![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 2, 1553-1559, January 11, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, September 13, 2001, and in revised form, October 24, 2001
UvrB plays a major role in recognition and
processing of DNA lesions during nucleotide excision repair. The
crystal structure of UvrB revealed a similar fold as found in monomeric
DNA helicases. Homology modeling suggested that the Nucleotide excision repair
(NER)1 is a highly conserved
DNA repair pathway found in bacteria, yeast, and man (1, 2). NER is
remarkable because of the wide variety of chemically and structurally
distinct DNA lesions that are substrates for this process (3). NER has
been fully reconstituted from bacterial and mammalian proteins and can
be viewed as four basic steps, damage recognition and processing,
incision, repair synthesis, and ligation. One of the best-characterized
NER systems is the UvrABC nuclease from Escherichia coli (4,
5). Repair by UvrABC is initiated when the trimeric complex of
UvrA2B recognizes the damaged site. It has been suggested
that the UvrA2B complex may locate damage through a limited
helicase activity (6-8). However, more recent studies suggest that the
strand-separating activity of the UvrA2B complex is not
through a helicase-driven translocation step but in fact is due to
local, relatively slow changes within the protein-DNA complex leading
to a stable UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex and dissociation of the UvrA
dimer (9-12). Once the UvrB-DNA complex has formed, UvrC, in what
appears to be two different binding modes, first makes an incision four
to five nucleotides 3' to the modified nucleotide in an
ATP-dependent step, which is followed by rapid incision
seven nucleotides 5' to the lesion in a step that does not require ATP
hydrolysis (13). Recent work from Goosen and co-workers (14-17)
strongly suggests, that in contrast to earlier reports (18, 19), UvrB
has no intrinsic nuclease activity; 3' incision is mediated by the
N-terminal domain of UvrC and 5' incision appears to be mediated by a
nuclease center in the C-terminal domain of UvrC. After the incision
reaction UvrD (helicase II) and DNA polymerase I are necessary and
sufficient to release the excised oligonucleotide and allow UvrB and
UvrC to participate in another round of incision (20, 21).
UvrB plays a central role in bacterial NER, participating in damage
recognition, processing the DNA into a stable pre-incision complex,
helping direct the activity of UvrC to perform the dual incisions, and
finally staying bound to the non-damaged strand until being dislodged
by DNA polymerase I (19, 22). UvrB contains six highly conserved
sequence motifs, containing 10-40 amino acid residues each, that are
found in all DNA helicases (23, 24). Three laboratories have
independently solved the crystal structures of UvrB from thermophilic
bacteria (25-28). UvrB is folded into five structural domains, 1a, 1b,
2, 3, and 4. The structure of domain 4, disordered in crystals of the
full-length protein, has been determined separately (29). Domains 1a
and 3 contain the six helicase motifs, placing UvrB as a member of the
helicase superfamily II (30).
Superpositioning of UvrB onto other helicase structures has revealed
that UvrB domains 1a and 3 are structurally closely related to the
monomeric helicase fold found in PcrA, NS3, and Rep (28). Domains 1b
and 2 are unique to UvrB, the latter being a binding site for UvrA.
Comparing the structure of UvrB with these helicase structures revealed
that UvrB contains all the structural properties of a helicase that
couple ATP binding and hydrolysis to domain motions. However, if UvrB
binds DNA in a similar manner as observed in the DNA complexes of these
helicases, then the translocated DNA strand would be partially covered
by a flexible Only one known mutation has been made in this motif, Glu-99 in
UvrB (of E. coli), which was found to decrease the incision activity of the UvrABC system. To investigate the role of the Enzymes--
UvrA, UvrB, and UvrC proteins (Fig. 1C)
from Bacillus caldotenax were purified by standard
procedures (NEB IMPACTTM T7 system manual) with some modifications for
each protein, which will be published elsewhere. T4 polynucleotide
kinase was purchased from Life Technologies, Inc. Pfu
DNA polymerase was purchased from Stratagene.
Construction of the DNA Substrates--
Fluorescein-containing DNA substrates were
synthesized by Sigma. The DNA sequence of a 50-bp dsDNA
substrate containing a single internal fluorescein adduct
(F26-50 dsDNA) is shown in Fig. 2A. For 5'
labeling, 10 pmol of 50-mer fluorescein-containing top strand was
incubated with 25 units of T4 polynucleotide kinase in 70 mM Tris/Cl (pH 7.6), 10 mM MgCl2,
100 mM KCl, 1 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, and 15 pmol
of [
The DNA sequence of the helicase substrate (HS1F-M13mp19) is shown in
Fig. 2B. Five pmol of a 26-mer containing an internal fluorescein adduct (HS1F) were labeled at its 5' terminus under the
same conditions as the F26-50 top strand. The helicase
substrate was constructed by hybridizing 0.4 pmol of 5'-labeled HS1F
oligonucleotide with equimolar amounts of M13mp19(+) strand (Life
Technologies, Inc.) and purified as described above.
Gel Mobility Shift Assay--
Binding reactions were performed
with 2 nM DNA substrate (5'-32P-labeled
F26-50 dsDNA), 20 nM B. caldotenax
UvrA, and 60 nM B. caldotenax UvrB in 20 µl of
UvrABC buffer (50 mM Tris/Cl (pH 7.5), 10 mM
MgCl2, 50 mM KCl, 1 mM ATP, 5 mM dithiothreitol) for 20 min at 55 °C. Glycerol was
then added to the reaction (8%v/v), and the reaction mixture was
loaded onto a 4% native polyacrylamide gel (80:1). The gel and the
running buffer (89 mM Tris, 89 mM boric acid, 2 mM EDTA) contained 1 mM ATP and 10 mM MgCl2. The electrophoresis was performed for
3 h at 100 V at room temperature. The gel was dried and exposed
against Storage Phosphor Screen (Molecular Dynamics) overnight at room temperature.
UvrABC Incision Assay--
The 5' terminally labeled
F26-50 dsDNA substrate (2 nM) was incised by
UvrABC (20 nM UvrA, 60 nM UvrB, 50 nM UvrC) in 20 µl of UvrABC buffer at 55 °C for 1 h. The reaction was terminated by adding EDTA (20 mM). The
samples were denatured with formamide and heated to 90 °C for 5 min
and then quick-chilled on ice. The incision products were analyzed by
electrophoresis on a 12% polyacrylamide sequencing gel under
denaturating conditions at 400-600 V with Tris-borate-EDTA
buffer. In the case of the helicase substrate incision, the reaction
mixture (15 µl) contained ~8 fmol (in ssDNA circles) of DNA
substrate, 50 nM UvrA, 100 nM UvrB, and 100 nM UvrC in buffer A2 (50 mM Tris/Cl (pH 7.5),
100 mM KCl, 15 mM MgCl2, 1 mM EDTA, 5 mM ATP, 2 mM
dithiothreitol) and was incubated at 42 °C for 1 h. The
reaction was quenched with 5 µl of stop solution (25% (v/v) Ficoll,
1% SDS, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.25% orange G) and heated for 2 min
at 85 °C, and the entire sample was then loaded onto a 15%
denaturating polyacrylamide gel equilibrated with Tris-borate EDTA
running buffer. Electrophoresis was carried out at 400-600 V for 1-2
h. The gels were processed as described above.
CD Spectroscopy--
CD spectra were measured at 20 °C on an
Aviv model 62 ADS spectrometer using rectangular cells with a path
length of 0.2 mm. Proteins were measured at concentrations between 0.6 and 1.4 mg/ml in a buffer containing 500 mM KF and 10 mM K2HPO4 at pH 7.4. UV absorption
at 280 nm was used to determine protein concentrations. The extinction
coefficients of wild type UvrB (658 amino acids) and UvrB Oligonucleotide-releasing Assay--
The reaction mixture
contained 50 nM UvrA, 100 nM UvrB, and ~8
fmol (in ssDNA circles) of helicase substrate (HS1F-M13mp19) in buffer
A1 (50 mM Tris/Cl (pH 7.5), 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 2 mM ATP, 5 mM dithiothreitol) and was incubated at 37 °C for various time intervals. The reaction was stopped with 5 µl of stop
solution (50% (v/v) glycerol, 1% SDS, 0.1 M EDTA, 0.25%
orange G), and the entire sample was loaded on 12% non-denaturating
acrylamide gel in Tris-borate EDTA running buffer. Electrophoresis was
run at 120-150 V for 1-2 h, and the gels were processed as described previously.
ATP Hydrolysis Assay--
The conversion of ATP to ADP by the
UvrABC system was determined by a coupled enzyme assay system
consisting of pyruvate kinase and lactate dehydrogenase to link the
hydrolysis of ATP to the oxidation of NADH. The assay mixture consisted
of 50 mM Tris/Cl (pH 7.5), 50 mM NaCl, 4 mM MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 20 units/ml lactate dehydrogenase, 20 units/ml pyruvate kinase, 2 mM phosphoenol pyruvate, 0.15 mM NADH and 200 nM Uvr proteins in the presence or absence of 50 ng of
UV-irradiated DNA substrate. DNA substrate was prepared by exposure of
pUC18 DNA to 200 J/m2. B. caldotenax UvrA, UvrB,
and UvrC proteins were preheated to 55 °C for 10 min to inactivate
E. coli contaminant protein activities. The reaction mixture
(0.5 ml) was allowed to equilibrate at 37 °C, and the assay was
initiated by the addition of ATP (0.5 mM). The rate of ATP
hydrolysis was calculated from the linear change in absorbance at
To test our padlock DNA binding model and the importance of the
UvrABC-mediated Incision of a Fluorescein-containing 50-bp Duplex
Using the UvrB Loading of the CD Spectra of Wild Type and the Strand Destabilizing Activity of Incision of Strand-destabilizing Substrate by ATPase Activity of Mutational analysis of UvrB has not yet identified which parts of
UvrB are involved in DNA binding (reviewed in Ref. 28). One
complication is that UvrB has an ATPase activity that is stimulated by
DNA binding and is necessary for the formation of the pre-incision complex. Thus, defects of UvrB mutants defective in DNA binding might
be due to defects in ATP binding/hydrolysis and vice versa. So far,
mutants characterized for both properties showed either inactivation of
both or no effect on either. Most of the mutations that affect DNA
binding are located in the six highly conserved sequence motifs found
in helicases of superfamily I and II. In a previous report (25) we
presented a three-dimensional structure of the UvrB protein from the
thermophilic bacterium B. caldotenax. The crystal structure
of B. caldotenax UvrB has a significant level of similarity
with that of helicase NS3 (34). By superposition of B. caldotenax UvrB with the helicase domains of NS3 complexed with
DNA, we have hypothesized a model for the UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex, which has a pivotal role in the mechanism of damage
recognition by the UvrABC system. In our model we propose a
padlock-like binding mode of UvrB to wrap around one DNA strand by
inserting a To test our model and investigate the functional role of the
During the late 1980s and early 1990s Grossman and co-workers developed
a "helicase scanning model" of damage recognition (6-8). In this
model, UvrA2B can displace short oligonucleotides and also
generate negative and positive supercoiled DNA as it migrates through
the helix in search of damage. It was predicted that the helicase
machine will stall at a lesion. However, UV was found to stimulate the
negative/positive supercoiling, inconsistent with this earlier model
(8).
Because of these discrepancies Gordienko and Rupp (11) developed a
"damage-processing model" in which damage clearly increased the
displacement of oligonucleotides (11). In this model UvrA2B finds damage by random diffusion. Once a lesion is encountered, the
affinity of UvrA for DNA and UvrB is somehow weakened, and the
dissociation of UvrA results in a UvrB-DNA complex. The DNA in
this complex is greatly distorted, and it is believed that it is this
step that requires ATP binding/hydrolysis to allow UvrB to facilitate
cleavage upon UvrC binding. It is important to note that although these
experiments have described the activity of UvrA2B as
helicase-like, the DNA in these complexes is only destablized and not
fully dissociated. In agreement with these results, we show here that
the release of the 26-mer containing the damage does not occur until
the addition of the loading buffer containing SDS. Because UvrC can
still incise the destabilized strand, these results are inconsistent
with a true helicase activity in which the strand is fully displaced
from the complement strand. Our results in Fig. 7 demonstrate that
deletion of the The pre-incision complex between UvrB and damaged DNA is a key
intermediate in excision repair linking damage recognition to the
location of dual incision. Once the pre-incision complex is formed UvrB
has to remain bound tightly to the DNA without translocating, ensuring
precise incisions by UvrC and subsequent removal of the damaged
fragment. In contrast to many non-sequence specific protein-DNA
complexes, the UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex does not dissociate at
high ionic strength, suggesting a hydrophobic mode of DNA binding. It
has been suggested that UvrB might form favorable hydrophobic
interactions with aromatic amino acid side chains and the DNA bases;
however, this has never been directly determined (35) and awaits the
solution of a co-crystal structure.
We hypothesize that there are five critical regions in UvrB that are
necessary and sufficient for DNA damage binding and processing: 1) a
damage recognition pocket located at the base of the Having formed a stable UvrB-DNA complex, how is incision achieved? It
is believed that UvrC is recruited to the UvrB-DNA complex through a
coiled-coiled domain at the C terminus of UvrB. We envision that UvrB
uses the closure of domain III through ATP binding and/or hydrolysis to
further distort the damaged DNA strand in order to drive the phosphate
backbone into the nuclease cleft at the N terminus of the UvrC to
initiate the 3'-incision (37). However, the ATPase activity of In summary, our data clearly indicate that the upper part of the
While this paper was in press, Goosen and
co-workers (EMBO J. 20, 6140-6149) described three
sets of double mutants (Y101+F108; Y95+Y96; Y92+Y93) that also support
a direct role of the *
This research was supported by grants from the Department of
Energy and from the Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical
Sciences (to C. K.).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.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, October 30, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M108847200
The abbreviations used are:
NER, nucleotide
excision repair;
bp, base pair;
dsDNA, double-stranded DNA;
ssDNA, single-stranded DNA;
wt, wild type.
The
-Hairpin Motif of UvrB Is Essential for DNA Binding,
Damage Processing, and UvrC-mediated Incisions*
§,
,
Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, NIEHS,
National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27709, § Department of Molecular Genetics, Cancer Research
Institute, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Vlarska 7, 833 91 Bratislava,
Slovakia, ¶ Department of Pharmacological Sciences, Center for
Structural Biology, State University of New York,
Stony Brook, New York 11794-5115
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-hairpin motif
of UvrB might be involved in DNA binding (Theis, K., Chen, P. J.,
Skorvaga, M., Van Houten, B., and Kisker, C. (1999) EMBO J. 18, 6899-6907). To determine a role of the
-hairpin of
Bacillus caldotenax UvrB, we have constructed a deletion
mutant, 
h UvrB, which lacks residues Gln-97-Asp-112 of the
-hairpin. 
h UvrB does not form a stable UvrB-DNA pre-incision
complex and is inactive in UvrABC-mediated incision. However, 
h
UvrB is able to bind to UvrA and form a complex with UvrA and damaged
DNA, competing with wild type UvrB. In addition, 
h UvrB shows
wild type-like ATPase activity in complex with UvrA that is stimulated
by damaged DNA. In contrast to wild type UvrB, the ATPase activity of
mutant UvrB does not lead to a destabilization of the damaged duplex.
These results indicate that the conserved
-hairpin motif is a major
factor in DNA binding.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-hairpin structure. This unique structural element
(see Figs. 1, A and B) connecting domains 1a and
1b was found to be highly conserved in all bacterial species. The
-hairpin is held in place with respect to domain 1b by two salt
bridges and hydrophobic interactions at the base and the tip of the
hairpin. Similar
-hairpin motifs found in PcrA and RNA polymerase II
are thought to be essential for the strand opening performed by these
two proteins (31, 32). We have previously shown that the DNA in the
UvrB-DNA complex is partially melted over a 5-bp region (12). Based on
these data, the UvrB structure, and comparisons to helicase structures and properties, a padlock binding mode for UvrB DNA interactions has
been proposed in which UvrB wraps the
-hairpin around one DNA strand
of partially unwound DNA in the pre-incision complex (25, 28). One
critical test for this model is whether mutations in the
-hairpin
affect binding and processing of damaged DNA.
-hairpin motif in more detail, we constructed a
-hairpin mutant that replaced residues 97-112 with a glycine residue. We report here
that this
-hairpin deletion mutant is greatly reduced in its ability
to support incision, bind to a damaged containing duplex, and
destabilize a damage containing 26-mer but has retained the ability to
hydrolyze ATP in a UvrA- and damaged DNA-dependent manner.
Thus, ATP hydrolysis and formation of the UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex
are uncoupled in this mutant. The ability of the mutant to form a
UvrA2B-DNA complex and to hydrolyze ATP combined with its
inability to form the UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex strongly suggests
that the deleted residues are directly involved in DNA binding by UvrB.
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-Hairpin Deletion Mutant of UvrB--
The
deletion of amino acid residues Gln-97 to Asp-112 and introduction of a
glycine residue in the deleted region constitutes the 
h UvrB
mutant. The uvrB gene has been subcloned into a pUC18 vector, and the construction of the mutant was performed by PCR using
pUC18uvrB as a template DNA, db3 (5'-GCGAAAATCAACGATGAAATCGAC-3') and
db5 ('-GCCATAGTAATCGTAATAGCTGACAAATA-3') oligonucleotides as PCR
primers, and Pfu DNA polymerase using the QuikChange
site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene). The entire fragment
amplified by PCR was sequenced to ensure that only the desired but no
additional mutations were introduced.
-32P]ATP (3000 Ci/mmol). After incubation at
37 °C for 1 h, the reaction was terminated by incubation at
80 °C for 10 min in the presence of 20 mM EDTA.
Annealing of the top and the bottom strand was performed in the
presence of 50 mM NaCl followed by purification through
Bio-Spin P-30 polyacrylamide gel column (Bio-Rad) for removal of
unincorporated nucleotides. The double-stranded character and
homogeneity of the 50-bp substrate were examined by a restriction assay
(38) and analyzed on a 12% polyacrylamide sequencing gel under
denaturating conditions.

h (643 amino acids) were calculated from the primary sequence to be 33,280 and
30,720 liters/mol/cm, respectively. The CD spectra were sampled at 1-nm
intervals with a time constant of 1 s and 10 scans for both
samples and blanks, resulting in an acquisition time of 1 h for
each spectrum.
= 340 nm over 30 min, which accompanied the oxidation of NADH,
using a Beckman spectrophotometer. Determinations were performed in
duplicate and done three separate times. Data are reported as the
means ± S.D.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-hairpin motif in the recognition of DNA damage, we have constructed
a
-hairpin deletion mutant of the B. caldotenax UvrB protein, designed as 
h UvrB, with amino acid residues from Gln97 to Asp112 removed and the resulting gap bridged by a glycine residue (Fig. 1, A and B).
In the resulting deletion mutant only the upper half of the
-hairpin
was removed. To test the properties of this mutant, we reconstituted
the B. caldotenax UvrABC nuclease system with purified UvrA,
UvrB, and UvrC (Fig. 1C), each obtained via intein fusion
proteins.

View larger version (51K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Construction of the UvrB
-hairpin deletion mutant
(
h UvrB). Panel A,
alignments of UvrB proteins from B. caldotenax
(Bca), Bacillus subtilis (Bsu),
E. coli (Eco), and Thermus
thermophilus (Tth). At each position, residues other
than those present in B. caldotenax UvrB are
highlighted. The amino acid residues deleted in 
h UvrB
are shown in a box. Panel B, location of the
-hairpin (darkest shading) in the
three-dimensional structure of UvrB. In the deletion mutant, 
h
UvrB, residues Gln-97-Asp-112 have been replaced with a glycine.
Gln-97 and Asp-112 are indicated by spheres in this ribbon diagram.
Panel C, SDS-PAGE gel showing purified UvrA, UvrB, 
h
UvrB, and UvrC from B. caldotenax.
-Hairpin Deletion Mutant--
We first investigated
the effect of 
h UvrB on UvrABC endonuclease mediated-incision.
The substrate was a 50-bp duplex containing a fluorescein moiety in the
middle of the top strand (position F26, see Fig.
2A), labeled at its 5'
terminus with [
-32P]ATP. Results of the UvrABC
endonuclease incision kinetics of F26-50 dsDNA are shown in
Fig. 3. Panel A contains data
for wild type UvrB, panel B contains data for 
h UvrB,
and panel C summarizes the incision kinetics. The results
show that 
h UvrB does not support UvrABC-mediated incision of
substrate DNA. The residual incision of
5-6% represents the level
of background for the substrate used. Clearly, deleting the
-hairpin
of UvrB disrupts one of the steps that lead to incision of the damaged
DNA.

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
DNA substrates used in this study. Panel
A, F26-50 dsDNA substrate, 50-base pair duplex with
fluorescein attached at position 26. Panel B, schematic
representation of the helicase substrate, HS1F-M13mp19(+). The figure
shows the complete nucleotide sequence of a fluorescein-containing
26-mer (bottom strand), HS1F, that has been annealed to
single-stranded M13mp19(+) DNA (top strand). The
position of the fluorescein adduct in the bottom strand is
designated as a bold F.

View larger version (30K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.

h UvrB does not
support incision of a fluorescein containing a 50-bp duplex. The
F26-50 dsDNA substrate (2 nM) (sequence shown
in Fig. 2A with a 5' terminally labeled modified strand) was
incubated with UvrA (20 nM), UvrB (60 nM), and
UvrC (50 nM) at 55 °C for 1 h. The samples were
analyzed by PAGE under denaturating conditions. Panel A, wt
UvrB; Panel B, 
h UvrB. Panel C, kinetics of
the incision reaction.

h UvrB Protein onto the Site of
Damage--
The failure of 
h UvrB to confer endonuclease
activity to the UvrABC system might be due to failure to recognize the
damage or failure to incise the damage after successful recognition. We
used a gel mobility shift assay to test whether the intermediate between these processes, the UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex, is formed
with the 
h UvrB mutant (Figs. 4 and
5). The 
h UvrB protein does not
form a stable complex with the damaged DNA neither at low
concentrations (1-20 nM; Fig. 4A) nor at higher
amounts (50-200 nM; Fig. 4B), whereas loading
of wild type UvrB is very efficient, even at 5 nM (Fig.
4A, lane 7). It is interesting to note that the
band corresponding to the UvrA2-DNA complex (Fig. 4B, lane 2) migrates slightly faster than the
samples containing the 
h UvrB protein (Fig. 4B,
lanes 4-6). This slower mobility band probably represents
the UvrA2
h UvrB-DNA complex. To further investigate
whether 
h UvrB is able to bind to UvrA, we have conducted
competition experiments between the mutant and the wild type UvrB for
binding to UvrA and F26-50 dsDNA. In these experiments (Fig. 5) there is a clear difference in mobility between the
UvrA2-DNA and UvrA2
h UvrB-DNA complexes
(Fig. 5, compare lane 2 with lanes 3-5).
Increasing amounts of 
h UvrB (10, 50, 100 nM) at a
constant wild type UvrB concentration (5 nM) resulted in a
significant reduction of the amount of wt UvrB-DNA complex (Fig.
5, lanes 4-6 versus lane 8). This dominant
negative effect of 
h UvrB supports the idea that 
h UvrB is
properly folded and shows that it is capable of interacting with UvrA,
resulting in the reduction of the amount of UvrA molecules available to
interact with wild type UvrB.

View larger version (69K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Binding of

h UvrB to F26-50
dsDNA. UvrA (20 nM) was incubated with various amounts
of wild-type or mutant (
h) UvrB as indicated at 55 °C for 20 min in the presence of 2 nM F26-50 duplex DNA
with the modified strand 5' terminally labeled. The reaction mixtures
were analyzed on 4% polyacrylamide native gels in the presence of ATP
(1 mM) and MgCl2 (10 mM).
Panel A, lower concentrations of 
h UvrB (1-10
nM); panel B, higher concentrations of 
h
UvrB (50-200 nM).

View larger version (47K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Competition between wt and

h UvrB in binding to
F26-50 dsDNA. UvrA (20 nM), wt UvrB (5 nM), and increasing amounts of 
h UvrB (10-100
nM) were incubated at 55 °C for 20 min with 2 nM F26-50 dsDNA. The reaction mixtures were
analyzed by 4% native PAGE using Tris-borate-EDTA running buffer with
1 mM ATP and 10 mM
MgCl2.
-Hairpin Deletion Mutant
UvrB--
Fig. 6 shows CD spectra of
wild type (filled ovals) and 
h (open
ovals) UvrB proteins, respectively. The results exhibit nearly
identical CD spectra for both wild type and mutant proteins, indicating
that the deletion of the
-hairpin motif in UvrB does not affect the
global folding of the protein.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
CD Spectra of wt and

h UvrB. CD spectra of wt UvrB
(filled circles) and 
h UvrB (open circles)
collected in the range between 180 and 260 nm.

h UvrB--
In our padlock
DNA binding model, we proposed that the
-hairpin of UvrB requires at
least 5 base pairs of DNA to be disrupted so that the
-hairpin could
be inserted between the strands of DNA. The limited strand opening by
the UvrA2B complex has been shown previously to be
important for dynamic recognition of DNA damage (11, 12) and has been
called a limited helicase activity (6, 7). To evaluate the importance
of the
-hairpin motif for the presumed helicase activity of the
UvrA2B complex, we assayed 
h UvrB in a strand
destabilization assay that measures the release of a radioactively
labeled 26-mer containing fluorescein annealed to a single-stranded DNA
circle (M13mp19(+) strand). The results are shown in Fig.
7, with kinetics of the 26-mer release
summarized in panel C. Although wild type UvrB supports the
release of the fluorescein-containing 26-mer very efficiently, reaching
about 80% release of oligomer after 60 min, the
-hairpin deletion
mutant has very low, if any, activity. It is critical to realize that the "release" of the oligomer is assayed after the addition of a
stop buffer containing1% SDS and 0.1 M EDTA.

View larger version (38K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.

h UvrB is not
capable of destabilizing or incising a fluorescein-containing 26-mer
annealed to ssHS1F-M13mp19(+) DNA. For the kinetics of release,
HS1F-M13mp19(+) DNA (8 fmol) (sequence shown in Fig. 1B,
with the modified strand 5' terminally labeled) was incubated with UvrA
(50 nM) and UvrB (100 nM), wt, or 
h at
37 °C for the indicated periods of time. The reactions were
terminated with stop buffer containing SDS, and the reaction mixtures
were analyzed by 12% native PAGE. The figure shows the kinetics of
26-mer release by wt UvrB (panel A), 
h UvrB
(panel B), and graphic comparison of both wt and 
h
UvrB (panel C). Panel D, incision of a 26-mer
containing fluorescein. HS1F-M13mp19(+) DNA (8 fmol) with a 5'
terminally labeled modified strand was incubated with UvrA (20 nM), UvrB (60 nM), and UvrC (50 nM)
at 55 °C for 1 h. The samples were analyzed by PAGE under
denaturing conditions.

h UvrB--
If
UvrB is capable of true strand displacement like a bona fide
helicase, then the displaced strand would be single-stranded. However,
single-stranded damaged DNA is not a substrate for the UvrABC system.
As can be clearly seen in Fig. 7D, the helix-destabilizing substrate, a 5'-labeled 26-mer containing a fluorescein adduct annealed
to M13mp19 ssDNA, was incised by the UvrABC nuclease system. The
incision efficiency supported by wild type UvrB was ~55% (at
42 °C for 1 h; Fig. 7, panel D, lane
2), whereas the 
h UvrB mutant did not support any incision
of the 26-mer-fluorescein/M13 substrate. Based on this incision of the
strand-displacement substrate with wild type UvrB (as part of the
UvrABC endonuclease), we suggest that UvrA2B does not
completely release the damage-containing 26-mer from a ssDNA circle
until SDS is added as part of the stop buffer. Therefore, we feel it is
inappropriate to call this activity a true helicase, and we suggest it
is better to call this property of UvrA2UvrB a
strand-destabilizing activity.

h UvrB--
It has been shown previously
that ATP binding/hydrolysis is absolutely required for NER (6). In our
padlock model (25) we suggest that the formation of a stable UvrB-DNA
pre-incision complex requires free energy, which might be available
either through ATP hydrolysis by UvrA2B or as a result of
complex formation. To test whether the altered DNA binding properties
of 
h UvrB are due to an altered ATPase activity, we have examined
this activity for both wild type UvrB and 
h UvrB (Table
I). By itself, 
h UvrB has a very
low ATPase activity at 37 °C (2.88 µmol of ATPase/min/mg of
protein), similar to wild type UvrB (1.40 µmol/min/mg). In this
respect, B. caldotenax UvrB resembles E. coli
UvrB that has a cryptic ATPase activity. It has been shown that full
ATPase activity of UvrB requires the presence of both UvrA and DNA
(33). Our data show that the ATPase activity of 
h UvrB is not
affected by deletion of the
-hairpin motif. In fact, in the presence
of UV-irradiated DNA, the ATPase activity of the UvrA2

hUvrB complex is higher than that of the UvrA2 wt
UvrB complex (29, 22 µmol/min/mg, respectively). This is further
evidence that UvrA and 
h UvrB interact, as was suggested from our
previous experiments (gel mobility shifts, CD spectra, helicase assay).
The deletion of the
-hairpin does not interfere with the ATP
hydrolysis by UvrB in the UvrA2B complex, but apparently
the free energy of hydrolysis is not coupled to proper processing of
the DNA that is necessary for UvrC binding and incision.
ATPase activity of B. caldotenax UvrA, and UvrB
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-hairpin between the two strands of DNA (28).
-hairpin motif, we constructed a
-hairpin deletion mutant
(
h UvrB) in which residues 97-112 are replaced by a glycine,
removing the tip of the
-hairpin. Data presented here show that the
-hairpin deletion mutant 1) is greatly reduced in its ability to
support incision, 2) is unable to bind to a damage-containing duplex, 3) cannot destabilize a damage-containing 26-mer, and 4) has retained the ability to hydrolyze ATP in a UvrA and damaged
DNA-dependent manner. Thus, functions of UvrB required for
the formation of the UvrB-DNA complex, namely UvrA binding and ATP
hydrolysis, are not disrupted in the deletion mutant. Nevertheless,

h UvrB is unable to form a stable complex with DNA, strongly
suggesting that the deleted residues are directly involved in DNA binding.
-hairpin inhibits the helix destabilization step.
-hairpin; 2) a
flexible
-hairpin, which acts as a padlock to secure the non-damaged
strand in place; 3) an ATP binding site, which facilitates conformational changes in UvrB; 4) the coiled-coiled C terminus of
UvrB, which interacts with UvrC; and finally, 5) residues in domain 3 that contain helicase motifs IV-VI which help drive a conformational
change in the DNA, leading to incision. How might the
-hairpin motif
participate in allowing UvrB to bind and process damage? In our padlock
DNA binding model of UvrB, the
-hairpin must first open to accept a
strand of DNA and then close to lock one DNA strand; we favor the
non-damaged strand, forming a stable UvrB-DNA interaction. Taking a
closer look at the anatomy of the
-hairpin reveals four critical
regions, three of which were removed in the 
h mutant. The tip of
the
-hairpin is hydrophobic in character and interacts with
hydrophobic residues in domain Ib. Two salt bridges located in the
middle of the hairpin provide further strength to the lock. Preserved
in the 
h mutant is an aromatic base containing several Tyr and
Phe residues that are 100% conserved in all bacterial species examined
to date. We propose that these residues are part of the damage
recognition pocket. However, the interaction energy of these residues
with the damaged strand without the strong padlock holding onto the
non-damaged strand are apparently insufficient to provide sufficient
binding energy in the 
h mutant for productive binding (Fig. 4)
and incision (Fig. 3). In this regard it is interesting to note that
UvrB binds to single-stranded oligonucleotides with a
Kd of 0.83-1.5 µM and has an
increased affinity for damaged DNA (19, 36). Because all our
experiments were performed with UvrB and DNA concentrations well below
this Kd, it is not unexpected that we did not see
any productive binding or incision.

h
UvrB mutant is still active and actually more robust than wild type
(Table I), suggesting that futile cycles of ATP hydrolysis occur as the

h mutant UvrB attempts to grip and distort the DNA with the
remaining stump (lacking the salt bridge and hydrophobic tip, see Fig.
1B). We have previously shown that UvrB and UvrC, in the
complete absence of UvrA, can in an ATP-dependent manner
coordinately incise a DNA bubble-substrate containing a lesion in a
4-6 bases unpaired region (12). Loss of the
-hairpin motif
completely abolished this activity (data not shown), further supporting
the hypothesis that the
-hairpin is required for productive DNA
binding and incision. Finally, these observations taken together
suggest that UvrA is required to help open up the DNA strands for
insertion of the
-hairpin into the DNA helix, thereby allowing
proper juxtaposition of the damage recognition pocket to the site of
the DNA lesion.
-hairpin (residues 97-112) is absolutely required for DNA damage
recognition by the UvrABC system, since the 
h UvrB failed to bind
the damaged DNA, support incision, and had no strand destabilizing activity. These results are simply not due to a large conformational change in 
h UvrB, since CD experiments indicate that the deletion mutant and wt protein have nearly identical spectra. This is further supported by the ability of the mutant protein to interact with UvrA
and demonstrate an ATPase activity that is induced in the presence of
UvrA and UV-irradiated DNA (Table I). We are currently studying the
importance of the individual amino acid residues within the
-hairpin
as well as those residues presumably involved in the formation of salt
bridges that might be essential for the proper function of the
-hairpin.
![]()
Note Added in Proof
-hairpin in damage recognition and DNA binding.
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed: NIEHS, P. O. Box
12233, MD D3-01, 111 T. W. Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Tel.: 919-541-2799; E-mail: vanhout1@niehs.nih.gov.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Friedberg, E. C.,
Walker, G. C.,
and Siede, W.
(1995)
DNA Repair and Mutagenesis
, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D. C.
2.
Sancar, A.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65,
43-81
3.
Lloyd, R. S.,
and Van Houten, B.
(1995)
in
DNA Damage Recognition
(Vos, J.-M., ed)
, pp. 25-66, R. G. Landes Co., Biomedical Publishers, Austin, TX
4.
Van Houten, B.
(1990)
Microbiol. Rev.
54,
18-51
5.
Grossman, L.,
Lin, C. I.,
and Ahn, Y.
(1998)
in
Nucleotide Excision Repair in Escherichia coli
(Nickoloff, J. A.
, and Hoekstra, M. F., eds), Vol. 1
, pp. 11-27, Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ
6.
Oh, E. Y.,
and Grossman, L.
(1987)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
84,
3638-3642
7.
Oh, E. Y.,
and Grossman, L.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
1336-1343
8.
Koo, H. S.,
Claassen, L.,
Grossman, L.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
1212-1216
9.
Orren, D. K.,
and Sancar, A.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
5237-5241
10.
Orren, D. K.,
and Sancar, A.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
15796-15803
11.
Gordienko, I.,
and Rupp, W. D.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
889-895
12.
Zou, Y.,
and Van Houten, B.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
4889-4901
13.
Sancar, A.,
and Rupp, W. D.
(1983)
Cell
33,
249-260
14.
Verhoeven, E. E.,
van Kesteren, M.,
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Visse, R.,
and Goosen, N.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
5120-5123
15.
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Franken, K. L. M. C.,
Dijkstra, D. M.,
Thomas-Oates, J. E.,
Visse, R.,
van de Putte, P.,
and Goosen, N.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
30508-30515
16.
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Franken, K. L. M. C.,
van de Putte, P.,
and Goosen, N.
(1997)
Mutat. Res.
385,
195-203
17.
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Herron, M. F.,
Monaco, V.,
van der Marel, G. A.,
van Boom, J. H.,
Visse, R.,
and Goosen, N.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
8044-8050
18.
Lin, J. J.,
and Sancar, A.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
6824-6828
19.
Hsu, D. S.,
Kim, S.-T.,
Sun, Q.,
and Sancar, A.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
8319-8327
20.
Caron, P. R.,
Kushner, S. R.,
and Grossman, L.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
4925-4929
21.
Husain, I.,
Van Houten, B.,
Thomas, D. C.,
Abdel-Monem, M.,
and Sancar, A.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
6774-6778
22.
Orren, D. K.,
Selby, C. P.,
Hearst, J. E.,
and Sancar, A.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
780-788
23.
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Visse, R.,
Ortiz-Buysse, M.,
Goosen, N.,
and van de Putte, P.
(1994)
J. Mol. Biol.
240,
294-307
24.
Goosen, N.,
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Visse, R.,.,
and van de Putte, P.
(1998)
in
Nucleic Acids and Molecular Biology
(Eckstein, F.
, and Lilley, D. M. J., eds), Vol. 12
, pp. 103-123, Springer-Verlag, Berlin
25.
Theis, K.,
Chen, P. J.,
Skorvaga, M.,
Van Houten, B.,
and Kisker, C.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
6899-6907
26.
Machius, M.,
Henry, L.,
Palnitkar, M.,
and Deisenhofer, J.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
11717-11722
27.
Nakagawa, N.,
Sugahara, M.,
Masui, R.,
Kato, R.,
Fukuyama, K.,
and Kuramitsu, S.
(1999)
J. Biochem. (Tokyo)
126,
986-990
28.
Theis, K.,
Skorvaga, M.,
Machius, M.,
Nakagawa, N.,
Van Houten, B.,
and Kisker, C.
(2000)
Mutat. Res.
460,
277-300
29.
Sohi, M.,
Alexandrovich, A.,
Moolenaar, G.,
Visse, R.,
Goosen, N.,
Vernede, X.,
Fontecilla-Camps, J. C.,
Champness, J.,
and Sanderson, M. R.
(2000)
FEBS Lett.
465,
161-164
30.
Gorbalenya, A. E.,
Koonin, E. V.,
Donchenko, A. P.,
and Blinov, V. M.
(1989)
Nucleic Acids Res.
17,
4713-4730
31.
Soultanas, P.,
Dillingham, M. S.,
Velankar, S. S.,
and Wigley, D. B.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
290,
137-148
32.
Cheetham, G. M.,
Jeruzalmi, D.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1999)
Nature
399,
80-83
33.
Caron, P. R.,
and Grossman, L.
(1988)
Nucleic Acids Res.
16,
10891-10902
34.
Kim, J. L.,
Morgenstern, K. A.,
Griffith, J. P.,
Dwyer, M. D.,
Thomson, J. A.,
Murcko, M. A.,
Lin, C.,
and Caron, P. R.
(1998)
Structure (Lond.)
6,
89-100
35.
Van Houten, B.,
and Snowden, A.
(1993)
Bioessays
15,
51-59
36.
Yamagata, A.,
Masui, R.,
Kato, R.,
Nakagawa, N.,
Ozaki, H.,
Sawai, H.,
Kuramitsu, S.,
and Fukuyama, K.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
13235-13242
37.
Moolenaar, G. F.,
Monaco, V.,
van der Marel, G. A.,
van Boom, J. H.,
Visse, R.,
and Goosen, N.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
8038-8043
38.
Zou, Y.,
Liu, T. M.,
Geacintov, N. E.,
and Van Houten, B.
(1995)
Biochemistry
34,
13582-13593
Copyright © 2002 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:
![]() |
L. G. Henry, L. Sandberg, K. Zhang, and H. M. Fletcher DNA Repair of 8-Oxo-7,8-Dihydroguanine Lesions in Porphyromonas gingivalis J. Bacteriol., December 15, 2008; 190(24): 7985 - 7993. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. A. Christensen, H. Wang, B. Van Houten, and K. M. Vasquez Efficient processing of TFO-directed psoralen DNA interstrand crosslinks by the UvrABC nuclease Nucleic Acids Res., November 7, 2008; (2008) gkn880v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Kurthkoti, P. Kumar, R. Jain, and U. Varshney Important role of the nucleotide excision repair pathway in Mycobacterium smegmatis in conferring protection against commonly encountered DNA-damaging agents Microbiology, September 1, 2008; 154(9): 2776 - 2785. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. L. Croteau, M. J. DellaVecchia, H. Wang, R. J. Bienstock, M. A. Melton, and B. Van Houten The C-terminal Zinc Finger of UvrA Does Not Bind DNA Directly but Regulates Damage-specific DNA Binding J. Biol. Chem., September 8, 2006; 281(36): 26370 - 26381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Wang, M. J. DellaVecchia, M. Skorvaga, D. L. Croteau, D. A. Erie, and B. Van Houten UvrB Domain 4, an Autoinhibitory Gate for Regulation of DNA Binding and ATPase Activity J. Biol. Chem., June 2, 2006; 281(22): 15227 - 15237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Malta, G. F. Moolenaar, and N. Goosen Base Flipping in Nucleotide Excision Repair J. Biol. Chem., January 27, 2006; 281(4): 2184 - 2194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Nakano, A. Katafuchi, R. Shimizu, H. Terato, T. Suzuki, H. Tauchi, K. Makino, M. Skorvaga, B. Van Houten, and H. Ide Repair activity of base and nucleotide excision repair enzymes for guanine lesions induced by nitrosative stress Nucleic Acids Res., April 14, 2005; 33(7): 2181 - 2191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Skorvaga, M. J. DellaVecchia, D. L. Croteau, K. Theis, J. J. Truglio, B. S. Mandavilli, C. Kisker, and B. Van Houten Identification of Residues within UvrB That Are Important for Efficient DNA Binding and Damage Processing J. Biol. Chem., December 3, 2004; 279(49): 51574 - 51580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. DellaVecchia, D. L. Croteau, M. Skorvaga, S. V. Dezhurov, O. I. Lavrik, and B. Van Houten Analyzing the Handoff of DNA from UvrA to UvrB Utilizing DNA-Protein Photoaffinity Labeling J. Biol. Chem., October 22, 2004; 279(43): 45245 - 45256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|