Elevated Levels of the Escherichia coli nrdAB-Encoded Ribonucleotide Reductase Counteract the Toxicity Caused by an Increased Abundance of the β Clamp

Clues to transcription/replication collision-induced DNA damage: it was RNAP, in the chromosome, with the fork

DNA replication and RNA transcription processes compete for the same DNA template and, thus, frequently collide. These transcription-replication collisions are thought to lead to genomic instability, which places a selective pressure on organisms to avoid them. Here, we review the predisposing causes, molecular mechanisms, and downstream consequences of transcription-replication collisions (TRCs) with a strong emphasis on prokaryotic model systems, before contrasting prokaryotic findings with cases in eukaryotic systems. Current research points to genomic structure as the primary determinant of steady-state TRC levels and RNA polymerase regulation as the primary inducer of excess TRCs. We review the proposed mechanisms of TRC-induced DNA damage, attempting to clarify their mechanistic requirements. Finally, we discuss what drives genomes to select against TRCs.

During Translesion Synthesis, Escherichia coli DinB89 (T120P) Alters Interactions of DinB (Pol IV) with Pol III Subunit Assemblies and SSB, but Not with the β Clamp

Translesion synthesis (TLS) by specialized DNA polymerases (Pols) is an evolutionarily conserved mechanism for tolerating replication-blocking DNA lesions. Using the Escherichia coli dinB-encoded Pol IV as a model to understand how TLS is coordinated with the actions of the high-fidelity Pol III replicase, we previously described a novel Pol IV mutant containing a threonine 120-to-proline mutation (Pol IV-T120P) that failed to exchange places with Pol III at the replication fork in vitro as part of a Pol III-Pol IV switch. This in vitro defect correlated with the inability of Pol IV-T120P to support TLS in vivo, suggesting Pol IV gains access to the DNA, at least in part, via a Pol III-Pol IV switch. Interaction of Pol IV with the β sliding clamp and the single-stranded DNA binding protein (SSB) significantly stimulates Pol IV replication and facilitates its access to the DNA. In this work, we demonstrate that Pol IV interacts physically with Pol III. We further show that Pol IV-T120P interacts normally with the β clamp, but is impaired in interactions with the α catalytic and εθ proofreading subunits of Pol III, as well as SSB. Taken together with published work, these results provide strong support for the model in which Pol IV-Pol III and Pol IV-SSB interactions help to regulate the access of Pol IV to the DNA. Finally, we describe several additional E. coli Pol-Pol interactions, suggesting Pol-Pol interactions play fundamental roles in coordinating bacterial DNA replication, DNA repair, and TLS. IMPORTANCE Specialized DNA polymerases (Pols) capable of catalyzing translesion synthesis (TLS) generate mutations that contribute to bacterial virulence, pathoadaptation, and antimicrobial resistance. One mechanism by which the bacterial TLS Pol IV gains access to the DNA to generate mutations is by exchanging places with the bacterial Pol III replicase via a Pol III-Pol IV switch. Here, we describe multiple Pol III-Pol IV interactions and discuss evidence that these interactions are required for the Pol III-Pol IV switch. Furthermore, we describe several additional E. coli Pol-Pol interactions that may play fundamental roles in managing the actions of the different bacterial Pols in DNA replication, DNA repair, and TLS.

The Mutant βE202K Sliding Clamp Protein Impairs DNA Polymerase III Replication Activity

Expression of the Escherichia coli dnaN-encoded β clamp at ≥10-fold higher than chromosomally expressed levels impedes growth by interfering with DNA replication. We hypothesized that the excess β clamp sequesters the replicative DNA polymerase III (Pol III) to inhibit replication. As a test of this hypothesis, we obtained eight mutant clamps with an inability to impede growth and measured their ability to stimulate Pol III replication in vitro. Compared with the wild-type clamp, seven of the mutants were defective, consistent with their elevated cellular levels failing to sequester Pol III. However, the β^E202K mutant that bears a glutamic acid-to-lysine substitution at residue 202 displayed an increased affinity for Pol IIIα and Pol III core (Pol IIIαεθ), suggesting that it could still sequester Pol III effectively. Of interest, β^E202K supported in vitro DNA replication by Pol II and Pol IV but was defective with Pol III. Genetic experiments indicated that the dnaN^E202K strain remained proficient in DNA damage-induced mutagenesis but was induced modestly for SOS and displayed sensitivity to UV light and methyl methanesulfonate. These results correlate an impaired ability of the mutant β^E202K clamp to support Pol III replication in vivo with its in vitro defect in DNA replication. Taken together, our results (i) support the model that sequestration of Pol III contributes to growth inhibition, (ii) argue for the existence of an additional mechanism that contributes to lethality, and (iii) suggest that physical and functional interactions of the β clamp with Pol III are more extensive than appreciated currently. IMPORTANCE The β clamp plays critically important roles in managing the actions of multiple proteins at the replication fork. However, we lack a molecular understanding of both how the clamp interacts with these different partners and the mechanisms by which it manages their respective actions. We previously exploited the finding that an elevated cellular level of the β clamp impedes Escherichia coli growth by interfering with DNA replication. Using a genetic selection method, we obtained novel mutant β clamps that fail to inhibit growth. Their analysis revealed that β^E202K is unique among them. Our work offers new insights into how the β clamp interacts with and manages the actions of E. coli DNA polymerases II, III, and IV.