1 Krebs Institute for Biomolecular Research, Department of Molecular Biology and
Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, PO Box 594, Western Bank, Sheffield
S10 2TN, UK
2 Genome Damage and Stability Centre, School of Biological Sciences, University
of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RQ, UK
3 Department of Biological Sciences, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YQ,
UK
¶ Author for correspondence (e-mail: c.price1{at}lancaster.ac.uk)
Accepted 21 May 2003
![]() |
Summary |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: Rad4, Chk1, Checkpoint control, Genome integrity, DNA damage, DNA replication
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Genetic and physiological experiments have revealed a core set of six
proteins, collectively termed the 'checkpoint Rad' proteins (Rad1, Rad3, Rad9,
Rad17, Rad26 and Hus1). These proteins are fundamental to both pathways and
appear necessary for the receipt and transmission of the checkpoint signal
(Al-Khodairy and Carr, 1992;
Enoch et al., 1992
;
O'Connell et al., 2000
). As
yet, the precise mechanism(s) by which these proteins act to achieve this goal
is unclear, although recent studies have indicated the presence of discrete
intracellular complexes between Rad3 and Rad26, between Rad17 and the four
small subunits of replication factor C (RFC) and between Rad9, Rad1 and Hus1
(Edwards et al., 1999
;
Shimada et al., 1999
;
Kostrub et al., 1998
;
Caspari et al., 2000a
). The
Rad3-Rad26 complex functions as a PI3-related protein kinase and the
Rad1-dependent complex (known as the 9-1-1 complex) is related to the
proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) sliding clamp. Rad17 associates with
RFC subunits and, by analogy with the mechanism of eukaryotic DNA replication,
may act to load the PCNA-like 9-1-1 complex onto chromatin (for a review, see
O'Connell et al., 2000
). The
regulated assembly of specific protein complexes onto the DNA in response to
different checkpoint cues may prove a general and important feature of
checkpoint regulation. Homologs of Rad3-Rad26 and Rad9-Rad1-Hus1 have been
shown in S. cerevisiae and human systems to load independently at
sites of DNA damage. Loading of the 9-1-1 complex is dependent on Rad17,
consistent with the homology to replication factors RFC and PCNA
(Kondo et al., 2001
;
Melo et al., 2001
;
Zou et al., 2002
).
Downstream of the checkpoint Rad proteins lie two conserved effector
kinases, Chk1 and Cds1, which act in the G2/M and S-M checkpoint pathways,
respectively (Walworth et al.,
1993; Murakami and Okayama,
1995
). Chk1 is phosphorylated in response to DNA damage and recent
work demonstrates a direct link between Rad3-dependent serine 345
phosphorylation and Chk1 function
(Walworth and Bernards, 1996
;
Lopez-Girano et al., 2001
;
Capasso et al., 2002
). Chk1
phosphorylation therefore serves as a useful biochemical marker for the
activation of the DNA damage checkpoint pathway. Activation and
phosphorylation of Cds1 is S-phase-specific in response to either inhibition
of DNA replication or DNA damage, and kinase activation correlates with
phosphorylation of the protein (Lindsay et
al., 1998
), providing a useful marker for the S-M checkpoint. Rad9
and Rad26 are also phosphorylated in response to radiation-induced DNA damage
and Hus1 is phosphorylated in response to both DNA damage and prolonged
inhibition of DNA replication (Kostrub et
al., 1998
; Edwards et al.,
1999
; Caspari et al.,
2000a
; Caspari et al.,
2000b
). Ultimately, all of these phosphorylation events have been
demonstrated to be Rad3-dependent and this has enabled hierarchical
relationships between fission yeast checkpoint proteins to be determined. The
current model predicts that at least two complexes are loaded independently at
the sites of DNA damage, Rad3-Rad26 and the 9-1-1 complex that is loaded in a
Rad17-dependent manner. Rad3-Rad26 kinase complex appears to be at the head of
a phosphorylation cascade immediately upstream of the PCNA-related 9-1-1
complex. This organization may be maintained for both the G2/M and S-M
pathways. In the event of DNA damage occurring in S phase, the Rad17 and 9-1-1
complexes appear to be required for Rad3 phosphorylation of Rad26, suggesting
that the loading or activation of Rad3 requires a function of the RFC- and
PCNA-related proteins. Thus under these circumstances they may formally act
above the Rad3 kinase (Edwards et al.,
1999
; O'Connell et al.,
2000
).
In addition to the proteins discussed above, Crb2/Rhp9 and Rad4/Cut5 (two
BRCT-domain-containing proteins) and Mrc1 (Mediator of the Replication
Checkpoint) are also required for the checkpoint responses
(Willson et al., 1997;
Saka et al., 1997
;
Alcasabas et al., 2001
). Cells
deleted for the crb2+ gene fail to arrest the cell cycle
in response to UV and ionizing radiation-mediated DNA damage but are
functional for the replication checkpoint. Crb2 has been shown to interact
with Chk1 and the second BRCT-domain protein Rad4/Cut5, hereafter termed Rad4,
in response to the DNA damage (Saka et
al., 1997
). Phenotypic analysis of conditional mutations of
rad4 reveal that, at the restrictive temperature, these mutants fail
to complete DNA replication yet continue to divide
(Saka and Yanagida, 1993
).
This results in cells undergoing a lethal mitosis and the accumulation of
'cut' cells (cell untimely torn) in which the nucleus is bisected by the
septum. Hence, rad4+ defines a gene that as well as being
essential for DNA replication appears to play a positive role in the S-M
checkpoint. Subsequent work established that, under conditions permissive for
DNA replication, rad4 mutants lack checkpoint responses to both DNA
damage and to the inhibition of DNA replication
(Saka et al., 1994
;
McFarlane et al., 1997
). This
formally established independent functional requirements for Rad4 during DNA
replication and for DNA structure checkpoint control. Despite this, the
position of Rad4 within the checkpoint control pathways remains to be
determined. Work in budding yeast has demonstrated that the Rad4 homologue,
Dpb11, is required for activation of the Rad53 checkpoint kinase following
engagement of the S-phase checkpoint (Wang
and Elledge, 1999
). More recently, Dpb11 has been shown to
interact with Ddc1, S. pombe rad9 homologue, a result that implies a
role for Dpb11 in the DNA damage checkpoint as well as the S-phase checkpoint
(Wang and Elledge, 2002
).
In this study we present a combined genetic and biochemical approach to delineating the position of Rad4 within the checkpoint pathways. We demonstrate that the phosphorylation of Chk1 in the presence of DNA damage is Rad4-dependent. Similarly, Cds1 kinase activity requires functional Rad4. In contrast, phosphorylation of Rad9 and Rad26 in response to DNA damage and of Hus1 in the presence of either DNA damage or a DNA replication inhibitor are independent of Rad4 activity. During our investigations we found that a novel allele of Rad4 acts as a dominant suppressor of the checkpoint deficiencies of certain rad3-, rad26- and rad17- mutants. Suppression resulted in the restoration of mitotic arrest and was dependent upon the remaining checkpoint Rad proteins and the two effector kinases. We conclude from our data that Rad4 acts with Rad3, Rad26 and Rad17 to effect the checkpoint response, and suggest that Rad4 defines a requirement for a bifurcated checkpoint response to converge on the regulatory checkpoint kinases Cds1 and Chk1 in either the S-M or G2/M checkpoint pathways, respectively.
![]() |
Materials and Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Plasmid construction
A full-length rad4+ cDNA flanked by a Nde1 restriction
endonuclease site at the ATG and a 3' BamHI was isolated by PCR
from a S. pombe cDNA library (gift of C. Norbury) and inserted into
pREP41HAN (Craven et al.,
1998). The sequence of the cDNA was confirmed and the plasmid was
tested for complementation of the conditional growth and checkpoint
deficiencies of the rad4-116 allele. The rad4+
cDNA was also inserted into pREP41 (Basi et
al., 1993
) and tested for its ability to complement
rad4-116.
Biochemical checkpoint cell culture experiments
One-hundred ml cultures were grown at 26°C overnight to OD 0.5-1.0. For
each required sample, a volume of culture representing 5 OD units was
harvested for 5 minutes (1650 g) and resuspended in preheated
YES medium. Cells were preheated at the temperatures indicated for 90 minutes
and then grown in the presence or absence of either 20 µg/ml bleomycin for
3 hours or 10 mM hydroxyurea (HU) for 3 hours (5 hours for Hus1 experiments).
In the case of the Chk1 dose dependency experiment, ionizing radiation was
delivered by a Gammacell 1000 37Caesium source at 12 Gy/min. For
the UV experiments, after preincubation, cells were centrifuged at 1650
g for 5 minutes, resuspended in 150 µl of YES and plated as
a lawn of cells on YES plates. The plates were then irradiated (or mock
irradiated) with 150 J/m2 UV in a SpectrolinkerTM XL-1000 UV
crosslinker (Spectronics Corporation) and the cells collected and recovered in
5 ml of fresh YES at the temperatures indicated for 30 minutes. Cell extracts
were prepared as described.
Genetic suppression checkpoint analyses
Typically, 30-40 ml cultures were grown at 26°C to mid-log phase in YES
(Figs 1 and
2) or EMM - thiamine (Figs
3,
4,
5). Cultures were then split
and to one half, 10 mM HU or 20 µg/ml bleomycin was added. One-hundred
µl samples were then removed every 2 hours over an 8-hour period and a
dilution series plated out onto YES. Plates were incubated at 26°C for 3-4
days, the number of colonies formed counted and the viability of each culture
at each time point determined. Samples were also fixed for nuclear staining as
described. In the case of the UV irradiation dose response experiments, the
cell densities of mid-log phase cultures were determined and a dilution series
set up to give a final density of 5x103 cells
cm-2. Ten µl of each dilution (500 cells) were then spotted onto
a series of YES plates and exposed to 0, 25, 50, 75, 100 and 150
J/m2 UV irradiation as indicated. Plates were incubated for 3-4
days at 26°C until colonies formed and the relative viability of each
strain at varying doses was determined. Where necessary, cells were
synchronized in G2 following lactose gradient centrifugation
(Mitchison and Carter,
1975).
|
|
|
|
|
Cds1 kinase assays
One l cultures were grown overnight at 26°C to mid-log phase. G2 cells
were isolated by lactose gradient centrifugation
(Mitchison and Carter, 1975)
and released into pre-warmed YEP medium in the presence or absence of 10 mM HU
at the temperatures indicated. Samples were removed every 20 minutes and
stained with 4,6 diaminidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) and Calcofluor white to
monitor progression into S-phase. S-phase whole cell extracts were prepared
and Cds1p kinase activity assayed as described previously
(Lindsay et al., 1998
).
Preparation of protein extracts
Initially, soluble whole cell extracts were prepared using lysis buffer [50
mM Tris (7.5), 80 mM ß-glycerophosphate, 250 mM NaCl, 15 mM
nitophenylphosphate, 50 mM NaF, 5 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 1% tergitol-NP40]
supplemented with protease inhibitors (40 µg/ml pepstatin A, 40 µg/ml
aprotinin, 20 µg/ml leupeptin, 200 µg/ml PMSF) as described previously
(Lindsay et al., 1998).
However, it became necessary to prepare total cell extracts using
tri-chloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation (see
Caspari et al., 2000a
), as we
found that the checkpoint proteins invariably associated with the insoluble
fraction.
Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and western blotting
In the case of initial Chk1 Westerns, soluble protein extracts were boiled
for 3 minutes in SDS sample buffer and then 60 µg of protein loaded onto
small (BioRad) 8% SDS-polyacrylamide gels. For all subsequent checkpoint
Westerns, TCA extracts were boiled for 5 minutes and then 50 µl volumes
loaded onto large 8% polyacrylamide gels. After electrophoresis, proteins were
transferred to nitrocellulose (Hybond-C, Amersham), via wet blotting. The
membranes were blocked in 1xPBS, 0.1% Tween 20, 5% dried milk for 1 hour (or
overnight), incubated in PBS/Tween containing the appropriate primary antibody
[Monoclonal HA.11 (Babco) used at 1:2000; monoclonal 9E10 (Babco), used at
1:2000], washed in PBS/Tween (3x10 minutes) and incubated with horse
radish peroxidaseconjugated secondary antibody [Goat Anti-Mouse (DAKO), used
at 1:5000]. Detection was by chemiluminescence using the Amersham ECL kit. All
antibody incubations were for 1 hour.
Microscopy and immunofluorescence
Nuclear staining was performed as described in Moreno et al.
(Moreno et al., 1991), using
mounting medium comprising 1 µg/ml DAPI, 1 mg/ml
p-Phenylenediamine/Antifade and 50% glycerol. Immunofluorescence experiments
examining Rad9-myc localization were performed using a standard protocol
(Hagan and Hyams, 1988
).
Briefly, 50 ml cultures were grown overnight to mid-exponential phase (OD
0.5-1.0). Ten OD units of cell were harvested by centrifugation at 1650
g and resuspended in 40 ml of YES to which 5.5 ml of fresh 30%
paraformaldehyde were added. After incubation at 26°C for 10 minutes,
cells were then washed twice with PBS, once with PEM (100 mM PIPES, 1 mM EGTA
and 1 mM MgSO4, pH 6.9) and then once with PEMS (1.2 M sorbitol in
PEM). Following this, the cells were resuspended in PEMS containing Zymolyase
20000 (ICN) at 1.25 mg/ml and then incubated at 37°C for 70 minutes to aid
cell-wall digestion. After harvesting (1650 g), cells were
washed once with PEMS and once with 1% Triton-X100 in PEMS, and then twice
with PEM. The cells were then blocked with PEMBAL (1% BSA, 0.1% sodium azide
and 100 mM L-lysine in PEM, pH 6.8) by incubating on a rotating wheel for at
least 1 hour at room temperature. The cells were then incubated in primary
antibody [monoclonal 9E10 (Babco), used at 1:200] overnight at room
temperature on a rotating wheel. The next day, cells were washed three times
with PEMBAL before further incubation for 20 minutes on a rotating wheel at
room temperature. The cells were then incubated with the FITC-conjugated
secondary antibody [Goat Anti-Mouse, (Sigma), used at 1:100] for at least 6
hours in the dark. The stained samples were then washed twice with PEM and
once with PBS before further incubation with PBS on the rotating wheel for 10
minutes. The cells were washed with PBS followed by PBS containing 100 mM
sodium azide prior to microscopic examination.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Rad4 lies upstream of Chk1 in the DNA damage checkpoint
Chk1 phosphorylation in response to DNA damage is dependent upon the
checkpoint Rad proteins, correlates with G2/M checkpoint activation and is
limited to the G2 phase of the cell cycle
(Walworth and Bernards, 1996;
Martinho et al., 1998
). In
order to establish the requirement for Rad4 in this response, Chk1
modification was monitored in rad4-116 cells following exposure to
DNA-damaging agents. Asynchronous cultures of wild-type and rad4-116
cells were treated with either UV irradiation or bleomycin, a widely used
-irradiation mimetic. In both strains Chk1 was phosphorylated at
26°C, but phosphorylation was absent (bleomycin) or severely reduced
(UV-irradiation) in rad4-116 cells at 32°C
(Fig. 1B). During the course of
these experiments we noted that the level of Chk1 phosphorylation in the
presence of bleomycin was consistently lower in rad4-116 mutants
relative to wild-type cells, even at 26°C. In order to confirm this, we
tested Chk1 phosphorylation in response to
-irradiation. Again, lower
levels of Chk1 phosphorylation were seen in rad4-116 cells at
26°C compared with wild-type and phosphorylation was completely absent in
the mutant strain at 32°C (Fig.
1C). These data suggested that the DNA damage checkpoint response
to DNA double-strand breaks was impaired in rad4-116 cells at the
permissive temperature. To examine this further we performed a dose-dependency
experiment at 26°C, in which Chk1 phosphorylation was measured in
rad4-116 and wild-type cells exposed to a range of
-irradiation doses. The results show that Chk1 phosphorylation is
clearly reduced in rad4-116 cells relative to wild-type for all doses
tested (Fig. 1D). Taken
together, these data demonstrate that Chk1 phosphorylation in the presence of
both UV-mediated DNA damage and DNA double-strand breaks is dependent upon
Rad4 function, consistent with a loss of G2/M checkpoint function at 32°C.
The results further show that the response to ionizing radiation is
compromised in rad4-116 cells at the permissive temperature,
consistent with a mild DNA damage sensitivity at 26°C.
Rad4 is not required for phosphorylation of Rad9, Hus1 or Rad26 in
response to DNA damage
In addition to Chk1, S. pombe Rad9, Hus1 and Rad26 are known to be
phosphorylated in response to DNA damage. Rad9 and Rad26 have been shown to be
phosphorylated in response to ionizing radiation, whereas Hus1 has been shown
to be phosphorylated in response to both ionizing radiation and UV. We assayed
Rad9 and Hus1 phosphorylation in rad4-116 and wild-type cells
following exposure to UV and/or bleomycin (see Materials and Methods) by band
shift on SDS-PAGE. In contrast to the results obtained with Chk1, we found
that both Hus1 and Rad9 were phosphorylated in rad4-116 cells
following DNA damage at both 26°C and 32°C
(Fig. 2A,B). This result
clearly demonstrates that Rad4 checkpoint function is not required for
phosphorylation of either Rad9 or Hus1, and suggests that Rad4 acts downstream
of, or parallel to, these proteins within the DNA damage checkpoint pathway.
Similarly, Rad26 is phosphorylated in rad4-116 cells at 32°C,
although this may be reduced slightly (Fig.
2C). A small amount of Rad26 phosphorylation is also detectable in
the absence of DNA damage at 32°C. This is consistent with earlier data
that demonstrated that Rad26 is phosphorylated in several Rad
checkpoint-deficient backgrounds (Edwards
et al., 1999).
Checkpoint-dependent phosphorylation of Hus1 has also been reported after several hours' exposure to HU. In order to establish the dependency relationship between Rad4 and Hus1 within the DNA replication checkpoint pathway, we examined Hus1 phosphorylation in wild-type and rad4-116 cells following exposure to HU at 26°C and 32°C. Hus1 is phosphorylated in rad4-116 cells, irrespective of the growth temperature (Fig. 2D). Hence, Hus1 phosphorylation is also independent of Rad4 in the event of DNA replication inhibition.
A dominant allele of rad4 suppresses DNA damage and HU sensitivity of
rad3-, rad26- and rad17- mutations
In parallel to the experiments described above, we investigated the effects
of increased Rad4p expression. Two different plasmids,
pREP41-HA-rad4+ (p247) and pREP41-HA (empty vector) were
used in the initial experiment. The plasmid expressing the epitope-tagged
rad4 allele fully complemented the rad4-116 mutation and no
phenotypic effects were observed in wild-type cells carrying the plasmid.
Comparison of protein levels between a single integrated copy of rad4-HA and
the plasmid-borne copy indicate a significant increase in the levels of
protein in the latter case, although proteolytic degradation prevented
accurate quantification (C. Kemplen, Delineating the position of
rad4+ within the DNA damage and DNA replication checkpoints in the
fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe, PhD thesis, University of
Sheffield, 2002). Cell-doubling time, cell size, DNA structure checkpoint
function and sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents were as for
rad4+ control cells carrying empty vector (C. Kemplen, PhD
thesis).
The sensitivity to HU, bleomycin and UV irradiation of exponentially growing rad3-56 mutant cells carrying pREP41-HA-rad4+ was tested. The data show that the presence of the HA-Rad4-expressing plasmid suppresses the sensitivity of rad3-56 cells to all three agents (Fig. 3A), restoring viability over the course of the experiment to wild-type levels. Subsequent experiments demonstrated that a pREP41 plasmid expressing the wild-type rad4+ cDNA was unable to suppress the rad3-56 phenotype (data not shown) and this is confirmed below. The tagged, plasmid-borne rad4+ cDNA was expressed from the nmt41 promoter, although suppression was observed in both the presence and absence of thiamine.
We next tested the ability of HA-Rad4 to suppress rad26,
rad17-w and hus1-4 mutations. The sensitivity to HU,
bleomycin and UV irradiation of exponentially growing mutant strains carrying
pREP41-HA-rad4+ was assessed. The data show the presence
of the HA-Rad4-expressing plasmid suppresses sensitivity to all three agents
in rad26
and rad17-w cells when compared with control
cells carrying the vector alone (Fig.
3B,C). In contrast, Hus1p-deficient cells carrying the plasmid
remain sensitive to HU and both forms of DNA damage
(Fig. 3D). We note that the
presence of the vector alone increases the sensitivity of
rad26
cells to HU and of all three mutants to UV irradiation.
Conversely, it slightly reduces the sensitivity of rad17-w cells to
HU. We can offer no convincing explanation for this, although they are robust
observations in that all of the above suppression experiments were repeated
three times and the mean values plotted. In the remaining suppression
experiments the hus1-4 mutant strain expressing increased levels of
HA-Rad4 was employed as a negative control.
Suppression correlates with restoration of checkpoints
We then investigated whether suppression correlated with restoration of a
checkpoint response. Mutant strains carrying pREP41-HA-Rad4 were synchronized
in G2, incubated in the presence of bleomycin and the septation index scored
at 20-minute intervals to quantify the number of cells passing through
mitosis. The data demonstrate that those strains in which suppression was
observed exhibit a mitotic delay relative to control cells
(Fig. 4A). These data are
consistent with the presence of the Rad4p-expressing plasmid causing a
restoration of checkpoint function in rad3-56, rad26 and
rad17-w mutants. Conversely, hus1-4 cells carrying the
plasmid undergo mitosis with similar kinetics in the presence and absence of
the DNA-damaging agent, a characteristic of cells lacking the G2/M checkpoint.
Microscopic examination of the cells demonstrated that in the presence of
bleomycin, rad3-56, rad26
and rad17-w cells,
containing pREP41-HA-rad4+, exhibit an increase in cell
length, consistent with a checkpoint-induced mitotic delay
(Fig. 4A-C). Control
hus1-4 cells carrying pREP41-HA-rad4+ fail to
elongate and exhibit the classic 'cut' (cell untimely torn) phenotype of
checkpoint-deficient cells (Fig.
4D). These results indicate that expression of HA-Rad4p suppresses
the G2/M checkpoint deficiency conferred by the rad3-56, rad26
and rad17-w mutations. All the experiments were repeated three times
and data from a representative experiment are shown. We then performed similar
experiments in asynchronous cultures in the presence of HU with similar
results. In all three cases in which suppression of HU sensitivity was
observed, cells exhibited a clear mitotic arrest, whereas control cells had a
cut phenotype (data not shown).
Suppression is allele-specific for rad17 and rad3, but not rad26
We assessed the ability of pREP41-HA-rad4+ to suppress
mutations in several genes implicated in DNA structure checkpoint control. The
results of these experiments are summarized in
Table 2. Suppression was
restricted to those genes discussed above, and all other strains retained
sensitivity to the genotoxic stresses applied. It is important to note that
HA-rad4+-mediated suppression was allele-specific with
respect to the rad3 locus, the plasmid failing to suppress either a
deletion of rad3 or a kinase-deficient mutant
(Table 2). This result implies
that the rad3-56 mutant retains some aspect of its function, which is
required for HA-rad4+-mediated suppression and that this
is probably its kinase activity. Similarly, there was no suppression of a
rad17 deletion, perhaps indicating a physical requirement for the
mutant Rad17. Next, the dependency relationships of suppression were examined
using the double mutant strains listed in
Table 1. Taking the
rad3-56 mutation as the exemplar, we tested the sensitivity to HU and
DNA damage of strains carrying this mutation in combination with mutations in
all the other known S. pombe checkpoint genes in addition to a
rad26 rad17-w double mutant. The data, presented in
Table 3, demonstrate that
suppression requires functional copies of all of the other checkpoint
genes.
|
|
Biochemical characterization of rad4+-mediated
suppression
The physiological data presented above indicate that high-level expression
of Rad4p is able to compensate for mutation of rad3, rad26 and
rad17 as a result of restoration of checkpoint function. In order to
further explore the nature of suppression we examined the biochemical events
described above in mutant strains carrying either
pREP41-HA-rad4+ or pREP41-HA. Cds1p kinase activity was
assayed in synchronous cultures in the presence of HU. In all cells in which
pREP41-HA-rad4+-mediated suppression of HU sensitivity was
observed, significant levels of Cds1p kinase activity were present
(Fig. 5A). These results are
consistent with the physiological data indicating a restoration of checkpoint
function. In contrast, the hus1-4 mutant expressing increased levels
of Rad4 completely lacked Cds1p kinase activity. It should be noted that in
control hus1-4 cells carrying the pREP41-HA vector, a small amount of
Cds1 kinase activity was detectable in the presence of HU. This presumably
reflects a partial activation of the S-M checkpoint, although this was
insufficient to rescue HU sensitivity.
Nuclear localization of Rad9p in rad17-w mutants
It had previously been demonstrated that Rad9 failed to localize to the
nucleus in rad17 null mutant cells
(Caspari et al., 2000a). One
possible mechanism for HA-rad4+ suppression might be
restoration of nuclear localization of the 9-1-1 PCNA-like complex. The
results of experiments to test this possibility are presented in
Fig. 5A-F. We first examined
Rad9 localization in the rad17-w mutant and found the protein to
reside mainly in the cytoplasm (Fig.
5C). The presence of the HA-rad4+ plasmid
caused Rad9 to relocate to the nucleus
(Fig. 5D). However, in
rad17-w cells expressing the untagged version of
rad4+, which remain checkpoint-deficient, Rad9 was also
found in the nucleus (Fig. 5E).
Nuclear localization was dependent upon Hus1, as would be predicted by a
requirement for complex formation (Fig.
5F). We conclude from these data that, although restoration of the
nuclear localization of this complex may offer a partial explanation for the
observed suppression, it is not sufficient for restoration of checkpoint
function, at least in a rad17-w mutant.
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Hus1 is phosphorylated in response to prolonged inhibition of DNA
replication and in the presence of DNA damage. Rad9 forms a complex with Hus1
and Rad1 and is itself phosphorylated in response to DNA damage. Both of these
post-translational modification events are dependent on the remaining
checkpoint Rad proteins but independent of Crb2 (also termed Rhp9) and the
effector kinases (Kostrub et al.,
1998; Caspari et al.,
2000a
; Caspari et al.,
2000b
). Fig. 2
demonstrates that phosphorylation of Hus1 and Rad9 is independent of Rad4.
Formally, these data are consistent with Rad4 acting downstream of the 9-1-1
complex, perhaps in conjunction with Crb2 as has been previously suggested
(Saka et al., 1997
). However,
for the reasons discussed below, we believe this interpretation is probably
incomplete.
We have shown that a modified version of Rad4, carrying three copies of the 12CA5 HA epitope at its N-terminus, acts to suppress mutation of each of rad3, rad26 and rad17. These proteins are thought to act upstream of the PCNA-like checkpoint complex. Moreover, the observed suppression is dependent upon the presence of the PCNA-like complex for the S-M and G2/M pathways (see Table 3). These data are inconsistent with a model in which Rad4 acts downstream of the PCNA-like complex. Suppression is also dependent upon Cds1 if DNA replication is compromised, and on Crb2 and Chk1 in the presence of DNA damage. Suppression is allele-specific with respect to rad3 and rad17 (Table 2). HA-Rad4 is unable suppress deletion of either of these genes, but is able to suppress point mutations of both genes. This suggests that a physical interaction between HA-Rad4, Rad3 and Rad17 is required for suppression. One of the most surprising results is that deletion of rad26 is suppressed by HA-Rad4 expression. Rad26 and its homologues are widely thought to provide a chromatin-loading function for Rad3-related kinases. It may be that high levels of the tagged Rad4 provide this function in the absence of Rad26. Alternatively, this might be explained if Rad26 is auxiliary to the main complex, but normally acts to provide additional stability to that complex - an activity that would be dispensable in the presence of the modified Rad4. Further, Rad3 requires an active kinase domain for the observed suppression.
The most parsimonious interpretation of the above data places Rad4
downstream of Rad3, Rad26 and Rad17, but parallel to the 9-1-1 complex, thus
defining a bifurcation of both the S-M and G2/M checkpoint pathways. The
bifurcated pathways then converge to activate the respective effector kinases.
In the case of the response to DNA damage, Crb2 will probably act downstream
of Rad4 as it is required for Chk1 phosphorylation and for the
HA-Rad4-mediated suppression described here. It remains possible that Rad4 and
Crb2 act in concert and there is evidence to suggest that they may form a
heteromeric complex (Saka et al.,
1997). Rad3 and Rad26 are known to form an active protein kinase
complex and are shown to act as a complex at the head of the phosphorylation
cascade associated with the S-M and G2-M checkpoint pathways
(Edwards et al., 1999
). Rad17
is not required for Rad3/Rad26 activity, as measured by phosphorylation of
Rad26, but is required for Hus1 and Rad9 modification
(Edwards et al., 1999
; Kosrub
et al., 1998; Caspari et al.,
2000b
) as well as for suppression. This positions Rad17 upstream
of both Rad4 and the 9-1-1 complex.
As suggested above, in order to fully explain all of these observations we
hypothesize the existence of a multimeric complex between Rad4 and
Rad3/Rad26/Rad1-Rad9-Hus1. Given the independent loading of Rad3-Rad26 and
9-1-1 complexes on the DNA at sites of damage, we suggest this interaction
occurs at the time of assembly onto the DNA. Our genetic interaction between
rad17 and rad4 may reflect biochemical interactions between
Rad4 with the 9-1-1 complex (and possibly Rad17 as well), because Rad17 is
required to load 9-1-1 at sites of damage and a physical interaction has been
identified between the Dpb11 and Ddc1, the homologs in S. cerevisiae
of Rad4 and Rad9, respectively (Wang and
Elledge, 2002). We speculate that Rad4 interacts with these
complexes to integrate the bifurcation of the pathway (evident at the point of
chromatin loading). This integration then allows the Rad3-dependent
phosphorylation cascade to link to Chk1. A requirement of this argument is
that both branches must be active for a functional checkpoint response as
evidenced by the dependency of suppression. Thus physically, these data
reflect the fact that activation of the effector kinase requires two
independent steps. This model is summarized in
Fig. 6. We imagine that Rad4
plays a similar role in recruiting Cds1 to the appropriate complexes in the
presence of stalled replication forks. Once present at the correct site, the
kinase is activated and proceeds to interact with the relevant target
proteins, which are probably distinct from the Chk1 targets. It is not yet
clear why only the epitope-tagged form of Rad4 is able to suppress the
checkpoint mutations. One possibility is that it alters the stability of the
protein such that it confers an increased stability to the mutant complexes,
thus allowing them to function. However, it will be necessary to develop
further reagents before this question can be properly addressed.
|
One remaining question relates to the nature of the observed suppression.
In an attempt to address this we examined the nuclear localization of Rad9
that had previously been shown to be dependent upon Rad17
(Caspari et al., 2000a). The
data indicated that high-level expression of either Rad4 or HA-Rad4 restores
the nuclear localization of Rad9 in rad17-w cells
(Fig. 5). High-level expression
of wild-type Rad4 is unable to rescue the checkpoint deficiency of a
rad17-w mutant, and therefore the restoration of Rad9 nuclear
localization cannot fully explain HA-Rad4-mediated suppression. However, it
may explain this suppression in part and offer an insight into the function of
Rad4. It could be that Rad4, in forming the multimeric complex hypothesized
above, also acts as an accessory factor with the Rad17-Rfc complex for
chromatin loading of the 9-1-1 PCNA-related complex, perhaps at sites of
unusual DNA structure. If this were so, then it might also explain the role of
Rad4 during DNA replication, in which it could interact with RFC to facilitate
PCNA loading. This interpretation would be consistent with data implicating
the S. cerevisiae homologue, Dpb11, in processive DNA replication and
perhaps in the loading of processive DNA polymerases
(Reid et al., 1999
). Dpb11 has
also been shown to be required for the association of DNA polymerases
and
with an origin of DNA replication
(Masumoto et al., 2000
).
![]() |
Acknowledgments |
---|
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
* These authors contributed equally to this work
Present address: Cathcart Laboratory, Division of Molecular Biology and
Biochemistry, Davidson Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ,
UK
Present address: Pieris Proteolab AG, An der Saatzucht 5, D-85350 Freising,
Germany
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Alcasabas, A. A., Osborn, A. J., Bachant, J., Hu, F., Werler, P. J., Bousset, K., Furuya, K., Diffley, J. F., Carr, A. M. and Elledge, S. J. (2001). Mrc1 transduces signals of DNA replication stress to activate Rad53. Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 958-965.[CrossRef][Medline]
Al-Khodairy, F. and Carr, A. M. (1992). DNA repair mutants defining G2 checkpoint pathways in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. EMBO J. 11,1343 -1350.[Abstract]
Bahler, J., Wu, J.-Q., Longtine, M. S., Shah, N. G., McKenzie, A., III, Steever, A., Wach, A., Philippsen, P. and Pringle, J. R. (1998). Heterologous modules for efficient and versatile PCR-based gene targeting in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Yeast 14,943 -951.[CrossRef][Medline]
Basi, G., Schmid, E. and Maundrell, K. (1993). TATA box mutations in the Schizosaccharomyces pombe nmt1 promoter affect transcription efficiency but not the transcription start point or thiamine repressibility. Gene 123,131 -136.[CrossRef][Medline]
Capasso, H., Palermo, C., Wan, S., Rao, H., John, U. P.,
O'Connell, M. J. and Walworth, N. C. (2002). Phosphorylation
activates Chk1 and is required for checkpoint-mediated cell cycle arrest.
J. Cell Sci. 115,4555
-4564.
Carr, A. M. (2000). Piecing together the p53
puzzle. Science 287,1765
-1777.
Caspari, T., Dahlen, M., Kanter-Smoler, G., Lindsay, H. D.,
Hofmann, K., Papadimitiou, K., Sunnerhagen, P. and Carr, A. M.
(2000a). Characterization of Schizosaccharomyces pombe
Hus1: a PCNA related protein that associates with Rad1 and Rad9.
Mol. Cell. Biol. 20,1254
-1262.
Caspari, T., Davies, C. and Carr, A. M. (2000b). Analysis of the fission yeast checkpoint Rad proteins. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 65,451 -456.[Medline]
Craven, R. A., Griffiths, D. J. F., Sheldrick, K. S., Randall, R. E., Hagan, I. M. and Carr, A. M. (1998). Vectors for the expression of tagged proteins in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Gene 221,59 -68.[CrossRef][Medline]
Edwards, R. J., Bentley, N. J. and Carr, A. M. (1999). A Rad3-Rad26 complex responds to DNA damage independently of other checkpoint proteins. Nat. Cell Biol. 1, 393-398.[CrossRef][Medline]
Elledge, S. J. (1996). Cell cycle checkpoints:
preventing an identity crisis. Science
274,1664
-1672.
Enoch, T., Carr, A. M. and Nurse, P. (1992). Fission yeast genes involved in coupling mitosis to completion of DNA replication. Genes Dev. 6,2035 -2046.[Abstract]
Evan, G. I., Lewis, G. K., Ramsey, G. and Bishop, J. M. (1985) Isolation of monoclonal-antibodies specific for human c-myc proto-oncogene product. Mol. Cell. Biol. 5,3610 -3616.[Medline]
Hagan, I. M. and Hyams, J. S. (1988). The use of cell cycle mutants to investigate the control of microtubule distribution in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. J. Cell Sci. 89,343 -357.[Abstract]
Hartwell, L. H. and Kastan, M. B. (1994). Cell cycle control and cancer. Science 266,1821 -1828.[Medline]
Kondo, T., Wakayama, T., Naiki, T., Matsumoto, K. and Sugimoto,
K. (2001). Recruitment of Mec1 and Ddc1 checkpoint proteins
to double-strand breaks through distinct mechanisms.
Science 294,867
-870.
Kostrub, C. W., Knudsen, K., Subramani, S. and Enoch, T.
(1998). Hus1p, a conserved fission yeast checkpoint protein,
interacts with Rad1p and is phosphorylated in response to DNA damage.
EMBO J. 17,2055
-2066.
Lindsay, H. D., Griffiths, D. J. F., Edwards, R. J.,
Christensen, P. U., Murray, J. M., Osman, F., Walworth, N. and Carr, A. M.
(1998). S-phase-specific activation of Cds1 kinase defines a
subpathway of the checkpoint response in S. pombe. Genes
Dev. 12,382
-395.
Lopez-Girano, A., Tanaka, K., Chen, X.-B., Baber, B. A.,
McGowan, C. H. and Russell, P. (2001). Serine-345 is required
for Rad3-dependent phosphorylation and function of checkpoint kinase Chk1 in
fission yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
98,11289
-11294.
Martinho, R. G., Lindsay, H. D., Flaggs, G., DeMaggio, A. J.,
Hoekstra, M. F., Carr, A. M. and Bentley, N. J. (1998).
Analysis of Rad3 and Chk1 protein kinases defines different checkpoint
responses. EMBO J. 17,7239
-7249.
Masumoto, H., Sugino, A. and Araki, H. (2000).
Dpb11 controls the association between DNA polymerases alpha and epsilon and
the autonomously replicating sequence region of budding yeast. Mol.
Cell. Biol. 20,2809
-2817.
McFarlane, R. M., Carr, A. M. and Price, C. (1997). Characterization of the S. pombe Rad4 mutant phenotypes: dissection of DNA replication and G2 checkpoint control functions. Mol. Gen. Genet. 255,332 -340.[CrossRef][Medline]
Melo, J. A., Cohen, J. and Toczyski, D. P.
(2001). Two checkpoint complexes are independently recruited
to sites of DNA damage in vivo. Genes Dev.
15,2809
-2821.
Mitchison, J. M. and Carter, B. L. A. (1975). Cell cycle analysis. Methods Cell Biol. 11,201 -219.[Medline]
Moreno, S., Klar, A. and Nurse, P. (1991). Molecular genetic analysis of fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Methods Enzymol. 194,795 -823.[Medline]
Murakami, H. and Okayama, H. (1995). A kinase from fission yeast responsible for blocking mitosis in S phase. Nature 374,817 -819.[CrossRef][Medline]
O'Connell, M. J., Walworth, N. C. and Carr, A. M. (2000). The G2-phase DNA damage checkpoint. Trends Cell Biol. 10,296 -303.[CrossRef][Medline]
Reid, R. J., Fiorani, P., Sugawara, M. and Bjornsti, M.-A.
(1999). CDC45 and DPB11 are required for
processive DNA replication and resistance to DNA topoisomerase I-mediated DNA
damage. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96,11440
-11445.
Saka, Y. and Yanagida, M. (1993). Fission yeast cut5+, required for S phase onset and M phase restraint, is identical to the radiation-damage repair gene rad4+. Cell 74,383 -393.[Medline]
Saka, Y., Esashi, F., Matsusaka, S., Mochida, S. and Yanagida,
M. (1997). Damage and replication checkpoint control in
fission yeast is ensured by interactions of Crb2, a protein with BRCT motif,
with Cut5 and Chk1. Genes Dev.
11,3387
-3400.
Saka, Y., Fantes, P., Sutani, T., McInerny, C., Creanor, J. and Yanagida, M. (1994). Fission yeast cut5 links nuclear chromatin and M phase regulator in the replication checkpoint control. EMBO J. 13,5319 -5329.[Abstract]
Shimada, M., Okuzaki, D., Tanaka, S., Tougan, T., Tamai, K. K.,
Shimoda, C. and Nojima, H. (1999). Rfc3 of
Schizosaccharomyces pombe, a small subunit of replication factor C
complex, is required for both replication and damage checkpoints.
Mol. Biol. Cell 10,3991
-4003.
Verkade, H. M. and O'Connell, M. J. (1998). Cut5 is a component of the UV-responsive DNA damage checkpoint in fission yeast. Mol. Gen. Genet. 260,426 -433.[CrossRef][Medline]
Walworth, N. C. and Bernards, R. (1996). rad-dependent response of the chk1-encoded protein kinase at the DNA damage checkpoint. Science 271,353 -356.[Abstract]
Walworth, N., Davey, S. and Beach, D. (1993). Fission yeast chk1 protein kinase links rad checkpoint pathway to cdc2. Nature 363,368 -371.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wang, H. and Elledge, S. J. (1999).
DRC1, DNA replication and checkpoint protein 1, functions with
DPB11 to control DNA replication and the S-phase checkpoint in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 96,3824
-3829.
Wang, H. and Elledge, S. J. (2002). Genetic and
physical interactions between DPB11 and DDC1 in the yeast
DNA damage response pathway. Genetics
160,1295
-1304.
Willson, J., Wilson, S., Warr, N. and Watts, F. Z.
(1997). Isolation and characterization of the
Schizosaccharomyces pombe rhp9 gene: a gene required for the DNA
damage checkpoint but not the replication checkpoint. Nucleic Acids
Res. 25,2138
-2146.
Zou, L., Cortez, D. and Elledge, S. J. (2002).
Regulation of ATR substrate selection by Rad17-dependent loading of Rad9
complexes onto chromatin. Genes Dev.
16,198
-208.