Advertisement

Current Genetics

, Volume 65, Issue 2, pp 445–451 | Cite as

DDR Inc., one business, two associates

  • María Moriel-Carretero
  • Philippe Pasero
  • Benjamin PardoEmail author
Mini-Review
  • 218 Downloads

Abstract

Eukaryotic cells activate cell cycle checkpoints in response to DNA damage. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the DNA damage response is achieved by the activation of the sensor kinases Mec1 and Tel1 and transmitted to the effector kinase Rad53. Rad9 and Mrc1 are thought to differentially mediate the activation of Rad53 depending on the cell cycle phase. Rad9 can respond to DNA lesions throughout the cell cycle, whereas Mrc1 responds to replication impediments in S phase. It was not clear if Rad9 and Mrc1 were triggering the same response to DNA damage occurring in S phase. By carefully studying the kinetics of activation of Rad53 by different types of replication stresses, we recently showed that Rad9 and Mrc1 cooperate in time and space to trigger a unique response to DNA damage in S phase. This primarily includes the control of both DNA replication initiation and elongation. After showing that Rad9 plays a preponderant role during S phase, the data presented here provocatively suggest that Mrc1 could also mediate the activation of Rad53 outside of S phase.

Keywords

Rad9 Mrc1 DNA replication S-phase checkpoint Mediators Replication stress 

References

  1. Alabert C, Bianco JN, Pasero P (2009) Differential regulation of homologous recombination at DNA breaks and replication forks by the Mrc1 branch of the S-phase checkpoint. EMBO J 28:1131–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcasabas AA, Osborn AJ, Bachant J, Hu F, Werler PJ, Bousset K, Furuya K, Diffley JF, Carr AM, Elledge SJ (2001) Mrc1 transduces signals of DNA replication stress to activate Rad53. Nat Cell Biol 3:958–965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bacal J, Moriel Carretero M, Pardo B, Barthe A, Sharma S, Chabes A, Lengronne A, Pasero P (2018) Mrc1 and Rad9 cooperate to regulate initiation and elongation of DNA replication in response to DNA damage. EMBO J.  https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201899319 Google Scholar
  4. Balint A, Kim T, Gallo D, Cussiol JR, Bastos de Oliveira FM, Yimit A, Ou J, Nakato R, Gurevich A, Shirahige K, Smolka MB, Zhang Z, Brown GW (2015) Assembly of Slx4 signaling complexes behind DNA replication forks. EMBO J 34:2182–2197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bando M, Katou Y, Komata M, Tanaka H, Itoh T, Sutani T, Shirahige K (2009) Csm3, Tof1, and Mrc1 form a heterotrimeric mediator complex that associates with DNA replication forks. J Biol Chem 284:34355–34365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bastos de Oliveira FM, Kim D, Cussiol José R, Das J, Jeong Min C, Doerfler L, Schmidt Kristina H, Yu H, Smolka Marcus B (2015) Phosphoproteomics reveals distinct modes of Mec1/ATR signaling during DNA replication. Mol Cell 57:1124–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bjergbaek L, Cobb JA, Tsai-Pflugfelder M, Gasser SM (2005) Mechanistically distinct roles for Sgs1p in checkpoint activation and replication fork maintenance. EMBO J 24:405–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonetti D, Villa M, Gobbini E, Cassani C, Tedeschi G, Longhese MP (2015) Escape of Sgs1 from Rad9 inhibition reduces the requirement for Sae2 and functional MRX in DNA end resection. EMBO Rep 16:351–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Branzei D, Foiani M (2010) Maintaining genome stability at the replication fork. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 11:208–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bylund GO, Burgers PMJ (2005) Replication protein A-directed unloading of PCNA by the Ctf18 cohesion establishment complex. Mol Cell Biol 25:5445–5455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Calzada A, Hodgson B, Kanemaki M, Bueno A, Labib K (2005) Molecular anatomy and regulation of a stable replisome at a paused eukaryotic DNA replication fork. Genes Dev 19:1905–1919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cejka P, Cannavo E, Polaczek P, Masuda-Sasa T, Pokharel S, Campbell JL, Kowalczykowski SC (2010) DNA end resection by Dna2-Sgs1-RPA and its stimulation by Top3-Rmi1 and Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2. Nature 467:112–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chabes A, Thelander L (2003) DNA building blocks at the foundation of better survival. Cell Cycle 2:171–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen S-h, Zhou H (2009) Reconstitution of Rad53 activation by Mec1 through adaptor protein Mrc1. J Biol Chem 284:18593–18604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen S-h, Albuquerque CP, Liang J, Suhandynata RT, Zhou H (2010) A proteome-wide analysis of kinase-substrate network in the DNA damage response. J Biol Chem 285:12803–12812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen ES, Hoch NC, Wang SC, Pellicioli A, Heierhorst J, Tsai MD (2014) Use of quantitative mass spectrometric analysis to elucidate the mechanisms of phospho-priming and auto-activation of the checkpoint kinase Rad53 in vivo. Mol Cell Proteom MCP 13:551–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ciccia A, Elledge SJ (2010) The DNA damage response: making it safe to play with knives. Mol Cell 40:179–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crabbé L, Thomas A, Pantesco V, De Vos J, Pasero P, Lengronne A (2010) Analysis of replication profiles reveals key role of RFC-Ctf18 in yeast replication stress response. Nat Struct Mol Biol 17:1391–1397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cussiol JR, Jablonowski CM, Yimit A, Brown GW, Smolka MB (2015) Dampening DNA damage checkpoint signalling via coordinated BRCT domain interactions. EMBO J 34:1704–1717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Bruin RA, Wittenberg C (2009) All eukaryotes: before turning off G1-S transcription, please check your DNA. Cell Cycle 8:214–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Desany BA, Alcasabas AA, Bachant JB, Elledge SJ (1998) Recovery from DNA replicational stress is the essential function of the S-phase checkpoint pathway. Genes Dev 12:2956–2970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. di Cicco G, Bantele SCS, Reusswig K-U, Pfander B (2017) A cell cycle-independent mode of the Rad9-Dpb11 interaction is induced by DNA damage. Sci Rep 7:11650–11650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dmowski M, Fijalkowska IJ (2017) Diverse roles of Dpb2, the non-catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase epsilon. Curr Genet 63:983–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Doksani Y, Bermejo R, Fiorani S, Haber JE, Foiani M (2009) Replicon dynamics, dormant origin firing, and terminal fork integrity after double-strand break formation. Cell 137:247–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Downs JA, Lowndes NF, Jackson SP (2000) A role for Saccharomyces cerevisiae histone H2A in DNA repair. Nature 408:1001–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Emili A (1998) MEC1-dependent phosphorylation of Rad9p in response to DNA damage. Mol Cell 2:183–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ferrari M, Dibitetto D, De Gregorio G, Eapen VV, Rawal CC, Lazzaro F, Tsabar M, Marini F, Haber JE, Pellicioli A (2015) Functional interplay between the 53BP1-ortholog Rad9 and the Mre11 complex regulates resection, end-tethering and repair of a double-strand break. PLoS Genet 11:e1004928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Galanti L, Pfander B (2018) Right time, right place-DNA damage and DNA replication checkpoints collectively safeguard S phase. EMBO J.  https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.2018100681 Google Scholar
  29. García-Rodríguez LJ, De Piccoli G, Marchesi V, Jones RC, Edmondson RD, Labib K (2015) A conserved Polϵ binding module in Ctf18-RFC is required for S-phase checkpoint activation downstream of Mec1. Nucleic Acids Res 43:8830–8838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. García-Rodríguez N, Morawska M, Wong RP, Daigaku Y, Ulrich HD (2018) Spatial separation between replisome- and template-induced replication stress signaling. EMBO J.  https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201798369 Google Scholar
  31. Germann SM, Schramke V, Pedersen RT, Gallina I, Eckert-Boulet N, Oestergaard VH, Lisby M (2014) TopBP1/Dpb11 binds DNA anaphase bridges to prevent genome instability. J Cell Biol 204:45–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Giannattasio M, Lazzaro F, Plevani P, Muzi-Falconi M (2005) The DNA damage checkpoint response requires histone H2B ubiquitination by Rad6-Bre1 and H3 methylation by Dot1. J Biol Chem 280:9879–9886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gilbert CS, Green CM, Lowndes NF (2001) Budding yeast Rad9 is an ATP-dependent Rad53 activating machine. Mol Cell 8:129–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gravel S, Chapman JR, Magill C, Jackson SP (2008) DNA helicases Sgs1 and BLM promote DNA double-strand break resection. Genes Dev 22:2767–2772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Grenon M, Gilbert C, Lowndes NF (2001) Checkpoint activation in response to double-strand breaks requires the Mre11/Rad50/Xrs2 complex. Nat Cell Biol 3:844–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Grenon M, Costelloe T, Jimeno S, O’Shaughnessy A, Fitzgerald J, Zgheib O, Degerth L, Lowndes NF (2007) Docking onto chromatin via the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rad9 Tudor domain. Yeast 24:105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hegnauer AM, Hustedt N, Shimada K, Pike BL, Vogel M, Amsler P, Rubin SM, van Leeuwen F, Guenole A, van Attikum H, Thoma NH, Gasser SM (2012) An N-terminal acidic region of Sgs1 interacts with Rpa70 and recruits Rad53 kinase to stalled forks. EMBO J 31:3768–3783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Katou Y, Kanoh Y, Bando M, Noguchi H, Tanaka H, Ashikari T, Sugimoto K, Shirahige K (2003) S-phase checkpoint proteins Tof1 and Mrc1 form a stable replication-pausing complex. Nature 424:1078–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Komata M, Bando M, Araki H, Shirahige K (2009) The direct binding of Mrc1, a checkpoint mediator, to Mcm6, a replication helicase, is essential for the replication checkpoint against methyl methanesulfonate-induced stress. Mol Cell Biol 29:5008–5019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kubota T, Hiraga S-i, Yamada K, Lamond AI, Donaldson AD (2011) Quantitative proteomic analysis of chromatin reveals that Ctf18 acts in the DNA replication checkpoint. Mol Cell Proteom 10:M110.005561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kumar S, Burgers PM (2013) Lagging strand maturation factor Dna2 is a component of the replication checkpoint initiation machinery. Genes Dev 27:313–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Labib K, De Piccoli G (2011) Surviving chromosome replication: the many roles of the S-phase checkpoint pathway. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 366:3554–3561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lee CS, Lee K, Legube G, Haber JE (2014) Dynamics of yeast histone H2A and H2B phosphorylation in response to a double-strand break. Nat Struct Mol Biol 21:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lengronne A, McIntyre J, Katou Y, Kanoh Y, Hopfner KP, Shirahige K, Uhlmann F (2006) Establishment of sister chromatid cohesion at the S. cerevisiae replication fork. Mol Cell 23:787–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lou H, Komata M, Katou Y, Guan Z, Reis CC, Budd M, Shirahige K, Campbell JL (2008) Mrc1 and DNA polymerase epsilon function together in linking DNA replication and the S phase checkpoint. Mol Cell 32:106–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lydeard JR, Jain S, Yamaguchi M, Haber JE (2007) Break-induced replication and telomerase-independent telomere maintenance require Pol32. Nature 448:820–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ma J-L, Lee S-J, Duong JK, Stern DF (2006) Activation of the checkpoint kinase Rad53 by the phosphatidyl inositol kinase-like kinase Mec1. J Biol Chem 281:3954–3963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Majka J, Burgers PM (2003) Yeast Rad17/Mec3/Ddc1: a sliding clamp for the DNA damage checkpoint. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:2249–2254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Majka J, Niedziela-Majka A, Burgers PM (2006) The checkpoint clamp activates Mec1 kinase during initiation of the DNA damage checkpoint. Mol Cell 24:891–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mikolaskova B, Jurcik M, Cipakova I, Kretova M, Chovanec M, Cipak L (2018) Maintenance of genome stability: the unifying role of interconnections between the DNA damage response and RNA-processing pathways. Curr Genet 64:971–983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mimitou EP, Symington LS (2008) Sae2, Exo1 and Sgs1 collaborate in DNA double-strand break processing. Nature 455:770–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nakada D, Matsumoto K, Sugimoto K (2003) ATM-related Tel1 associates with double-strand breaks through an Xrs2-dependent mechanism. Genes Dev 17:1957–1962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Navadgi-Patil VM, Burgers PM (2008) Yeast DNA replication protein Dpb11 activates the Mec1/ATR checkpoint kinase. J Biol Chem 283:35853–35859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Navadgi-Patil VM, Burgers PM (2009) A tale of two tails: Activation of DNA damage checkpoint kinase Mec1/ATR by the 9-1-1 clamp and by Dpb11/TopBP1. DNA Repair 8:996–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nedelcheva MN, Roguev A, Dolapchiev LB, Shevchenko A, Taskov HB, Stewart AF, Stoynov SS (2005) Uncoupling of unwinding from DNA synthesis implies regulation of MCM helicase by Tof1/Mrc1/Csm3 checkpoint complex. J Mol Biol 347:509–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nielsen I, Bentsen IB, Andersen AH, Gasser SM, Bjergbaek L (2013) A Rad53 independent function of Rad9 becomes crucial for genome maintenance in the absence of the RecQ Helicase Sgs1. PloS One 8:e81015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ogiwara H, Ohuchi T, Ui A, Tada S, Enomoto T, Seki M (2007) Ctf18 is required for homologous recombination-mediated double-strand break repair. Nucl Acids Res 35:4989–5000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ohouo PY, Bastos de Oliveira FM, Liu Y, Ma CJ, Smolka MB (2013) DNA-repair scaffolds dampen checkpoint signalling by counteracting the adaptor Rad9. Nature 493:120–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Osborn AJ, Elledge SJ (2003) Mrc1 is a replication fork component whose phosphorylation in response to DNA replication stress activates Rad53. Genes Dev 17:1755–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Paciotti V, Clerici M, Lucchini G, Longhese MP (2000) The checkpoint protein Ddc2, functionally related to S. pombe Rad26, interacts with Mec1 and is regulated by Mec1-dependent phosphorylation in budding yeast. Genes Dev 14:2046–2059Google Scholar
  61. Palou R, Palou G, Quintana DG (2017) A role for the spindle assembly checkpoint in the DNA damage response. Curr Genet 63:275–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pardo B, Crabbé L, Pasero P (2017) Signaling pathways of replication stress in yeast. FEMS Yeast Res.  https://doi.org/10.1093/femsyr/fow101 Google Scholar
  63. Pfander B, Diffley JF (2011) Dpb11 coordinates Mec1 kinase activation with cell cycle-regulated Rad9 recruitment. EMBO J 30:4897–4907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rouse J, Jackson SP (2002) Interfaces between the detection, signaling, and repair of DNA damage. Science 297:547–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sanchez Y, Desany BA, Jones WJ, Liu Q, Wang B, Elledge SJ (1996) Regulation of RAD53 by the ATM-like kinases MEC1 and TEL1 in yeast cell cycle checkpoint pathways. Science 271:357–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sanchez Y, Bachant J, Wang H, Hu F, Liu D, Tetzlaff M, Elledge SJ (1999) Control of the DNA damage checkpoint by chk1 and rad53 protein kinases through distinct mechanisms. Science 286:1166–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schwartz MF, Duong JK, Sun Z, Morrow JS, Pradhan D, Stern DF (2002) Rad9 phosphorylation sites couple Rad53 to the Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA damage checkpoint. Mol Cell 9:1055–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shimada K, Pasero P, Gasser SM (2002) ORC and the intra-S-phase checkpoint: a threshold regulates Rad53p activation in S phase. Genes Dev 16:3236–3252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Siede W, Friedberg AS, Friedberg EC (1993) RAD9-dependent G1 arrest defines a second checkpoint for damaged DNA in the cell cycle of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:7985–7989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Smolka MB, Chen S-h, Maddox PS, Enserink JM, Albuquerque CP, Wei XX, Desai A, Kolodner RD, Zhou H (2006) An FHA domain-mediated protein interaction network of Rad53 reveals its role in polarized cell growth. J Cell Biol 175:743–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Smolka MB, Albuquerque CP, Chen SH, Zhou H (2007) Proteome-wide identification of in vivo targets of DNA damage checkpoint kinases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:10364–10369 doiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sweeney FD, Yang F, Chi A, Shabanowitz J, Hunt DF, Durocher D (2005) Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rad9 acts as a Mec1 adaptor to allow Rad53 activation. Curr Biol CB 15:1364–1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Szyjka SJ, Viggiani CJ, Aparicio OM (2005) Mrc1 is required for normal progression of replication forks throughout chromatin in S. cerevisiae. Mol Cell 19:691–697 doiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tanaka K, Russell P (2001) Mrc1 channels the DNA replication arrest signal to checkpoint kinase Cds1. Nat Cell Biol 3:966–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tanaka K, Russell P (2004) Cds1 phosphorylation by Rad3-Rad26 kinase is mediated by forkhead-associated domain interaction with Mrc1. J Biol Chem 279:32079–32086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tercero JA, Diffley JF (2001) Regulation of DNA replication fork progression through damaged DNA by the Mec1/Rad53 checkpoint. Nature 412:553–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tercero JA, Longhese MP, Diffley JF (2003) A central role for DNA replication forks in checkpoint activation and response. Mol Cell 11:1323–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Toh GWL, O’Shaughnessy AM, Jimeno S, Dobbie IM, Grenon M, Maffini S, O’Rorke A, Lowndes NF (2006) Histone H2A phosphorylation and H3 methylation are required for a novel Rad9 DSB repair function following checkpoint activation. DNA Repair 5:693–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tourrière H, Versini G, Cordón-Preciado V, Alabert C, Pasero P (2005) Mrc1 and Tof1 promote replication fork progression and recovery independently of Rad53. Mol Cell 19:699–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Weinert T (1998) DNA damage checkpoints update: getting molecular. Curr Opin Genet Dev 8:185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wilson MA, Kwon Y, Xu Y, Chung WH, Chi P, Niu H, Mayle R, Chen X, Malkova A, Sung P, Ira G (2013) Pif1 helicase and Poldelta promote recombination-coupled DNA synthesis via bubble migration. Nature 502:393–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wysocki R, Javaheri A, Allard S, Sha F, Cote J, Kron SJ (2005) Role of Dot1-dependent histone H3 methylation in G1 and S phase DNA damage checkpoint functions of Rad9. Mol Cell Biol 25:8430–8443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Xu Y, Davenport M, Kelly TJ (2006) Two-stage mechanism for activation of the DNA replication checkpoint kinase Cds1 in fission yeast. Genes Dev 20:990–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Yeeles JTP, Janska A, Early A, Diffley JFX (2017) How the eukaryotic replisome achieves rapid and efficient DNA replication. Mol Cell 65:105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Yoo HY, Jeong S-Y, Dunphy WG (2006) Site-specific phosphorylation of a checkpoint mediator protein controls its responses to different DNA structures. Genes Dev 20:772–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yoshida K, Poveda A, Pasero P (2013) Time to be versatile: regulation of the replication timing program in budding yeast. J Mol Biol 425:4696–4705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Zhu Z, Chung W-H, Shim EY, Lee SE, Ira G (2008) Sgs1 helicase and two nucleases Dna2 and Exo1 resect DNA double-strand break ends. Cell 134:981–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zou L, Elledge SJ (2003) Sensing DNA damage through ATRIP Recognition of RPA–ssDNA complexes. Science 300:1542–1548CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Equipe Labellisée Ligue contre le Cancer, Institut de Génétique HumaineCNRS and Université de MontpellierMontpellierFrance

Personalised recommendations