![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 40, 30833-30838, October 6, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,From the Department of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv 69978, Israel
Received for publication, February 29, 2000, and in revised form, August 1, 2000
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Homologous recombination can result in the
transfer of genetic information from one DNA molecule to another (gene
conversion). These events are often accompanied by a reciprocal
exchange between the interacting molecules (termed "crossing
over"). This association suggests that the two types of events
could be mechanistically related. We have analyzed the repair, by
homologous recombination, of a broken chromosome in yeast. We show that
gene conversion can be uncoupled from crossing over when the length of
homology of the interacting substrates is below a certain threshold. In addition, a minimal length of homology on each broken chromosomal arm
is needed for crossing over. We also show that the coupling between
gene conversion and crossing over is affected by the mismatch repair
system; mutations in the MSH2 or MSH6 genes
cause an increase in the crossing over observed for short alleles. Our
results provide a mechanism to explain how chromosomal recombinational
repair can take place without altering the stability of the genome.
Homologous recombination is a universal process that plays a role
in generating diversity during meiosis and is an important DNA repair
mechanism in vegetative cells. Recombination results in the transfer of
genetic information from one DNA molecule to a homologous one (gene
conversion) and in the reciprocal exchange of DNA fragments between
chromosomes (crossing over). The association between gene conversion
and crossing-over events has led to the assumption that they are
mechanistically related (Refs. 1-5; Fig. 1). One of the characteristic
features of most eukaryotic genomes is the presence of large amounts of
repetitive DNA. Reciprocal recombination between dispersed repeats may
result in chromosomal aberrations, such as deletions, translocations,
etc., that can affect the reproductive fitness of an organism or lead
to cancer. Therefore, to maintain the genome integrity, crossing over
must be prevented during recombinational repair of DNA lesions
involving dispersed repeats.
Double-strand breaks (DSBs)1
in the DNA of living organisms occur as a consequence of the natural
cell metabolism, or they can be created by exogenous sources such as
chemical agents or radiation. If left unrepaired, DSBs result in broken
chromosomes and cell death (6). Mitotic recombination plays an
important role in the repair of this damage. In addition, DSBs are
generated during certain developmental processes such as meiosis (7) and mating-type switch in yeast (8). In different experimental systems,
it was found that the level of association between gene conversion and
crossing over varies, from no coupling (e.g. mating-type switch (8-10) or recombination between direct repeats (11)) to a level
of association of 70% (5). In two of the currently held models of
recombination, the synthesis-dependent strand annealing (SDSA) model (12) and the DSB repair model (4), recombination is
initiated by the creation of a DSB in one of the two participating DNA
duplexes (Fig. 1). Although the mechanism
suggested by the SDSA model accounts mainly for gene conversion events,
the DSB in the second model leads to the formation of an intermediate, which can be resolved either as a gene conversion event or as a gene
conversion accompanied by a crossover (4). The dispersed repeated
sequences in the genome can serve as a source of homology to repair
broken chromosomes. If the recombinational repair results in a
crossover, however, a deleterious aberration may occur; hence, regulating the coupling between gene conversion and crossing over is
crucial to the maintenance of genome integrity. The mechanism that
determines the coupling, however, is still unknown. In this paper, we
dissect the rules that determine the association between gene
conversion and crossing over in vegetative cells under conditions in
which the initiation of the recombinational event is not limiting.
Strains--
All of the yeast strains used in this study are
isogenic derivatives of strain OI27 (MATa-inc ura3-HOcs-inc
ade3::GALHO ade2-1 leu2-3, 112 his3-11, 15 trp1-1
can1-100) (13). The ura3-HOcs alleles were created by
inserting a 39-bp oligonucleotide (14) at the NcoI site of
the 5.6-kb BamHI fragment containing the URA3 gene. The different alleles used were subclones of this fragment inserted at a HpaI site within LYS2 sequences in
the integrative plasmid pOI5 (TRP1 LYS2 URA3). These
alleles were integrated into the yeast chromosome II
by a two-step replacement method, selecting first for Trp+
transformants and then plating on 5-FOA plates to obtain
Trp
The ura3 fragments present on chromosome II in
the strains used are as follows: strain OI70 carries a 5.6-kb
BamHI DNA fragment; MK187 carries a BamHI to
SmaI 4.7-kb fragment; MK186 carries a SnaBI to
BamHI 4.1-kb insert; OI87 has a
SnaBI-HincII 2.9-kb fragment; OI86 and MK201
carry 1.9- and 1.7-kb AseI-Asp700
fragments, respectively; OI90 carries an
AseI-HincII 1.2-kb allele; MK29 has a 1.2-kb
HindIII-HindIII insert; OI92 carries an
AseI-HincII 1-kb fragment; OI30 has a PstI-StuI 0.5-kb allele; OI91 carries a 4.1-kb
BamHI-AccI fragment; and OI94 has a 2.9-kb
NdeI-PvuII allele. In this last strain, a PCR
fragment carrying 923 bp to the right of the 5.6-kb fragment was added
to the cloned ura3 allele before integrating it at the LYS2 locus.
Deletion of the MMR genes were created by one- or two-step
transplacement using plasmids pSR211 for PMS1, pSR453 for
MLH1, pSR395 for MSH2, pRK366 for
MSH3, and pRK465 for MSH6 (15, 16). All of the
configurations were checked by Southern blot analysis.
Media and Growth Conditions--
Saccharomyces
cerevisiae strains were grown at 30 °C. Standard YEP medium
(1% yeast extract, 2% Bacto-peptone) supplemented with 3% glycerol
(YEPGly), 2% galactose (YEPGal), or 2% dextrose (YEPD) was used for
nonselective growth. 1.8% Bacto-agar was added for solid media.
Recombination Assay--
Single colonies were resuspended in
rich YEPGly medium, grown to logarithmic phase, centrifuged, and
resuspended in YEPGal or YEPD medium. DNA was extracted from samples at
timely intervals and subjected to Southern blot analysis using
URA3 or LYS2 sequences as probes. Two Southern
blot analyses were performed. In the first one, the probe could
detect the presence of a parental band or of the broken chromosome. The
repaired chromosome appeared as a band of the same size as the parental
one (see Fig. 2B). In the
second Southern blot, the same DNA samples were digested with BamHI or EcoRI. This blot allowed monitoring of
the parental allele, which was not cut by these restriction enzymes
(e.g. Fig. 3). In all of the
experiments presented, by 12 h after transfer to galactose less
than 5% of the DNA retained its parental configuration (was not cut by
BamHI or EcoRI). The blots were also hybridized to a probe carrying the LEU2 gene. This gene is located on a
separate chromosome and remained unchanged during the
course of the experiments, serving as a loading control. The
blots were quantified with a Fujix BAS1000 phosphorimager.
For each strain tested, the experiment was repeated at least three
times. Survival was assayed by plating at different times during the
experiment. The survival of all strains was usually ~90%. Individual
colonies were also subjected to PCR and restriction digestion with
BamHI or EcoRI, to confirm the transfer of
information from the donor chromosome in individual colonies.
Reciprocal translocations were also monitored by Southern blot analysis
from independently obtained colonies grown on galactose.
Experimental System--
To study the way crossing over is
associated with gene conversion, we have developed an assay for
DSB-initiated interchromosomal recombination (Ref. 20; Fig.
2A). Haploid strains of the yeast S. cerevisiae
bear two copies of the URA3 gene. One of these strains, on
chromosome II, carries the recognition site for the yeast HO site-specific endonuclease (8, 17) inserted as a short oligonucleotide (ura3-HOcs). The second copy, located on another chromosome
(V), carries a similar site containing a single-bp mutation
that prevents recognition by the endonuclease (ura3-HOcs-inc
(17)). In addition, the two ura3 alleles differ at two
restriction sites, located to the right and to the left of the
HOcs-inc insertion; these polymorphisms are used to follow
the transfer of information between the chromosomes. In these strains,
the HO gene is under the transcriptional control of the
GAL1 promoter (18). Upon transfer of the cells to
galactose-containing medium, the HO endonuclease is produced at high
levels. The enzyme creates a DSB that is repaired by recombination in
essentially the whole cell population. The repair is carried out by
copying the HOcs-inc information, together with the flanking markers, resulting in a gene conversion event. During repair, the donor
chromosome remains unchanged. When the gene conversion event is
accompanied by a crossover, a reciprocal translocation between
chromosomes II and V is created. The region
around the break is completely homologous with the unbroken allele, so
as to avoid production of nonhomologous tails, which might affect the
recombinational repair (19, 20). Because there is no genetic selection
for recombination, repair is monitored in the entire cell population
(Fig. 2A). During the course of the experiment, cell
viability remains high (~90%).
Kinetics of DSB Repair--
The kinetics of recombination of a
strain carrying 5.6 kb of shared homology between the two
ura3 alleles (OI70) was followed. DNA samples taken at
intervals were subjected to two different restriction digestions
followed by Southern blot analysis. In the first blot (Fig.
2B), we monitored the appearance and disappearance of the
DSB. Induction of the HO endonuclease created a chromosomal break,
which could be followed by the appearance of two new bands and the
concomitant decrease in intensity of the parental band. Repair of the
broken chromosome led to the disappearance of the small DSB bands and
the creation of a band of the same size as the parental. To distinguish
between the parental band and the recombinant products, the same DNA
samples were subjected to a second Southern blot analysis. In this
blot, the conversion products were recognized by the presence of
EcoRI or BamHI sites transferred during the
repair of the DSB (data not shown and Fig. 3A). Only unbroken chromosomes that have not been repaired by gene conversion give a parental band. Fig. 3A shows that most of the
population has undergone a gene conversion event by 10 h.
The results of the two blots can be integrated in a quantitative way
(Fig. 2C). As a reference point in each lane, we used the
intensity measured for either the band created by hybridization to the
unbroken chromosome V or to the LEU2 gene on
chromosome III, which does not participate in the repair
event (the results were identical). Within 30 min after transfer, two
new bands were seen, representing the broken chromosome arms. One hour
after transfer, a broken chromosome II could be detected in
almost the entire cell population. Most of the cells remained with
unrepaired chromosomes for another hour, and then the break was
repaired by gene conversion in a process that lasted ~2.5 h. Repair
of the broken chromosome led to the disappearance of the small DSB bands and the creation of a band of the same size as the parental. The
repair involved the transfer of the BamHI and
EcoRI restriction site polymorphisms from chromosome
V to chromosome II. The transfer was confirmed by
a second Southern blot analysis (using these restriction enzymes) of
both whole cell populations (Fig. 3A) and of 24 individual
cells that had undergone the repair process. Concomitantly with the
gene conversion, there was an accumulation of the bands created by the
associated crossing over, which reached a maximal level of 12.4% (Fig.
2, B and C), in agreement with the level of
association seen in previous mitotic studies (1, 5, 21, 22). An
analysis of individual recombinant colonies confirmed the presence of
reciprocal translocations between chromosomes II and
V (data not shown).
When a strain carrying only 1.2 kb of shared homology between the two
ura3 alleles (OI29) was analyzed, the DSB was repaired in
the entire cell population by gene conversion (Fig. 2B).
Surprisingly, however, no crossing-over products could be detected in
Southern blot analyses. By quantitative PCR, we estimated that crossing over in OI29 occurred only in 0.09% of the cells; this level of crossing over is lower by two orders of magnitude than that seen in the
strain with the longer homologous substrates (12.4%). Hence, in both
strains the DSB was efficiently repaired by gene conversion, but an
uncoupling of crossing over from gene conversion occurred during
recombination in the strain with shorter substrates.
The Relationship between Homology Size and Crossing Over--
To
further study how homology size affects the coupling between gene
conversion and crossing over, we tested a series of yeast strains
carrying ura3-HOcs alleles of different lengths (Fig. 4). Gene conversion was very efficient
(>90% of the cells) independently of the length of the shared
homology. Even short alleles (e.g. OI30, 496 bp) were
efficiently repaired by gene conversion. In contrast, crossing over
could not be detected by Southern analysis for alleles shorter than 1.7 kb (Fig. 4). These results are consistent with the existence of a
homology length threshold. In strains that bear alleles sharing
homology longer than the threshold, the coupling of crossing over to
gene conversion increased with the overall length of homology between
the recombining DNA molecules.
Fig. 4 shows that the coupling does not depend only on overall homology
length; a minimal region of homology in each broken arm is necessary to
obtain crossing over. For example, strains OI91 and MK186 each bear 4.1 kb of shared homology between the ura3 alleles. Although the
first strain, carrying 139 bp of homology on one arm, failed to show
any crossing over (below the level of detection of Southern blot
analysis, ~0.5% of the DNA), MK186, with 2.5 and 1.6 kb of shared
homology on the broken arms, showed 4.5% crossing over (Fig. 4).
Role of the Mismatch Repair System--
The mismatch repair (MMR)
system has been implicated in the prevention of recombination between
diverged sequences in many organisms (15, 16, 23-25). The MMR gene
products thus are good candidates for proteins that may affect the
association between gene conversion and crossing over. We inactivated
the MMR system by introducing mutations in the MSH2, MSH3,
MSH6, and PMS1 genes in strain OI29 (1.2 kb of shared
homology). Although repair by gene conversion was not affected in the
quadruple mutant, crossing over was elevated 24-fold in comparison with
the wild type strain; 2.2% of the mutant cells showed a crossover
associated with the gene conversion (Fig.
5A). Thus, MMR proteins play a
role in uncoupling crossing over from gene conversion. Analysis of
strains bearing mutations in individual MMR genes revealed that the
increased crossing over can be seen in the absence of the Msh2 or Msh6
proteins, but not when the MSH3 or PMS1 genes are
deleted (Fig. 5B). Although in the figure the double mutant
msh2 msh6 shows slightly higher levels of crossing over than
the individual msh2 or msh6 mutants (2.5 versus 1.8 and 1.7% of the total DNA), this difference does not seem to be significant, as it was not seen in other Southern blots.
We conclude that the MSH2 and MSH6 genes operate
in the same pathway. The Msh2 protein was shown to form heterodimers with both Msh3p and Msh6p (26, 27). The Msh2-Msh6 heterodimer shows
affinity for both base pair mismatches and single nucleotide insertion/deletions (26, 28, 29). Lately, the Msh2/Msh6 protein complex
has been shown to bind directly to Holliday junctions, providing a
possible mechanism for linking the mismatch repair system to
recombination (30).
When a chromosome is broken, homologous sequences present in the
genome can be used as templates for its repair by recombination. The
transfer of genetic information to the broken DNA molecule during
recombinational repair prevents mutagenesis by restoring information
that may have been eliminated at the site of the DNA damage. In
addition, repair by recombination ensures the restoration of the
original chromosomal structure when a chromosome is fragmented. On the
other hand, recombinational repair of DNA damage using repetitive
sequences as templates may result in deleterious chromosomal aberrations when it results in crossing over of the interacting molecules. Repetitive DNA sequences are abundant in the genomes of most
eukaryotes. Hence, it is important to understand how crossing over
involving dispersed repeats can be prevented.
The study of the mechanism of homologous recombination is hampered by
the fact that it usually requires the selection of rare genetic
products. This selection introduces biases into the type of events
analyzed and precludes an understanding of the processes that take
place in the majority of the cells. To overcome these problems, we have
developed a recombination system that allows monitoring of the fate of
a cell population that has suffered a chromosomal break, without the
need to select for recombinants. The repair of the broken chromosome is
carried out in the whole cell population by a gene conversion event.
This event may or may not be associated with a crossover. We have
systematically investigated the rules that govern this coupling.
We have found that gene conversion can take place efficiently between
sequences that share a short stretch of homology (250 bp on each broken
arm, OI30). The coupling to crossing over, in contrast, requires a
minimal homology length of about 1.7 kb (MK201). Below this threshold,
the level of association decreases by two orders of magnitude. In
agreement with these results, the repair of a chromosomal DSB by gene
conversion in mouse ES cells carrying alleles that share 1.1 kb of
homology was not associated with crossing over (31). The coupling
between gene conversion and crossing over does not depend only on
overall homology length; to obtain a crossover, the template allele
must share a minimal amount of homology with both broken chromosomal
arms. When one of the arms shares only a short stretch of homology, no
crossing over is observed, even when a large region of the other arm is homologous (Fig. 4). Among the strains that exhibit crossing over, we
found a correlation between the total homology length and the level of
associated crossing over (r2 = 0.75). This
linear relationship, however, is not necessarily the best function to
describe the relationship between homology length and associated
crossover (see for example Ref. 32). Previously, a similar correlation
between the length of the homologous partners and the level of
associated crossing over was seen in a system that monitored
spontaneous interchromosomal recombination (5). In a different study,
the level of crossing over showed a correlation with the length of the
conversion tract (33). These results were interpreted to mean that
crossing over requires the formation of a long heteroduplex
intermediate; alleles sharing short homology length would be unable to
create such an intermediate and therefore to produce crossovers. Our
results agree with those obtained for spontaneous recombination. When
monitoring spontaneous recombination, however, the nature and location
of the initiating lesion is unknown. In our strains, the initiating
lesion is of a defined nature (a DSB) and is always at the same
location. The results we have obtained thus provide direct evidence
that under conditions in which the initiation is not limiting,
efficient gene conversion takes place even between very short
homologous regions, whereas crossing over requires a larger minimal length.
We propose the following model to explain the mechanism that determines
coupling between gene conversion and crossing over in recombination
(Fig. 6). It incorporates features from
both currently held recombination models, the DSB repair (4) and the
SDSA (12, 34-37) models (Fig. 1). The first model assumes that both
broken arms invade the donor DNA molecule, whereas the different
versions of the SDSA model propose that recombination is initiated by
the invasion by only one of the DNA ends. We have observed that during
repair, genetic information is always transferred to both broken arms
of chromosome II. In 22 of 24 cases analyzed, the
restriction site polymorphisms located to the right as well as to the
left of the DSB were co-transferred. This observation could be
explained by one-ended models, but it would require making several
assumptions. A simpler and more parsimonious model assumes that
recombination takes place by the invasion of the two broken arms,
either concomitantly or sequentially. We present the following model,
which incorporates features from the two types of models discussed, to
explain the mechanism that determines the coupling between gene
conversion and crossing over in recombination (Fig. 6).
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Schematic representation of two of the
currently held models of recombination. A, the
double-strand break repair (DSBR) model (4). Both broken
arms are resected (a) and invade the homologous sequence
(b). After DNA synthesis (c) and ligation
(d), a double Holliday junction is formed, which can be
resolved to give non-crossover (e) or crossover
(f) products. Repair of heteroduplex DNA (so that now both
strands carry gray information) creates a gene conversion event in both
cases. B, the simplest version of the SDSA model (12, 34)
proposes that after resection (a), one arm invades the
homologous sequence (b) and copies its content through a
"migrating bubble" (c). Annealing back to the other arm
of the broken chromosome creates heteroduplex DNA, which can lead to
gene conversion (transfer of gray information in this case). This
mechanism cannot generate reciprocal crossing-over events. Variations
of this model that allow some crossing over also exist (see Ref.
19).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
Ura
derivatives, which have replaced the
LYS2 allele on chromosome II by the appropriate
lys2::ura3-HOcs allele. All of the strain configurations were checked by Southern blot analysis.

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
A, schematic representation of the
experimental system used in this study. Open rectangles represent the
ura3 alleles on chromosomes II and V. Striped rectangles represent LYS2
sequences on chromosome II. A stippled box
represents the HOcs; black boxes represent the
inactive HOcs-inc, which also shows two lines,
representing polymorphic sites recognized by the EcoRI and
BamHI restriction enzymes. Transfer of the cells to
galactose-containing medium induces the production of HO endonuclease,
which recognizes the HOcs and creates a DSB. This break is
repaired by a gene conversion event that transfers the
HOcs-inc to chromosome II, thus preventing
further recognition by the HO endonuclease. An associated reciprocal
exchange creates a translocation between chromosomes II and
V. B, Southern blot analysis of DNA extracted from strain
OI70 at intervals. Single colonies were resuspended in rich YEPGly
medium, grown to logarithmic phase, centrifuged, and resuspended in
YEPGal or YEPD medium. DNA was extracted from samples at various times
and subjected to Southern blot analysis. The DNA was digested with
SphI and XbaI and probed with a fragment of
chromosome V carrying the URA3 gene. The
reference band is the unbroken chromosome V, which is used
to estimate the amount of DNA in each lane. A schematic map
of the bands seen in the Southern blot is given below the
blot. An additional Southern blot analysis
demonstrates the transfer of the BamHI and EcoRI
sites from chromosome V. C, kinetics of double-strand break
repair. The Southern blot shown in B was scanned, and the
intensity of each band is presented after normalization.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
The broken chromosome is repaired by gene
conversion. A, strain OI70. Lanes 1-3 show
DNA from cells taken at 0, 2, or 10 h after transfer to
galactose-containing medium. The DNA was digested with SphI
and XbaI and probed with a fragment of chromosome
V carrying the URA3 gene. The reference band
comes from the unbroken chromosome V, which is used to
estimate the amount of DNA in each lane. Two hours after
transfer, most cells show broken chromosomes. Ten hours after transfer,
the DSB bands disappeared, and the parental band reappeared (together
with the products of translocation). Lanes 4 and
5 show the same DNA samples digested with NcoI
and BamHI. The presence of the BamHI transferred
during the gene conversion can be monitored (a similar analysis was
carried out to detect the transfer of the EcoRI site). The
parental band seen 10 h after transfer accounts for 1.2% of the
DNA and represents the maximal estimate of repair events that did not
involve the transfer of the BamHI site. Thus, ~99% of the
cells have repaired the DSB by gene conversion 10 h after transfer
to galactose. B, strain OI29; similar to A,
except that the probe is a fragment from the LYS2 gene on
chromosome II. The DNA was digested with BglII
(lanes 1-3) or BglII and BamHI
(lanes 4 and 5). The reference bands represent
adjacent fragments on chromosome II. The parental band
remaining 10 h after transfer represent 0.9% of the DNA
implying, again, that 99% of the cells of OI29 repaired the broken
chromosome by gene conversion. No bands indicative of reciprocal
recombination could be detected (asterisks denote the place
where they would have been found).
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (30K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Dependence of crossing over on homology
length. A schematic representation of the ura3-HOcs
alleles inserted at chromosome II is given. For each strain,
the length of the allele is depicted as a rectangle, with a
black box representing the Hocs. The
numbers at both sides of the box give
the length (in bp) of the homologous region at each broken arm.
b. d., below detection. The lower detection limit of our
Southern blot analyses is approximately 0.5% of the population.
Evidence that the repair was carried out by gene conversion was
obtained by monitoring the presence of EcoRI and
BamHI sites transferred from chromosome V; this
was done either by Southern blot analysis or by PCR of 24 individual
colonies followed by restriction digestion or by direct sequencing.
According to this analysis, the repair of the DSB was carried out by
gene conversion in >95% of the population in all of the strains
analyzed.

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
A, Southern blot analysis, at various
times, of DNA extracted from the MMR+ strain OI29 (1.2-kb
ura3 alleles) and a quadruple MMR
isogenic
strain. The DNA was digested with HindIII and
XbaI and probed with a fragment of chromosome II
carrying the LYS2 gene. The reference band is a
neighboring invariant DNA restriction fragment, which is used to
estimate the amount of DNA in each lane. The two
bands representing crossing over (2.2% of the DNA in the last
time point) appear to be of different intensities because of different
levels of hybridization to the probe. The LYS2 probe is
indicated as a black box with homology only to chromosome
II. B, crossing over is elevated in msh2 and
msh6 mutants. DNA of OI29 and different MMR derivatives
grown overnight on YEPGal were digested with HindIII and
XbaI and probed with a fragment of the URA3 gene.
The reference band is the uncut donor allele (similar
results were seen when a LEU2 probe was used).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
A model for DSB-initiated recombination.
After the creation of a DSB, the ends are resected (a) and
invade the homologous DNA sequence (b). The invading
sequences are subjected to a directed mismatch repair immediately with
the invasion, and DNA synthesis proceeds (c). If this
intermediate is stable, DNA synthesis is completed, and a double
Holliday junction is created (d). If the intermediate is not
stable, the invading ends re-anneal to each other, giving rise to a
gene conversion event (12, 34-37) (e). The double
Holliday junction can also be resolved to give either a gene conversion
event or a gene conversion accompanied by a crossover (4) (e
and f).
After the formation of the break, a 5' to 3' resection of ssDNA exposes 3' ends (Fig. 6a), that can invade the homologous DNA (Fig. 6b). At this stage, the mismatches present in the short DNA duplex created by the invasion are repaired. This repair is directional; the invading DNA strand is always corrected using the information present in the invaded DNA (Fig. 6c). Evidence for a fast, directional repair was obtained for recombination at the MAT locus (38). The repair could be carried out by the 3' to 5' proofreading activity of the DNA polymerase itself (19, 39), which would then proceed with DNA synthesis. Recombination can then continue by two different pathways; in one of them, the invading DNA strands complete DNA synthesis, resulting in the formation of a double Holliday junction (Fig. 6d), which can now be resolved to give either a gene conversion event or a gene conversion event accompanied by a crossover (Fig. 6, e and f) (4). In the second pathway, the intermediate shown in Fig. 6c is disassembled, and the newly synthesized DNA molecules re-anneal to each other, resulting in a gene conversion event that is never accompanied by a crossover (Fig. 6e) (12, 34-37). The choice of pathway determines whether there is a coupling between gene conversion and crossing over (9, 11). We suggest that the choice is dependent on the stability of the key intermediate depicted in Fig. 6c. Hence, the correlation between homology length and crossing over association reflects the increasing stability of this intermediate, in agreement with results obtained when spontaneous recombination was monitored (5, 33).
The choice between the pathways could be regulated in an active way to allow the uncoupling to crossing over in response to specific conditions such as limited homology on either of the invading DNA ends (Fig. 4). Specific proteins may recognize the recombination intermediate and influence its stability. Good candidates for such proteins are the members of the MMR system, which have been shown to play an anti-recombinational role in many systems (23). We have shown that the MMR proteins play a role in uncoupling crossing over from gene conversion; mutations in the MSH2 or MSH6 genes allow the detection of crossing over in strains bearing short homologous alleles. Our results suggest that the Msh2-Msh6 heterodimer may be responsible for preventing crossing over after strand invasion, either by recognizing mismatches in the newly formed heteroduplex or by destabilizing the Holliday junction. Consistent with our results, the conversion tracts were found in a recent study to be larger in MMR mutants compared with the wild type (25). The presence of bound MMR proteins may destabilize the intermediate depicted in Fig. 6c, for example, by affecting the direction of branch migration, leading to the resolution of the intermediate (15). The annealing of the newly synthesized strands would result in a gene conversion event not associated with crossing over (Fig. 6e). In the absence of the Msh2 or Msh6 proteins, the intermediate is not destabilized, resulting in an increased level of crossing over (Fig. 5). It should be noted that in contrast to their effect on crossing over, our results imply that the MMR proteins are not required to carry out gene conversion events during mitotic recombinational repair of DSBs (40). Msh2p and Msh3p, however, do seem to play a role in DSB-induced gene conversion, when nonhomologous genetic information has to be removed from the broken chromosomal ends (13, 19, 20).
The ability of yeast cells to find homology and use it to repair the
break is essential for their survival. The presence of repetitive
sequences in the genomes of most eukaryotes presents a challenge; if a
chromosome breaks close to a member of a repetitive sequence family,
recombinational repair may produce chromosomal aberrations. The
mechanism that allows the cells to deal with this challenge involves
uncoupling gene conversion from crossing over when repeated sequences
are identified through their limited homology length and/or sequence divergence.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank J. Nickoloff, S. Jinks-Robertson, and R. Kolodner for the generous gift of plasmids.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by a grant from the Israel Science Foundation (to M. K.).
Supported in part by a scholarship from the Constantiner Institute
for Molecular Genetics.
§ To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 972-3-640-9031; Fax: 972-3-640-9407; E-mail: martin@ccsg.tau.ac.il.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 2, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.C000133200
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: DSB, double-strand break; SDSA, synthesis-dependent strand annealing; MMR, mismatch repair; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; bp, base pair(s); kb, kilobase pair.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Petes, T. D., Malone, R. E., and Symington, L. S. (1991) in The Molecular and Cellular Biology of the Yeast Saccharomyces: Genome Dynamics, Protein Synthesis and Energetics (Broach, J. R. , Pringle, J. R. , and Jones, E. W., eds) , pp. 407-521, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY |
| 2. | Holliday, R. (1964) Genet. Res. 5, 282-304 |
| 3. | Meselson, M. S., and Radding, C. M. (1975) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 72, 358-361 |
| 4. | Szostak, J. W., Orr-Weaver, T. L., Rothstein, R., and Stahl, F. W. (1983) Cell 3, 725-738 |
| 5. | Jinks-Robertson, S, Michelitch, M., and Ramcharan, R. (1993) Mol. Cell. Biol. 13, 3937-3950 |
| 6. | Bennett, C. B., Lewis, A. L., Baldwin, K. K., and Resnick, M. A. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 90, 5613-5617 |
| 7. | Zenvirth, D., Arbel, T., Sherman, A., Goldway, M., Klein, S., and Simchen, G. (1992) EMBO J. 11, 3441-3447 |
| 8. | White, C. I., and Haber, J. E. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 663-674 |
| 9. | Nasmyth, K. A. (1982) Annu. Rev. Genet. 16, 439-500 |
| 10. | Klar, A. J. S., and Strathern, J. N. (1984) Nature 310, 744-748 |
| 11. | Klein, L. H. (1984) Nature 310, 748-753 |
| 12. | Nassif, N., Penney, J., Pal, S., Engels, E. R., and Gloor, G. B. (1994) Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 1613-1625 |
| 13. | Inbar, O., and Kupiec, M. (1999) Mol. Cell. Biol. 19, 4134-4142 |
| 14. | Sweetser, D. B., Hough, H., Whelden, J. F., Arbuckle, M., and Nickoloff, J. A. (1994) Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 3863-3875 |
| 15. | Alani, E., Reenan, R. A. G., and Kolodner, R. D. (1994) Genetics 137, 19-39 |
| 16. | Datta, A., Hendrix, M., Lipsitch, M., and Jinks-Robertson, S. (1997) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 94, 9757-9762 |
| 17. | Nickoloff, J. A., Singer, J. D., and Heffron, F. (1990) Mol. Cell. Biol. 10, 1174-1179 |
| 18. | Sandell, L. L., and Zakian, V. A. (1993) Cell 75, 729-739 |
| 19. | Paques, F., and Haber, J. E. (1997) Mol. Cell. Biol. 17, 6765-6771 |
| 20. | Sugawara, N., Paques, F., Colaiacovo, M., and Haber, J. E. (1997) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 94, 9214-9219 |
| 21. | Lichten, M., and Haber, J. E. (1989) Genetics 123, 261-268 |
| 22. | McGill, C. B., Shafer, B. K., Derr, L. K., and Strathern, J. A. (1993) Curr. Genet. 23, 305-314 |
| 23. | Rayssiguier, C., Thaler, D. S., and Radman, M. (1989) Nature 342, 396-401 |
| 24. | Datta, A., Adjiri, A., New, L., Crouse, G. F., and Jinks-Robertson, S. (1996) Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 1085-1093 |
| 25. | Chen, W., and Jinks-Robertson, S. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 6525-6537 |
| 26. | Iaccarino, I., Palombo, F., Drummond, J., Totty, N. F., Hsuan, J. J., Modrich, P., and Jiricny, J. (1996) Curr. Biol. 6, 484-486 |
| 27. | Palombo, F., Iaccarino, I., Nakajima, E., Ikejima, M., Shimada, T., and Jiricny, J. (1996) Curr. Biol. 6, 1181-1184 |
| 28. | Johnson, R. E., Kovvalli, G. K., Prakash, L., and Prakash, S. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 7285-7888 |
| 29. | Alani, E. (1996) Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 5604-5615 |
| 30. | Marsischky, G. T., Lee, S., Griffith, J., and Kolodner, R. D. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 7200-7206 |
| 31. | Richardson, C., Moynahan, M. E., and Jasin, M. (1998) Genes Dev. 12, 3831-3842 |
| 32. | Fujitani, Y., Yamamoto, K., and Kobayashi, I. (1995) Genetics 140, 797-809 |
| 33. | Aguilera, A., and Klein, H. (1989) Genetics 123, 683-694 |
| 34. | Formosa, T., and Alberts, B. M. (1986) Cell 47, 793-806 |
| 35. | Belmaaza, A., and Chartrand, P. (1994) Mutat. Res. 314, 199-208 |
| 36. | Paques, F., Leung, W. Y., and Haber, J. E. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 2045-2054 |
| 37. | Weng, Y., and Nickoloff, J. A. (1998) Genetics 148, 59-70 |
| 38. | Haber, J. E., Ray, B. L., Kolb, J. M., and White, C. I. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 90, 3363-3367 |
| 39. | Holmes, A. M., and Haber, J. E. (1999) Cell 96, 415-424 |
| 40. | Porter, G., Westmoreland, J., Priebe, S., and Resnick, M. (1996) Genetics 143, 755-767 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
C. Welz-Voegele and S. Jinks-Robertson Sequence Divergence Impedes Crossover More Than Noncrossover Events During Mitotic Gap Repair in Yeast Genetics, July 1, 2008; 179(3): 1251 - 1262. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. A. H. Neuwirth, M. Honma, and A. J. Grosovsky Interchromosomal Crossover in Human Cells Is Associated with Long Gene Conversion Tracts Mol. Cell. Biol., August 1, 2007; 27(15): 5261 - 5274. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Shedge, M. Arrieta-Montiel, A. C. Christensen, and S. A. Mackenzie Plant Mitochondrial Recombination Surveillance Requires Unusual RecA and MutS Homologs PLANT CELL, April 1, 2007; 19(4): 1251 - 1264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Nicholson, R. M. Fabbri, J. W. Reeves, and G. F. Crouse The Effects of Mismatch Repair and RAD1 Genes on Interchromosomal Crossover Recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, June 1, 2006; 173(2): 647 - 659. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Malkova, M. L. Naylor, M. Yamaguchi, G. Ira, and J. E. Haber RAD51-Dependent Break-Induced Replication Differs in Kinetics and Checkpoint Responses from RAD51-Mediated Gene Conversion Mol. Cell. Biol., February 1, 2005; 25(3): 933 - 944. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Egli, E. Hafen, and W. Schaffner An Efficient Method to Generate Chromosomal Rearrangements by Targeted DNA Double-Strand Breaks in Drosophila melanogaster Genome Res., July 1, 2004; 14(7): 1382 - 1393. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Jazayeri, A. D. McAinsh, and S. P. Jackson Saccharomyces cerevisiae Sin3p facilitates DNA double-strand break repair PNAS, February 10, 2004; 101(6): 1644 - 1649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Aylon and M. Kupiec The Checkpoint Protein Rad24 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Is Involved in Processing Double-Strand Break Ends and in Recombination Partner Choice Mol. Cell. Biol., September 15, 2003; 23(18): 6585 - 6596. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. N. Dobrovolsky, P. B. McKinzie, J. G. Shaddock, R. A. Mittelstaedt, R. H. Heflich, and B. L. Parsons Pms2 deficiency results in increased mutation in the Hprt gene but not the Tk gene of Tk+/- transgenic mice Mutagenesis, July 1, 2003; 18(4): 365 - 370. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Aylon, B. Liefshitz, G. Bitan-Banin, and M. Kupiec Molecular Dissection of Mitotic Recombination in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mol. Cell. Biol., February 15, 2003; 23(4): 1403 - 1417. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Stark and M. Jasin Extensive Loss of Heterozygosity Is Suppressed during Homologous Repair of Chromosomal Breaks Mol. Cell. Biol., January 15, 2003; 23(2): 733 - 743. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Ira and J. E. Haber Characterization of RAD51-Independent Break-Induced Replication That Acts Preferentially with Short Homologous Sequences Mol. Cell. Biol., September 15, 2002; 22(18): 6384 - 6392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Gray and S. M. Honigberg Effect of chromosomal locus, GC content and length of homology on PCR-mediated targeted gene replacement in Saccharomyces Nucleic Acids Res., December 15, 2001; 29(24): 5156 - 5162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. S. Symington, L. E. Kang, and S. Moreau Alteration of gene conversion tract length and associated crossing over during plasmid gap repair in nuclease-deficient strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Nucleic Acids Res., December 1, 2000; 28(23): 4649 - 4656. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||