DNA base excision repair (BER) is initiated by DNA glycosylases that recognize and remove damaged bases. The phosphate backbone adjacent to the resulting apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) site is then cleaved by an AP endonuclease or glycosylase-associated AP lyase to invoke subsequent BER steps. We have used a genetic approach in Saccharomyces cerevisiae to address whether AP sites are blocks to DNA replication and the biological consequences if AP sites persist in the genome. We found that yeast cells deficient in the two AP endonucleases (apn1 apn2 double mutant) are extremely sensitive to killing by methyl methanesulfonate (MMS), a model DNA alkylating agent. Interestingly, this sensitivity can be reduced up to 2500-fold by deleting the MAG1 3-methyladenine DNA glycosylase gene, suggesting that Mag1 not only removes lethal base lesions, but also benign lesions and possibly normal bases, and that the resulting AP sites are highly toxic to the cells. This rescuing effect appears to be specific for DNA alkylation damage, since the mag1 mutation reduces killing effects of two other DNA alkylating agents, but does not alter the sensitivity of apn cells to killing by UV, gamma-ray or H(2)O(2). Our mutagenesis assays indicate that nearly half of spontaneous and almost all MMS-induced mutations in the AP endonuclease-deficient cells are due to Mag1 DNA glycosylase activity. Although the DNA replication apparatus appears to be incapable of replicating past AP sites, Polzeta-mediated translesion synthesis is able to bypass AP sites, and accounts for all spontaneous and MMS-induced mutagenesis in the AP endonuclease-deficient cells. These results allow us to delineate base lesion flow within the BER pathway and link AP sites to other DNA damage repair and tolerance pathways.
"In our system, both mms2∆ and mag1∆ cells showed marked inductions of the RNR3-Cypridina luciferase reporter gene when treated with MMS (Figure 3). The significantly enhanced luciferase reporter induction in mag1∆ cells is consistent with previous observations in both our β-gal reporter assay (Ichikawa and Eki, 2006) and another study (Jia and Xiao, 2003); the observed enhancement is presumably due to the accumulation of damaged DNA caused by defects in BER mediated by Mag1 DNA glycosylase (Xiao et al., 2001). Mms2p forms a heteromeric complex with Ubc13p to form an active ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme involved in errorfree PPR in yeast by cooperating with chromatinassociated RING finger proteins, Rad18p and Rad5p (Hofmann and Pickart, 1999; Ulrich and Jentsch, 2000). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Yeast-based reporter assays are useful for detecting various genotoxic chemicals. We established a genotoxicity assay using recombinant strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, each containing a reporter plasmid with the secretory luciferase gene from Cypridina noctiluca, driven by a DNA damage-responsive promoter of the yeast RNR3 gene. This system detected the genotoxicity of methyl methanesulphonate (MMS) as sensitively as conventional yeast-based reporter assays, using the β-galactosidase gene in a concentration-dependent manner; it also detects four other genotoxic chemicals, allowing us to monitor DNA damage easily by skipping the cell extraction process for the assay. We examined Cypridina luciferase levels induced by MMS and three antitumour agents using a set of BY4741-derived deletion mutants, each defective in a DNA repair pathway or DNA damage checkpoint. Luciferase activities were particularly enhanced in mutant strains with mms2 Δ and mag1 Δ by exposure to MMS, rad59 Δ and mlh1 Δ to camptothecin and mms2 Δ and mlh1 Δ to mitomycin C, respectively, compared with their parent strains. Enhanced reporter activities were also found in some DNA repair mutants with cisplatin. These observations suggest that this Cypridina secretory luciferase reporter assay using yeast DNA repair mutants offers convenient and sensitive detection of the potential genotoxicity of numerous compounds, including antitumour drugs and studying the mechanisms of DNA damage response in yeast.
"We simultaneously disrupted the two genes that encode the apurinic endonucleases essential for the abasic site repair, APN1 and APN2, in the pol3-Y708A strain. As reported earlier ( Johnson et al. 1998; Bennett 1999; Xiao et al. 2001), the double apn1 apn2 mutation itself caused increased spontaneous mutagenesis (Figure 1B, Table S1), consistent with the expected mutagenicity of AP sites that accumulate at high levels in these strains. As in the case of rad14, the interaction of the apn1 apn2 double mutation with the pol3-Y708A mutation was strictly additive (Figure 1B, Table S1). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Translesion synthesis DNA polymerases contribute to DNA damage tolerance by mediating replication of damaged templates. Due to the low fidelity of these enzymes, lesion bypass is often mutagenic. We have previously shown that, in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the contribution of the error-prone DNA polymerase zeta (Polzeta) to replication and mutagenesis is greatly enhanced if the normal replisome is defective due to mutations in replication genes. Here we present evidence that this defective-replisome-induced mutagenesis (DRIM) results from the participation of Polzeta in the copying of undamaged DNA rather than from mutagenic lesion bypass. First, DRIM is not elevated in strains that have a high level of endogenous DNA lesions due to defects in nucleotide excision repair or base excision repair pathways. Second, DRIM remains unchanged when the level of endogenous oxidative DNA damage is decreased by using anaerobic growth conditions. Third, analysis of the spectrum of mutations occurring during DRIM reveals the characteristic error signature seen during replication of undamaged DNA by Polzeta in vitro. These results extend earlier findings in Escherichia coli indicating that Y-family DNA polymerases can contribute to the copying of undamaged DNA. We also show that exposure of wild-type yeast cells to the replication inhibitor hydroxyurea causes a Polzeta-dependent increase in mutagenesis. This suggests that DRIM represents a response to replication impediment per se rather than to specific defects in the replisome components.
"In contrast to HIB induction, the level of MMS-induced breakage after processing DNA plugs of the triple mutant at 55°C was high (comparable to the high level of HDBs in the mag1 single mutant (Table 2). Consistent with prior studies (7) and our result that deletion of mag1 prevents formation of unrepairable breaks in apn1 apn2 yeast, deletion of MAG1 reduced the level of MMS-sensitivity of the double mutant (Figure 4A, 1 mM MMS and Figure 4B). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Base excision repair (BER) provides relief from many DNA lesions. While BER enzymes have been characterized biochemically, BER functions within cells are much less understood, in part because replication bypass and double-strand break (DSB) repair can also impact resistance to base damage. To investigate BER in vivo, we examined the repair of methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) induced DNA damage in haploid G1 yeast cells, so that replication bypass and recombinational DSB repair cannot occur. Based on the heat-lability of MMS-induced base damage, an assay was developed that monitors secondary breaks in full-length yeast chromosomes where closely spaced breaks yield DSBs that are observed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. The assay detects damaged bases and abasic (AP) sites as heat-dependent breaks as well as intermediate heat-independent breaks that arise during BER. Using a circular chromosome, lesion frequency and repair kinetics could be easily determined. Monitoring BER in single and multiple glycosylase and AP-endonuclease mutants confirmed that Mag1 is the major enzyme that removes MMS-damaged bases. This approach provided direct physical evidence that Apn1 and Apn2 not only repair cellular base damage but also prevent break accumulation that can result from AP sites being channeled into other BER pathway(s).
Nucleic Acids Research 05/2008; 36(6):1836-46. DOI:10.1093/nar/gkm1148 · 9.11 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.