J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 35, 24779-24786, August 27, 1999
Human Transcription Release Factor 2 Dissociates RNA Polymerases
I and II Stalled at a Cyclobutane Thymine Dimer*
Ryujiro
Hara
,
Christopher P.
Selby
,
Mingyi
Liu§,
David H.
Price§, and
Aziz
Sancar
¶
From the
Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics,
University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina 27599 and the § Department of Biochemistry,
University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242
 |
ABSTRACT |
RNA polymerase II stalled at a lesion in the
transcribed strand is thought to constitute a signal for
transcription-coupled repair. Transcription factors that act on RNA
polymerase in elongation mode potentially influence this mode of
repair. Previously, it was shown that transcription elongation factors
TFIIS and Cockayne's syndrome complementation group B protein did not
disrupt the ternary complex of RNA polymerase II stalled at a thymine
cyclobutane dimer, nor did they enable RNA polymerase II to bypass the
dimer. Here we investigated the effect of the transcription factor 2 on
RNA polymerase II and RNA polymerase I stalled at thymine dimers. Transcription factor 2 is known to release transcripts from RNA polymerase II early elongation complex generated by
pulse-transcription. We found that factor 2 (which is also called
release factor) disrupts the ternary complex of RNA polymerase II at a
thymine dimer and surprisingly exerts the same effect on RNA polymerase
I. These findings show that in mammalian cells a RNA polymerase I or
RNA polymerase II transcript truncated by a lesion in the template strand may be discarded unless repair is accomplished rapidly by a
mechanism that does not displace stalled RNA polymerases.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Preferential repair is the repair of certain regions of the genome
at a faster rate compared with the bulk of genomic DNA (1-5). The
single most significant contributor to preferential repair is
transcription. It has been found that pyrimidine dimers in the template
strand of transcribed sequences in Escherichia coli and in
humans are repaired at a fast rate relative to the nontranscribed
strand and the rest of the genome (2, 3). The molecular mechanism of
coupling transcription to repair in E. coli is relatively
well understood (5). A protein called transcription-repair coupling
factor (TRCF)1 displaces
stalled RNA polymerase while simultaneously recruiting the excision
repair complex to the site of damage and thus accelerates the rate of
damage recognition and removal (6). In mammalian cells,
transcription-coupled repair depends on the CSA and CSB proteins (7).
The CSB protein, like the TRCF of E. coli, has the so-called
helicase motifs (8, 9), and initially it was suspected that it may
function in a manner similar to that of TRCF in coupling repair to
transcription. However, the purified CSB protein, in contrast to TRCF,
does not disrupt the ternary complex of stalled RNA polymerase II but
instead it appears to function as a transcription elongation factor for
RNA polymerase II (10). Furthermore, in a study aimed at uncovering the
mechanism of stimulation of repair by transcription, it was found that
human RNA polymerase II stalled at a thymine dimer was rapidly
dissociated from the template/substrate by human cell-free extract
without detectable stimulation of repair (11). This observation raised the possibility that the basic mechanism of coupling repair to transcription in humans may be different from that of E. coli. Hence, we wished to investigate the effect of other factors
known to act on stalled RNA polymerase II in order to gain some insight on the parameters that affect the accessibility of
transcription-blocking lesions to repair enzymes, the stability of the
ternary complex that forms at such lesions, and the fate of the
truncated transcript during and after repair.
Factor 2 is a well characterized transcription factor that acts during
elongation. The factor was first identified in Drosophila Kc
cells as an activity that suppressed the appearance of incomplete transcripts by unknown mechanism (12). Later factor 2 was identified as
one of the negative transcription elongation factors, N-TEF (13, 14),
that are responsible for the production of short, prematurely
terminated transcripts. Factor 2 has been shown to be an
ATP-dependent RNA polymerase II termination factor (14). Its activity resides in a 154-kDa polypeptide with DNA-stimulated ATPase but no helicase activity (14-16). Recently, the human homolog of factor 2 (HuF2) was isolated and characterized (17, 18). It exhibits
essentially the same properties as the Drosophila factor 2. Since RNA polymerase stalled at a lesion is a key component for most
models for transcription-coupled repair, we wished to investigate the
effect of factor 2 on RNA polymerases I and II stalled at thymine
cyclobutane dimers. We found that factor 2 releases both polymerases.
Thus, any model for transcription-coupled repair in humans must account
for the presence of a relatively abundant nuclear factor that disrupts
ternary complexes rapidly and efficiently.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Templates/Substrates--
pMLU112 and pPU192 have been described
(9, 10). Both constructs have the adenovirus major late promoter.
pMLU112 has been constructed such that there is no U in the first 112 nt of the transcripts ("U-less cassette"; Ref. 19), and there is a cleavage site for restriction endonuclease PvuII at 330 bp
downstream of the transcription start site. pPU192 has a single
thymine-thymine dimer (T<>T) in the template strand at nucleotide
positions 149-150 downstream of the transcription start site.
pHr163-T<>T was prepared by hybridization of the
5'-32P-labeled T<>T oligonucleotide to the single strand
form of pHr163 followed by second strand synthesis by T4 DNA polymerase
(Roche Molecular Biochemicals) as described (20). To construct pHr163, pIBI25 (International Biotechnologies, Inc.) was modified to contain sequence complementary to a thymine-thymine cyclobutane dimer (T<>T) containing oligonucleotide by site-specific mutagenesis (21),
and this construct was named pMLH100. Then a DNA fragment containing
sequence from nucleotide position
285 to +83 of human ribosomal RNA
gene promoter sequence with respect to the transcription start site
(22, 23) was amplified by polymerase chain reaction from prHu3 (23) and
inserted into pMLH100. The prHu3 plasmid was a kind gift from Dr.
Robert Tjian (University of California at Berkeley). pHr163-T<>T has
a single T<>T in the template strand at nucleotide positions 164 and
165 downstream of the transcription start site. Both pPU192 and
pHr163-T<>T were radiolabeled at the 13th phosphodiester bond 5' to
the dimer. "Template 1" (24) has the T7 A1 promoter and is
constructed such that 20-nt-long transcripts are obtained by including
ApU, ATP, GTP, and CTP in the transcription reaction. Polymerase chain
reaction was used as described by Krummel and Chamberlin (24) to
synthesize Template 1 from pAR1707.
Proteins--
Recombinant protein of human homolog of
Drosophila melanogaster RNA polymerase II release factor
(HuF2) was prepared as described (17). Native (RNA polymerase II and
TFIIH) and recombinant factors (TBP, IIB, IIE, and IIF) for RNA
polymerase II transcription reaction were prepared as described
previously (11). Purified recombinant CSB protein was prepared as
described (9). The partially purified RNA polymerase I fraction was
prepared as described elsewhere (23, 25) with some modifications. 200 mg of whole cell extract from HeLa cells was prepared as described (26)
and applied to a 20-ml DEAE-Sepharose column (Sigma), which was washed
with 5 column volumes of buffer TM (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 12.5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 20% glycerol) containing 100 mM KCl and step-eluted with 280 mM KCl. This
fraction was dialyzed against TM buffer containing 100 mM
KCl and loaded onto a 5-ml heparin-agarose column (Sigma); the column
was washed with TM buffer containing 100 mM KCl and eluted
with 200, 400, and 600 mM KCl in TM buffer. A single
fraction, eluted with 400 mM KCl in TM buffer supported
transcription from the human ribosomal RNA gene promoter. This fraction
was dialyzed against 100 mM KCl in TM buffer and used for
transcription experiments as partially purified RNA polymerase I
fraction. The mutant E. coli Mfd C-X, the
transcription-repair coupling factor, which lacks amino acids 1-378
but possesses RNA polymerase dissociating activity, was prepared as
described previously (27). E. coli RNA polymerase was
purchased from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech (Uppsala, Sweden).
Transcription Experiments by Human RNA Polymerase
II--
Transcription by human RNA polymerase II was carried out with
purified recombinant (TBP, IIB, and IIE) and native (IIH and RNA
polymerase II) human transcription proteins (except yeast TBP) as
described previously (11). To test negative transcription elongation
activity of HuF2 on reconstituted RNA polymerase II transcription
system, RNA polymerase II ternary complex was formed on pMLU112 by
nucleotide starvation as described (10, 11). Briefly, 2 ng of pMLU112
was transcribed in the absence of UTP with transcription factors in 3.3 µl of transcription buffer (60 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 6 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 108 mM KCl, 6.4 mM MgCl2, 2.1 mM EDTA, 4 mM dithiothreitol, 2.8 mM
-mercaptoethanol,
5.5% glycerol, and 3% polyethylene glycol, 625 µM each
ATP and GTP), resulting in the formation of the ternary complex at the
end of U-less cassette. 1.5 µM CTP and several µCi of
[
-32P]CTP were also included in the reaction so that
the transcripts were radiolabeled. The reactions were then brought to
10 µl in repair buffer (8.7 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 30 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 61 mM KCl, 13 mM
NaCl, 5.4 mM MgCl2, 0.9 mM EDTA, 2 mM dithiothreitol, 0.9 mM
-mercaptoethanol,
5% glycerol, 1% polyethylene glycol, 1.9 mM ATP, 208 µM GTP, 20 µM each dNTP, 133 µg/ml bovine
serum albumin, and 17 µg/ml carrier DNA) and incubated with
restriction endonuclease PvuII (New England Biolabs, MA) for
60 min at 30 °C to cut pMLU112 at 330 bp downstream of the
transcription start site. HuF2 was then added to the reactions, and the
reactions were further incubated for 15 min at 30 °C. UTP (to 400 µM) and cold CTP (to 800 µM) were then
added to the reactions to elongate the ternary complex to the
PvuII cleavage site generating run-off transcripts of
defined size. The reaction products were then extracted, precipitated,
and analyzed on a 5% sequencing gel. To test the effects of CSB
protein on the release activity of HuF2, CSB protein was added to the
reactions after the formation of stalled ternary complex, and the
reactions were incubated for 15 min at 30 °C before the addition of
4 nM of HuF2.
Footprinting Experiments by Human RNA Polymerase II--
To test
the release activity of HuF2 on stalled RNA polymerase II at the T<>T
site on the transcribed strand by DNase I protection assay, stalled RNA
polymerase II ternary complex was formed on pPU192 template/substrate
as described previously (11). Briefly, 50 ng of pPU192 was transcribed
by the RNA polymerase II transcription system in 10 µl of
transcription buffer as described above with 625 µM each
ATP, GTP, UTP, and CTP but without [
-32P]CTP, and the
RNA polymerase II ternary complex was blocked at the dimer site and
formed a stable complex on the transcribed strand. The reactions were
brought to 30 µl in repair buffer and incubated with HuF2 for 15 min
at 30 °C. 30 units of the DNase I (Life Technologies, Inc.) was then
added to the reactions, and the reactions were incubated for 5 min at
30 °C. The DNA was extracted, precipitated, and analyzed on an 8%
sequencing gel. 20 µg/ml
-amanitin was included in the reaction
mixture when used.
Transcription Experiments by Human RNA Polymerase
I--
Transcription reactions were carried out essentially as
described by Learned and Tjian (23). To analyze blockage of
transcription by a T<>T, we used a linearized template/substrate. The
pHr163-T<>T plasmid and the unmodified template/substrate, pHr163,
were digested with HindIII restriction endonuclease
(Promega, WI), which cuts these plasmids at 331 nucleotides downstream
of the transcription start site. 50 ng of linearized pHr163 and
pHr163-T<>T were incubated individually with 30 µg of whole cell
extract in 10 µl of transcription buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl,
pH 7.9, 50 mM KCl, 6.25 mM MgCl2,
0.5 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol, 5 mM creatine phosphate, 100 µg/ml
-amanitin, 10%
glycerol, 0.5 mM each ATP, GTP, and UTP, 0.05 mM CTP, and 2 µCi of [
-32P]CTP) for 30 min at 30 °C. The reactions were stopped by adding 100 µl of stop
buffer (10 mM EDTA, 300 mM sodium phosphate,
0.2% sodium dodecyl sulfate, and 25 µg of yeast tRNA). The reaction products were then extracted with phenol, precipitated with ethanol, and analyzed on a 5% polyacrylamide sequencing gel.
Footprinting Experiments by Human RNA Polymerase I--
For
footprinting experiments, 50 ng of template/substrate DNA was incubated
with 3 µg of partially purified RNA polymerase I fraction in 10 µl
of transcription buffer as described above except that 0.05 mM CTP and 2 µCi of [
-32P]CTP were
replaced by 0.5 mM CTP. After 45 min of incubation at
30 °C, 30 units of DNase I (Life Technologies) was added directly to
the reactions and incubated for 5 min at 30 °C. The DNA was then
phenol-extracted, precipitated, and analyzed on an 8% polyacrylamide sequencing gel. Control reactions (Trn
) were performed by omitting CTP from the reaction mixture. To test the release activity, HuF2 was
added directly to the reactions after forming stable RNA polymerase I
ternary complex, and the reactions were incubated for 30 min at
30 °C before DNase I digestion.
For T4 DNA polymerase 3'-5' exonuclease protection experiments,
pHr163-T<>T was first transcribed with partially purified RNA
polymerase I fraction and nonradioactive ribonucleotides at 30 °C
for 45 min as described above to form a ternary complex at the T<>T
site. The reactions were brought to 30 µl in T4 DNA polymerase buffer
(42 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.8, 12.5 mM
(NH4)2SO4, 7.8 mM
MgCl2, 16.7 mM KCl, 0.33 mM EDTA,
0.8 mM dithiothreitol, 1.7 mM creatine
phosphate, 33.3 µg/ml
-amanitin, 8.3 mM
2-mercaptoethanol, 3.3% glycerol, 16.7 µg/ml bovine serum albumin,
and 0.2 µg of pUC18), and 1 unit of the T4 DNA polymerase plus 10 units of HinP1I restriction endonuclease were added.
HinP1I restriction endonuclease digestion generated a DNA
fragment of 115 nucleotides containing the stalled elongation complex
and radiolabel in the transcribed strand. After incubating the
reactions at 30 °C for 30 min, reaction products were extracted,
precipitated, and analyzed on a 5% polyacrylamide sequencing gel. For
lambda 5' to 3' exonuclease protection experiments, after forming
ternary complex at the T<>T site, 4.5 units of lambda exonuclease
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and 5 units of HinP1I restriction endonuclease were added directly to the reactions. The
reactions were incubated at 30 °C for 30 min and analyzed as
described above. CTP was omitted from the control reactions (no transcription).
Measurement of Lifetime of the Ternary Complex--
To measure
the lifetime of the RNA polymerase I·RNA·DNA complex formed at a
T<>T, pHr163-T<>T was first incubated with partially purified RNA
polymerase I fraction and cold ribonucleotides as described above to
form a ternary complex at the T<>T site. Ten units of
HinP1I restriction endonuclease (New England Biolabs, MA),
which has three cleavage sites between the transcription start site and
the T<>T site, was then added directly to the reactions to sever the
stalled complex from the promoter and thus prevent formation of new
complexes during the course of the experiment. The reaction mixtures
were incubated at 30 °C, and at the indicated time points, samples
were taken and incubated with 30 units of DNase I at 30 °C for 5 min. The reaction products were then extracted, precipitated, and
analyzed on an 8% polyacrylamide sequencing gel. Control reactions (no
transcription) were performed by omitting CTP from the reaction mixture.
To calculate the fraction of ternary complexes at the T<>T site, the
intensities of DNase I footprints were quantified using a
PhosphorImagerTM with a Storm 860 scanner (Molecular
Dynamics, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). The intensities of footprints of
ternary complexes were normalized by subtracting the background bands
appearing in the same region in reactions with no transcription. The
band intensities at various time points were expressed relative to that
at time 0 on a first-order rate plot.
Escherichia coli RNA Polymerase Transcription
Reaction--
E. coli RNA polymerase ternary complex was
formed on Template 1 by nucleotide starvation as described previously.
Briefly, 20 ng of Template 1 was transcribed with 0.01 unit of E. coli RNA polymerase in the same transcription buffer as for RNA
polymerase II as described above in the presence of ApU dinucleotide to
allow elongation from the transcription start site but in the absence of UTP to form ternary complex stalled at position +20 with respect to
the transcription start site (27). 2 µCi of
[
-32P]CTP was also added to the reactions to
radiolabel transcripts. To test the effects of prokaryotic and
eukaryotic transcription release factors, the reactions were then
brought to 30 µl in repair buffer, and either HuF2 or mutant E. coli Mfd C-X (27) was added to the reactions. Rifampicin was also
added to the repair buffer to 22 µg/ml to avoid reinitiation of
transcription. After incubation for 15 min at 30 °C, UTP (to 400 µM) and CTP (to 800 µM) were added to the
reactions to elongate transcripts, and the reactions were incubated for
15 min at 30 °C. The RNA was extracted, precipitated, and analyzed
on a 20% sequencing gel.
 |
RESULTS |
Release of RNA Polymerase II Stalled by Nucleotide Starvation or
Thymine Dimer--
Previous work has shown that two distinct classes
of complexes form after transcription initiation with RNA polymerase
II. One class undergoes abortive elongation giving rise to short
transcripts (28). A factor called N-TEF2 was shown to promote this
abortive termination (12). Further studies showed that one of the
components of N-TEF2 called factor 2 was responsible for release of
prematurely terminated transcripts (14, 17). We wished to know if
factor 2 dissociates RNA polymerase II ternary complex stalled because of "nucleotide starvation" at a U-less cassette or because of a
physical block in the template strand in the form of a thymine dimer.
To test for the effect of HuF2 on RNA polymerase II, transcription was
carried out with U-less cassette template, pMLU112 (Fig.
1), then HuF2 was added to the reaction
mixture, and the reaction was supplemented with UTP and incubated
further. The products were analyzed on a denaturing polyacrylamide gel
(Fig. 2). In the absence of HuF2, nearly
50% of the short transcripts are converted to the full-length
transcripts, indicating that at least this fraction of ternary complex
remained stable during nucleotide starvation. In contrast, when HuF2
was included in the reaction mixture in sufficient quantities, nearly
all of the transcripts remained truncated (lanes 3-5),
indicating that all of the ternary complexes were disrupted by HuF2.
These results confirm the previous studies on factor 2 using nuclear
extracts for transcription (17). By conducting our experiments with
highly purified RNA polymerase II and recombinant factor 2, however, we
have greatly reduced the possibility of contribution of other proteins
to the release of RNA polymerase II by HuF2.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Templates/substrates used. pMLU112
contains U-less cassette sequence such that the first 112 nt of the
transcript contains no U. pPU192 and pHr163-T<>T possess a single
T<>T indicated with the angle bracket located
in the template strand downstream from the promoter and were labeled
with 32P at the 13th phosphate 5' to the dimer as indicated
by an asterisk. Template 1 contains sequence such that
20-nt-long transcript was obtained by including ApU and three of the
ribonucleoside triphosphates in the reaction. Start sites for
transcription from the adenovirus major late promoter (MLP),
human ribosomal gene promoter (HrP), and promoter for
E. coli RNA polymerase (T7 A1 promoter) are indicated by
bent arrows. The nucleotide positions of
PvuII and HinP1I restriction sites, thymine
cyclobutane dimer, and the upstream and downstream edges of Template 1 are indicated with respect to the transcription start site. The first
20 nucleotide sequences of the coding strand of Template 1 are also
indicated.
|
|

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Negative transcription elongation activity of
recombinant human RNA polymerase II transcript release factor,
HuF2. pMLU112 was transcribed by RNA polymerase II in the presence
of [ -32P]CTP and the absence of UTP. Stalling of RNA
polymerase II at the end of the U-less cassette generated the
112-nt-long transcript labeled Stalled. Then the template
was digested with PvuII, which cleaves downstream from the
stall site, and the reactions were incubated with increasing amounts of
HuF2 as indicated for 15 min. Finally, RNA polymerase II was chased by
adding UTP and CTP and incubating for another 15 min. RNA polymerase II
was not chased in the control reaction (lane 1).
The reaction products were extracted and analyzed on a 5% sequencing
gel. The 330-nt-long run-off transcription product is indicated.
Lane M, DNA markers of the sizes indicated, which
have a slightly different mobility from RNA. Schematic representations
of the assay are also shown.
|
|
The effect of HuF2 on RNA polymerase II stalled at a thymine dimer was
determined by different strategy. pPU192, which contains a single
T<>T at 149-150 bp in the transcribed strand downstream of the
transcription start site and radiolabel at the 13th phosphate 5' to the
dimer, was employed for this purpose (Fig. 1). pPU192 was digested with
DNase I after transcription with highly purified RNA polymerase II to
prove the existence of RNA polymerase on the template/substrate DNA. It
must be noted that because of poor template utilization (1-10% of
template is transcribed), we could not perform conventional DNase I
footprinting. Instead, by having radiolabel in the vicinity of damage,
we relied on the protection of the region containing the radiolabel
from DNase I degradation. RNA polymerase II ternary complex stalled at
the dimer on pPU192 protected a 29-46-nucleotide region centered near
the T<>T site including the radiolabel from DNase I digestion, thus
generating a "footprint" (Fig. 3,
lane 2) as reported previously (11). The addition of HuF2
eliminates this protection (Fig. 3, lane 3).
Thus, HuF2 is capable of disrupting ternary complexes at lesion sites
as it does for early elongation complex generated by
pulse-transcription (17).

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
HuF2 releases RNA polymerase II stalled at a
T<>T. pPU192, radiolabeled at the 13th phosphate 5' to the
dimer, was first transcribed with human RNA polymerase II for 30 min.
The reactions were incubated with and without 2 nM HuF2 for
15 min and then digested with DNase I. Reaction products were then
extracted, precipitated, and resolved on an 8% sequencing gel. The
reaction in lane 1 contains 20 µg/ml
-amanitin to inhibit RNA polymerase II transcription. Sizes of DNA
segments protected from DNase I (bracket) are indicated.
M indicates DNA size markers in nucleotides.
|
|
Cyclobutane Pyrimidine Dimer Is an Absolute Block for Human RNA
Polymerase I--
HuF2 is known to act on RNA polymerase II in
elongation mode. However, there were no data on whether or not HuF2 had
affected any other class of RNA polymerase. We therefore were
interested in the effect of HuF2 on RNA polymerase I stalled at a
thymine dimer. Toward that end, we first determined the effect of
thymine dimer in the template strand on RNA polymerase I. A
template/substrate consisting of a plasmid with a ribosomal RNA gene
promoter (HrP) located 163 nucleotides upstream of a cyclobutane
thymine dimer, pHr163-T<>T, was used in our experiments (Fig. 1). In
order to analyze the effect of T<>T on transcription by RNA
polymerase I, we linearized the plasmid with HindIII
restriction enzyme, which incises the DNA 166 nucleotides downstream of
the dimer in order to obtain transcripts of defined size resulting from run-off transcription. Fig. 4 shows the
results of transcription experiments carried out with control and
dimer-containing templates. With the control template/substrate,
run-off transcripts of 310-320 nucleotides in length are produced as
expected (lane 2). With the template containing
the thymine dimer, truncated transcripts of 148-160 nucleotides are
observed exclusively. With this template, within the resolution of our
assay, there is no detectable run-off transcript. Thus, we conclude
that cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer is an absolute block for human RNA
polymerase I as it was shown to be for RNA polymerase II (29).

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Thymine cyclobutane dimer is an absolute
block for elongation by RNA polymerase I. The pHr163-T<>T
plasmid was digested with HindIII restriction endonuclease
and then transcribed with RNA polymerase I in the presence of
[ -32P]CTP. Elongation block at the T<>T site
generated the transcript marked Blocked (lane 1). Reaction with the unmodified version of the template DNA
(UM), pHr163, which was linearized with HindIII
(H), generated a run-off transcript indicated as
Run-off (lane 2). Schematic
representations of the products are also shown. The transcription start
site and the T<>T are indicated by a bent arrow
and a triangle, respectively. The expected lengths of
transcripts are also indicated in nucleotide numbers. DNA size markers
of indicated nucleotide length were run in lane M.
|
|
Footprint of RNA Polymerase I Stalled at a Thymine
Dimer--
Having found that the thymine dimer blocks the progression
of RNA polymerase I, we wished to find out if the polymerase remained at the lesion site following blockage and, if so, to what extent the
DNA around the lesion was covered by RNA polymerase. We employed DNase
I and exonuclease footprinting methods to answer these questions as in
the case of RNA polymerase II (Fig. 3 and Ref. 11). The pHr163-T<>T
template/substrate was digested with DNase I or exonuclease after
transcription with partially purified RNA polymerase I. The results of
footprinting experiments with this substrate are shown in Fig.
5 for RNA polymerase I. A region of
29-43 nucleotides in the damaged strand is protected from DNase I
(Fig. 5A). These data show that the blocked RNA polymerase I
makes a stable complex at the site of the lesion and also provides an
approximate idea about the DNA region covered by RNA polymerase I. However, because of the nature of the footprinting strategy, the 3' and
5' boundaries of the region protected by RNA polymerase I cannot be
ascertained by this method.

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Characterization of RNA polymerase I
elongation complex stalled at T<>T in the transcribed strand.
A, footprinting of RNA polymerase I elongation complex
stalled at the T<>T in the transcribed strand. pHr163-T<>T,
radiolabeled at the 13th phosphodiester bond 5' to the dimer, was
transcribed with partially purified human RNA polymerase I to form
ternary complex at the T<>T. The DNA was then digested with DNase I
and analyzed on an 8% polyacrylamide sequencing gel. Control reaction
(Trn , lane 2) was performed by omitting CTP
from the reaction mixture. The size of DNA fragments protected from
DNase I (bracket) are indicated in nucleotide numbers.
M, DNA size markers. B and C, high
resolution footprinting of RNA polymerase I elongation complex.
pHr163-T<>T was first transcribed with partially purified RNA
polymerase I (RNAP I) to form ternary complex at the T<>T site. The
DNA was then digested with HinP1I restriction endonuclease
and either with T4 DNA polymerase 3' to 5' exonuclease (T4
Exo) (B) or 5' to 3' lambda exonuclease ( Exo) (C). HinP1I cuts template DNA at
the 65th nt 3' and the 48th nt 5' to the T<>T, which generates
115-nt-long radiolabeled DNA fragment. Exonuclease activity of T4 DNA
polymerase digested this 115 nt fragment from its 3' end to the
upstream edge of the elongation complex, which generates 73- and
74-nt-long DNA fragments (Fig. 5B, lane 4). The lambda exonuclease digested the 115 nt fragment from
its 5' end to the downstream edge of the ternary complex, which
generates 86-nt-long DNA fragment (Fig. 5C, lane 4). The 50-nt-long DNA fragment was due to the digestion by
T4 DNA polymerase up to but not past the dimer (Fig. 5, B
and C, lanes 2-4). Control reactions
(Trn ) were performed by omitting CTP from the reactions. DNA ladders
were run in lane L, and DNA size markers of the
indicated nucleotide length were run in lane M.
Schematic representations of the assays are also shown. The
ellipse indicates RNA polymerase I elongation complex
stalled at the T<>T site (dark triangle). The
asterisk indicates the position of radiolabeled
phosphodiester bond. Cleavage sites for HinP1I restriction
endonuclease, upstream and downstream edges of the ternary complex
determined by T4 Exo and Exo, are also indicated. D, the
template DNA sequence around the T<>T site is shown. The
vertical arrows indicate the edges of the RNA
polymerase I elongation complex determined by T4 DNA polymerase and
lambda exonuclease. The thick bar above the
transcribed strand of the template DNA indicates the region protected
against DNase I digestion, which was deduced from the footprinting
experiments using three DNA nucleases.
|
|
To determine the footprint boundaries more precisely, we used the T4
DNA polymerase 3' to 5' exonuclease and the lambda 5' to 3'
exonuclease. Ternary complexes were formed, and the DNA was digested
with HinP1I, which cut the DNA 48 nt 5' and 65 nt 3' to the
damage to separate the promoter from the photodimer and thus prevent
multiple rounds of transcription and also to make the DNA susceptible
to exonucleases. Then, the DNA was digested with the exonucleases
individually. The results are shown in Fig. 5B. Digestion
with T4 DNA polymerase 3' to 5' exonuclease in the absence of
transcription generates a fragment of 50 nt, consistent with a previous
report of block of T4 polymerase 3' to 5' exonuclease immediately at
the dimer (30). When RNA polymerase I is present under transcription
conditions, in addition to the 50-mer arising from the nontranscribed
DNA, two specific bands of 73 and 74 nt are observed (Fig.
5B). Thus, RNA polymerase I stalled at a T<>T protects the
template strand 23-24 nt 3' to the dimer. Similar experiments with
lambda 5' to 3' exonuclease reveal that this enzyme specifically
generates a fragment 86 nt in length, meaning that stalled RNA
polymerase I blocks the exonuclease 19 nt 5' to the dimer (Fig.
5C). Thus, the RNA polymerase I forms a 45-bp exonuclease
footprint around the dimer (Fig. 5D). This is in reasonable agreement with the 43-nt maximum DNase I footprint obtained in Fig.
5A.
Stability of RNA Polymerase I Ternary Complex at DNA
Lesion--
Since RNA polymerase stalled at DNA lesions is considered
to be a beacon for coupling of transcription to repair (1, 2), we
wished to find out if the stalled polymerase made a stable complex at
the site of the damage or dissociated rapidly after encountering the
roadblock. We performed a transcription reaction with the thymine dimer
substrate/template and probed the ternary complex at the damage site by
DNase I footprinting as a function of time. Stalled complex was formed,
and then template/substrate was cleaved by HinP1I
restriction endonuclease that has restriction sites between the
transcription start site and the dimer site (Fig. 1). At time intervals
after the addition of HinP1I restriction endonuclease,
samples were taken and subjected to DNase I digestion. The results are
shown in Fig. 6. The complex is quite
stable. It dissociates with a biphasic kinetic with the faster species having a half-life of about 6 h and the slower species with a half-life of about 36 h. The samples were also tested for
HinP1I digestion of the DNA region between the promoter and
the dimer to ensure that no reinitiation occurred during the course of
the experiment. More than 90% of the template/substrate was cut within 5 min after the addition of HinP1I, excluding the
possibility that footprints shown resulted from multiple initiations
(data not shown). Thus, clearly the ternary complex that forms at the lesion site is, like that formed with RNA polymerase II (11), quite
stable and capable of acting as a signal for the excision repair
system.

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Human RNA polymerase I elongation complex
forms stable complex at a T<>T. A, DNase I footprint
of stalled elongation complex as a function of time following
transcriptional block. pHr163-T<>T, radiolabeled at the 13th
phosphate 5' to the dimer, was transcribed by partially purified RNA
polymerase I. Restriction endonuclease HinP1I, which has
three cleavage sites between the transcription start site and the
T<>T, was then added to the reactions and incubated at 30 °C.
Samples were taken at the indicated times, and the DNA was digested
with DNase I and analyzed on an 8% polyacrylamide sequencing gel.
Control reactions (Trn ) were performed by omitting CTP from the
reactions. The bracket indicates the DNA fragments protected
from DNase I. DNA size markers of indicated sizes were run in
lane M. B, quantitative analysis of
the data in A. The footprinting signal in each
lane in A was quantified using a PhosphorImager
with a Storm 860 scanner. The relative amount of footprint signal at
each time point with respect to the 0-h time point was plotted after
normalizing the signal in the Trn+ reaction by the signal in the Trn
reaction.
|
|
HuF2 Releases RNA Polymerase I Stalled at a Thymine Dimer--
To
test the release activity on RNA polymerase I, HuF2 was tested in the
footprinting assay described above. Interestingly, HuF2 dissociates the
ternary complex of RNA polymerase I as well (Fig.
7, lanes 3-5).
Thus, whatever effects HuF2 may have on the repair of transcription
blocking lesions of protein-encoding genes, it must have the same
effect on rRNA genes.

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
HuF2 releases RNA polymerase I stalled at
T<>T. pHr163-T<>T, radiolabeled at the 13th phosphate 5' to
the dimer, was first transcribed by partially purified human RNA
polymerase I and then incubated with increasing amounts of HuF2 as
indicated. The DNA was then digested with DNase I and analyzed on an
8% sequencing gel. The sizes of DNA segments protected from DNase I
(bracket) are indicated. Control reaction (Trn ,
lane 1) was performed by omitting CTP from the
reaction. M indicates DNA size markers in nucleotides.
|
|
Since the effect of HuF2 on RNA polymerase I was unexpected, we were
concerned that the release of a stalled RNA polymerase might be a
general nonspecific property of HuF2 on stalled RNA polymerases.
Therefore, we tested the effect of HuF2 on E. coli RNA
polymerase stalled by nucleotide starvation. Fig.
8 shows that HuF2 does not release
E. coli RNA polymerase, whereas the E. coli
transcription repair coupling factor, Mfd, does disrupt the ternary
complex as was shown previously (27). Thus, with regard to their
effects on stalled transcription complex, HuF2 and the E. coli Mfd protein appear to be functional homologs.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
HuF2 does not release E. coli RNA polymerase. Template 1 was transcribed by E. coli RNA polymerase in the presence of ApU, A, G, and
[ -32P]CTP. Stalling at several sites along the
template generated the transcripts indicated as Stalled.
HuF2 (to 4 nM) or Mfd (to 10 nM) were added to
the reactions as indicated. RNA polymerase was then chased by adding
unlabeled UTP and CTP generating run-off transcripts. RNA polymerase
was not chased in the control reaction (lane 1).
Reaction products were extracted, precipitated, and analyzed on a 20%
sequencing gel. Rifampicin was added (to 22 µg/ml) to all of the
reactions after formation of stalled ternary complex to avoid
transcription reinitiation during the release and chase reactions. The
run-off transcription products are indicated. M indicates
DNA size markers in nucleotides.
|
|
CSB Does Not Affect the Transcription Termination Effect of
HuF2--
Curiously, although CSB appears in vivo to be the
functional counterpart of Mfd of E. coli, the biochemical
properties of HuF2 are more similar to those of Mfd (27, 31). There are no known HuF2 mutants, and therefore whether or not HuF2 plays any role
in transcription-repair coupling is not known. To find out whether
there exist cooperative or competitive interactions of CSB
(transcription elongation) and HuF2 (transcription termination), we
tested their joint effect on stalled RNA polymerase II. Fig. 9 reveals that even at comparatively high
concentrations CSB does not overcome the transcription termination
effect of HuF2.

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Effect of CSB protein on negative
transcription elongation activity of HuF2. Stalled RNA polymerase
II ternary complex was formed at the end of the U-less cassette on
pMLU112, which generates transcripts labeled Stalled. After
PvuII digestion, CSB protein was added to the reactions as
indicated. Reactions were then incubated with 4 nM HuF2 and
chased by adding unlabeled UTP and CTP as indicated above the gel. The
run-off transcription product is indicated. DNA markers of the
indicated nucleotide length were run in lane M.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The molecular mechanism of transcription-repair coupling in
mammalian cells is unknown. Although a possible coupling mechanism has
been proposed whereby coupling is mainly due to redistribution of TFIIH
between transcription initiation and assembly of the excision nuclease
complex (32, 33), we favor an active mechanism whereby the excision
nuclease is targeted by a "transcription-repair coupling factor" to
the site of stalled RNA polymerase. Presently, there is no in
vitro system for transcription-coupled repair in eukaryotic cells.
We are unable to differentiate between the two models.
A crucial element of the active model is the interaction of CSA and CSB
with a stalled elongation complex and the recruitment of the excision
repair proteins to the transcription-blocking lesion. Genetic evidence
shows that both CSA and CSB are required for transcription-coupled
repair (7), and biochemical data have revealed interactions among CSB
and RNA polymerase II, XPA, TFIIH, and XPG (9, 34). However, the
addition of cell extract to stalled RNA polymerase II failed to elicit
enhanced repair and instead disrupted the ternary complex (11).
Similarly, the addition of CSB, or CSB plus CSA to a partially purified
transcription and repair system did not induce preferential repair of
the template strand. Hence, it is plausible that other factors in
addition to CSA and CSB contribute to preferential repair. Thus, it was of interest to test other factors that are known to have an effect on
the elongation step of transcription on RNA polymerase stalled at a
thymine dimer. Indeed, in a previous study we found that nuclear
extracts contained a "release factor," which disrupted ternary
complexes formed by RNA polymerase II (11). In this regard, HuF2 is of
special significance because this factor has several similarities to
the prokaryotic transcription-repair coupling factor TRCF (27, 31);
both are DNA stimulated ATPases, and both release stalled cognate RNA
polymerases from transcriptional pause sites. Here we have demonstrated
that HuF2 releases RNA polymerase II stalled at a thymine dimer as well.
The present study provides direct evidence of the function of HuF2 as a
RNA polymerase release factor by demonstrating the displacement of RNA
polymerase from the template DNA. The possible role of HuF2 in
transcription machinery is to retrieve RNA polymerase from template DNA
after stalling, thus making RNA polymerase available for transcription
initiation. It is known that human RNA polymerase I and III
transcription termination factors, PTRF (polymerase I and
transcript release factor) and La,
respectively, have a stimulatory effect on transcription (35, 36).
Unexpectedly, we find that up until now what was thought to be RNA
polymerase II-specific transcription termination factor works with
comparable efficiency on RNA polymerase I. It is not unprecedented,
however, that one transcription elongation factor has the same effect
on two different classes of RNA polymerase. TFIIS has been shown to
have a stimulatory effect and cause transcript cleavage on both RNA
polymerase I and II transcription at elongation mode (37). These data
suggest that regulatory mechanisms of transcription elongation are
shared among different classes of eukaryotic RNA polymerases. Recently,
a factor that induces dissociation of RNA polymerase I ternary complex
paused at terminator sequence, PTRF, was identified (35). PTRF does not
require ATP but requires a U-run at the 3'-end of transcript to exert
its function. HuF2, on the other hand, does not require any specific
RNA sequence for its function based on our results that showed that
HuF2 dissociates RNA polymerase stalled at unrelated sequences, the end
of the U-less cassette and the T<>T site. Thus, HuF2 constitutes an
additional termination factor for RNA polymerase I transcription.
In the present study, we have found that a thymine cyclobutane dimer in
the template strand constitutes an absolute block for RNA polymerase I
and that the stalled polymerase makes a long lived complex at the site
of the lesion. These findings raise certain questions regarding the
stimulation or inhibition of excision repair by stalled RNA polymerase I.
There is extensive literature on transcription-coupled repair of genes
transcribed by RNA polymerase II (1-5, 30). In contrast, there are
only a few studies addressing the questions of the effects of lesions
in the rRNA genes on RNA polymerase I and the effect of RNA polymerase
I transcription on repair of rRNA genes (38-43). This is, in part, due
to the fact that rRNA genes are members of a multigene family, and
under physiological conditions only about 30% of the family members
are transcribed (39, 41, 44). This makes the study of the effect of
transcription on repair problematic. Nevertheless, the repair of
thymine dimers and of psoralen monoadducts and cross-links in rRNA
genes has been investigated in vivo by taking special
precautions to separate transcribed from nontranscribed DNA, and it was
found that in rRNA genes transcription was not coupled to repair (38,
41). Yet, another study that measured the relative rates of recovery
from initial inhibition of rRNA synthesis after UV irradiation found
that rRNA synthesis recovered normally in an XP-C cell line but not in
other XP cell lines, suggesting that the transcription-inhibiting
photoproducts were removed from the transcriptionally active rRNA genes
only in XP-C cell (42). Since the same kinetics of RNA synthesis recovery is observed for genes transcribed by RNA polymerase II, this
finding suggested that transcription-coupled repair machinery operates
on the rRNA gene because XP-C cells are proficient for transcription-coupled repair but defective in genome overall repair (45, 46).
Recently, it was observed that in yeast UV photoproducts are removed
from the transcribed strand of rRNA gene in rad7 and rad16 mutants (43), demonstrating the transcription-coupled repair of rRNA genes because both rad7 and rad16
mutants are defective in genome overall repair but proficient in
transcription-coupled repair, as is the XP-C mammalian mutant (46). The
present study revealed that RNA polymerase I ternary complex formed at
the T<>T has the same biochemical features as RNA polymerase II
ternary complex, satisfying one of the potential prerequisites of
transcription-coupled repair of rRNA genes.
Finally, the results presented here show that although CSB does not
release RNA polymerases stalled at a lesion, HuF2 does. Furthermore,
HuF2 is a relatively abundant nuclear protein (15, 16). Hence, any
model for transcription-repair coupling that includes the step of
targeting of repair proteins by CSB to a stalled RNA polymerase complex
and eventual repair of the damage without discarding the transcript
(47) must take into account that there is an abundant protein in the
nucleus that rapidly and efficiently dissociates RNA polymerase and
discards the transcript.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
We thank Dr. Robert Tjian for providing the
prHu3 plasmid.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Institute of Health
Grants GM32833 (to A. S.) and GM35500 (to D. H. P.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of
Biochemistry and Biophysics, Mary Ellen Jones Bldg., CB# 7260, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC
27599-7260. Tel.: 919-962-0115; Fax: 919-843-8627.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TRCF, transcription-repair coupling factor;
N-TEF, negative transcription
elongation factor;
T<>T, thymine-thymine dimer;
rRNA, ribosomal RNA;
HuF2, human factor 2;
CSA, Cockayne's syndrome complementation group
A;
CSB, Cockayne's syndrome complementation group B;
Mfd, mutation
frequency decline;
nt, nucleotide(s);
bp, base pair(s).
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bohr, V. A.,
Smith, C. A.,
Okumoto, D. S.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1985)
Cell
40,
359-369[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Mellon, I.,
Spivak, G.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1987)
Cell
51,
241-249[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Mellon, I.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1989)
Nature
342,
95-98[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Friedberg, F. C.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65,
15-42[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Sancar, A.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65,
43-81[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Selby, C. P.,
and Sancar, A.
(1993)
Science
260,
53-58[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Venema, J.,
Mullenders, L. H. F.,
Natarajan, A. T.,
van Zeeland, A. A.,
and Mayne, L. V.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
4707-4711[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Troelstra, C.,
van Gool, A.,
de Wit, J.,
Vermeulen, W.,
Bootsma, D.,
and Hoejimakers, J. H. J.
(1992)
Cell
71,
939-953[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Selby, C. P.,
and Sancar, A.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
1885-1890[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Selby, C. P.,
and Sancar, A.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
11205-11209[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Selby, C. P.,
Drapkin, R.,
Reinberg, D.,
and Sancar, A.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
787-793[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Price, D. H.,
Sluder, A. E.,
and Greenleaf, A. L.
(1987)
J. Biol. Chem.
262,
3244-3255[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Marshall, N. F.,
and Price, D. H.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
2078-2090[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Xie, Z.,
and Price, D. H.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
11043-11046[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Xie, Z.,
and Price, D.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
31902-31907[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Xie, Z.,
and Price, D. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
3771-3777[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Liu, M.,
Xie, Z.,
and Price, D. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
25541-25544[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Peng, J.,
Liu, M.,
Marion, J.,
Zhu, Y.,
and Price, D. H.
(1998)
Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol.
63,
365-370[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Zawel, L.,
Kumar, K. P.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
1479-1490[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Huang, J.-C.,
Svoboda, D. L.,
Reardon, J. T.,
and Sancar, A.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
3664-3668[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Kunkel, T. A.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
488-492[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Miesfeld, R.,
and Arnheim, N.
(1982)
Nucleic Acids Res.
10,
3933-3949[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Learned, R. M.,
and Tjian, R.
(1982)
J. Mol. Appl. Genet.
1,
575-584[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Krummel, B.,
and Chamberlin, M. J.
(1992)
J. Mol. Biol.
225,
221-237[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Schnapp, A.,
Pfleiderer, C.,
Rosenbauer, H.,
and Grummt, I.
(1990)
EMBO J.
9,
2857-2863[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Manley, J. L.,
Fire, A.,
Cano, A.,
Sharp, P. A.,
and Gefter, M. L.
(1980)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
77,
3855-3859[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Selby, C. P.,
and Sancar, A.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
4882-4889[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Marshall, N. F.,
Peng, J.,
Xie, Z.,
and Price, D. H.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
27176-27183[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Donahue, B. A.,
Yin, S.,
Taylor, J.-S.,
Reines, D.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
8502-8506[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Pierce, J. R.,
Nazimiec, M.,
and Tang, M.
(1993)
Biochemistry
32,
7069-7078[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Selby, C. P.,
and Sancar, A.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
4890-4895[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Tijsterman, M.,
and Brouwer, J.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
1199-1202[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
van Oosterwijk, M. F.,
Filon, R.,
de Groot, A. J. L.,
van Zeeland, A. A.,
and Mullenders, L. H. F.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
13599-13604[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Iyer, N.,
Readon, M. S.,
Wu, K. J.,
Canagarajah, B.,
and Friedberg, E. C.
(1996)
Biochemistry
35,
2157-2167[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Jansa, P.,
Mason, S. W.,
Hoffmann-Rohrer, U.,
and Grummt, I.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
2855-2864[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Maraia, R. J.,
Kenan, D. J.,
and Keene, J. D.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
2147-2158[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Schnapp, G.,
Graveley, B. R.,
and Grummt, I.
(1996)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
252,
412-419[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Vos, J.-M. H.,
and Wauthier, E. L.
(1991)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11,
2245-2252[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Christians, F. C.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1993)
Biochemistry
32,
10512-10518[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Christians, F. C.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1994)
Mutat. Res.
323,
179-187[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 41.
|
Fritz, L. K.,
and Smerdon, M. J.
(1995)
Biochemistry
34,
13117-13124[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Ayaki, H.,
Hara, R.,
and Ikenaga, M.
(1996)
J. Radiat. Res.
37,
107-116
|
| 43.
|
Verhage, R. A.,
van de Putte, P.,
and Brouwer, J.
(1996)
Nucleic Acids Res.
24,
1020-1025[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Haaf, T.,
Hayman, D. L.,
and Schmid, M.
(1991)
Exp. Cell Res.
193,
78-86[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 45.
|
Venema, J.,
van Hoffen, A.,
Natarajan, A. T.,
van Zeeland, A. A.,
and Mullenders, L. H. F.
(1990)
Nucleic Acids Res.
18,
443-448[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
van Hoffen, A.,
Venema, J.,
Meschini, R.,
van Zeeland, A. A.,
and Mullenders, L. H. F.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
360-367[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Hanawalt, P. C.
(1994)
Science
266,
1957-1958[Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. S. Gilmour and R. Fan
Derailing the Locomotive: Transcription Termination
J. Biol. Chem.,
January 11, 2008;
283(2):
661 - 664.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Flaus, D. M. A. Martin, G. J. Barton, and T. Owen-Hughes
Identification of multiple distinct Snf2 subfamilies with conserved structural motifs
Nucleic Acids Res.,
May 31, 2006;
34(10):
2887 - 2905.
|