| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, May 2008, p. 3058-3069, Vol. 28, No. 9
0270-7306/08/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.02025-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
,
Genome Stability Laboratory, Laval University Cancer Research Center, Hotel-Dieu de Quebec, 9 McMahon, Quebec City G1R 2J6, Canada,1 Laboratory of Ultrastructural Analysis, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland,2 Terry Fox Molecular Oncology Group, Bloomfield Center for Research on Aging, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research and Departments of Oncology and Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Quebec, Canada3
Received 9 November 2007/ Returned for modification 13 December 2007/ Accepted 9 February 2008
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-H2AX. These studies highlight an important role for the GAR domain in regulating MRE11 function at the biochemical and cellular levels during DNA double-strand break repair. | INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
DNA repair functions of the MRN complex involve the processing of DNA ends during homologous recombination, nonhomologous end joining, and maintenance of telomere length (9). By using yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and human proteins, biochemical studies have shown that Mre11 has a 3'-to-5', Mn2+-dependent exonuclease activity on DNA substrates with blunt or 5' protruding ends. MRE11 displays endonuclease activity on hairpin and single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) substrates (26, 37). The MRN complex can also mediate limited DNA duplex unwinding and hairpin opening in a reaction that is stimulated by ATP. The presence of ATP also allows the complex to endonucleolytically cut a 3' overhang at a single-strand-double-strand transition (25). In view of the effects of deleting the Saccharomyces MRE11, RAD50, or XRS2 gene on the processing of DSBs in vivo, it was surprising to observe that MRE11 has in vitro 3'-to-5' exonuclease activity on double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) (26). Indeed, DSBs induced in mitotic cells by the HO endonuclease are resected in a 5' to 3' fashion and this degradation of DSB ends is markedly retarded when any one gene among MRE11, RAD50, and XRS2 is deleted (15, 20). It is now clear that the nuclease activity of MRE11 is important for DSB signaling and repair. A nuclease-defective MRE11 protein containing two amino acid substitutions (H129L/D130V) that reduce its endonuclease activity (35) failed to fully restore damage-induced ATM activation in human ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder cells (39). The nuclease activity of MRE11 is required for the processing of DNA DSBs to generate the replication-protein-A-coated ssDNA that is needed for ATR recruitment and the subsequent phosphorylation and activation of Chk1 (16). In this context, the processing of DSBs by MRE11 is modulated by the CtIP protein (32).
Although the biochemical properties of MRE11 are well defined, little is known about the regulation of these activities by posttranslational modifications. Amino acid side chain methylation was first reported in the mid-sixties and proposed to regulate transcription (2, 8, 24). For many years, fewer than 20 proteins, including myelin basic proteins and histones, had been identified as containing dimethylated arginines (24). Arginine methylation is a posttranslational modification that can result in symmetrical or asymmetrical dimethylarginines (3). Nine protein arginine methyltransferases (PRMTs) catalyze this reaction by using S-adenosyl-L-methionine as a methyl donor (13). This modification occurs frequently on nucleic acid binding proteins containing a glycine-arginine-rich (GAR) motif, and arginine methylation has previously been shown to regulate the cellular localization of proteins as well as protein-protein interactions (3). A proteomic study conducted in 2003 identified more than 200 proteins that may be arginine methylated. Components required for pre-mRNA splicing, polyadenylation, transcription, and signal transduction as well as the DNA repair protein MRE11 were found to be arginine methylated, suggesting that this modification regulates many cellular processes (4). DNA repair proteins, such as MRE11 (5), 53BP1 (1, 7), and DNA polymerase β (11), are now emerging as key targets of PRMTs.
We have previously shown the role of arginine methylation in S-phase progression and nuclear compartmentalization (5, 6). These observations left open several important questions that we sought to address further in this study. What are the roles of the GAR motif and arginine methylation in MRE11 enzymatic activity? How many residues need to be methylated for optimal MRE11 biochemical activity? Does MRE11 relocalization to DNA damage sites depend on the GAR domain? We present in vitro and in vivo data to answer these questions. We have purified MRE11 from Sf9 cells and demonstrated that methylation by PRMT1 is conserved in insect cells. By using purified MRE11 mutant proteins, we show that the first six arginines modulate MRE11 biochemical activities. The inhibition of arginine methylation decreases MRE11 focus formation on a unique DSB in vivo. Moreover, the GAR domain is sufficient to localize MRE11 to nuclear focus after DNA damage and for DNA binding in vitro. The crucial role of the GAR domain for MRE11 protein function is supported by a high conservation in multicellular organisms.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Antibodies.
Asym25, anti-R587, and anti-MeMRE11 antibodies have previously been described (5, 6). Commercial antibodies used were anti-MRE11 rabbit (Oncogene), anti-MRE11 mouse (GeneTex), anti-c-Myc (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), anti-NBS1 and anti-RAD50 (Novus Biologicals), anti-Flag (Sigma), anti-
H2AX (Upstate), and anti-RAD51.
DNA constructs and MRE11 mutagenesis. Full-length human MRE11, NBS1, and RAD50 cDNAs cloned in pFASTBAC1 were generously provided by Tanya Paull. Human PRMT1 cDNA fused to the c-Myc tag from the pcDNA3-PRMT1 construct was cloned in pFASTBAC by using BamHI and XhoI sites. Fusions to green fluorescent protein (GFP) (with or without nuclear localization signal [NLS]) were performed by using modified pcDNA3 vectors containing FLAG-GFP or FLAG-GFP-NLS. pCBASce is an I-SceI expression vector (29). Mutations were introduced into the GAR motif of MRE11 by using the QuikChange II site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene). All constructs were confirmed by DNA sequencing.
Protein expression and purification from insect cells.
Recombinant wild-type (WT) MRE11 and MRE11 mutants, GAR-Sf9 (encompassing amino acids 498 to 615 of human MRE11) and MRE11-
GAR, were fused with a six-histidine tag and purified as described previously (5). Recombinant GAR-Bacto was purified from Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) RP (Stratagene) by using the same scheme of purification. NBS1, RAD50, and PRMT1-Myc were produced from baculovirus-infected Sf9 cells by using the Bac-to-Bac expression system (Invitrogen).
Gel filtration analysis. The molecular mass of purified MRE11 proteins was determined by a comparison with gel filtration standards (250 µg; bovine thyroglobulin [670 kDa], bovine gamma globulin [158 kDa], chicken ovalbumin [44 kDa], horse myoglobin [17 kDa], and vitamin B-12 [1.35 kDa]). Proteins were analyzed on an Explorer 10 (fast-performance liquid chromatography) system fitted with a 24-ml Superdex 200 PC 3.2/30 column (Pharmacia) equilibrated in R150 buffer (25 mM Tris-Cl, pH 8.0, 50 mM NaCl, 5% glycerol, 1 mM dithiothreitol [DTT], 0.05% Tween 20). Fractions (500 µl) were collected and analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, followed by Western blotting with a monoclonal antihistidine antibody.
Coimmunoprecipitation.
Immunoprecipitations using DR95 or 293T cells (collected 24 h after transfection) were performed as described previously (29). Immunoprecipitations from Sf9 cells were performed as described above, with the following modifications. Sf9 cells (20 x 106) were infected with MRE11, NBS1, RAD50, or PRMT1 baculovirus (multiplicity of infection of
10) for 2 days at 27°C and stored in two aliquots at –80°C. Cells were lysed in P5 buffer (50 mM NaHPO4, pH 7.0, 500 mM NaCl, 5 mM imidazole, 10% glycerol, 0.05% Triton X-100), and soluble extracts were prepared to verify the level of expression of the proteins of interest in the first aliquot. When similar levels were achieved, the remaining cells were lysed in P5 buffer and used for immunoprecipitation and immunoblotting analysis.
Endonuclease, exonuclease assays, EMSA, and electron microscopy. DNA substrates used in endonuclease and exonuclease assays were generated with purified oligonucleotides (18). Endonuclease and exonuclease reactions were performed as described previously (5). Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) reactions were performed in 25 mM MOPS (morpholinepropanesulfonic acid), pH 7.0, 60 mM KCl, 0.2% Tween, 2 mM DTT, 1 mM Mg(CH3COO)2. Protein and DNA were incubated for 15 min at 37°C, followed by 10 min of fixation in 0.2% glutaraldehyde. Reaction mixtures were subjected to electrophoresis on 6% acrylamide/bis-acrylamide (29:1), 50 mM Tris-glycine gels.
Electron microscopy reactions contained 5 µM øX174 ssDNA in 25 mM MOPS, pH 7.0, 60 mM KCl, 0.2% Tween, 2 mM DTT, 1 mM Mg(CH3COO)2. After 5 min at 37°C, MRE11 proteins (0.2 µM) were added and incubation was continued for a further 10 min. When fixation was required, protein-DNA complexes were fixed by the addition of glutaraldehyde to 0.2%, followed by 15 min of incubation at 37°C. Samples were diluted and washed in 5 mM Mg(CH3COO)2 prior to uranyl acetate staining (33). Complexes were visualized at a magnification of x22,000 by using a Philips CM12 electron microscope.
Immunofluorescence. Immunofluorescence analyses of SKN-SH A1 cells transfected with pCBASce, or HeLa subjected to local laser damage, were performed as described previously (29). Images were collected with a Leica DMI3000B inverted microscope. Images were deconvoluted using Volocity software (Improvision).
Live-cell microscopy, FRAP analysis, and laser-induced DNA DSBs.
Live-cell imaging was performed on a PerkinElmer UltraVIEW system. A laser-scanning confocal microscope (Olympus FV1000) with a 25-mW, 405-nm laser diode was used to perform all photobleaching experiments by using a 100x objective (numerical aperture, 1.4). Transmitted light images were collected to monitor cell viability. We performed fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) experiments by exposing defined regions of cells to 100% laser intensity for typically two iterations. The region bleached was 18 by 18 pixels, using the tornado function. Imaging was typically performed by using a 100-mW, 488-nm argon laser at 1% laser intensity. The interval between image scans was 127 ms for a total duration of 8.8 s. The interval between scans was set so that 70 image scans were required in total for the experiment. Recovery was considered complete when the intensity of the photobleached region stabilized (that is, when the curve flattened). For quantitative analysis, fluorescence intensity was measured at each time point for the photobleached region, a portion of the cell nucleus, and the extracellular background for normalization by using Olympus FluoView FV1000 (version 1.6) imaging software. Raw intensities were normalized following the double normalization as described previously (27). Briefly, the background is subtracted from the FRAP intensities before being normalized to prebleach intensities and corrected for the loss of total signal due to the bleach pulse. Half-recovery times were calculated by fitting an exponential model, I(t) = A(1 – e–
), on the normalized data by using R (www.r-project.org). In this equation, I(t) is the normalized data and t is the time elapsed since bleach in milliseconds. The two free parameters, A and
, are fitted, and the half-recovery time is calculated with –ln(0.5)/
. The significance of the difference between GAR RA and GAR WT half-recovery times was assessed using a t test assuming unequal variance and a two-sided hypothesis. Laser-induced DNA DSBs were created using a 25-mW, 405-nm laser diode by exposing defined regions of cells to 100% laser intensity for typically 10 iterations (19 ms per iteration). Immunofluorescence analysis was performed 1 h 30 min after the treatment.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
The enzymatic properties of MRE11 are regulated by arginine methylation. Since human MRE11 is methylated in insect cells, which suggests an evolutionary conservation, we checked whether the GAR motif was conserved in various organisms. Pileup analysis revealed that the GAR motif is conserved in Xenopus, chicken, mouse, rat, and monkey and possesses at least nine arginines within 60 amino acids (Fig. 2A). The first region of the GAR motif was better conserved than the second. Within the C terminus, the GAR motif is the most conserved MRE11 region for these organisms. Specific arginine-glycine stretches were not found in budding and fission yeast protein sequences. We envisioned two roles for the GAR domain in the regulation of MRE11: (i) methyl-dependent protein-protein interactions on this domain could modulate MRE11 activity, and (ii) the GAR domain could directly control MRE11 biochemical activities.
|
One of the key functions of MRE11 is its nuclease activity. Hence, we investigated whether arginine methylation can directly regulate MRE11 exonuclease and endonuclease activities. Thus, we separated the GAR motif into two regions and different mutants were generated (Fig. 3A) based on a sequence comparison (Fig. 2A). Mutations in all nine arginines were named "full" mutants, whereas mutants in region I (RI) comprised mutations in the first six arginines, and mutants in region II (RII) were mutated in the last three arginines. The first mutant group, designated R/A, represents mutants in which the arginines were changed to alanines, therefore allowing us to study the effects of absence of positive charges and methyl group on each residue. Members of the R/K group of mutants have arginines changed to lysines in order to conserve a long side chain with positive charges. Altogether, six different mutant proteins, along with WT MRE11, were purified to homogeneity (Fig. 3B). The methylation status of the different mutants was verified using antibodies that recognize methylated arginines in RI (anti-MeMRE11) or RII (anti-R587). Mutants in RI were not recognized by anti-MeMRE11, whereas mutants in RII were not detected by anti-R587. Therefore, all purified MRE11 mutants are region specific and mutations in one region do not affect the methylation of the other.
|
|
|
GAR) or with only the GAR region (amino acids 498 to 615) comprised between the two putative DNA binding domains identified in budding yeast MRE11 (38). The GAR region was expressed in Sf9 insect cells and in E. coli, to produce methylated (GAR-Sf9) or unmethylated (GAR-Bacto) GAR motifs, respectively (Fig. 6 A and B). Western blotting with anti-MeMRE11 confirmed the absence of methylation in MRE11-
GAR and a decrease of methylation in GAR-Bacto compared to GAR-Sf9 (Fig. 6B). MRE11-
GAR multimerized (see Fig. S1A in the supplemental material) and interacted with NBS1 (see Fig. S1B in the supplemental material), suggesting that it was folded properly. MRE11-
GAR displayed a weak exonuclease activity compared to that of MRE11-WT, even if known nuclease and DNA binding domains are present (Fig. 6C). Furthermore, the DNA binding activity of MRE11-
GAR was reduced compared to that of WT MRE11. Also, GAR-Bacto was less efficient in binding DNA than was GAR-Sf9. Taken together, these results suggest that the regions encompassing the GAR motif and arginine methylation both contribute to MRE11 DNA binding (Fig. 6D).
|
|
-H2AX (Fig. 8D). Similarly, GAR-RA also formed a unique focus, albeit at a lower level (Fig. 8E). Live-cell microscopy established that after treatment with etoposide, nuclear foci formed by GAR-WT peaked 1 h 30 min after treatment (Fig. 8E). GFP alone (data not shown) or an MRE11-
GAR mutant did not form any specific foci after etoposide treatment (Fig. 8G). These results show that the GAR domain of MRE11 is essential for determining the localization of MRE11 following DNA damage.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Although human MRE11 has been studied for many years, a complete structure-function analysis has not been performed. An analysis of budding yeast Mre11 protein revealed that residues 1 to 292 contained a phosphoesterase homology domain, residues 407 to 421 are required for DNA binding, and residues 643 to 692 at the C terminus of the protein contained a second DNA binding site (38). According to pfam04152, the presumed DNA binding domain of human MRE11 is between amino acids 250 and 461. Efforts to purify unmethylated MRE11, either from E. coli or Sf9 cells treated with methylation inhibitors, were unsuccessful due to the degradation of the protein in both systems. To overcome this problem and study the direct implication of the GAR motif in MRE11 DNA binding activity, we expressed and purified only the GAR region (amino acids 498 to 615), which lies outside the putative DNA binding domain of MRE11. Protein expression in insect cells produced a protein dimethylated asymmetrically, while expression in bacteria produced a soluble unmethylated protein. Interestingly, we observed that methylation of this region changed the elution profile on gel filtration analysis, suggesting a conformational change (see Fig. S1A in the supplemental material). Moreover, we showed that arginine methylation of the MRE11 GAR motif influences DNA binding directly. This result was consistent with the DNA binding patterns of our R/A and R/K MRE11 mutants, but without any amino acid substitutions. Similar analyses performed with the MRE11-
GAR protein, lacking amino acids 498 to 615, corroborated these results. MRE11-
GAR includes both putative DNA binding domains of MRE11 but displays a weak DNA binding activity in gel retardation assays. Furthermore, MRE11-
GAR exonuclease activity is impaired compared to that of full-length MRE11. Our results demonstrate a direct implication of the MRE11 GAR motif in DNA binding that impacts indirectly on nuclease activity. We infer that the GAR region contains a new DNA binding domain for human MRE11.
The function of the GAR region was also monitored using live-cell microscopy and FRAP analysis. First we observed that constructs expressing GFP-GAR with or without an NLS were methylated in vivo. This result is consistent with the observation that PRMT1 is ubiquitously expressed and localized within the cytoplasm and the nucleus (36). However, our data suggest that although colocalization of PRMT1 and MRE11 occurs in promyelytic nuclear bodies (6), MRE11 methylation could also occur outside nuclear bodies. Since MRE11 (but not MRN) interacts with PRMT1, we propose that methylation by PRMT1 occurs before the incorporation of MRE11 into the MRN complex. When DSBs were introduced by laser or etoposide, the GFP-GAR-NLS, but not GFP-MRE11-
GAR, formed distinct nuclear foci that colocalized with
-H2AX. The remaining capability of GFP-GAR-RA to form foci is consistent with the fact that we still observed DNA binding for the unmethylated GAR-Bacto protein compared to methylated GAR-Sf9. Taken together, these results suggest that the GAR domain is essential to control the accumulation of MRE11 on DNA or chromatin, while arginine methylation on the domain may not be essential in the targeting. The increased diffusion rate of the GAR-RA construct suggests that arginine methylation may be required to retain the protein on chromatin in a more efficient manner. Chromatin binding could occur through direct binding to DNA or protein-protein interactions. For instance, proteins with a Tudor domain are well known to bind methylated arginine or lysine residues. We have shown that the GAR domain could be accessible for such interactions. Proteins binding the MRE11 GAR motif have been identified in our laboratory (J.-Y. Masson, unpublished observations).
It was previously shown that point mutations in the forkhead-associated domain and deletion of amino acids 682 to 693 on human NBS1, corresponding to the MRE11 binding domain, resulted in a failure to observe MRE11 focus formation following gamma irradiation (31). However, the deletion of amino acids 682 to 693 of human NBS1 resulted in an about threefold decrease in homologous recombination, although NBS1 foci were still formed. This result suggests that MRE11 localization to DNA damage sites, rather than NBS1 localization, could be a key event for homologous recombination (31). Based on these observations and the data presented in this paper, we infer that there are at least two important ways to target MRE11 to DNA damage sites, one depending on the N and C termini of human NBS1 and the second depending on the GAR domain. The inactivation of one of these regions in NBS1 or MRE11 results in a decrease in MRE11 focus formation.
We have found no evidence for DNA-damage-induced MRE11 methylation in the GAR region. However, our data suggest that this modification is necessary for a proper cellular response to DNA damage. Recently, histone H3 methylation on lysine 79 has been shown to be required for the recruitment of 53BP1 to sites of DNA damage (14). In this case also, the methylation of lysine 79 was not increased in response to DNA damage. Although these observations suggest constitutive arginine methylation on MRE11 and 53BP1, this process might be more dynamic and transient than anticipated. A new alternative pathway for the removal of a methyl group from arginines has been reported. Deimination by peptidylarginine deiminase 4 converts unmodified and monomethylated arginine to citrulline at the tails of histones H3 and H4. Citrulline deposition on histones appears to be short lived (10). Although a specific enzyme responsible for dimethylarginine demethylation has yet to be discovered, a similar level of control could be foreseeable in the future.
We previously reported that cells containing hypomethylated MRE11 displayed intra-S-phase DNA damage checkpoint defects (6). When WT and PRMT1–/– embryonic stem cells were exposed to etoposide, PRMT1–/– cells progressed more slowly through the S phase. We wanted to extend this study and verify whether DNA repair was impaired under these conditions. If MRE11 functions are dependent on methylation, the formation of RAD51 foci should be reduced in these cells. In order to study DNA repair at the resolution of a single lesion, we used the DR95 cell line (29). We observed that pretreatment of the cells with ADOX decreased the single-focus formation of MRE11 and RAD51. Our interpretation is that MRE11 arginine methylation is an initial step in preparing MRE11 and the MRN complex for DSB repair. Hence, the inhibition of arginine methylation decreases RAD51 focus formation, because homologous recombination is dependent on the resection of the DSB by MRN and its recruitment to the break is impaired under these conditions. These results confirm that arginine methylation on MRE11 is important for DNA repair.
Genetic instability associated with defective DNA repair and checkpoint signaling is a key feature of cancer cells. Ataxia-telangiectasia-like disease, cause by mutations in MRE11, was identified in four patients presenting the clinical features of ataxia telangiectasia, including progressive cerebellar degeneration, increased levels of chromosome aberrations, and increased sensitivity to ionizing radiation at the cellular and chromosomal levels (34). Very interestingly, one in-frame stop codon found in two patients with ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder resulted in the truncation of MRE11 to 571 amino acids (28). This mutation occurs directly in the GAR motif, changing arginine 572 to a stop codon having for consequence nonsense-mediated mRNA decay. In addition, in a screening of 159 primary tumors, a G-to-A transition, changing arginine 572 to glutamine in lymphoma, was found (12). These results may highlight the importance of the MRE11 GAR motif in disease progression and cancer formation.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
U.D. and A.R. are recipients of an FRSQ doctoral scholarship and a CIHR doctoral scholarship, respectively. J.Y.M. holds a CIHR New Investigator Award and S.R. is a CIHR investigator. This research was supported by funds from the NCIC (017121) to J.Y.M. and CIHR (MOP-67070) to S.R.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published ahead of print on 19 February 2008. ![]()
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://mcb.asm.org/. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Allfrey, V. G., R. Faulkner, and A. E. Mirsky. 1964. Acetylation and methylation of histones and their possible role in the regulation of RNA synthesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 51:786-794.
3. Bedford, M. T., and S. Richard. 2005. Arginine methylation an emerging regulator of protein function. Mol. Cell 18:263-272.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Boisvert, F. M., J. Cote, M. C. Boulanger, and S. Richard. 2003. A proteomic analysis of arginine-methylated protein complexes. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2:1319-1330.
5. Boisvert, F. M., U. Dery, J. Y. Masson, and S. Richard. 2005. Arginine methylation of MRE11 by PRMT1 is required for DNA damage checkpoint control. Genes Dev. 19:671-676.
6. Boisvert, F. M., M. J. Hendzel, J. Y. Masson, and S. Richard. 2005. Methylation of MRE11 regulates its nuclear compartmentalization. Cell Cycle 4:981-989.[Medline]
7. Boisvert, F. M., A. Rhie, S. Richard, and A. J. Doherty. 2005. The GAR motif of 53BP1 is arginine methylated by PRMT1 and is necessary for 53BP1 DNA binding activity. Cell Cycle 4:1834-1841.[Medline]
8. Comb, D. G., N. Sarkar, and C. J. Pinzino. 1966. The methylation of lysine residues in protein. J. Biol. Chem. 241:1857-1862.
9. Connelly, J. C., and D. R. Leach. 2002. Tethering on the brink: the evolutionarily conserved Mre11-Rad50 complex. Trends Biochem. Sci. 27:410-418.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Cuthbert, G. L., S. Daujat, A. W. Snowden, H. Erdjument-Bromage, T. Hagiwara, M. Yamada, R. Schneider, P. D. Gregory, P. Tempst, A. J. Bannister, and T. Kouzarides. 2004. Histone deimination antagonizes arginine methylation. Cell 118:545-553.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. El-Andaloussi, N., T. Valovka, M. Toueille, R. Steinacher, F. Focke, P. Gehrig, M. Covic, P. O. Hassa, P. Schar, U. Hubscher, and M. O. Hottiger. 2006. Arginine methylation regulates DNA polymerase beta. Mol. Cell 22:51-62.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Fukuda, M., and K. Mikoshiba. 1997. The function of inositol high polyphosphate binding proteins. Bioessays 19:593-603.[CrossRef][Medline]
13. Gary, J. D., and S. Clarke. 1998. RNA and protein interactions modulated by protein arginine methylation. Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol. 61:65-131.[Medline]
14. Huyen, Y., O. Zgheib, R. A. Ditullio, Jr., V. G. Gorgoulis, P. Zacharatos, T. J. Petty, E. A. Sheston, H. S. Mellert, E. S. Stavridi, and T. D. Halazonetis. 2004. Methylated lysine 79 of histone H3 targets 53BP1 to DNA double-strand breaks. Nature 432:406-411.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Ivanov, E. L., N. Sugawara, C. I. White, F. Fabre, and J. E. Haber. 1994. Mutations in XRS2 and RAD50 delay but do not prevent mating-type switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14:3414-3425.
16. Jazayeri, A., J. Falck, C. Lukas, J. Bartek, G. C. Smith, J. Lukas, and S. P. Jackson. 2006. ATM- and cell cycle-dependent regulation of ATR in response to DNA double-strand breaks. Nat. Cell Biol. 8:37-45.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Kobayashi, J., H. Tauchi, S. Sakamoto, A. Nakamura, K. Morishima, S. Matsuura, T. Kobayashi, K. Tamai, K. Tanimoto, and K. Komatsu. 2002. NBS1 localizes to gamma-H2AX foci through interaction with the FHA/BRCT domain. Curr. Biol. 12:1846-1851.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Lee, J. H., R. Ghirlando, V. Bhaskara, M. R. Hoffmeyer, J. Gu, and T. T. Paull. 2003. Regulation of Mre11/Rad50 by Nbs1: effects on nucleotide-dependent DNA binding and association with ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder mutant complexes. J. Biol. Chem. 278:45171-45181.
19. Lee, J. H., and T. T. Paull. 2004. Direct activation of the ATM protein kinase by the Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 complex. Science 304:93-96.
20. Lee, S. E., J. K. Moore, A. Holmes, K. Umezu, R. D. Kolodner, and J. E. Haber. 1998. Saccharomyces Ku70, Mre11/Rad50, and RPA proteins regulate adaptation to G2/M arrest after DNA damage. Cell 94:399-409.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Lim, D. S., S. T. Kim, B. Xu, R. S. Maser, J. Y. Lin, J. H. J. Petrini, and M. B. Kastan. 2000. ATM phosphorylates p95/nbs1 in an S-phase checkpoint pathway. Nature 404:613-617.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Lukas, C., F. Melander, M. Stucki, J. Falck, S. Bekker-Jensen, M. Goldberg, Y. Lerenthal, S. P. Jackson, J. Bartek, and J. Lukas. 2004. Mdc1 couples DNA double-strand break recognition by Nbs1 with its H2AX-dependent chromatin retention. EMBO J. 23:2674-2683.[CrossRef][Medline]
23. Nelms, B. E., R. S. Maser, J. F. MacKay, M. G. Lagally, and J. H. J. Petrini. 1998. In situ visualization of DNA double-strand break repair in human fibroblasts. Science 280:590-592.
24. Paik, W. K., and S. Kim. 1968. Protein methylase I. Purification and properties of the enzyme. J. Biol. Chem. 243:2108-2114.
25. Paull, T. T., and M. Gellert. 1999. Nbs1 potentiates ATP-driven DNA unwinding and endonuclease cleavage by the Mre11/Rad50 complex. Genes Dev. 13:1276-1288.
26. Paull, T. T., and M. Gellert. 1998. The 3'-exonuclease to 5'-exonuclease activity of Mre11 facilitates repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Mol. Cell 1:969-979.[CrossRef][Medline]
27. Phair, R. D., S. A. Gorski, and T. Misteli. 2004. Measurement of dynamic protein binding to chromatin in vivo, using photobleaching microscopy. Methods Enzymol. 375:393-414.[Medline]
28. Pitts, S. A., H. S. Kullar, T. Stankovic, G. S. Stewart, J. I. Last, T. Bedenham, S. J. Armstrong, M. Piane, L. Chessa, A. M. Taylor, and P. J. Byrd. 2001. hMRE11: genomic structure and a null mutation identified in a transcript protected from nonsense-mediated mRNA decay. Hum. Mol. Genet. 10:1155-1162.
29. Rodrigue, A., M. Lafrance, M.-C. Gauthier, D. McDonald, M. Hendzel, S. C. West, M. Jasin, and J. Y. Masson. 2006. Interplay between human DNA repair proteins at a unique double-strand break in vivo. EMBO J. 25:222-231.[CrossRef][Medline]
30. Rogakou, E. P., C. Boon, C. Redon, and W. M. Bonner. 1999. Megabase chromatin domains involved in DNA double-strand breaks in vivo. J. Cell Biol. 146:905-916.
31. Sakamoto, S., K. Iijima, D. Mochizuki, K. Nakamura, K. Teshigawara, J. Kobayashi, S. Matsuura, H. Tauchi, and K. Komatsu. 2007. Homologous recombination repair is regulated by domains at the N- and C-terminus of NBS1 and is dissociated with ATM functions. Oncogene 26:6002-6009.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Sartori, A. A., C. Lukas, J. Coates, M. Mistrik, S. Fu, J. Bartek, R. Baer, J. Lukas, and S. P. Jackson. 2007. Human CtIP promotes DNA end resection. Nature 450:509-514.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Sogo, J., A. Stasiak, W. De Bernadin, R. Losa, and T. Koller. 1987. Negative staining of proteins and filaments, p. 61-79. In J. Sommerville and U. Scheer (ed.), Electron microscopy in molecular biology. IRL Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
34. Stewart, G. S., R. S. Maser, T. Stankovic, D. A. Bressan, M. I. Kaplan, N. G. J. Jaspers, A. Raams, P. J. Byrd, J. H. J. Petrini, and A. M. R. Taylor. 1999. The DNA double-strand break repair gene hMRE11 is mutated in individuals with an Ataxia telangiectasia-like disorder. Cell 99:577-587.[CrossRef][Medline]
35. Stracker, T. H., C. T. Carson, and M. D. Weitzman. 2002. Adenovirus oncoproteins inactivate the Mre11-Rad50-NBS1 DNA repair complex. Nature 418:348-352.[CrossRef][Medline]
36. Tang, J., J. D. Gary, S. Clarke, and H. R. Herschman. 1998. PRMT 3, a type I protein arginine N-methyltransferase that differs from PRMT1 in its oligomerization, subcellular localization, substrate specificity, and regulation. J. Biol. Chem. 273:16935-16945.
37. Trujillo, K. M., S. S. F. Yuan, E. Y. H. P. Lee, and P. Sung. 1998. Nuclease activities in a complex of human recombination and DNA repair factors Rad50, Mre11, and p95. J. Biol. Chem. 273:21447-21450.
38. Usui, T., T. Ohta, H. Oshiumi, J. Tomizawa, H. Ogawa, and T. Ogawa. 1998. Complex formation and functional versatility of Mre11 of budding yeast in recombination. Cell 95:705-716.[CrossRef][Medline]
39. Uziel, T., Y. Lerenthal, L. Moyal, Y. Andegeko, L. Mittelman, and Y. Shiloh. 2003. Requirement of the MRN complex for ATM activation by DNA damage. EMBO J. 22:5612-5621.[CrossRef][Medline]
40. Varon, R., C. Vissinga, M. Platzer, K. M. Cerosaletti, K. H. Chrzanowska, K. Saar, G. Beckmann, E. Seemanova, P. R. Cooper, N. J. Nowak, M. Stumm, C. M. R. Weemaes, R. A. Gatti, R. K. Wilson, M. Digweed, A. Rosenthal, K. Sperling, P. Concannon, and A. Reis. 1998. Nibrin, a novel DNA double-strand break repair protein, is mutated in Nijmegen breakage syndrome. Cell 93:467-476.[CrossRef][Medline]
41. Zhao, S., W. Renthal, and E. Y. Lee. 2002. Functional analysis of FHA and BRCT domains of NBS1 in chromatin association and DNA damage responses. Nucleic Acids Res. 30:4815-4822.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| J. Bacteriol. | J. Virol. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|
| Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. | Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | All ASM Journals |
|---|