![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 47, 45331-45337, November 22, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Cancer Center, and
Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego School
of Medicine, La Jolla, California 92093-0660
Received for publication, July 19, 2002, and in revised form, September 11, 2002
Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) plays
an essential role in eukaryotic DNA replication, and numerous DNA
replication proteins have been found to interact with PCNA through a
conserved eight-amino acid motif called the PIP-box. We have searched
the genome of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae for open
reading frames that encode proteins with putative PIP-boxes and
initiated testing of 135 novel candidates for their ability to interact with PCNA-conjugated agarose beads. The first new PCNA-binding protein
identified in this manner is the 5' to 3' DNA helicase RRM3. Yeast
two-hybrid tests show that N-terminal deletions of RRM3, which remove
the PIP-box but leave the helicase motifs intact, abolish the
interaction with PCNA. In addition, mutating the two phenylalanine
residues in the PIP-box to alanine or aspartic acid reduces binding to
PCNA, confirming that the PIP-box in RRM3 is responsible for
interaction with PCNA. The results presented here suggest that the RRM3
helicase functions at the replication fork.
Proliferating cell nuclear antigen
(PCNA)1 is an essential
eukaryotic DNA replication factor. It functions as a homotrimer that
forms a clamp that slides along double-stranded DNA serving as a
processivity factor for DNA polymerases and as an attachment site for
numerous other replication proteins (1). Similar processivity factors
for DNA polymerases have been characterized in a wide spectrum of
organisms and include gp45 of T4 bacteriophage (2) and the Our initial understanding of how PCNA interacts with other proteins
comes from structural studies of the interaction between PCNA and
p21WAF1/CIP1. The ability of human PCNA (hPCNA) to interact
with DNA polymerases can be inhibited by p21WAF1/CIP1, an
inhibitor of DNA replication that controls S-phase entry by binding
hPCNA (5, 6). As revealed by co-crystallization of hPCNA and a peptide
derived from the C terminus of p21, this interaction mainly occurs
between a hydrophobic stretch of 8 amino acids in p21
(144QTSMTDFY151) and a hydrophobic pocket under
the interdomain connector loop of hPCNA (7). In addition, basic
residues like lysine and arginine that are located N-terminal to the
p21WAF1/CIP1 motif participate in the interaction by
contacting the highly acidic C terminus of hPCNA (7).
Eukaryotic DNA-sliding clamps not only serve as the polymerase
processivity factors but also provide attachment sites for various
other proteins that function in DNA replication (RAD27, DNA ligase),
DNA repair (MSH3, MSH6, UNG1) and chromatin assembly (CAC1) (Refs.
8-14; for reviews, see Refs. 1 and 15). A p21-like PCNA-interaction
motif, called a PIP-box, with the consensus sequence QXX(M/I/L)XX(F/Y)(F/Y), has been identified in
all of these proteins, suggesting that they all bind to the same site
on PCNA (1, 14). Most PIP-boxes were found near the N or C terminus of
the protein, which probably facilitates their interaction with PCNA by
exposing a flexible peptide on the protein surface. There is also
evidence that PCNA does more than simply provide a docking port for
components of the replisome. PCNA has recently been shown to influence
the catalytic activity of interacting proteins such as DNA ligase (16)
and FEN1 (17), to increase the substrate specificity of the
MSH2·MSH6 mismatch repair complex (10), and to affect the
phosphorylation status of RFC1 and DNA ligase (18).
Because the discovery of new PCNA-interacting proteins continues, and
as more effects of these interactions on protein activity are revealed,
new roles for PCNA beyond its primary function as a polymerase
processivity factor may be identified. By searching the protein
sequences encoded by more than 6000 open reading frames (ORFs) in the
genome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, we have identified 144 known or hypothetical proteins that contain the PIP-box consensus sequence. We have initiated a project with the aim to test all novel
candidates for their ability to interact with PCNA of S. cerevisiae using in vitro and in vivo
methods. Here we present the examination of the first 26 candidates,
among which we have identified RRM3 as a PCNA-interacting protein. RRM3
is a 5'-3' DNA helicase of the PIF1 family (19, 20) and has been shown to be required for the stability of ribosomal DNA (rDNA) (21), for the
inhibition of Ty1 transposition (22), and for telomere replication
(20). We show that RRM3 interacts directly with PCNA in
vitro and in vivo and that the interaction with PCNA is promoted by salt, suggesting a hydrophobic interaction. Using two-hybrid analysis we show that the interaction between RRM3 and PCNA
depends on the presence of a canonical PIP-box motif at the N terminus
of RRM3, and we propose that interaction between RRM3 and PCNA may be
important for replication fork progression and for inhibition of
site-specific hyper-recombination.
Constructs for in Vitro Transcription/Translation--
Complete
ORFs of 26 candidate genes were amplified by PCR using genomic DNA from
yeast strain RDKY3023 as a template. The sequence 5'-GCCGCCACC-3' was
added to the forward primer sequence upstream of the ATG start codon to
provide a eukaryotic ribosome binding site for in vitro
translation (23). The PCR products were inserted into the E. coli expression vector pCRT7/CT-TOPO (Invitrogen) by TA-cloning to
generate plasmids pRDK1026-BUD7 to pRDK1053-YPL110C (Table
I). Primer sequences used to generate the
plasmids used in the illustrated experiments are listed in Table
II, and the remainder are available upon
request.
Constructs for Yeast Two-hybrid Tests--
The wild type
POL30 gene and the pol30-104 allele (A251V) (24)
were amplified by PCR from genomic DNA of yeast strains RDKY3023 and
RDKY3921, respectively, using primer pair KHS-D304/KHS-D305 (Table II).
The PCR products were digested with the restriction endonuclease
XhoI and inserted into the single XhoI site of
pJG4-5* to yield pRDK1060-POL30 and pRDK1061-POL30-104, respectively. EST1 and RRM3 genes were amplified by PCR using
primer pairs KHS-D312/KHS-D313 and KHS-D288/KHS-D289, respectively
(Table II). The PCR products were digested with XhoI and
inserted into the single XhoI site of pEG202 to generate
pRDK1054-EST1 and pRDK1055-RRM3, respectively. Bait plasmids (pEG202)
containing deletion mutations in the RRM3 gene
(pRDK1056-RRM3-D54 and pRDK1057-RRM3-D230) were constructed by PCR
using primer pairs KHS-D324/KHS-D289 and KHS-D322/KHS-D289, respectively (Table II). The PCR products were digested with
XhoI and inserted into the XhoI site of pEG202.
All constructs were confirmed by DNA sequencing.
Site-directed Mutagenesis--
Amino acid substitutions in the
putative PIP-box of RRM3 were introduced using the QuikChange method
(Stratagene). The F41AF42A and F41DF42D mutations in RRM3 were
generated using primer pairs KHS-D187/KHS-D188 and KHS-D443/KHS-D444
(Table II) and pRDK1055-RRM3 as template DNA to yield
pRDK1058-RRM3-FFAA and pRDK1059-RRM3-FFDD, respectively. Both mutations
were confirmed by DNA sequencing.
In Vitro Transcription and Translation--
Reactions were
performed in 50-µl volumes containing 0.5-1.5 µg of template DNA
(pRDK1025-ASG7 to pRDK1053-YPL110C), 30 µCi of
[35S]methionine (Amersham Biosciences) and 40 µl of
rabbit reticulocyte lysate (TNT Quick Coupled Transcription/Translation
System, Promega). Reactions were incubated for 1.5 h at 30 °C
and used in the PCNA pull-down assay without further purification.
PCNA Pull-down Assay--
Overexpressed PCNA of S. cerevisiae was purified from E. coli and bound to
Affi-Gel-15 beads as previously described (10). Binding reactions
containing 25 µl of in vitro translated protein, 15 µl
of PCNA beads (or Mock beads without PCNA), and 460 µl of buffer A
(25 mM Tris (pH 7.4), 200 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.01% Nonidet P-40, 10% glycerol) were incubated
for 1 h at 4 °C. Beads were collected by centrifugation for 1 min at 5000 rpm and washed 3 times with 500 µl of ice-cold buffer A. Ten µl of the supernatant was saved for SDS-PAGE analysis (called
unbound protein fraction, U). Bound protein was eluted from the beads
by boiling for 5 min in 20 µl of SDS-PAGE sample buffer (called bound
protein fraction, P). Samples were then analyzed on 4-15% gradient
SDS-polyacrylamide Ready-gels (Bio-Rad), dried, and exposed overnight
to a PhosphorImager screen (Molecular Dynamics). Images were developed
using a PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics) and analyzed using
ImageQuant version 1.2 (Molecular Dynamics). The same procedure was
followed for the NaCl titration experiment except that the buffer A
used for the incubation and wash steps contained different NaCl
concentrations as indicated in individual experiments.
Yeast Two-hybrid Assay--
Yeast strain RDKY2926 (strain EGY48
harboring reporter plasmid pSH18-34; Ref. 25; for review, see Ref. 26)
was co-transformed with a lexA-fusion bait construct (in vector pEG202)
and a B42-tagged prey construct (in vector pJG4-5*), and transformants
were selected on synthetic complete (SC) medium plates lacking uracil,
histidine, and tryptophan made using standard recipes and amino acid
drop-out mixes obtained from Bio101, Inc. Single transformants were
resuspended in 100 µl of sterile double-distilled H2O
spotted on SC-Ura-His-Trp plates, grown for 2 days at 30 °C, and
then replica-plated onto SC-Ura-His-Trp plates containing 2% galactose
to induce POL30 gene expression and 80 µg/ml X-gal
(5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl- Verification of Bait and Prey Expression by Western Blot
Analysis--
Ten-ml cultures of the yeast strain RDKY2926 carrying
pEG202-based expression constructs were grown overnight in liquid
SC-Ura-His-Trp medium containing 2% glucose. Five-ml cultures of yeast
strain RDKY2926 carrying pJG4-5*-based expression constructs were
grown for 2 days in liquid SC-Ura-His-Trp medium containing 2%
galactose. Based on the A600 of each
culture, an equal number of cells was harvested by centrifugation and
frozen at Preparation of Whole Cell Extracts from Yeast Two-hybrid Strains
and Quantification of
Identification of Yeast ORFs Coding for Proteins with Putative
PIP-box Motifs--
To identify new PCNA-interacting proteins, we
searched the yeast genome data base for ORFs that encode proteins with
the PIP-box consensus sequence
(Q/M)XX(I/L/M)XX(F/Y)(F/Y). Although all known PIP-boxes in S. cerevisiae contain phenylalanine residues in
positions seven and eight, we included the possibility of tyrosine
residues in these positions since such PIP-boxes have been found in
higher eukaryotes (7, 27). Furthermore, we required a methionine residue in position 1 if this was also the first amino acid in the
protein. This search identified 144 potential PIP-boxes, 88 of which
were in known proteins, including 9 previously identified PCNA-interacting proteins in S. cerevisiae (RFC1, MSH6,
MSH3, DNA ligase1, POL32, RAD27, UNG1, CAC1, and POL2), and 56 were in
hypothetical proteins. We decided to initiate a study with the aim of
testing all 135 new candidates for their ability to interact with PCNA
and not to exclude any candidates on the basis of what is known about
their biological function or subcellular localization.
PCNA Pull-down Assay--
We selected 26 known or hypothetical
proteins (Table I) of the 135 novel PCNA-interaction candidates and
tested their ability to bind PCNA in vitro. Candidate ORFs
were in vitro translated in the presence of
[35S]methionine and incubated with PCNA-Affi-Gel-15 beads
or with Mock beads (without PCNA) in the presence of 200 mM
NaCl, and the bound proteins were analyzed using SDS-PAGE. We found
that the DNA helicase RRM3 bound to PCNA beads but not to Mock beads (Fig. 1A), whereas 16 of the
candidates did not bind to either beads (Fig. 1B). The
remaining nine candidates bound to both the PCNA beads and the Mock
beads, suggesting that this assay is not suited for analysis of all
candidates (Fig. 1C). This in vitro assay
provided us with preliminary evidence that RRM3 is a PCNA-interacting protein. Using this assay, we were able to confirm interactions between
PCNA and all four PIP-box containing proteins (MSH3, MSH6, UNG1, POL32)
chosen as positive controls because they had been previously shown to
interact with PCNA (data not shown).
PCNA Complex Formation with RRM3 Is Promoted by Salt--
In
vitro co-precipitation experiments were carried out in the
presence of 200 mM NaCl. However, when we tested the
ability of RRM3 to interact with PCNA in the presence of varying NaCl concentrations (50-700 mM) we found that RRM3·PCNA
complex formation was reduced at the lower NaCl concentrations of 50 and 100 mM, whereas binding increased at higher NaCl
concentrations (Fig. 2). Similar but less
pronounced salt-induced binding was also observed for the known
PCNA-binding proteins MSH6 and POL32 (Fig. 2). This salt-inducible
complex formation is consistent with a hydrophobic interaction between
two proteins, most likely between the hydrophobic pocket below the
interdomain connector loop of PCNA and the PIP-box of the interacting
protein.
RRM3 Interacts with PCNA in Vivo--
The interaction between
full-length wild-type RRM3 and PCNA proteins was tested in
vivo using a lexA-based yeast two-hybrid system (Figs.
3 and 4).
We also re-examined the possibility of an interaction between PCNA and
the telomerase subunit EST1 (which contains a PIP-box but did not
interact with PCNA beads in the pull-down assay) since yeast telomerase
is a multi-protein complex in vivo and in our initial
in vitro analysis EST1 was tested separately for its ability
to interact with PCNA (Fig. 5). In these
experiments, the POL30 gene was present in the bait vector
pJG4-5* in-frame with a transcription activation domain and under
control of a galactose-inducible promoter. The RRM3 and
EST1 ORFs were present in the prey vector pEG202, fused to
the lexA protein of E. coli. Expression of wild type RRM3
and PCNA proteins as well as mutant proteins was confirmed by Western
blot analysis (Fig. 4, A and B). Complementation
of the senescence phenotype of an est1 Site-directed Mutagenesis Identifies PCNA Interaction Site on
RRM3--
To localize the PCNA interaction domain on RRM3 we first
generated 54- and 230-amino acid deletions of the N terminus of RRM3 in
the prey vector pEG202, (pRDK1056-RRM3-D54 and pRDK1057-RRM3-D230), both of which delete the putative PIP-box
(35QQTLSSFF42) and leave the helicase motifs
intact (Fig. 3B). Using a two-hybrid spot assay, we found
that deletion of the N-terminal 230 amino acids eliminated the ability
of RRM3 to interact with PCNA, whereas deletion of the N-terminal 54 amino acids significantly reduced the interaction (Fig. 3C).
Quantification of the
In an attempt to locate the RRM3 binding site on PCNA, we tested the
ability of wild type RRM3 to interact with PCNA-104, which has an
alanine to valine substitution at residue 251 (A251V). The crystal
structure of PCNA indicates that this alanine residue is present in the
same hydrophobic pocket that interacts with the PIP-box of p21 during
the interaction between hPCNA and p21. Consistent with this, this amino
acid substitution has been shown to disrupt the interaction between
PCNA and MSH6 (10). However, Fig. 3C shows that PCNA-104 and
wild type RRM3 interact strongly in the two-hybrid assay, similar to
what was observed for the interaction between the wild-type proteins,
suggesting that the pol30-104 mutation did not disrupt
interaction with RRM3.
We have identified 144 ORFs in the genome of S. cerevisiae that encode proteins with the PIP-box consensus
sequence, QXX(M/I/L)XX(F/Y)(F/Y). Among them are
nine proteins that have previously been shown to interact with PCNA
(POL32, RAD27, MSH3, MSH6, UNG1, POL2, RFC1, CAC1, and DNA ligase). We
have initiated a study with the aim to test all 135 new candidates for
their ability to interact with PCNA. In the study presented here we
have tested 26 candidates, most of which were chosen because the
PIP-box was located near the N or C terminus of the protein or the
protein was implicated in DNA metabolism, and we found that one of
these candidates, the RRM3 helicase, interacts with PCNA. Fifteen of
these 26 candidates did not interact with PCNA in the pull-down assay,
suggesting that many PIP-box-containing proteins do not interact with
PCNA. Consistent with this, most of these 15 proteins whose function is
known do not have a function that suggests they might interact with
PCNA (Table I). The remaining 109 candidates as well as the 9 candidates that nonspecifically precipitated with PCNA beads (Table I,
group No. 3) will be tested for PCNA interaction using other
assays including a yeast two-hybrid assay. Of these 118 candidates, 4 are known to function in DNA metabolism, making them the most logical
candidates for testing. It is difficult to predict whether more
PCNA-binding proteins will be identified among the remaining candidates
since knowledge about their biological function and subcellular
localization is often very limited.
The RRM3 gene (ribosomal DNA
recombination mutation 3) was first
identified in a screen for suppressors of recombination between naturally occurring tandem repeats such as the rDNA genes and the
copper chelation genes CUP1A and CUP1B
(21). The RRM3 gene product is 38% identical to 485 amino
acids spanning the helicase domain of PIF1, an
ATP-dependent 5'-3' DNA helicase that is involved in the
maintenance of telomeric, ribosomal, and mitochondrial DNA (28). Like
PIF1, RRM3 possesses 5'-3' helicase activity (20), and its role in rDNA
replication has been studied in great detail. Ivessa et al.
(19) observe that in the absence of RRM3 activity replication pauses at
a number of specific sites within rDNA repeats and that replication
forks converging at the replication fork barrier are unusually
persistent. The rrm3 mutants exhibit RAD52-dependent accumulation of extrachromosomal rDNA
circles and an increased presence of Holliday junctions (19). This
suggested that pause sites are eventually converted into double-strand
breaks that are then repaired by homologous recombination, which can result in the formation of rDNA circles. Interestingly, replication pause sites within the rDNA repeats coincided with sites that are bound
by proteins, and it was therefore suggested that RRM3 might be required
to replicate through such protein-rDNA complexes (19, 29). Furthermore,
the report of telomere instability and destabilization of mitochondrial
DNA in rrm3 mutants may suggest that RRM3 also contributes
to faithful replication by unwinding DNA secondary structures that are
found at these sites (19).
In addition to its role in maintaining the stability of direct tandem
repeats a recent study has identified RRM3 as a regulator of Ty1
transposition in yeast (22). A 110-fold increase in transposition events occurred in rrm3 mutants despite the absence of
increased Ty1 transcription. This suggests that RRM3 normally
suppresses Ty1 transposition by inhibiting homologous recombination
and/or integration at de novo sites. One possible
explanation for the large increase in Ty1 transposition could be that
in the absence of RRM3, increased DNA breakage occurs due to impaired
replication fork progression, and this would result in a larger number
of potential integration sites for Ty1 elements.
Taken together the observations discussed above suggest a role for RRM3
in genome replication although probably not as a replicative helicase
but rather as an accessory helicase that facilitates progression of
replication forks through obstructions such as bound proteins and
possibly DNA secondary structure. The ability of RRM3 to directly
interact with PCNA might help target RRM3 to these sites when the
replication fork encounters them. Because the interaction between RRM3
and PCNA is mediated by the similar PIP-box motif found in many DNA
replication proteins that bind PCNA, one can imagine a scenario where
replication proteins occupy the interaction site(s) on the PCNA clamp
during DNA replication but disengage upon encountering replication
blocks, allowing "helper" proteins such as RRM3 to be brought to
the stalled fork to deal with specific obstructions.
In contrast to a previous study that showed that the interaction
between PCNA and the mismatch repair protein MSH6 could be disrupted by
a pol30-104 mutation (10), we found that the
pol30-104 mutation did not interrupt the interaction with
RRM3. However, similar to our observation, Gomes and Burgers (17) find
that the interaction between RAD27 and PCNA-90, which contains P252A and K253A amino acid substitutions, was similar to the interaction between the wild type proteins. Interestingly, the mutated residues in
PCNA-90 are adjacent to the residue mutated in PCNA-104 (A251V), which
is consistent with our observation that the interaction with RRM3 was
unaffected by the PCNA-104 mutation. Although the contrasting findings
on the interaction between PCNA and RRM3 or RAD27 (17) compared with
the interaction between PCNA and MSH2-MSH6 (10) could be attributed to
differences under "Experimental Procedures," they could also be an
indication that the various PIP-box proteins bind to PCNA with
different affinities or include multiple sites despite the fact that
they all interact via a conserved binding motif. To further elucidate
this question we are currently investigating the ability of RRM3 to
interact with various PCNA mutants.
It is interesting to note that the closely related PIF1 helicase may
also interact with PCNA but indirectly through its ability to interact
with the chromatin-assembly factor subunit CAC1, which is also a
PCNA-interacting protein (13, 30). The N terminus of PIF1 contains the
CAC1-interacting region, which is similar to the observation that the N
terminus of RRM3 contains the PCNA-interaction region. This supports a
previous suggestion that within the PIF1 family of DNA helicases
functional specificity may be achieved by varying protein-protein
interactions at the N terminus while the helicase motif region is
highly conserved (29). One can speculate that the opposing roles of
RRM3 and PIF1 in telomere elongation and rDNA replication (29) may be
the result of competition between RRM3 and the PIF1·CAC1 complex for
binding to PCNA, and this competition then regulates such processes as
telomere elongation and rDNA replication.
We are grateful to Dan Mazur, Vincent
Pennaneach, Patrick Lau, and Nobuya Sasaki for comments on the
manuscript and Christopher Putnam for advice on protein structure.
*
This project was supported by National Institutes of Health
Grant GM27017 (to R. D. 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, September 17, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M207263200
The abbreviations used are:
PCNA, proliferating
cell nuclear antigen;
hPCNA, human PCNA;
ORF, open reading frame;
SC
media, synthetic complete media;
rDNA, ribosomal DNA.
Saccharomyces cerevisiae RRM3, a 5' to 3'
DNA Helicase, Physically Interacts with Proliferating Cell Nuclear
Antigen*
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-subunit
of polymerase III of Escherichia coli (3). Despite sometimes
low sequence similarity among members of this class of proteins, their
three-dimensional structures are highly conserved, suggesting that
their function has remained unchanged throughout evolution (4).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
Proteins with PIP-box consensus sequences tested for PCN interaction in
this study
Sequences of primers used in this study
-D-galactoside; Sigma) to
assess expression of the lacZ reporter gene. Plates were
incubated overnight to test for reporter gene expression.
80 °C. Protein was then extracted as described in the
HybridHunter II manual (Invitrogen). In brief, the frozen cell pellets
were lysed by resuspending the pellet in 100 µl of warm (60 °C)
cracking buffer (8 M urea, 5% SDS, 40 mM
Tris-HCl pH 6.8, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1%
-mercaptoethanol, 0.4 mg/ml bromphenol blue). Then 100 µl of glass beads (425-600 µm,
acid-washed, Sigma) was added to each tube, and the mixture was
incubated at 70 °C for 10 min. The mixture was then vortexed at high
speed for 1 min at room temperature, and the lysate was cleared by
centrifugation for 5 min at 14,000 rpm at room temperature. Then 2 µl
of supernatant was mixed with 4 µl of SDS-PAGE sample buffer, the
solution was incubated at 100 °C for 5 min, and the proteins were
separated by SDS-PAGE (4-15% Ready Gel, Bio-Rad) and transferred to a
polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Bio-Rad). The membranes were
incubated with antibodies against the hemagglutinin tag (Sigma) to
detect proteins expressed from pJG4-5* (PCNA and PCNA-104) and with
antibodies against the lexA protein (Invitrogen) to detect proteins
expressed from pEG202 (RRM3 wild type and RRM3 mutants) according to
the manufacturer's instructions. The Enhanced Chemiluminescence Plus
(ECL-Plus) kit from Amersham Biosciences was used for detecting the
tagged proteins according to the manual provided by the manufacturer.
-Galactosidase Activity--
A single colony
from a yeast two-hybrid strain of interest was inoculated into 10 ml of
liquid SC-Ura-Trp-His medium containing 2% glucose and grown overnight
at 30 °C. The cells were then pelleted by centrifugation for 2 min
at 2,000 rpm. Each pellet was resuspended in the volume of liquid
SC-Ura-Trp-His medium containing 1% raffinose and 2% galactose such
that each culture had am A600 = 1.8. Incubation was continued for 5 h at 30 °C. The cells were then pelleted, washed once with 25 ml of ice-cold double-distilled water
H2O, and washed once with 1 ml of ice-cold buffer P (50 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.7), 300 mM sodium
acetate, 10% glycerol, 1 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, 500 nM dithiothreitol, 1 µg/ml pepstatin A (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), 1 µg/ml chymostatin (Roche Molecular Biochemicals),
0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (Sigma), 1 mM benzamidine (Sigma), 0.5 µg/ml leupeptin (Sigma), and
0.5 µg/ml bestatin (Sigma)). The cells were then resuspended in 100 µl of buffer P and lysed in a Mini-Bead Beater (Biospec Products) in
the presence of 100 µl of glass beads (425-600 µm, acid washed,
Sigma). The resulting extract was transferred to a fresh tube. The
beads were washed once with 100 µl of buffer P, and the supernatant
was added to the first extract, mixed gently, and incubated for 15 min
on ice. The lysate was then cleared by centrifugation for 1 h at
14,000 rpm at 4 °C.
-Galactosidase activity in cleared whole cell extracts was measured
using the
-gal assay kit from Invitrogen according to the
manufacturer's instructions.
-Galactosidase activity was determined
from at least two transformants for each two-hybrid strain.
-Galactosidase activity detected in the two-hybrid strain expressing
wild-type RRM3 and wild-type PCNA was set 100% to calculate the
relative
-galactosidase activity for the mutant strains.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (32K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
PCNA pull-down assay testing in
vitro translated 35S-labeled candidate proteins
for interaction with PCNA. Candidates fell into three groups
(A-C), candidate binds PCNA beads (A), candidate
does not bind PCNA beads (B), and candidate binds both PCNA
beads and Mock beads (C). One representative example is
shown for each group. The results for all candidates are listed in
Table I. A, 35S-labeled RRM3 binds to PCNA beads
(lane 2) but not to Mock beads (lane 4).
B, 35S-labeled YPL110C does not bind to
PCNA beads (lane 2) or to Mock beads (lane 4).
C, 35S-labeled YMR115W binds to PCNA beads
(lane 2) and to Mock beads (lane 4). Lanes
1 and 3 show the unbound (U) protein
fraction in the supernatant for PCNA beads and Mock beads,
respectively. Lanes 2 and 4 show protein
precipitated (P) with PCNA beads and Mock beads,
respectively.

View larger version (36K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Binding of RRM3 to PCNA beads is
salt-dependent. Binding of in vitro
translated 35S-labeled RRM3, 35S-labeled MSH6,
and 35S-labeled POL32 to PCNA beads was assessed at varying
NaCl concentrations (50-700 mM), 1/50 of the
35S-labeled protein added to the PCNA beads was loaded in
lane 1 (input), all the protein eluted from the PCNA beads
was loaded in lanes 2-7.
mutant confirmed
that the EST1 gene in pRDK1054-EST1 was expressed and that
the lexA-EST1 fusion was a fully functional component of the telomerase
complex (Fig. 5A). Interactions between bait and prey
proteins were then detected by measuring the transcriptional activation
of a lacZ reporter gene. As shown in Fig. 3C,
RRM3 tested positive for induction of lacZ expression in the
presence of galactose in the media (i.e. when PCNA was
expressed, Fig. 3C, left panel) but tested
negative when glucose was added to the media (i.e. in the
absence of PCNA, Fig. 3C, right panel). EST1
expression failed to activate the lacZ reporter gene (Fig. 5B). Testing combinations of bait and empty prey vector as
well as of prey and empty bait vector ruled out the possibility of auto-activation of the reporter genes.

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Mapping of the PCNA-interaction domain on
RRM3 by yeast two-hybrid analysis. A, N-terminal
PIP-boxes for RRM3 and known PCNA-interacting proteins of S. cerevisiae (DNA ligase, MSH6, MSH3, UNG1). B,
N-terminal deletions of RRM3 (RRM3-D230, RRM3-D54) and two PIP-box
motif mutants (RRM3-FFAA, RRM3-FFDD) generated for the yeast two-hybrid
assay. C, yeast two-hybrid interaction was tested between
PCNA (or PCNA-104 mutant or pJG4-5* vector) and different RRM3
constructs in the presence of 2% galactose in the media (left
panel) and in the presence of 2% glucose in the media as a
negative control (right panel).

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
-Galactosidase activity is
reduced in two-hybrid strains expressing PIP-box mutants of RRM3.
Anti-lexA (A) and anti-hemagglutinin (HA)
(B) Western blotting confirms the expression of bait
proteins (RRM3, RRM3-FFAA, RRM3-FFDD, RRM3-D54, RRM3-D230) and prey
proteins (PCNA, PCNA-104), respectively. C,
-galactosidase activity was measured in yeast two-hybrid strains
expressing PCNA and RRM3 mutant alleles and compared with the
two-hybrid strain expressing wild type RRM3 and PCNA proteins, which
was set to 100%. The average of
-galactosidase activity from at
least two transformants is shown.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
EST1 and PCNA do not interact in the yeast
two-hybrid test. A, EST1-lexA fusion expressed from
pRDK1054-EST1 bait vector is fully functional as shown by
complementation of the senescence phenotype of the est1
mutant RDKY4345 (31). RDKY4345 was transformed with pRDK1054-EST1
vector or empty pEG202 vector, streaked on SC-His media, and grown at
30 °C for 2 days. B, yeast two-hybrid interaction was
tested between PCNA (or pJG4-5* vector) and EST1 in the presence of
2% galactose in the media (left panel) and in the presence
of 2% glucose in the media as a negative control (right
panel). The lacZ reporter gene is not expressed in a
EST1/PCNA two-hybrid strain, suggesting that EST1 and PCNA do not
interact.
-galactosidase activity in two-hybrid strains
expressing RRM3-D54 or RRM3-D230 revealed that they contained 4% or
less than 1%, respectively, of the
-galactosidase activity detected
in a two-hybrid strain expressing full-length RRM3, indicating that the
site of interaction with PCNA resides within the N-terminal 54 amino
acids of RRM3 (Fig. 4C). To further localize the PCNA
binding site on RRM3, the phenylalanine residues Phe-41 and Phe-42 in
the putative PIP-box were changed to alanine using site-directed
mutagenesis (Fig. 3B). Interaction between PCNA and this
RRM3 mutant was detectable in the spot assay (Fig. 3C) but
at a lower level than between the wild type proteins. Quantification of
the
-galactosidase activity in whole cell extracts from this
two-hybrid strain showed about 80% reduced
-galactosidase activity
compared with the two-hybrid strain expressing the wild type proteins
(Fig. 4C). Surprisingly, substitution of phenylalanine
residues Phe-41 and Phe-42 in RRM3 with charged aspartate residues as
opposed to substitution with alanine residues did not further reduce
-galactosidase activity (Figs. 3C and 4C),
even though model building studies suggested that these substitutions
might be more disruptive than the RRM3-FFAA substitutions. It should be
noted that
-galactosidase activity in the two-hybrid strain
expressing the RRM3-FFAA mutant varied between 3 and 47% compared with
the two-hybrid strain expressing wild type RRM3, which might be
attributable to variable expression of this RRM3 mutant (Fig
4A, lane 2).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Ludwig Institute for
Cancer Research, University of California San Diego School of Medicine,
CMME 3080, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093-0669. Tel.:
858-534-7804; Fax: 858-534-7750; E-mail: rkolodner@ucsd.edu.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Warbrick, E.
(2000)
Bioessays
22,
997-1006[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
2.
Moarefi, I.,
Jeruzalmi, D.,
Turner, J.,
O'Donnell, M.,
and Kuriyan, J.
(2000)
J. Mol. Biol.
296,
1215-1223[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
3.
Kong, X. P.,
Onrust, R.,
O'Donnell, M.,
and Kuriyan, J.
(1992)
Cell
69,
425-437[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Kelman, Z.,
and O'Donnell, M.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
3613-3620 5.
Waga, S.,
Hannon, G. J.,
Beach, D.,
and Stillman, B.
(1994)
Nature
369,
574-578[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Flores-Rozas, H.,
Kelman, Z.,
Dean, F. B.,
Pan, Z. Q.,
Harper, J. W.,
Elledge, S. J.,
O'Donnell, M.,
and Hurwitz, J.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
8655-8659 7.
Gulbis, J. M.,
Kelman, Z.,
Hurwitz, J.,
O'Donnell, M.,
and Kuriyan, J.
(1996)
Cell
87,
297-306[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
8.
Chen, U.,
Chen, S.,
Saha, P.,
and Dutta, A.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
11597-11602 9.
Levin, D. S.,
Bai, W.,
Yao, N.,
O'Donnell, M.,
and Tomkinson, A. E.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
12863-12868 10.
Flores-Rozas, H.,
Clark, D.,
and Kolodner, R. D.
(2000)
Nat. Genet.
26,
375-378[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
11.
Clark, A. B.,
Valle, F.,
Drotschmann, K.,
Gary, R. K.,
and Kunkel, T. A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
36498-36501 12.
Otterlei, M.,
Warbrick, E.,
Nagelhus, T. A.,
Haug, T.,
Slupphaug, G.,
Akbari, M.,
Aas, P. A.,
Steinsbekk, K.,
Bakke, O.,
and Krokan, H. E.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
3834-3844[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
13.
Shibahara, K.,
and Stillman, B.
(1999)
Cell
96,
575-585[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
14.
Krawitz, D. C.,
Kama, T.,
and Kaufman, P. D.
(2002)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
22,
614-625 15.
Paunesku, T.,
Mittal, S.,
Protic, M.,
Oryhon, J.,
Korolev, S. V.,
Joachimiak, A.,
and Woloschak, G. E.
(2001)
Int. J. Radiat. Biol.
77,
1007-1021[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
16.
Tom, S.,
Henricksen, L. A.,
Park, M. S.,
and Bambara, R. A.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
24817-24825 17.
Gomes, X. V.,
and Burgers, P. M.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
3811-3821[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
18.
Koundrioukoff, S.,
Jonsson, Z. O.,
Hasan, S.,
de Jong, R. N.,
van der Vliet, P. C.,
Hottiger, M. O.,
and Hubscher, U.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
22882-22887 19.
Ivessa, A. S.,
Zhou, J. Q.,
and Zakian, V. A.
(2000)
Cell
100,
479-489[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
20.
Ivessa, A. S.,
Zhou, J. Q.,
Schulz, V. P.,
Monson, E. K.,
and Zakian, V. A.
(2002)
Genes Dev.
16,
1383-1396 21.
Keil, R. L.,
and McWilliams, A. D.
(1993)
Genetics
135,
711-718[Abstract]
22.
Scholes, D. T.,
Banerjee, M.,
Bowen, B.,
and Curcio, M. J.
(2001)
Genetics
159,
1449-1465 23.
Kozak, M.
(1986)
Cell
44,
283-292[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
24.
Amin, N. S.,
and Holm, C.
(1996)
Genetics
144,
479-493[Abstract]
25.
Gyuris, J.,
Golemis, E.,
Chertkov, H.,
and Brent, R.
(1993)
Cell
75,
791-803[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
26.
Mendelsohn, A. R.,
and Brent, R.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Biotechnol.
5,
482-486[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
27.
Warbrick, E.,
Heatherington, W.,
Lane, D. P.,
and Glover, D. M.
(1998)
Nucleic Acids Res.
26,
3925-3932 28.
Lahaye, A.,
Stahl, H.,
Thines-Sempoux, D.,
and Foury, F.
(1991)
EMBO J.
10,
997-1007[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
29.
Bessler, J. B.,
Torredagger, J. Z.,
and Zakian, V. A.
(2001)
Trends Cell Biol.
11,
60-65[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
30.
Monson, E. K.,
de Bruin, D.,
and Zakian, V. A.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
13081-13086 31.
Myung, K.,
Chen, C.,
and Kolodner, R. D.
(2001)
Nature
411,
1073-1076[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
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:
![]() |
K. H. Schmidt and R. D. Kolodner Suppression of spontaneous genome rearrangements in yeast DNA helicase mutants PNAS, November 28, 2006; 103(48): 18196 - 18201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-B. Boule and V. A. Zakian Roles of Pif1-like helicases in the maintenance of genomic stability Nucleic Acids Res., September 10, 2006; 34(15): 4147 - 4153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Das-Bradoo, R. M. Ricke, and A.-K. Bielinsky Interaction between PCNA and Diubiquitinated Mcm10 Is Essential for Cell Growth in Budding Yeast. Mol. Cell. Biol., July 1, 2006; 26(13): 4806 - 4817. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. K. Mohanty, N. K. Bairwa, and D. Bastia The Tof1p-Csm3p protein complex counteracts the Rrm3p helicase to control replication termination of Saccharomyces cerevisiae PNAS, January 24, 2006; 103(4): 897 - 902. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. W. Refsland and D. M. Livingston Interactions Among DNA Ligase I, the Flap Endonuclease and Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen in the Expansion and Contraction of CAG Repeat Tracts in Yeast Genetics, November 1, 2005; 171(3): 923 - 934. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Calzada, B. Hodgson, M. Kanemaki, A. Bueno, and K. Labib Molecular anatomy and regulation of a stable replisome at a paused eukaryotic DNA replication fork Genes & Dev., August 15, 2005; 19(16): 1905 - 1919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Irwin, M. Aye, P. Baldi, N. Beliakova-Bethell, H. Cheng, Y. Dou, W. Liou, and S. Sandmeyer Retroviruses and yeast retrotransposons use overlapping sets of host genes Genome Res., May 1, 2005; 15(5): 641 - 654. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. S. Briggs, A. A. Mahdi, Q. Wen, and R. G. Lloyd DNA Binding by the Substrate Specificity (Wedge) Domain of RecG Helicase Suggests a Role in Processivity J. Biol. Chem., April 8, 2005; 280(14): 13921 - 13927. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Bessler and V. A. Zakian The Amino Terminus of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA Helicase Rrm3p Modulates Protein Function Altering Replication and Checkpoint Activity Genetics, November 1, 2004; 168(3): 1205 - 1218. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Makovets, I. Herskowitz, and E. H. Blackburn Anatomy and Dynamics of DNA Replication Fork Movement in Yeast Telomeric Regions Mol. Cell. Biol., May 1, 2004; 24(9): 4019 - 4031. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Z. Torres, S. L. Schnakenberg, and V. A. Zakian Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rrm3p DNA Helicase Promotes Genome Integrity by Preventing Replication Fork Stalling: Viability of rrm3 Cells Requires the Intra-S-Phase Checkpoint and Fork Restart Activities Mol. Cell. Biol., April 15, 2004; 24(8): 3198 - 3212. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. H. Schmidt and R. D. Kolodner Requirement of Rrm3 Helicase for Repair of Spontaneous DNA Lesions in Cells Lacking Srs2 or Sgs1 Helicase Mol. Cell. Biol., April 15, 2004; 24(8): 3213 - 3226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||