pairing activity is independent of RAD51 in vitro and is not mechanistically related to that of another member of the SWI/SNF family, RAD54. In addition, the 3′-end of the invading strand in the D-loop can serve as a primer and is extended by DNA polymerase. Our data indicate that HLTF is involved in a RAD51-independent D-loop branch of template switch pathway that can promote repair of gaps formed during replication of damaged DNA.