HLTF's Ancient HIRAN Domain Binds 3' DNA Ends to Drive Replication Fork Reversal

DNA Repair in Drosophila: Mutagens, Models, and Missing Genes

The numerous processes that damage DNA are counterbalanced by a complex network of repair pathways that, collectively, can mend diverse types of damage. Insights into these pathways have come from studies in many different organisms, including Drosophila melanogaster Indeed, the first ideas about chromosome and gene repair grew out of Drosophila research on the properties of mutations produced by ionizing radiation and mustard gas. Numerous methods have been developed to take advantage of Drosophila genetic tools to elucidate repair processes in whole animals, organs, tissues, and cells. These studies have led to the discovery of key DNA repair pathways, including synthesis-dependent strand annealing, and DNA polymerase theta-mediated end joining. Drosophila appear to utilize other major repair pathways as well, such as base excision repair, nucleotide excision repair, mismatch repair, and interstrand crosslink repair. In a surprising number of cases, however, DNA repair genes whose products play important roles in these pathways in other organisms are missing from the Drosophila genome, raising interesting questions for continued investigations.

Rad18-dependent SUMOylation of human specialized DNA polymerase eta is required to prevent under-replicated DNA

Translesion polymerase eta (polη) was characterized for its ability to replicate ultraviolet-induced DNA lesions that stall replicative polymerases, a process promoted by Rad18-dependent PCNA mono-ubiquitination. Recent findings have shown that polη also acts at intrinsically difficult to replicate sequences. However, the molecular mechanisms that regulate its access to these loci remain elusive. Here, we uncover that polη travels with replication forks during unchallenged S phase and this requires its SUMOylation on K163. Abrogation of polη SUMOylation results in replication defects in response to mild replication stress, leading to chromosome fragments in mitosis and damage transmission to daughter cells. Rad18 plays a pivotal role, independently of its ubiquitin ligase activity, acting as a molecular bridge between polη and the PIAS1 SUMO ligase to promote polη SUMOylation. Our results provide the first evidence that SUMOylation represents a new way to target polη to replication forks, independent of the Rad18-mediated PCNA ubiquitination, thereby preventing under-replicated DNA.

Translesion synthesis polymerase eta has a well characterized role in replicating past UV-induced DNA lesions and has recently been shown to act at difficult to replicate sequences. Here the authors show that its SUMOylation is required to recruit pol eta at the replication fork and to prevent under-replicated DNA.

Solution NMR structure of the HLTF HIRAN domain: a conserved module in SWI2/SNF2 DNA damage tolerance proteins

HLTF is a SWI2/SNF2-family ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling enzyme that acts in the error-free branch of DNA damage tolerance (DDT), a cellular mechanism that enables replication of damaged DNA while leaving damage repair for a later time. Human HLTF and a closely related protein SHPRH, as well as their yeast homologue Rad5, are multi-functional enzymes that share E3 ubiquitin-ligase activity required for activation of the error-free DDT. HLTF and Rad5 also function as ATP-dependent dsDNA translocases and possess replication fork reversal activities. Thus, they can convert Y-shaped replication forks into X-shaped Holliday junction structures that allow error-free replication over DNA lesions. The fork reversal activity of HLTF is dependent on 3'-ssDNA-end binding activity of its N-terminal HIRAN domain. Here we present the solution NMR structure of the human HLTF HIRAN domain, an OB-like fold module found in organisms from bacteria (as a stand-alone domain) to plants, fungi and metazoan (in combination with SWI2/SNF2 helicase-like domain). The obtained structure of free HLTF HIRAN is similar to recently reported structures of its DNA bound form, while the NMR analysis also reveals that the DNA binding site of the free domain exhibits conformational heterogeneity. Sequence comparison of N-terminal regions of HLTF, SHPRH and Rad5 aided by knowledge of the HLTF HIRAN structure suggests that the SHPRH N-terminus also includes an uncharacterized structured module, exhibiting weak sequence similarity with HIRAN regions of HLTF and Rad5, and potentially playing a similar functional role.

AtRAD5A is a DNA translocase harboring a HIRAN domain which confers binding to branched DNA structures and is required for DNA repair in vivo

DNA lesions such as crosslinks represent obstacles for the replication machinery. Nonetheless, replication can proceed via the DNA damage tolerance pathway also known as postreplicative repair pathway. SNF2 ATPase Rad5 homologs, such as RAD5A of the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana, are important for the error-free mode of this pathway. We able to demonstrate before, that RAD5A is a key factor in the repair of DNA crosslinks in Arabidopsis. Here, we show by in vitro analysis that AtRAD5A protein is a DNA translocase able to catalyse fork regression. Interestingly, replication forks with a gap in the leading strand are processed best, in line with its suggested function. Furthermore AtRAD5A catalyses branch migration of a Holliday junction and is furthermore not impaired by the DNA binding of a model protein, which is indicative of its ability to displace other proteins. Rad5 homologs possess HIRAN (Hip116, Rad5; N-terminal) domains. By biochemical analysis we were able to demonstrate that the HIRAN domain variant from Arabidopsis RAD5A mediates structure selective DNA binding without the necessity for a free 3'OH group as has been shown to be required for binding of HIRAN domains in a mammalian RAD5 homolog. The biological importance of the HIRAN domain in AtRAD5A is demonstrated by our result that it is required for its function in DNA crosslink repair in vivo.

DNA damage tolerance pathway involving DNA polymerase ι and the tumor suppressor p53 regulates DNA replication fork progression

DNA damage tolerance facilitates the progression of replication forks that have encountered obstacles on the template strands. It involves either translesion DNA synthesis initiated by proliferating cell nuclear antigen monoubiquitination or less well-characterized fork reversal and template switch mechanisms. Herein, we characterize a novel tolerance pathway requiring the tumor suppressor p53, the translesion polymerase ι (POLι), the ubiquitin ligase Rad5-related helicase-like transcription factor (HLTF), and the SWI/SNF catalytic subunit (SNF2) translocase zinc finger ran-binding domain containing 3 (ZRANB3). This novel p53 activity is lost in the exonuclease-deficient but transcriptionally active p53(H115N) mutant. Wild-type p53, but not p53(H115N), associates with POLι in vivo. Strikingly, the concerted action of p53 and POLι decelerates nascent DNA elongation and promotes HLTF/ZRANB3-dependent recombination during unperturbed DNA replication. Particularly after cross-linker-induced replication stress, p53 and POLι also act together to promote meiotic recombination enzyme 11 (MRE11)-dependent accumulation of (phospho-)replication protein A (RPA)-coated ssDNA. These results implicate a direct role of p53 in the processing of replication forks encountering obstacles on the template strand. Our findings define an unprecedented function of p53 and POLι in the DNA damage response to endogenous or exogenous replication stress.

SMARCAL1 and telomeres: Replicating the troublesome ends

DNA replication is constantly challenged by both endogenous and exogenous sources of replication stress. SMARCAL1, an SNF2 family DNA translocase, functions in the DNA damage response to address these obstacles and promote the completion of replication. Most studies examining the function of SMARCAL1 and related enzymes have relied on the addition of exogenous genotoxic agents, but SMARCAL1 is needed even in the absence of these drugs to maintain genome stability during DNA replication. We recently determined that SMARCAL1 functions to limit DNA damage during replication of difficult-to-replicate telomere sequences. SMARCAL1-deficient cells display several markers of telomere instability including extrachromosomal telomere circles and co-localization with DNA damage markers. Furthermore, cells lacking the highly related proteins ZRANB3 and HLTF do not exhibit similar problems suggesting a unique function for SMARCAL1. These studies identified the first source of endogenous replication stress that SMARCAL1 resolves and provide insight into the mechanism of SMARCAL1 function in maintaining genome stability.

HIV-1 and HIV-2 exhibit divergent interactions with HLTF and UNG2 DNA repair proteins

HIV replication in nondividing host cells occurs in the presence of high concentrations of noncanonical dUTP, apolipoprotein B mRNA-editing, enzyme-catalytic, polypeptide-like 3 (APOBEC3) cytidine deaminases, and SAMHD1 (a cell cycle-regulated dNTP triphosphohydrolase) dNTPase, which maintains low concentrations of canonical dNTPs in these cells. These conditions favor the introduction of marks of DNA damage into viral cDNA, and thereby prime it for processing by DNA repair enzymes. Accessory protein Vpr, found in all primate lentiviruses, and its HIV-2/simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) SIVsm paralogue Vpx, hijack the CRL4(DCAF1) E3 ubiquitin ligase to alleviate some of these conditions, but the extent of their interactions with DNA repair proteins has not been thoroughly characterized. Here, we identify HLTF, a postreplication DNA repair helicase, as a common target of HIV-1/SIVcpz Vpr proteins. We show that HIV-1 Vpr reprograms CRL4(DCAF1) E3 to direct HLTF for proteasome-dependent degradation independent from previously reported Vpr interactions with base excision repair enzyme uracil DNA glycosylase (UNG2) and crossover junction endonuclease MUS81, which Vpr also directs for degradation via CRL4(DCAF1) E3. Thus, separate functions of HIV-1 Vpr usurp CRL4(DCAF1) E3 to remove key enzymes in three DNA repair pathways. In contrast, we find that HIV-2 Vpr is unable to efficiently program HLTF or UNG2 for degradation. Our findings reveal complex interactions between HIV-1 and the DNA repair machinery, suggesting that DNA repair plays important roles in the HIV-1 life cycle. The divergent interactions of HIV-1 and HIV-2 with DNA repair enzymes and SAMHD1 imply that these viruses use different strategies to guard their genomes and facilitate their replication in the host.

Stalled replication fork rescue requires a novel DNA helicase

During DNA replication, forks often stall and require restart. One mechanism for restart requires that the fork be moved in a direction opposite to that of replication. This reaction is known as fork regression. For this reaction to occur, the enzyme must couple unwinding of the nascent heteroduplex fork arms to the rewinding of nascent strands ahead of itself and to the parental duplex in its wake. As the arms of the fork are complementary, this reaction is isoenergetic making it challenging to study. To overcome this, a novel adaptation of magnetic tweezers was developed by the Croquette group. Here, a 1200bp hairpin was attached at opposite ends to a flow cell surface and a magnetic bead. By manipulating the bead with the magnets, force can be applied to unwind the hairpin or alternatively, released to allow the hairpin to rewind. This adaptation was used to study fork regression by RecG. The results show that this is an efficient regression enzyme, able to work against a large opposing force. Critically, it couples DNA unwinding to duplex rewinding and in the process, can displace bound proteins from fork arms.

HIV-1 Vpr degrades the HLTF DNA translocase in T cells and macrophages

Viruses often interfere with the DNA damage response to better replicate in their hosts. The human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) viral protein R (Vpr) protein has been reported to modulate the activity of the DNA repair structure-specific endonuclease subunit (SLX4) complex and to promote cell cycle arrest. Vpr also interferes with the base-excision repair pathway by antagonizing the uracil DNA glycosylase (Ung2) enzyme. Using an unbiased quantitative proteomic screen, we report that Vpr down-regulates helicase-like transcription factor (HLTF), a DNA translocase involved in the repair of damaged replication forks. Vpr subverts the DDB1-cullin4-associated-factor 1 (DCAF1) adaptor of the Cul4A ubiquitin ligase to trigger proteasomal degradation of HLTF. This event takes place rapidly after Vpr delivery to cells, before and independently of Vpr-mediated G2 arrest. HLTF is degraded in lymphocytic cells and macrophages infected with Vpr-expressing HIV-1. Our results reveal a previously unidentified strategy for HIV-1 to antagonize DNA repair in host cells.

Ubiquitinated Fancd2 recruits Fan1 to stalled replication forks to prevent genome instability

Mono-ubiquitination of Fancd2 is essential for repairing DNA interstrand cross-links (ICLs), but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. The Fan1 nuclease, also required for ICL repair, is recruited to ICLs by ubiquitinated (Ub) Fancd2. This could in principle explain how Ub-Fancd2 promotes ICL repair, but we show that recruitment of Fan1 by Ub-Fancd2 is dispensable for ICL repair. Instead, Fan1 recruitment--and activity--restrains DNA replication fork progression and prevents chromosome abnormalities from occurring when DNA replication forks stall, even in the absence of ICLs. Accordingly, Fan1 nuclease-defective knockin mice are cancer-prone. Moreover, we show that a Fan1 variant in high-risk pancreatic cancers abolishes recruitment by Ub-Fancd2 and causes genetic instability without affecting ICL repair. Therefore, Fan1 recruitment enables processing of stalled forks that is essential for genome stability and health.

Identification of a Substrate Recognition Domain in the Replication Stress Response Protein Zinc Finger Ran-binding Domain-containing Protein 3 (ZRANB3)

DNA damage and other forms of replication stress can cause replication forks to stall. Replication stress response proteins stabilize and resolve stalled forks by mechanisms that include fork remodeling to facilitate repair or bypass of damaged templates. Several enzymes including SMARCAL1, HLTF, and ZRANB3 catalyze these reactions. SMARCAL1 and HLTF utilize structurally distinct accessory domains attached to an ATPase motor domain to facilitate DNA binding and catalysis of fork remodeling reactions. Here we describe a substrate recognition domain within ZRANB3 that is needed for it to recognize forked DNA structures, hydrolyze ATP, catalyze fork remodeling, and act as a structure-specific endonuclease. Thus, substrate recognition domains are a common feature of fork remodeling, SNF2-family, DNA-dependent ATPases, and our study provides further mechanistic understanding of how these enzymes maintain genome integrity during DNA replication.

Replication stress: getting back on track

The replication-stress response enables the DNA replication machinery to overcome DNA lesions or intrinsic replication-fork obstacles, and it is essential to ensure faithful transmission of genetic information to daughter cells. Multiple replication stress–response pathways have been identified in recent years, thus raising questions about the specific and possibly redundant functions of these pathways. Here, we review the emerging mechanisms of the replication-stress response in mammalian cells and consider how they may influence the dynamics of the core DNA replication complex.

The helicase-like transcription factor (HLTF) in cancer: loss of function or oncomorphic conversion of a tumor suppressor?

The Helicase-like Transcription Factor (HLTF) belongs to the SWI/SNF family of proteins involved in chromatin remodeling. In addition to its role in gene transcription, HLTF has been implicated in DNA repair, which suggests that this protein acts as a tumor suppressor. Accumulating evidence indicates that HLTF expression is altered in various cancers via two mechanisms: gene silencing through promoter hypermethylation or alternative mRNA splicing, which leads to the expression of truncated proteins that lack DNA repair domains. In either case, the alteration of HLTF expression in cancer has a poor prognosis. In this review, we gathered published clinical and molecular data on HLTF. Our purposes are (a) to address whether HLTF alterations could be considered as cancer drivers or passengers and (b) to determine whether its different functions (transcription or DNA repair) could be diverted in clonal selection during cancer progression.

Bending Forks and Wagging Dogs--It's about the DNA 3' Tail

Protecting, reversing, and remodeling stalled replication forks are critical to genome stability and require coordinating DNA replication, remodeling, and repair. In this issue, Kile et al. (2015) find that unexpected HLTF specificity for DNA's 3'-hydroxyl tail helps control these biological functions.

Human HLTF mediates postreplication repair by its HIRAN domain-dependent replication fork remodelling

Defects in the ability to respond properly to an unrepaired DNA lesion blocking replication promote genomic instability and cancer. Human HLTF, implicated in error-free replication of damaged DNA and tumour suppression, exhibits a HIRAN domain, a RING domain, and a SWI/SNF domain facilitating DNA-binding, PCNA-polyubiquitin-ligase, and dsDNA-translocase activities, respectively. Here, we investigate the mechanism of HLTF action with emphasis on its HIRAN domain. We found that in cells HLTF promotes the filling-in of gaps left opposite damaged DNA during replication, and this postreplication repair function depends on its HIRAN domain. Our biochemical assays show that HIRAN domain mutant HLTF proteins retain their ubiquitin ligase, ATPase and dsDNA translocase activities but are impaired in binding to a model replication fork. These data and our structural study indicate that the HIRAN domain recruits HLTF to a stalled replication fork, and it also provides the direction for the movement of the dsDNA translocase motor domain for fork reversal. In more general terms, we suggest functional similarities between the HIRAN, the OB, the HARP2, and other domains found in certain motor proteins, which may explain why only a subset of DNA translocases can carry out fork reversal.