DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are cytotoxic lesions that can result in mutagenic events or cell death if left unrepaired or repaired inappropriately. Cells use two major pathways for DSB repair: nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR). The choice between these pathways depends on the phase of the cell cycle and the nature of the DSB ends. A critical determinant of repair pathway choice is the initiation of 5′-3′ resection of DNA ends, which commits cells to homology-dependent repair, and prevents repair by classical NHEJ. Here, we review the components of the end resection machinery, the role of end structure, and the cell-cycle phase on resection and the interplay of end processing with NHEJ.

Double-Strand Break End Resection and Repair Pathway Choice

DNA is subject to many endogenous and exogenous insults that impair DNA replication and proper chromosome segregation. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are one of the most toxic of these lesions and must be repaired to preserve chromosomal integrity. Eukaryotes are equipped with several different, but related, repair mechanisms involving homologous recombination, including single-strand annealing, gene conversion, and break-induced replication. In this review, we highlight the chief sources of DSBs and crucial requirements for each of these repair processes, as well as the methods to identify and study intermediate steps in DSB repair by homologous recombination.

/pdf/sources-of-dna-double-strand-breaks-and-models-of-2ej8n7gzfl.pdf

Sources of DNA Double-Strand Breaks and Models of Recombinational DNA Repair

With the recent burst of technological developments in genomics, and the clinical implementation of genome-wide assays, our understanding of the molecular basis of genomic disorders, specifically the contribution of structural variation to disease burden, is evolving quickly. Ongoing studies have revealed a ubiquitous role for genome architecture in the formation of structural variants at a given locus, both in DNA recombination-based processes and in replication-based processes. These reports showcase the influence of repeat sequences on genomic stability and structural variant complexity and also highlight the tremendous plasticity and dynamic nature of our genome in evolution, health and disease susceptibility.

Mechanisms underlying structural variant formation in genomic disorders

Subject Collection DNA Recombination Models of Recombinational DNA RepairSources of DNA Double-Strand Breaks andAnuja Mehta and James E. HaberMeets DNATranscription and Recombination: When RNAAndres Aguilera and Helene GaillardMechanism and RegulationEnd Resection at Double-Strand Breaks:Lorraine S. SymingtonResection in Homologous RecombinationStructural Studies of DNA End Detection andChristian Linke-Winnebeck, et al.Christian Bernd Schiller, Florian Ulrich Seifert,The Dissolution of Double Holliday JunctionsAnna H. Bizard and Ian D. HicksonFor additional articles in this collection, see http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/cgi/collection/ Copyright © 2014 Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; all rights reservedDownloaded from http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/

Sources of DNA Double-Strand Breaks and Models of Recombinational

Mating type in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is determined by two nonhomologous alleles, MATa and MATα. These sequences encode regulators of the two different haploid mating types and of the diploids formed by their conjugation. Analysis of the MATa1, MATα1, and MATα2 alleles provided one of the earliest models of cell-type specification by transcriptional activators and repressors. Remarkably, homothallic yeast cells can switch their mating type as often as every generation by a highly choreographed, site-specific homologous recombination event that replaces one MAT allele with different DNA sequences encoding the opposite MAT allele. This replacement process involves the participation of two intact but unexpressed copies of mating-type information at the heterochromatic loci, HMLα and HMRa, which are located at opposite ends of the same chromosome-encoding MAT. The study of MAT switching has yielded important insights into the control of cell lineage, the silencing of gene expression, the formation of heterochromatin, and the regulation of accessibility of the donor sequences. Real-time analysis of MAT switching has provided the most detailed description of the molecular events that occur during the homologous recombinational repair of a programmed double-strand chromosome break.

https://www.genetics.org/content/genetics/191/1/33.full.pdf

Mating-Type Genes and MAT Switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Break-induced replication (BIR) is an efficient homologous recombination (HR) pathway employed to repair a DNA double-strand break (DSB) when homology is restricted to one end. All three major replicative DNA polymerases are required for BIR, including the otherwise nonessential Pol32 subunit. Here we show that BIR requires the replicative DNA helicase (Cdc45, the GINS, and Mcm2–7 proteins) as well as Cdt1. In contrast, both subunits of origin recognition complex (ORC) and Cdc6, which are required to create a prereplication complex (pre-RC), are dispensable. The Cdc7 kinase, required for both initiation of DNA replication and post-replication repair (PRR), is also required for BIR. Ubiquitination and sumoylation of the DNA processivity clamp PCNA play modest roles; in contrast, PCNA alleles that suppress pol32D’s cold sensitivity fail to suppress its role in BIR, and are by themselves dominant inhibitors of BIR. These results suggest that origin-independent BIR involves cross-talk between normal DNA replication factors and PRR.

/pdf/break-induced-replication-requires-all-essential-dna-4d5zbze02n.pdf

Break-induced replication requires all essential DNA replication factors except those specific for pre-RC assembly

In budding yeast, an HO endonuclease-inducible double-strand break (DSB) is efficiently repaired by several homologous recombination (HR) pathways. In contrast to gene conversion (GC), where both ends of the DSB can recombine with the same template, break-induced replication (BIR) occurs when only the centromere-proximal end of the DSB can locate homologous sequences. Whereas GC results in a small patch of new DNA synthesis, BIR leads to a nonreciprocal translocation. The requirements for completing BIR are significantly different from those of GC, but both processes require 5' to 3' resection of DSB ends to create single-stranded DNA that leads to formation of a Rad51 filament required to initiate HR. Resection proceeds by two pathways dependent on Exo1 or the BLM homolog, Sgs1. We report that Exo1 and Sgs1 each inhibit BIR but have little effect on GC, while overexpression of either protein severely inhibits BIR. In contrast, overexpression of Rad51 markedly increases the efficiency of BIR, again with little effect on GC. In sgs1Delta exo1Delta strains, where there is little 5' to 3' resection, the level of BIR is not different from either single mutant; surprisingly, there is a two-fold increase in cell viability after HO induction whereby 40% of all cells survive by formation of a new telomere within a few kb of the site of DNA cleavage. De novo telomere addition is rare in wild-type, sgs1Delta, or exo1Delta cells. In sgs1Delta exo1Delta, repair by GC is severely inhibited, but cell viability remains high because of new telomere formation. These data suggest that the extensive 5' to 3' resection that occurs before the initiation of new DNA synthesis in BIR may prevent efficient maintenance of a Rad51 filament near the DSB end. The severe constraint on 5' to 3' resection, which also abrogates activation of the Mec1-dependent DNA damage checkpoint, permits an unprecedented level of new telomere addition.

/pdf/sgs1-and-exo1-redundantly-inhibit-break-induced-replication-3fvyuz9p77.pdf

Zachary Lipkin-Moore

Papers

Break-induced replication requires all essential DNA replication factors except those specific for pre-RC assembly

Sgs1 and exo1 redundantly inhibit break-induced replication and de novo telomere addition at broken chromosome ends.

Machine Learning Prediction of Severe Asthma and COPD Hospital Readmission