![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 27, 20949-20955, July 7, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,From the Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520
Received for publication, November 15, 1999, and in revised form, March 20, 2000
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The polymerase and 5'-nuclease components of DNA
polymerase I must collaborate in vivo so as to generate
ligatable structures. Footprinting shows that the polymerase and
5'-nuclease cannot bind simultaneously to a DNA substrate and appear to
compete with one another, suggesting that the two active sites are
physically separate and operate independently. The desired biological
end point, a ligatable nick, results from the substrate specificities of the polymerase and 5'-nuclease. The preferred substrate of the
5'-nuclease is a "double-flap" structure having a frayed base at
the primer terminus overlapping the displaced strand that is to be
cleaved by the 5'-nuclease. Cleavage of this structure occurs almost
exclusively between the first two paired bases of the downstream strand, yielding a ligatable nick. In whole DNA polymerase I, the
polymerase and 5'-nuclease activities are coupled such that the
majority of molecules cleaved by the 5'-nuclease have also undergone
polymerase-catalyzed addition to the primer terminus. This implies
that the 5'-nuclease can capture a DNA molecule from the polymerase
site more efficiently than from the bulk solution.
The DNA polymerase I (Pol
I)1 enzymes of eubacteria
function in DNA repair and in the removal of RNA primers from Okazaki
fragments during lagging strand replication (1). To facilitate the
formation of ligatable structures, the bacterial Pol I enzymes usually
have nuclease activity, which degrades the downstream DNA or RNA
strand. Originally described as a 5'-3' exonuclease, this activity is now recognized to be a structure-specific nuclease with specificity for
the junction between a DNA duplex and a 5'-single-stranded tail (or
flap) and is therefore better described as a 5'-nuclease (2). On a
nicked DNA duplex, polymerase-catalyzed primer extension continuously
regenerates the substrate for the 5'-nuclease, so that the polymerase
effectively drives nick translation (3). The 5'-nuclease activity of
Pol I is present on an independent structural domain encoded by the
first one-third of the structural gene, which can be separated from the
polymerase by proteolysis or by recombinant DNA manipulations (4-6).
The structure specificity is inherent to the 5'-nuclease domain itself
and does not rely on the presence of the polymerase domain (3, 6, 7).
Indeed, some bacteriophages encode separate nucleases, having a high
degree of homology to the N-terminal region of the bacterial Pol I
enzymes, which act in concert with the relevant bacteriophage
polymerase (8-10). In eukaryotes and archaebacteria, the
structure-specific cleavages required in replication and repair are
carried out by "flap endonucleases" (11-13), which exist as
independent protein subunits and are therefore able to collaborate with
a variety of polymerases. The flap endonuclease family of proteins
shows only a modest level of sequence similarity to the bacterial and bacteriophage 5'-nucleases (14), but the similarity in
three-dimensional structures (14-18) and in the reactions carried out
by these two families of 5'-nucleases leaves little doubt that they are
functionally analogous to one another.
In vivo, the polymerase and 5'-nuclease of bacterial Pol I
must collaborate so as to leave a nick that can be sealed by DNA ligase. Two extreme scenarios can be envisaged. The Pol I molecule might adopt a structure that brings the two active sites into close
proximity so they can bind simultaneously to the DNA substrate. Alternatively, the polymerase and 5'-nuclease activities might operate
essentially independently of one another, perhaps even with the DNA
traveling from one active site to the other via dissociation into free
solution. This latter scenario fits well with the existence of a
separate 5'-nuclease in some systems and is analogous to the
relationship between the polymerase and 3'-5' exonuclease (editing)
functions of Klenow fragment, where the two active sites are separated
by about 30 Å, with a substantial amount of the transfer between them
occurring via dissociation (19). Close juxtaposition of polymerase and
5'-nuclease active sites might be difficult to achieve; the polymerase
active site is located at the base of a cleft (20), and the 5'-nuclease
domain is structurally complex, possibly requiring threading of the
unpaired 5' end through an arch or loop of the protein (16-18).
However, recent structures of polymerases with DNA bound at the
polymerase site suggest a dislocation of the downstream DNA template
beyond the site of synthesis (21, 22), and such a dislocation might
provide a way to accommodate both polymerase and 5'-nuclease active
sites in reasonably close proximity. Only two polymerase crystal
structures (both of Taq DNA polymerase) include a
5'-nuclease domain. The first structure showed the polymerase and
5'-nuclease sites separated by about 70 Å at opposite ends of a rather
extended molecule, arguing in favor of separate and independent active
sites; however, x-ray scattering measurements suggested that the
polymerase may fold more compactly in solution (15). A more recent
crystal structure of Taq DNA polymerase complexed with an
Fab showed the nuclease domain (which was remote from the Fab location)
close to the fingers subdomain of the polymerase (23). Although the active sites were still separated by almost 40 Å, this location brings
the 5'-nuclease much closer to the downstream portion of a DNA molecule
bound at the polymerase active site. At the very least, the structural
data suggest a flexible linkage between the 5'-nuclease and the rest of
the polymerase molecule, and this could allow the two domains to be
closely associated in an active complex.
In this work, we have investigated two aspects of the collaboration
between the polymerase and 5'-nuclease components of Escherichia coli Pol I: the way in which the substrate preferences of both activities are biased so as to produce a ligatable nick and the extent
to which polymerase and 5'-nuclease are coupled so that both reactions
take place within the same DNA binding event.
Materials--
DNA oligonucleotides were synthesized by the Keck
Biotechnology Resource Laboratory at Yale Medical School and purified
by denaturing gel electrophoresis after either 5'- or 3' end-labeling. Radiolabeled nucleotides were from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech. DNase I
was from Cooper Biomedical. Restriction enzymes were from New England
Biolabs and were used according to the manufacturer's recommendations.
Standard molecular biology protocols were used throughout (24).
Enzyme Purification--
Derivatives of Pol I and Klenow
fragment, all containing the D424A mutation that eliminates the 3'-5'
exonuclease activity (25), were purified to homogeneity as described
(26). Wild type and mutant derivatives of the 5'-nuclease domain were
purified as described (6), with the addition of a final gel filtration column.2
DNase I Footprinting--
Footprinting of the 5'-labeled 112-mer
(see Fig. 1a) was carried out as described (27), except that
samples were analyzed on polyacrylamide gels containing 7 M
urea and 40% (v/v) formamide in order to denature completely the
hairpin structure of the oligonucleotide. Markers were generated by
restriction enzyme digestion of the 112-mer and by partial chemical
degradation at G residues (28). The data were quantitated by
phosphorimaging on a BAS 2000 Bio-Imaging Analyzer (Fuji) using the
MacBAS Image Analysis software (Fuji).
Kinetic Assay of the 5'-Nuclease--
The 5'-nuclease activity
was measured on the substrates illustrated in Fig. 1. The 5'
end-labeled DNA (0.03 nM) and the wild-type 5'-nuclease
(0.5 µM) were preincubated in 50 mM Tris-HCl,
pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA. The nuclease
reaction was initiated by the addition of MgCl2 to a final
concentration of 5 mM. Samples, removed at appropriate time
intervals, were analyzed as described previously (6).
Gel Mobility Shift Assay of Klenow Fragment--
The procedure
was essentially as described previously (29), except that binding was
carried out in 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 2 mM
MgCl2, 10% (v/v) glycerol, 50 µg/ml bovine serum
albumin, and the gel was run in 50 mM Tris borate, 2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM EDTA.
Substrate Preference of the 5'-Nuclease--
The 63-mer
oligonucleotide (Fig. 6) was labeled at the 3' end by Klenow
fragment-catalyzed extension with [ Shuttling between the Polymerase and 5'-Nuclease Sites in Pol
I--
The 3'-labeled SG and SA substrates
described above were used. The SG substrate (30 nM) was incubated with wild-type Pol I (0.3 nM)
and 10 mM dATP in 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 5 mM MgCl2, and 100 mM NaCl for 5 min
at 23 °C. The reaction was quenched by the addition of EDTA to 30 mM. The cleaved and uncleaved DNA pools were separated and
analyzed by MluI digestion as described in the preceding
section. The SA substrate was treated similarly, with dCTP
as the added nucleotide and carrying out the Pol I reaction at 37 °C
to facilitate strand displacement. Control reactions were carried out
using a mixture of Klenow fragment and the 5'-nuclease domain and using
a mixture of Klenow fragment and the polymerase-deficient D882N
derivative of Pol I; in each case the relevant proteins were present at
0.3 nM.
Klenow Fragment and the 5'-Nuclease Compete for Binding to a DNA
Substrate--
We investigated the spatial relationship between the
DNA binding sites for the polymerase and 5'-nuclease domains of Pol I by DNase I footprinting. The substrate was a 5'-labeled 112-mer double-hairpin oligonucleotide with a single-base gap and a
5'-displaced strand (Fig. 1a).
Because the footprinting procedure was carried out in the presence of
Mg2+, we used 5'-nuclease derivatives carrying inactivating
mutations in the conserved carboxylates of the nuclease region (6) to prevent degradation of the substrate. We believe that these mutant derivatives provide a good model for DNA binding by the wild-type 5'-nuclease because similar results (not shown) were obtained with the
wild-type enzyme in Ca2+ (which does not support the
5'-nuclease reaction (2)). When the Klenow fragment and 5'-nuclease
components of Pol I were tested separately, they gave partially
overlapping DNase I footprints that were each about 20 nucleotides long
(Fig. 2, A and C).
The overlap (region b) was centered on the one-base gap and
the junction with the 5'-displaced strand; Klenow fragment bound also
to the DNA duplex upstream of the primer terminus (a),
whereas the 5'-nuclease protected more of the DNA downstream of the 5'
extension (c).
At low enzyme concentration, the footprint of whole Pol I (Fig.
2B) resembled that of Klenow fragment, with no apparent
protection of the 5'-nuclease binding site. The partial protection of
the 5'-nuclease binding region that was observed at higher Pol I
concentrations (Fig. 2B, region c) probably
corresponds to nonspecific binding; these same high concentrations of
Pol I gave substantial protection outside of the normal footprint
region, particularly on the hairpin loops.
DNase I protection using mixtures of the separate Klenow fragment and
5'-nuclease domains demonstrated that the two domains cannot bind to
DNA simultaneously but instead compete for binding. Fig.
3 shows a DNase I footprinting experiment
in which the concentration of Klenow fragment was kept constant and
increasing concentrations of 5'-nuclease were added to either a
singly-gapped (112-mer) or a nicked (113-mer) DNA. As the concentration
of the 5'-nuclease domain was increased, its binding site became
protected; however, there was a corresponding loss of the
polymerase-specific portion of the footprint, suggesting that binding
of the two domains is mutually exclusive; compare lane 5 (Fig. 3, left panel) with lane 2 (Klenow fragment
alone) and lane 6 (5'-nuclease alone). The balance of
polymerase and 5'-nuclease binding affinities was different on the two
substrates such that binding of the 5'-nuclease was more readily
observed, at the concentrations tested, on the nicked substrate. The
antagonism between the polymerase and 5'-nuclease modes of binding was
also demonstrated kinetically (Fig. 4).
The presence of Klenow fragment inhibited cleavage by the 5'-nuclease of the single-base-gapped substrate but had very little effect (at the
same concentration) on cleavage of the nicked substrate (on which
Klenow fragment competes less effectively with the exonuclease) or of a
bifurcated oligonucleotide (data not shown), which does not contain a
primer terminus to serve as a binding site for the polymerase.
Both Klenow Fragment and the 5'-Nuclease Can Distinguish between
Gapped and Nicked Substrates--
As demonstrated, the balance between
polymerase and 5'-nuclease is influenced by whether the DNA substrate
has a gap or a nick adjacent to the 5'-displaced strand. To achieve
this result, either or both of the proteins could exhibit preferences
for one DNA substrate over the other. A gel mobility shift experiment (Fig. 5) demonstrated that the polymerase
domain can discriminate between nicked and gapped DNA molecules. Klenow
fragment formed a relatively stable complex with the DNA
oligonucleotide having a one-base gap, whereas the dissociation
constant was higher for the nicked substrate, and the complex was less
stable in the gel, as indicated by the smearing between the bound and
free species. The bifurcated DNA substrate, which lacks a primer
terminus to serve as a binding site for the polymerase, bound Klenow
fragment even more weakly than the nicked DNA. The slowly migrating
complexes formed at high concentrations of Klenow fragment appear to be due to nonspecific binding, particularly to the loops of the hairpin structures.
The substrate preference of the 5'-nuclease was examined by determining
the extent to which nicked or gapped molecules were selected when the
nuclease was presented with an approximately 1:1 mixture of the two
(Fig. 6). The gapped substrate,
SG, and the nicked substrate, SGA, were
generated by appropriate additions to the 3' end of the 63-mer
oligonucleotide. After limited degradation by the 5'-nuclease, the
cleaved DNA was separated from unreacted starting material by gel
electrophoresis. Because cleavage by the 5'-nuclease did not occur at a
unique site, the presence of an extra base at the 3' end could not be
determined simply by examination of the cleaved pool on a denaturing
gel. Instead, MluI digestion was used to determine the
proportion of each pool derived from the nicked and the gapped
substrates (Fig. 6). We consistently observed a small bias
( The Position of 5'-Nuclease Cleavage Is
Substrate-dependent--
The presence of a single-base
gap, nick, or 3'-flap adjacent to the 5'-displaced strand influences
the location of the 5'-nuclease cleavage site (Fig.
7). The gapped substrate, SG,
was cleaved at several positions along the 5' tail, with the
predominant cleavages on either side of the first paired base; these
would result in a mixture of one-base and two-base gaps in the product
molecules. The nicked substrate, SA, was also cleaved on
either side of the first paired base, giving a mixture of nicked and
singly-gapped molecules, with the latter predominating ( DNA Transfer between the Polymerase and 5'-Nuclease
Sites--
Since Klenow fragment and the 5'-nuclease do not bind
simultaneously to a DNA substrate, the DNA must travel from one active site to the other for Pol I to carry out its biological functions. We
designed an experiment to determine whether transfer of the DNA
substrate occurs intramolecularly, within a single enzyme-DNA complex,
or whether it requires dissociation and rebinding. If DNA were to move
from one active site to the other without dissociation, the two
activities should be tightly coupled, and the products from a Pol
I-catalyzed reaction should contain a larger proportion of molecules
that have undergone both reactions than would be expected on a purely
statistical basis.
In separate reactions, we used the 3' end-labeled SG and
SA oligonucleotides (Fig. 6), which have either a
single-base gap (SG) or a nick (SA) adjacent to
the single-stranded tail that is to be cleaved by the 5'-nuclease. The
substrate was exposed to Pol I in the presence of the dNTP appropriate
for extension at the 3' end, with the DNA in large excess over Pol I so
as to minimize the likelihood that any substrate molecule encounter more than one Pol I molecule. We aimed to have no more than 50% of the
DNA elongated by the polymerase, so that there should be a good chance
for the 5'-nuclease to encounter unextended substrate (provided this is
not excluded by tight coupling between the two activities). In a
typical reaction (e.g. S1 in Fig.
8), when
In Fig. 8A the cleaved products (lane C)
consisted largely of molecules that had been extended by the
polymerase, which could indicate substantial coupling between
polymerase and 5'-nuclease. However, such a bias in product
distribution might be accounted for merely by the substrate preference
of the 5'-nuclease, which, as described above, will select a nicked
molecule over a gapped molecule and a double-flap over a nick. To
determine whether the substrate specificity of the 5'-nuclease could
account for the bias seen in the Pol I-catalyzed reaction, we set up
two control reactions in which the polymerase and 5'-nuclease functions
were not covalently joined. One control used a mixture of Klenow
fragment and the 5'-nuclease domain. The second control was similar
except that the 5'-nuclease was present on a polymerase-defective Pol I
derivative (D882N) that retains wild-type DNA binding affinity (because
the DNA binding affinity of the 5'-nuclease domain is more than a
1000-fold lower than that of Klenow fragment (27, 29), we reasoned that
the 5'-nuclease of intact Pol I might rely on the Klenow fragment
portion of the molecule to facilitate DNA binding). The preference of
the 5'-nuclease for molecules that had undergone polymerase-catalyzed
addition at the 3' end was similar in both controls (Fig.
8B) and agreed with the results from the substrate
preference experiments. For both substrates, the bias observed in the
Pol I-catalyzed reactions was much greater than in the controls,
indicating that the majority of 5' nucleolytic processing events are
likely to be carried out by the same Pol I molecule that has just
extended the upstream primer terminus.
To perform its functions in vivo, in excision repair
and in lagging strand replication, Pol I must leave a ligatable nick. Achieving this end point requires a delicate balance between polymerase and 5'-nuclease activities; an imbalance will give either a gapped or a
5'-tailed duplex, neither of which is a substrate for DNA ligase. Our
results imply that the DNA substrate cannot contact both polymerase and
5'-nuclease active sites simultaneously but, rather, must be passed
back and forth between two autonomous and non-overlapping active sites.
The correct end point, a ligatable nick, results from the substrate
preferences of the two domains and the cleavage specificity of the
5'-nuclease.
Polymerase and 5'-Nuclease Sites Are Separate and Operate
Independently--
Our footprinting data show that the polymerase and
5'-nuclease domains, when present on separate molecules, cannot bind
simultaneously to a DNA substrate. The slight overlap between the
footprints of the separate domains accounts for the inhibition by
Klenow fragment of both the binding and nuclease activity of the
5'-nuclease domain. The substrate specificities described below imply
that the polymerase senses what is beyond the primer terminus and the 5'-nuclease senses the location of the upstream primer strand, and this
fits with the observed footprints. When the polymerase and 5'-nuclease
are covalently joined in whole Pol I, the polymerase mode of binding
dominates, consistent with its greater DNA binding affinity (6, 27,
29). Failure to observe a Pol I footprint that is the sum of the
footprints of the two separate domains suggests that no benefit results
from the high local concentration of the 5'-nuclease domain when the
polymerase is bound to DNA and argues strongly that the two domains do
not cooperate so as to bind simultaneously to the DNA substrate. The
apparent antagonism between the polymerase and nuclease binding modes
probably accounts for the lower activity of the 5'-nuclease when
present in whole Pol I (6).
Formation of a Ligatable Nick--
Both polymerase and 5'-nuclease
discriminate between related substrate structures in such a way as to
increase the probability of generating a ligatable nick. The preference
of the polymerase for gapped structures helps to ensure that gaps are
filled, whereas rapid dissociation from a nick allows other enzymes to
act. The preferred substrate of the 5'-nuclease is a double-flap
molecule with an unpaired base at the primer terminus. Cleavage of the double-flap DNA is focused almost exclusively to a single position between the first two paired bases of the strand with the 5' overhang, generating a ligatable nick. The efficient processing of this substrate
to yield the required product suggests that the double-flap structure
may be the natural substrate for the 5'-nuclease. A preference for
double-flap substrates has also been reported for the 5'-nucleases of
Taq and Tth DNA polymerases and for
eukaryotic and archaebacterial FEN-1 enzymes (7, 30, 31).
In contrast to 5'-nuclease cleavage of the double-flap structure, the
reaction with nicked and gapped substrates seems much less efficient
and precise. The predominant cleavage site on a nicked or gapped
substrate is between the first two paired bases of the downstream
strand (Fig. 7) (2), which means that cleavage must be followed by at
least one more round of polymerase addition before ligation can take
place. Cleavage of nicked and gapped substrates often occurs at more
than one position, and this could reflect formation (via branch
migration) of several interconvertible structures. The extent to which
a particular cleavage site is represented in the reaction products
would be determined by the abundance of the relevant structure and the
efficiency with which it is cleaved by the 5'-nuclease. Specifically,
we suggest that the cleavages that apparently map within the
single-stranded 5' tail actually involve rearrangement of the DNA to
give double-flap structures, usually having imperfect base pairing
around the cleavage site. These double-flap and related structures need
not be abundant in the substrate pool if they are strongly preferred as
nuclease substrates. Similar reasoning has been invoked to explain the formation of a variety of cleavage products by the Taq
5'-nuclease (7). Examination of the structural model proposed for T5
5'-nuclease bound to its DNA substrate (16) suggests that there could
be room for an additional base at the primer terminus; contacts between the active site and the 3'-unpaired base would then account for the
preference of the 5'-nuclease for the double-flap substrate.
The potential for 5'-nuclease substrates (particularly those made by
strand-displacement synthesis) to rearrange and form double-flap
structures may account for some inconsistencies in the cleavage sites
reported for these enzymes. For example, Lundquist and Olivera (3)
consistently observed cleavage by the 5'-nuclease of E. coli
Pol I apparently at the junction between the downstream duplex and the
5' single strand, whereas other studies agree that the predominant
cleavage position for the bacterial Pol I 5'-nucleases is one base 3'
to this position, i.e. between the first two paired downstream bases (2, 6, 32). Significantly, Lundquist and Olivera (3)
made their DNA substrates by polymerase-catalyzed primer extension,
whereas the other studies used synthetic oligonucleotides in which the
possibilities for branch migration were more limited.
Our data suggest the following scenario for the processing of a DNA
substrate by Pol I (Fig. 9). The
polymerase extends the upstream primer strand, in some cases proceeding
beyond the junction with the downstream DNA. Branch migration can then
generate a family of interconvertible structures. Double-flap
structures with a single frayed base at the primer terminus will be the
most readily cleaved by the 5'-nuclease, generating a nick that
discourages binding of the polymerase, allowing access of DNA ligase.
Other conformations will lack the full complement of contacts to the 5'-nuclease domain and will therefore be cleaved less rapidly, allowing
time for further rearrangement to a more optimal substrate or
generating a product that can undergo additional cycles of extension
and cleavage.
Coupling of Polymerase and 5'-Nuclease--
When both polymerase
and 5'-nuclease are covalently linked in whole Pol I, the fraction of
product molecules that have undergone both reactions is greater than
when polymerase and nuclease are on separate molecules, implying that
both enzymatic reactions can take place within the same protein-DNA
binding event. Given the greater binding affinity and reaction rate at
the polymerase active site, the most likely scenario is that the
polymerase acts first, giving a DNA intermediate that is then cleaved
by the 5'-nuclease. Covalent linkage of the two domains delivers a high
effective concentration of the 5'-nuclease, compensating for the rather weak binding of DNA to this domain. Nevertheless, the majority of the
DNA molecules extended by the polymerase dissociate rather than become
substrates for the 5'-nuclease, and this probably argues against an
active mode of channeling the DNA intermediate from one active site to
the other. Instead, coupling of the two activities may involve partial
dissociation of the DNA from one active site followed by capture by the
other active site before it is lost into the bulk solution.
Polymerase activity is also coupled to variable extents to some of the
other auxiliary functions present in polymerases. Coupling between the
polymerase and 3'-5'-editing exonuclease activity is rather limited in
Klenow fragment (19) but greater in T4 and T7 DNA polymerases, where
the 3'-5' exonuclease reaction is more rapid and therefore competes
more effectively with dissociation (34, 35). By contrast, there appears
to be tight coupling between polymerase and RNase H activity in human
immunodeficiency virus-1 reverse transcriptase (36). The important
difference may be that in reverse transcriptase the nucleic acid
substrate is able to contact both polymerase and RNase H sites
simultaneously (37), whereas a DNA substrate has to transfer between
the polymerase and editing sites of DNA polymerases. The coupling we
have observed between polymerase and 5'-nuclease is not necessarily
restricted to those systems in which the two activities are covalently
linked. The activity of the bacteriophage T4 5'-nuclease (T4 RNase H) on the lagging strand may be integrated with the rest of the T4 replication complex through an interaction with the gene 32 single-stranded-binding protein (38), and the eukaryotic FEN-1 enzymes
may be localized at the replication fork by association with the
processivity factor, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)
(39).
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-32P]dGTP to give
the SG substrate or with unlabeled dGTP and
[
-32P]dATP to give SA. These labeled DNAs
were gel-purified and then elongated with one unlabeled nucleotide
(giving SGA and SAC, respectively) using Klenow
fragment, which was subsequently inactivated by heating. Mixtures
containing about 25 nM of each substrate were made by combining SG with SGA and SA with
SAC and were incubated at 23 °C with the wild-type
5'-nuclease domain in 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 5 mM MgCl2, 100 mM NaCl. The
SG/SGA reaction was incubated with 10 nM 5'-nuclease for 5 min, and the
SA/SAC reaction was incubated with 2 nM enzyme for 30 s; these conditions were chosen to
limit the reaction so that less than 20% of the substrate was converted to product. The reaction mixture was quenched by adding EDTA
to 20 mM and was then fractionated by electrophoresis on an
8% polyacrylamide gel containing 7M urea and 40% (v/v) formamide. Regions of the gel corresponding to cleaved and uncleaved DNA were
located by autoradiography, excised, eluted in 10 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5 M ammonium
acetate, and concentrated by ethanol precipitation. Because the
5'-nuclease cleavage did not always occur at a unique position, the
cleaved fraction often consisted of several bands on the gel, which
were eluted and processed together. The DNA samples were digested with
MluI, fractionated on a 15% polyacrylamide-urea gel, and
quantitated by phosphorimaging. Analysis of the data is described in
the legend to Fig. 6.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Oligonucleotides used in DNA binding
experiments. The predominant positions of cleavage by the
5'-nuclease are indicated by arrows. Restriction sites that
were used to generate markers are shown.

View larger version (72K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
DNase I protection of the 5'-labeled
112-mer. A, footprints of Klenow fragment (20 nM) and the indicated 5'-nuclease mutants (
40
µM) with
0.5 nM 112-mer. The control
lane shows the digestion pattern produced by DNase I alone.
Markers, of the lengths indicated, were generated by digestion of the
labeled 112-mer with restriction enzymes (see Fig. 1). B,
footprinting of 0.03 nM 112-mer by whole Pol I at a series
of concentrations. C, schematic representation of protection
of the double-stranded region of the DNA substrate; circles
represent phosphodiester linkages. Solid bars indicate at
least 50% protection of the relevant position (compared with the
DNase-only control); thin lines indicate that the DNase
signal was too weak to allow quantitation of the relevant band.

View larger version (106K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Competition between Klenow fragment and the
5'-nuclease (D185A mutant) for binding to the 112-mer and 113-mer
substrates. DNase I protection was measured in the presence of the
indicated concentrations of Klenow fragment (KF) and the
5'-nuclease. The marker lane (M) was generated by
restriction enzyme digestion of the 112-mer.

View larger version (15K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Kinetic demonstration of competition between
Klenow fragment and the 5'-nuclease domain. Cleavage by 0.5 µM 5'-nuclease of the 112-mer and 113-mer DNA substrates
(0.03 nM) was measured as described under "Experimental
Procedures" in the absence (
) and presence (
) of 10 nM Klenow fragment.

View larger version (44K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Gel mobility shifts caused by the binding of
Klenow fragment (KF) at the indicated concentrations
to the three DNA substrates shown in Fig. 1.
1.3-fold) in favor of cleavage of the nicked DNA, such that the
product derived from SGA was over-represented in the
cleaved DNA pool, whereas the SG substrate accumulated in
the pool of unreacted substrate. In these experiments, the
SGA substrate usually contained a small amount of a longer species, presumably containing an additional (mismatched) A residue at
the 3' end. This species, which can be described as having a
double-flap structure with both 3'- and 5'-single-stranded extensions, was degraded by the 5'-nuclease in preference to the nicked and gapped
molecules and, thus, appeared almost exclusively in the product pool
even at short reaction times. To investigate this phenomenon further,
we converted the labeled nicked DNA, SA, into SAC (which has the potential to form a double-flap
structure) and determined that SAC is preferred by at least
14-fold over SA (Fig. 6). We deduced that the
SAC DNA behaves as a double-flap structure with the 3' C
residue unannealed, rather than the alternative nick structure that
could be formed by branch migration, because the SAC
substrate behaved like the (n+2) species containing a 3'
mismatch (in the SG/SGA experiment), and
did not behave like the bona fide nicked substrates. This
reasoning is supported by similar studies on the Taq
5'-nuclease (7).

View larger version (66K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Substrate preference of the 5'-nuclease.
A, the DNA substrates were derived from the 63-mer
oligonucleotide by the addition of the appropriate labeled and
unlabeled nucleotides at the 3' end; asterisks indicate the
positions of 32P-labeling. The site of cleavage by
Mlu I (used in the analysis in B) is shown by the
arrow. B, the starting material for each
experiment was an
1:1 mixture of the two DNA substrates being
compared: gap (SG) versus nick (SGA)
in the left-hand panel and nick (SA)
versus double-flap (SAC) in the right-hand
panel. After reaction with the 5'-nuclease, the cleaved DNA
(C) was separated from unreacted starting material
(U) by gel electrophoresis. The two panels show
denaturing gels of the products of digestion by MluI,
indicating the fraction of each pool derived from each of the
substrates. The ratio of, for example, nick-derived and gap-derived
material was normalized by dividing by the same ratio obtained for the
initial mixture (T), indicating the extent to which these
species had become over- or under-represented in starting material or
product. In each panel the leftmost two
lanes show the labeled substrate oligonucleotides
before mixing, indicating that the SGA and
SAC substrates both contained a small amount of the
mismatched species (SGAA and SACC,
respectively), which like SAC, are excellent
substrates for the 5'-nuclease.
60% of the
mixture). The double-flap substrate, SAC, was cleaved much
more rapidly than the other two substrates. Moreover, about 80% of the
cutting occurred at a single position, between the first two paired
bases; after reannealing of the 3'-terminal base, this would give a
product with a ligatable nick.

View larger version (83K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
5'-nuclease cleavage of gapped
(SG), nicked (SA), and double-flap
(SAC) substrates (see Fig. 6). A,
urea-formamide denaturing gel of the reaction products after cleavage
of
30 nM 3'-labeled oligonucleotide with 2 nM wild-type 5'-nuclease domain for the indicated times.
The leftmost three lanes show the uncleaved substrates.
Markers were generated from the three substrates by limited digestion
with RsaI so as to give some singly cleaved molecules.
Lane M was derived by extensive 5'-nuclease cleavage of the
SG substrate in order to relate the 5'-nuclease products to
the RsaI bands. B, cleavage positions on each of
the substrates; large arrows represent the predominant
5'-nuclease cleavage products, and smaller arrows indicate
minor products.
50% of the substrate had
undergone polymerase-catalyzed addition, much less (
1% for
SG; 10-20% for SA) had been cleaved by the 5'-nuclease. As in the substrate preference experiment (Fig. 6), we
analyzed the cleaved and uncleaved pools by MluI digestion to distinguish extended from non-extended 3' ends (Fig. 8). If 5'-nuclease cleavage of the mixture of extended and non-extended DNA
molecules were truly random, then the proportion of extended and
non-extended ends should be similar in the cleaved and uncleaved pools
(the non-extended DNA would be slightly over-represented in the cleaved
pool because this substrate is present from the start of the reaction,
whereas the extended DNA becomes available only as time proceeds.)

View larger version (66K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Shuttling between polymerase and 5'-nuclease
sites of Pol I. A, experimental strategy, illustrated
using the SG substrate. The leftmost lane shows
the SG starting material (64 bases) on a fully denaturing
urea-formamide gel. Lanes S1 show the reaction mixture after
treatment of SG with Pol I and dATP (two exposures); about
half has been extended (to 65 bases). From S1, the uncleaved
(U) and the cleaved (C) pools were isolated and
analyzed by MluI digestion, which is diagnostic for
polymerase-catalyzed extension at the 3' end of the oligonucleotide.
B, gel analysis of MluI digests of cleaved and
uncleaved pools from the SG and SA substrates
after treatment with intact Pol I or with separate polymerase and
5'-nuclease enzymes (which served as controls). The separate activities
were present either as a mixture of Klenow fragment and a
polymerase-deficient Pol I mutant (D882N) (KF/Pol
)
or as a mixture of Klenow fragment and the wild-type 5'-nuclease domain
(KF/N). Selectivity of the 5'-nuclease cleavage for DNA
molecules that have been extended by the polymerase was calculated as
[(n+1)/n]cleaved divided by
[(n+1)/n]uncleaved, since the ratio for the uncleaved
pool approximates that for the entire reaction mixture if the extent of
5'-nuclease cleavage is small. Values are quoted for the individual
experiments shown, and as the average of 2-5 determinations.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (12K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 9.
Proposed mechanism for generating a ligatable
nick (shown as an asterisk) from a gapped DNA molecule by the combined
action of polymerase and 5'-nuclease. Using as an example a DNA
substrate having a two-base gap within a longer duplex region, a subset
of the many conceivable reaction schemes is shown, illustrating steps
that we believe are likely to be favored. Because the polymerase
reaction is about 100-fold faster than the 5'-nuclease and because the
polymerase has a higher affinity for its substrate, primer extension
(giving a newly synthesized strand shown as a thicker gray
line) is the likely first step. A variety of intermediates will be
produced, depending on the extent to which synthesis proceeds into the
downstream duplex. Those intermediates with a displaced 5' end can
rearrange via branch migration, giving structures having a frayed 3'
base, the preferred substrate for 5'-nuclease cleavage (it is this
rearrangement that can account for the apparently discrepant cleavage
sites observed by Lundquist and Olivera (3) mentioned in the text). For
simplicity we have not shown reactions involving molecules having more
than one unpaired base at the primer 3' terminus. In vivo,
the presence of the proofreading 3'-5' exonuclease in wild-type Pol I
is unlikely to cause significant degradation of the DNA species with
frayed 3' ends since the 3'-5' exonuclease is about 100-fold slower
than the 5'-nuclease (6, 33); this conclusion is supported by our own
observations in vitro (data not shown). Moreover, because
the substrate is probably passed from polymerase to 5'-nuclease site
without dissociation into the bulk solution, the displaced 3' end is
unlikely to become accessible to other cellular nucleases.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant GM-28550 and by NIH Postdoctoral Fellowship GM-19025 (to Y. X.).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.
Present address: Vion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., New Haven, CT 06511.
§ To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, 266 Whitney Ave., P. O. Box 208114, New Haven, CT 06520-8114. Tel.: 203-432-8992; Fax: 203-432-3104; E-mail: catherine.joyce@yale.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 9, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M909135199
2 Y. Xu, O. Potapova, N. D. F. Grindley, and C. M. Joyce, manuscript in preparation.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviation used is: Pol I, DNA polymerase I.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Kornberg, A., and Baker, T. A. (1992) DNA Replication , 2nd Ed. , W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco |
| 2. | Lyamichev, V., Brow, M. A. D., and Dahlberg, J. E. (1993) Science 260, 778-783 |
| 3. | Lundquist, R., and Olivera, B. (1982) Cell 31, 53-60 |
| 4. | Klenow, H., and Overgaard-Hansen, K. (1970) FEBS Lett. 6, 25-27 |
| 5. | Setlow, P., and Kornberg, A. (1972) J. Biol. Chem. 247, 232-240 |
| 6. | Xu, Y., Derbyshire, V., Ng, K., Sun, X. C., Grindley, N. D. F., and Joyce, C. M. (1997) J. Mol. Biol. 268, 284-302 |
| 7. | Lyamichev, V., Brow, M. A. D., Varvel, V. E., and Dahlberg, J. E. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 6143-6148 |
| 8. | Sayers, J. R., and Eckstein, F. (1990) J. Biol. Chem. 265, 18311-18317 |
| 9. | Hollingsworth, H. C., and Nossal, N. G. (1991) J. Biol. Chem. 266, 1888-1897 |
| 10. | Gutman, P. D., and Minton, K. W. (1993) Nucleic Acids Res. 21, 4406-4407 |
| 11. | Lieber, M. R. (1997) Bioessays 19, 233-240 |
| 12. | Bambara, R. A., Murante, R. S., and Henricksen, L. A. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 4647-4650 |
| 13. | Shen, B., Qiu, J., Hosfield, D., and Tainer, J. A. (1998) Trends. Biochem. Sci. 23, 171-173 |
| 14. | Mueser, T. C., Nossal, N. G., and Hyde, C. C. (1996) Cell 85, 1101-1112 |
| 15. | Kim, Y., Eom, S. H., Wang, J., Lee, D.-S., Suh, S. W., and Steitz, T. A. (1995) Nature 376, 612-616 |
| 16. | Ceska, T. A., Sayers, J. R., Stier, G., and Sück, D. (1996) Nature 382, 90-93 |
| 17. | Hwang, K. Y., Baek, K., Kim, H.-Y., and Cho, Y. (1998) Nat. Struct. Biol. 5, 707-713 |
| 18. | Hosfield, D. J., Mol, C. D., Shen, B., and Tainer, J. A. (1998) Cell 95, 135-146 |
| 19. | Joyce, C. M. (1989) J. Biol. Chem. 264, 10858-10866 |
| 20. | Brautigam, C. A., and Steitz, T. A. (1998) Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 8, 54-63 |
| 21. | Doublié, S., Tabor, S., Long, A., Richardson, C. C., and Ellenberger, T. (1998) Nature 391, 251-258 |
| 22. | Li, Y., Korolev, S., and Waksman, G. (1998) EMBO J. 17, 7514-7525 |
| 23. | Murali, R., Sharkey, D. J., Daiss, J. L., and Murthy, H. M. K. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 12562-12567 |
| 24. | Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E. F., and Maniatis, T. (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual , 2nd Ed. , Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY |
| 25. | Derbyshire, V., Freemont, P. S., Sanderson, M. R., Beese, L., Friedman, J. M., Joyce, C. M., and Steitz, T. A. (1988) Science 240, 199-201 |
| 26. | Joyce, C. M., and Derbyshire, V. (1995) Methods Enzymol. 262, 3-13 |
| 27. | Polesky, A. H., Steitz, T. A., Grindley, N. D. F., and Joyce, C. M. (1990) J. Biol. Chem. 265, 14579-14591 |
| 28. | Maxam, A. M., and Gilbert, W. (1977) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 74, 560-564 |
| 29. | Astatke, M., Grindley, N. D. F., and Joyce, C. M. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 1945-1954 |
| 30. | Murante, R. S., Rust, L., and Bambara, R. A. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 30377-30383 |
| 31. | Kaiser, M. W., Lyamicheva, N., Ma, W., Miller, C., Neri, B., Fors, L., and Lyamichev, V. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 21387-21394 |
| 32. | Kelly, R. B., Atkinson, M. R., Huberman, J. A., and Kornberg, A. (1969) Nature 224, 495-501 |
| 33. | Kuchta, R. D., Benkovic, P., and Benkovic, S. J. (1988) Biochemistry 27, 6716-6725 |
| 34. | Capson, T. L., Peliska, J. A., Kaboord, B. F., Frey, M. W., Lively, C., Dahlberg, M., and Benkovic, S. J. (1992) Biochemistry 31, 10984-10994 |
| 35. | Donlin, M. J., Patel, S. S., and Johnson, K. A. (1991) Biochemistry 30, 538-546 |
| 36. | Gopalakrishnan, V., Peliska, J. A., and Benkovic, S. J. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 89, 10763-10767 |
| 37. | Huang, H., Chopra, R., Verdine, G. L., and Harrison, S. C. (1998) Science 282, 1669-1675 |
| 38. | Bhagwat, M., Hobbs, L. J., and Nossal, N. G. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 28523-28530 |
| 39. | Wu, X., Li, J., Li, X., Hsieh, C.-L., Burgers, P. M. J., and Lieber, M. R. (1996) Nucleic Acids Res. 24, 2036-2043 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. L. Rossi and R. A. Bambara Reconstituted Okazaki Fragment Processing Indicates Two Pathways of Primer Removal J. Biol. Chem., September 8, 2006; 281(36): 26051 - 26061. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Bu, R. Biehl, M. Monkenbusch, D. Richter, and D. J. E. Callaway Coupled protein domain motion in Taq polymerase revealed by neutron spin-echo spectroscopy PNAS, December 6, 2005; 102(49): 17646 - 17651. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Gangisetty, C. E. Jones, M. Bhagwat, and N. G. Nossal Maturation of Bacteriophage T4 Lagging Strand Fragments Depends on Interaction of T4 RNase H with T4 32 Protein Rather than the T4 Gene 45 Clamp J. Biol. Chem., April 1, 2005; 280(13): 12876 - 12887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. D. Bayliss, W. A. Sweetman, and E. R. Moxon Destabilization of tetranucleotide repeats in Haemophilus influenzae mutants lacking RnaseHI or the Klenow domain of PolI Nucleic Acids Res., January 14, 2005; 33(1): 400 - 408. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. L. Ho, W. M. Byrnes, W.-p. Ma, Y. Shi, D. J. E. Callaway, and Z. Bu Structure-specific DNA-induced Conformational Changes in Taq Polymerase Revealed by Small Angle Neutron Scattering J. Biol. Chem., September 10, 2004; 279(37): 39146 - 39154. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Friedrich-Heineken and U. Hubscher The Fen1 extrahelical 3'-flap pocket is conserved from archaea to human and regulates DNA substrate specificity Nucleic Acids Res., May 6, 2004; 32(8): 2520 - 2528. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Bruck, M. F. Goodman, and M. O'Donnell The Essential C Family DnaE Polymerase Is Error-prone and Efficient at Lesion Bypass J. Biol. Chem., November 7, 2003; 278(45): 44361 - 44368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.-I Kao, L. A. Henricksen, Y. Liu, and R. A. Bambara Cleavage Specificity of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Flap Endonuclease 1 Suggests a Double-Flap Structure as the Cellular Substrate J. Biol. Chem., April 19, 2002; 277(17): 14379 - 14389. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Xu, O. Potapova, A. E. Leschziner, N. D. F. Grindley, and C. M. Joyce Contacts between the 5' Nuclease of DNA Polymerase I and Its DNA Substrate J. Biol. Chem., August 3, 2001; 276(32): 30167 - 30177. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Bhagwat and N. G. Nossal Bacteriophage T4 RNase H Removes Both RNA Primers and Adjacent DNA from the 5' End of Lagging Strand Fragments J. Biol. Chem., July 20, 2001; 276(30): 28516 - 28524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||