Hst3p, a histone deacetylase, promotes maintenance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae chromosome III lacking efficient replication origins

Persistent Acetylation of Histone H3 Lysine 56 Compromises the Activity of DNA Replication Origins

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, newly synthesized histones H3 are acetylated on lysine 56 (H3 K56ac) by the Rtt109 acetyltransferase prior to their deposition on nascent DNA behind replication forks. Two deacetylases of the sirtuin family, Hst3 and Hst4, remove H3 K56ac from chromatin after S phase. hst3Δ hst4Δ cells present constitutive H3 K56ac, which sensitizes cells to replicative stress via unclear mechanisms. A chemogenomic screen revealed that DBF4 heterozygosity sensitizes cells to NAM-induced inhibition of sirtuins. DBF4 and CDC7 encode subunits of the Dbf4-dependent kinase (DDK), which activates origins of DNA replication during S phase. We show that (i) cells harboring the dbf4-1 or cdc7-4 hypomorphic alleles are sensitized to NAM, and that (ii) the sirtuins Sir2, Hst1, Hst3, and Hst4 promote DNA replication in cdc7-4 cells. We further demonstrate that Rif1, an inhibitor of DDK-dependent activation of origins, causes DNA damage and replication defects in NAM-treated cells and hst3Δ hst4Δ mutants. cdc7-4 hst3Δ hst4Δ cells are shown to display delayed initiation of DNA replication, which is not due to intra-S checkpoint activation but requires Rtt109-dependent H3 K56ac. Our results suggest that constitutive H3 K56ac sensitizes cells to replicative stress in part by negatively influencing the activation of origins of DNA replication.

Genetic inhibitors of APOBEC3B-induced mutagenesis

The cytidine deaminases APOBEC3A (A3A) and APOBEC3B (A3B) are prominent mutators of human cancer genomes. However, tumor-specific genetic modulators of APOBEC-induced mutagenesis are poorly defined. Here, we used a screen to identify 61 gene deletions that increase A3B-induced mutations in yeast. We also determined whether each deletion was epistatic with Ung1 loss, which indicated whether the encoded factors participate in the homologous recombination (HR)-dependent bypass of A3B/Ung1-dependent abasic sites or suppress A3B-catalyzed deamination by protecting against aberrant formation of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). We found that the mutation spectra of A3B-induced mutations revealed genotype-specific patterns of strand-specific ssDNA formation and nucleotide incorporation across APOBEC-induced lesions. Combining these three metrics, we were able to establish a multifactorial signature of APOBEC-induced mutations specific to (1) failure to remove H3K56 acetylation, (2) defective CTF18-RFC complex function, and (3) defective HR-mediated bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions. We extended these results by analyzing mutation data for human tumors and found BRCA1/2-deficient breast cancers display three- to fourfold more APOBEC-induced mutations. Mirroring our results in yeast, Rev1-mediated C-to-G substitutions are mainly responsible for increased APOBEC-signature mutations in BRCA1/2-deficient tumors, and these mutations associate with lagging strand synthesis during replication. These results identify important factors that influence DNA replication dynamics and likely the abundance of APOBEC-induced mutation during tumor progression. They also highlight a novel role for BRCA1/2 during HR-dependent lesion bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions during cancer cell replication.

Genetic modifiers of APOBEC-induced mutagenesis

The cytidine deaminases APOBEC3A and APOBEC3B (A3B) are prominent mutators of human cancer genomes. However, tumor-specific genetic modulators of APOBEC-induced mutagenesis are poorly defined. Here, we utilized a screen to identify 61 gene deletions that increase A3B-induced mutations in yeast. Also, we determined whether each deletion was epistatic with UNG1 loss, which indicated whether the encoded factors participate in the error-free bypass of A3B/Ung1-dependent abasic sites or suppress A3B-catalyzed deamination by protecting against aberrant formation of single stranded DNA (ssDNA). Additionally, we determined that the mutation spectra of A3B-induced mutations revealed genotype-specific patterns of strand-specific ssDNA formation and nucleotide incorporation across APOBEC-induced lesions. Combining these three metrics we were able to establish a multifactorial signature of APOBEC-induced mutations specific to (1) failure to remove H3K56 acetylation, which results in extremely high A3B-induced mutagenesis, (2) defective CTF18-RFC complex function, which results in high levels of A3B induced mutations specifically on the leading strand template that synergistically increase with loss of UNG1, and (3) defective HR-mediated bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions, which were epistatic with Ung1 loss and result from increased Rev1-mediated C-to-G substitutions. We extended these results by analyzing mutation data for human tumors and found BRCA1/2-deficient breast cancer tumors display 3- to 4-fold more APOBEC-induced mutations. Mirroring our results in yeast, for BRCA1/2 deficient tumors Rev1-mediated C-to-G substitutions are solely responsible for increased APOBEC-signature mutations and these mutations occur on the lagging strand during DNA replication. Together these results identify important factors that influence the dynamics of DNA replication and likely the abundance of APOBEC-induced mutation during tumor progression as well as a novel mechanistic role for BRCA1/2 during HR-dependent lesion bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions during cancer cell replication.

Chromatin dynamics and DNA replication roadblocks

A broad spectrum of spontaneous and genotoxin-induced DNA lesions impede replication fork progression. The DNA damage response that acts to promote completion of DNA replication is associated with dynamic changes in chromatin structure that include two distinct processes which operate genome-wide during S-phase. The first, often referred to as histone recycling or parental histone segregation, is characterized by the transfer of parental histones located ahead of replication forks onto nascent DNA. The second, known as de novo chromatin assembly, consists of the deposition of new histone molecules onto nascent DNA. Because these two processes occur at all replication forks, their potential to influence a multitude of DNA repair and DNA damage tolerance mechanisms is considerable. The purpose of this review is to provide a description of parental histone segregation and de novo chromatin assembly, and to illustrate how these processes influence cellular responses to DNA replication roadblocks.

The Amazing Acrobat: Yeast's Histone H3K56 Juggles Several Important Roles While Maintaining Perfect Balance

Acetylation on lysine 56 of histone H3 of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been implicated in many cellular processes that affect genome stability. Despite being the object of much research, the complete scope of the roles played by K56 acetylation is not fully understood even today. The acetylation is put in place at the S-phase of the cell cycle, in order to flag newly synthesized histones that are incorporated during DNA replication. The signal is removed by two redundant deacetylases, Hst3 and Hst4, at the entry to G2/M phase. Its crucial location, at the entry and exit points of the DNA into and out of the nucleosome, makes this a central modification, and dictates that if acetylation and deacetylation are not well concerted and executed in a timely fashion, severe genomic instability arises. In this review, we explore the wealth of information available on the many roles played by H3K56 acetylation and the deacetylases Hst3 and Hst4 in DNA replication and repair.

DNA replication stress restricts ribosomal DNA copy number

Ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs) in budding yeast are encoded by ~100–200 repeats of a 9.1kb sequence arranged in tandem on chromosome XII, the ribosomal DNA (rDNA) locus. Copy number of rDNA repeat units in eukaryotic cells is maintained far in excess of the requirement for ribosome biogenesis. Despite the importance of the repeats for both ribosomal and non-ribosomal functions, it is currently not known how “normal” copy number is determined or maintained. To identify essential genes involved in the maintenance of rDNA copy number, we developed a droplet digital PCR based assay to measure rDNA copy number in yeast and used it to screen a yeast conditional temperature-sensitive mutant collection of essential genes. Our screen revealed that low rDNA copy number is associated with compromised DNA replication. Further, subculturing yeast under two separate conditions of DNA replication stress selected for a contraction of the rDNA array independent of the replication fork blocking protein, Fob1. Interestingly, cells with a contracted array grew better than their counterparts with normal copy number under conditions of DNA replication stress. Our data indicate that DNA replication stresses select for a smaller rDNA array. We speculate that this liberates scarce replication factors for use by the rest of the genome, which in turn helps cells complete DNA replication and continue to propagate. Interestingly, tumors from mini chromosome maintenance 2 (MCM2)-deficient mice also show a loss of rDNA repeats. Our data suggest that a reduction in rDNA copy number may indicate a history of DNA replication stress, and that rDNA array size could serve as a diagnostic marker for replication stress. Taken together, these data begin to suggest the selective pressures that combine to yield a “normal” rDNA copy number.

Eukaryotic genomes contain many copies of ribosomal DNA (rDNA) genes, usually far in excess of the requirement for cellular ribosome biogenesis. rDNA array size is highly variable, both within and across species. Although it is becoming increasingly evident that the rDNA locus serves extra-coding functions, and several pathways that contribute to maintenance of normal rDNA copy number have been discovered, the mechanisms that determine optimal rDNA array size in a cell remain unknown. Here we identify DNA replication stress as one factor that restricts rDNA copy number. We present evidence suggesting that DNA replication stress selects for cells with smaller rDNA arrays, and that contraction of the rDNA array provides a selective advantage to cells under conditions of DNA replication stress. Loss of rDNA copies may be a useful indicator of a history of replication stress, as observed in a mouse model for cancer.