Direct Restart of a Replication Fork Stalled by a Head-On RNA Polymerase
Richard T. Pomerantz, Mike O’Donnell
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Rockefeller University
Citation: Pomerantz R.T., O’Donnell M. (2010). Direct Restart of a Replication Fork Stalled by a Head-On RNA Polymerase. JoVE. 38. http://www.jove.com/details.php?id=1919, doi:
In vivo studies suggest that replication forks are arrested due to encounters with head-on transcription complexes. Yet, the fate of the replisome and
RNA polymerase (RNAP) following a head-on collision is unknown. Here, we find that the E. coli replisome stalls upon collision with a head-on
transcription complex, but instead of collapsing, the replication fork remains highly stable and eventually resumes elongation after displacing the
RNAP from DNA. We also find that the transcription-repair coupling factor, Mfd, promotes direct restart of the fork following the collision by
facilitating displacement of the RNAP. These findings demonstrate the intrinsic stability of the replication apparatus and a novel role for the
transcription-coupled repair pathway in promoting replication past a RNAP block.
This method was used in the research reported in Pomerantz and O'Donnell, Science 327, 590-592 (2010).
1. Assembly of a halted RNAP elongation complex was performed as follows:
500 nM final concentration of E. coli RNAP σ70HE was mixed with 5 nM final concentration of a biotinylated 3.6 kb DNA template containing the
T7A1 promoter in 100 μl of buffer A (20 mM Tris-Cl (pH 7.5), 8 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT, 10% glycerol) for 10 min at 37 °C. 100 μM
of ApU and 40 μM each of GTP, ATP, and CTP were added for an additional 10 min at 37 °C.
2. Immobilization of the halted RNAP elongation complex onto streptavidin beads was performed as follows:
200 μl of streptavidin magnetic coated beads (Invitrogen) were added to the reaction above for 10 min at room temp.
3. Purification of the immobilized halted RNAP elongation complex was performed as follows:
The beads (from above) were washed 5 times with 0.9 ml of buffer A containing 0.75 M NaCl, 200 μg/ml heparin, and 20 μg/ml ssDNA (The
supernatant was removed after each wash step by magnetic separation.) Next, the beads were washed 2 times with 0.9 ml of buffer A.
4. Formation of a replication fork downstream relative to the head-on RNAP was performed as follows:
The beads (from above) were resuspended in 100 μl of New England Biolabs buffer 4 and 10 units of Sap I (New England Biolabs) was added for
10 min at 37 °C. The beads were washed 3 times with 0.9 ml of buffer A and then resuspended in 50 μl of Quick T4 Ligation reaction buffer (New
England Biolabs). 2 μl of Quick T4 ligase (New England Biolabs) was added along with 6 nM final concentration of pre-annealed forked DNA
(RP10, RP22, RP25) for 10 min at room temp. The beads were washed 3 times with 0.9 ml of buffer A.
5. Assembly of the replisome and initiation of leading strand synthesis at the replication fork was performed as follows:
448 pmol of DnaB (as hexamer) was incubated with the beads 150 μl of buffer A (20 mM Tris-Cl (pH 7.5), 8 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT,
10% glycerol) for 30 s at 23 °C. 4.9 pmol of Pol III* (Pol III HE minus β), 15 pmol of β, 2 mM ATP, and 60 μM each of dGTP and dATP were added
to a volume of 200 μl and incubated a further 5 min at 37 °C. Replication was initiated upon adding 10 μg SSB and 24 μM each of dATP and
dTTP along with [α-32P]dTTP and [α-32P]dCTP (specific activity, 3,000-5,000 cpm/pmol) to a final volume of 250 μL. Reactions were terminated
after 10 min upon adding 12 μl of 500 mM EDTA.
6. Purification and concentration of the radio-labeled DNA products was performed as follows:
The beads (from above) were boiled after the reaction was terminated in order to remove the DNA from the beads. Any residual DNA remaining
attached to the beads was removed by treating the beads with proteinase K in a volume of 10 ul for 30 min at 50 °C. The beads were then boiled
and the supernatant was removed by magnetic separation. The combined supernatant containing the DNA was purified using the Qiagen PCR
Cleanup kit. Purified radio-labeled DNA products were then analyzed in an alkaline agarose gel.
*Replication in the absence of a head-on RNAP halted elongation complex was performed as above, however, σ70was omitted.
Collision of the replisome with a head-on RNAP usually results in two products of 2.5 kb and 3.6 kb in length. The 2.5 kb product represents the
length of the DNA from the fork to the halted RNAP and results from replisome stalling upon collision with the RNAP. The 3.6 kb product
represent full-length DNA and results from either incomplete occupancy of the promoter by RNAP or partial replisome read-through of the
head-on RNAP. A good or accurate result demonstrates that approximately 50% full-length DNA is produced. However, in some cases less
occupancy of the promoter by RNAP occurs and a higher percentage of full-length DNA is observed since a greater population of replisomes do
not encounter a head-on RNAP. Replication in the absence of a halted RNAP results in only full-length DNA (3.6 kb).
Page 1 of 2
Journal of Visualized Experimentswww.jove.com
Copyright © 2010 Journal of Visualized Experiments
Figure. 1 The replisome is impeded by a head-on RNAP.
(A) Experimental setup. A E. coli RNAP halted elongation complex was assembled on a biotinylated DNA containing the T7A1 promoter as
previously described (9). Briefly, a halted elongation complex was formed 20 bps downstream from the promoter by incubating RNAP
holoenzyme with biotinylated DNA for 10 min followed by the addition of ApU, GTP, ATP, and CTP for a further 10 min. Streptavidin beads were
added for an additional 10 min then the beads were washed five times each with 0.9 ml of buffer containing 0.75M NaCl, 200 mg/ml heparin, and
100 nM single-strand DNA to remove unstable RNAP-DNA complexes and excess NTPs. The DNA was then digested with SapI, washed, and
ligated to a pre-annealed forked DNA. The beads were washed again prior to assembly of the replisome. The promoter is located 2.5 kb from the
fork and is oriented to direct transcription towards the fork. (B) DnaB was added then the replisome was assembled and replication was initiated
either in the presence (lane 2) or absence (lane 1) of a head-on RNAP.
We are especially grateful to Seth Darst for providing RNAP and Mfd proteins and expression vectors. We are also thank Sergei Borukhov for
providing GreB and Dan Zhang for technical support. This work was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health (M.O.D.) and by a
Marie-Josee and Henry Kravis Fellowship at the Rockefeller University (R.T.P.).
Page 2 of 2
Journal of Visualized Experimentswww.jove.com
Copyright © 2010 Journal of Visualized Experiments
1.Rudolph, C. J., Dhillon, P., Moore, T., Lloyd, R. G. Avoiding and resolving conflicts between DNA replication and transcription.DNA Repair
(Amst) 6, 981 (2007).
Vilette, D., Ehrlich, S. D., Michel, B. Transcription-induced deletions in plasmid vectors: M13 DNA replication as a source of instability. Mol
Gen Genet 252, 398 (1996).
Trautinger, B. W., Jaktaji, R. P., Rusakova, E., Lloyd, R. G. RNA polymerase modulators and DNA repair activities resolve conflicts between
DNA replication and transcription. Mol Cell 19, 247 (2005).
McGlynn, P., Lloyd, R. G. Modulation of RNA Polymerase by (p)ppGpp Reveals a RecG-Dependent Mechanism for Replication Fork
Progression. Cell 101, 35 (2000).
McGlynn, P., Guy, C. P. Replication forks blocked by protein-DNA complexes have limited stability in vitro. J Mol Biol 381, 249 (2008).
Labib, K., Hodgson, B. Replication fork barriers: pausing for a break or stalling for time? EMBO Rep 8, 346 (2007).
Bidnenko, V., Ehrlich, S. D., Michel, B. Replication fork collapse at replication terminator sequences. Embo J 21, 3898 (2002).
Pomerantz, R. T., O'Donnell, M. Replisome mechanics: insights into a twin DNA polymerase machine. Trends Microbiol 15, 156 (2007).
Pomerantz, R. T., O'Donnell, M. The replisome uses mRNA as a primer after colliding with RNA polymerase. Nature 456, 762 (2008).
10. Heller, R. C., Marians, K. J. Replication fork reactivation downstream of a blocked nascent leading strand. Nature 439, 557 (2006).
11. Yuzhakov, A., Turner, J., O'Donnell, M. Replication fork reactivation downstream of a blocked nascent leading strand. Cell 86, 877 (1996).
12. Hinkle, D. C., Ring, J., Chamberlin, M. J. Replisome assembly reveals the basis for asymmetric function in leading and lagging strand
replication. J Mol Biol 70, 197 (1972).
13. Kaplan, D. L., O'Donnell, M. Studies of the binding of Escherichia coli RNA polymerase to DNA. V. T7 RNA chain initiation by enzyme-DNA
complexes. Mol Cell 15, 453 (2004).
14. Park, J. S., Marr, M. T., Roberts, J. W. Twin DNA pumps of a hexameric helicase provide power to simultaneously melt two duplexes. Cell 109
, 757 (2002).
15. Hanawalt, P. C., Spivak, G. E. coli Transcription repair coupling factor (Mfd protein) rescues arrested complexes by promoting forward
translocation. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 9, 958 (2008).
16. Hanawalt, P. C. Transcription-coupled DNA repair: two decades of progress and surprises. Science 266, 1957 (1994).
17. Selby, C. P., Sancar, A. Transcription-coupled repair and human disease. J Biol Chem 270, 4882 (1995).
18. Liu, B., Alberts, B. M. Structure and function of transcription-repair coupling factor. I. Structural domains and binding properties. Head-on
collision between a DNA replication apparatus and RNA polymerase transcription complex. Science 267, 1131 (1995).
19. George, D. L., Witkin, E. M. Slow excision repair in an mfd mutant of Escherichia coli B/r. Mol Gen Genet 133, 283 (1974).