Local and global functions of Timeless and Tipin in replication fork protection

The eukaryotic cell replicates its chromosomal DNA with almost absolute fidelity in the course of every cell cycle. This accomplishment is remarkable considering that the conditions for DNA replication are rarely ideal. The replication machinery encounters a variety of obstacles on the chromosome, including damaged template DNA. In addition, a number of chromosome regions are considered to be difficult to replicate owing to DNA secondary structures and DNA binding proteins required for various transactions on the chromosome. Under these conditions, replication forks stall or break, posing grave threats to genomic integrity. How does the cell combat such stressful conditions during DNA replication? The replication fork protection complex (FPC) may help answer this question. Recent studies have demonstrated that the FPC is required for the smooth passage of replication forks at difficult-to-replicate genomic regions and plays a critical role in coordinating multiple genome maintenance processes at the replication fork.

Timeless functions independently of the Tim-Tipin complex to promote sister chromatid cohesion in normal human fibroblasts

The Timeless-Tipin complex and Claspin are mediators of the ATR-dependent activation of Chk1 in the intra-S checkpoint response to stalled DNA replication forks. Tim-Tipin and Claspin also contribute to sister chromatid cohesion (SCC) in various organisms, likely through a replication-coupled process. Some models of the establishment of SCC posit that interactions between cohesin rings and replisomes could result in physiological replication stress requiring fork stabilization. The contributions of Timeless, Tipin, Claspin, Chk1 and ATR to SCC were investigated in genetically stable, human diploid fibroblast cell lines. Whereas Timeless, Tipin and Claspin showed similar contributions to UVC-induced activation of Chk1, siRNA-mediated knockdown of Timeless induced a 100-fold increase in sister chromatid discohesion, whereas the inductive effects of knocking down Tipin, Claspin and ATR were 4-20-fold. Knockdown of Chk1 did not significantly affect SCC. Consistent findings were obtained in two independently derived human diploid fibroblast lines and support a conclusion that SCC in human cells is strongly dependent on Timeless but independent of Chk1. Furthermore, the 10-fold difference in discohesion observed when depleting Timeless versus Tipin indicates that Timeless has a function in SCC that is independent of the Tim-Tipin complex, even though the abundance of Timeless is reduced when Tipin is targeted for depletion. A better understanding of how Timeless, Tipin and Claspin promote SCC will elucidate non-checkpoint functions of these proteins at DNA replication forks and inform models of the establishment of SCC.