Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, February 2001, p. 755-764, Vol. 21, No. 3
0270-7306/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/MCB.21.3.755-764.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Pie1, a Protein Interacting with Mec1, Controls
Cell Growth and Checkpoint Responses in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae
Tatsushi
Wakayama,1
Tae
Kondo,1
Seiko
Ando,1,
Kunihiro
Matsumoto,1,2 and
Katsunori
Sugimoto1,*
Division of Biological Science, Graduate
School of Science, Nagoya University,1 and
CREST, Japan Science and Technology
Corporation,2 Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-0814, Japan
Received 14 August 2000/Returned for modification 29 September
2000/Accepted 7 November 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
In eukaryotes, the ATM and ATR family proteins play a critical role
in the DNA damage and replication checkpoint controls. These proteins
are characterized by a kinase domain related to the
phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, but they have the ability to phosphorylate proteins. In budding yeast, the ATR family protein Mec1/Esr1 is essential for checkpoint responses and cell growth. We
have isolated the PIE1 gene in a two-hybrid screen for
proteins that interact with Mec1, and we show that Pie1 interacts
physically with Mec1 in vivo. Like MEC1, PIE1
is essential for cell growth, and deletion of the PIE1 gene
causes defects in the DNA damage and replication block checkpoints
similar to those observed in mec1
mutants. Rad53
hyperphosphorylation following DNA damage and replication block is
also decreased in pie1
cells, as in mec1
cells. Pie1 has a limited homology to fission yeast Rad26, which forms
a complex with the ATR family protein Rad3. Mutation of the region in
Pie1 homologous to Rad26 results in a phenotype similar to that of the
pie1
mutation. Mec1 protein kinase activity appears to
be essential for checkpoint responses and cell growth. However, Mec1
kinase activity is unaffected by the pie1
mutation, suggesting that Pie1 regulates some essential function other than Mec1
kinase activity. Thus, Pie1 is structurally and functionally related to
Rad26 and interacts with Mec1 to control checkpoints and cell proliferation.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
When DNA replication is blocked and
DNA damage occurs, checkpoints arrest the cell cycle, allowing DNA
replication and repair to take place (13, 19). Loss of
checkpoint control results in cell death or genetic instability that
can lead to cancer. Checkpoint pathways are an evolutionarily conserved
feature of eukaryotic cells. This conservation is exemplified by the
family of genes encoding high-molecular-weight protein kinases,
including ATM (mammals), ATR (mammals),
MEC1 (Saccharomyces cerevisiae), TEL1
(S. cerevisiae), rad3+
(Schizosaccharomyces pombe), mei-41
(Drosophila melanogaster), and uvsB
(Aspergillus nidulans) (6, 9, 18, 22, 23, 30, 37, 40,
48). Each of these genes falls into two family groups based on
homology; ATM is related most closely to TEL1, while ATR is more related to MEC1,
rad3+, mei-41, and uvsB
(6, 40). This homology is not restricted to the kinase
domain at the carboxyl terminus but extends over the length of the
protein. The carboxyl-terminal kinase domain is structurally related to
the catalytic domain of the phosphatidylinositol (PI) 3-kinases.
Despite this similarity, none of these proteins has been shown to
phosphorylate lipids. ATM, ATR, and Rad3 are all capable of
phosphorylating protein substrates (5, 8, 28, 29).
However, it remains to be determined how the kinase activity of these
proteins is controlled in checkpoint responses. Moreover, little is
known about whether these proteins form a complex with other proteins,
although Rad3 has been recently shown to form a complex with Rad26
(12). The only Rad26 homolog identified so far is
A. nidulans UVSD (40), but it has not been
determined whether UVSD interacts with the ATR-related UVSB.
In budding yeast, Mec1 plays a critical role in the checkpoint
controls. Three cell cycle-dependent DNA damage responses have been
characterized in budding yeast, known as the G1-, S-, and G2/M-phase damage checkpoints. Mec1 is essential for all
three DNA damage checkpoints (25), as well as the DNA
replication block checkpoint (48). Tel1 is suggested to
play an overlapping role with Mec1 in checkpoint responses
(30). Besides MEC1 and TEL1, a
number of genes have been identified that are involved in the DNA
damage checkpoint and/or the DNA replication block checkpoint. These
include CHK1, DDC1, MEC3,
RAD9, RAD17, RAD24, and
RAD53/MEC2 (2, 25-27, 35, 38, 46-48).
RAD53 and CHK1, encoding protein kinases,
function downstream of MEC1 in the checkpoint pathways.
Rad53, like Mec1, plays a role in both replication block and all three
DNA damage checkpoints (2, 48). Following DNA damage
and replication block, Rad53 is hyperphosphorylated and activated by a mechanism dependent on Mec1 (36, 42). Thus, Mec1 and Rad53 comprise a central checkpoint pathway in budding yeast.
Chk1 plays a role in the G2/M-phase DNA damage checkpoint control and is hyperphosphorylated following DNA damage in a
Mec1-dependent manner (35). RAD9,
RAD17, MEC3, DDC1, and
RAD24 are required for all three DNA damage checkpoints
(25). Rad9 is hyperphoshorylated after DNA damage, and the
phosphorylated Rad9 protein binds to Rad53, possibly to modulate Rad53
activity (14, 43, 45). Genetic evidence has suggested that
RAD17, RAD24, MEC3, and
DDC1 operate in the same checkpoint pathway
(25). Ddc1, Mec3, and Rad17 physically interact with each
other but not with Rad24 (24). Instead, Rad24 forms a
complex with Rfc2, Rfc3, Rfc4, and Rfc5 (16, 31, 38) and
has been suggested to function upstream of the Rad17-Mec3-Ddc1 complex
(24). Ddc1 is also hyperphosphorylated in a Mec1-dependent
manner following DNA damage (33). Thus, Mec1 might
regulate the Rad17-Rad24 checkpoint pathway by phosphorylating Ddc1. In
addition to its role in checkpoint controls, MEC1 is essential for cell growth and the mec1
mutation is
lethal. This lethality is suppressed by sml1 mutations or
overexpression of RNR1. RNR1 encodes a large
subunit of ribonucleotide reductase, while SML1 encodes a
small protein that binds to Rnr1 (10, 50). Deletion of
SML1 causes an increase in the deoxynucleoside triphosphate pool; thus, Mec1 may facilitate DNA replication by inhibiting Sml1 and
thereby increasing the pool of available deoxynucleoside triphosphate
(50). Although roles for Mec1 in checkpoint control and
cell proliferation have been characterized, no protein has been
identified that interacts with and/or regulates Mec1.
In this paper, we describe the isolation of PIE1 in a yeast
two-hybrid screen searching for proteins that interact with Mec1. We
show that Pie1 interacts physically with Mec1 in vivo. The pie1
mutation confers the same phenotype as the
mec1
mutation with respect to cell growth and checkpoint
responses. Thus, Pie1 plays a critical role in checkpoint control and
cell proliferation by interacting with Mec1.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Strains, media, and general methods.
The yeast strains used
in this study are isogenic and are listed in Table
1. Standard genetic techniques were used
for manipulating yeast strains (17, 21). Synthetic
complete (SC) medium containing 0.5% Casamino Acids and the
appropriate supplements was used to maintain selection of
URA3 and TRP1 plasmids.
Plasmids and gene disruptions.
To construct the
amino-terminal HA-tagged version of MEC1, the 5' noncoding
and amino-terminal regions of MEC1 gene were amplified by
PCR with the 5' noncoding HA-MEC1 primers KS113
(5'-TACGCGTAATCTGGAACATCGTATGGATATGATTCCATGCAGTCTTGT-3') and
KS006 (5'-AATTAACCCTCACTAAAGGGAAC-3') or the amino-terminal HA-MEC1 primers KS114
(5'-TACGCGTATCCTTATGACGTACCAGATTATGCGGAATCACACGTCAAATATC-3') and KS007 (5'-TTTTACGACTCACTATAGGGCGA-3'). The
YEp-MEC1-HA plasmid was constructed by a three-part ligation of the
EcoRI-MluI-treated, PCR-amplified 5' noncoding
fragment and the HindIII-MluI-treated, PCR-amplified amino-terminal fragment with
EcoRI-HindIII-linearized YEp-MEC1
(41). To construct the kinase-negative version of
MEC1 (mec1-KN), in vitro mutagenesis was
performed, with aspartic acid changed to serine at position 2224 and
asparagine changed to serine at position 2229, by PCR using YEp-MEC1
with the oligonucleotide primers KS006, KS106
(5'-CACGTTTTGGCTAGATATTGCGGCC-3'), KS118 (5'-ATATTAGGTCTAGGATCCAGGCACTGTGAAAGCATATTACTA-3'), and KS119 (5'-ATCTAGTAATATGCTTTCACAGTGCCTGGATCCTAGACCTAATAT-3'). The
KpnI-BstEII fragment of YEp-MEC1-HA was replaced
by a 0.4-kb KpnI-BstEII fragment from the PCR
product, generating YEp-MEC1-KN-HA. To create pBD-MEC1(2-2368), the
MluI-SalI fragment of YEp-MEC1-KN-HA was cloned
into the MluI-SalI sites of plasmid pGBDm. pGBDm
is a modified version of pGBDU-C1 (20), in which the
multicloning site contains the MluI restriction site
(obtained from T. Naiki). To construct the pBD-MEC1(2-938) and
pBD-MEC1(2-1399) plasmids, pBD-MEC1(2-2368) was treated with AflII-SalI or NheI-SalI,
respectively, blunted, and self-ligated. A fragment containing a
central region of MEC1 was obtained by PCR using primers
KS491 (5'-TGCGGATCCGAGAAAACTGGCAACCCTTTC-3') and KS492
(5'-GATGTCGACTTAAGTCCTTAATGGATCCTCGTTTG-3'). The PCR fragment was digested with BamHI and SalI and
then cloned into the BamHI-SalI sites of
pGBDU-C1, creating pBD-MEC1(496-1590). The amino-terminal Mec1
fragment (from positions 2 to 500) was cloned into the
MluI-SalI sites of plasmid pGBDm after the
corresponding fragment was amplified by PCR with primers KS488
(5'-TCGGTCGACTTAGTTGCCAGTTTTCTCAATATCGC-3') and KS489
(5'-AAAACGCGTATCCTTATGACGTAC-3'). To construct
pBD-MEC1(1586-2368), the BamHI-SalI fragment
from pBD-MEC1(2-2368) was cloned into the
BamHI-SalI sites of pGDBU-C3 (20).
To construct YIp-MEC1-HA, the SpeI-XhoI fragment
from YEp-MEC1-HA and a KpnI-SpeI fragment of the
5' noncoding sequence of MEC1 were cloned into the
KpnI-XhoI sites of pRS306. The PIE1
gene was cloned by PCR with primers KS418
(5'-CGAXGAATTCCAACACGAAATCCAGTTCTTCGACC-3') and KS419
(5'-TGTGGTCGACGTTCTTTCCATGTTCAAAAGAAGAC-3'). After treatment
with EcoRI-SalI, the fragment was subcloned into YCplac22 and YCplac33 (15), creating YCpT-PIE1 and
YCp-PIE1, respectively. To create pAD-PIE1, the PIE1 open
reading frame was cloned into the BamHI-SalI
sites of pGAD-C1 (20) by PCR using primers KS436
(5'-CTCGGATCCATGAGACGAGAAACGGTGGGT-3') and KS437
(5'-CTCGTCGACCTTACAGTCCCATTGAGAT-3'). The myc epitope sequence was
fused to the sequence encoding the amino- terminal Pie1 by PCR
using primers KS427
(5'-CTCACGCGTGTTCAAATCTTCCTCAGATATCAGTTTCTGTTCTCGTCTCATCTA TAATAGAAATAT-3') and KS428
(5'-CTCACGCGTGAGCAAAAGCTCATTTCTGAAGAGGACTTGAATGAAACGGTGGGTGAATTTTCT-3'). After treatment with MluI and self-ligation,
YCpT-PIE1-myc was obtained. To create YIp-PIE1-myc, YCpT-PIE1-myc
was digested with BglII and self-ligated. MEC1-HA
and PIE1-myc strains were obtained after
transforming YIp-MEC1-HA and YIp-PIE1-myc after treatment with
PshAI and PstI, respectively. To create
YCpT-PIE1-
C-myc, in vitro mutagenesis to create a termination codon
was performed by PCR with primers KS461
(5'-CCAGAATATATCGAAGAATTGAAGATGCAATAACCGCGGAAA-3') and KS462
(5'-CTTGCATTATTCTCCCCGTTCTTTTATTCCGCGGAAA-3') and the NedI-SalI fragment of YCpT-PIE1-myc was replaced
by the corresponding PCR product. To create YCpT-PIE1-KA-myc, the open
reading frame was amplified by PCR with primers KS481
(5'-AATCCGCGGCACGTAAGATAAGTGATAATTTACTGAAAAAAAATATGGT-3') and KS482 (5'-GTGCCGCGGATTGTGGTGATTGAGGTTTTGC-3') and the
MluI-XbaI fragment of YCpT-PIE1-myc was
replaced by the corresponding PCR fragment. The replaced PCR fragments
were completely sequenced. The SalI fragment from YEp-Rad53
(41), containing the sequence encoding the
carboxyl-terminal half of Rad53, was cloned into SalI-treated pGEX-5X-2 (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech),
creating pGST-Rad53. YCp-RAD53-HA was described previously
(41). The PIE1 and SML1 genes were
deleted by PCR-based deletion using the Candida glabrata
TRP1 and LEU2 genes (obtained from K. Kitada). The
disruption of MEC1/ESR1 was described previously
(22). The disruption of each gene was confirmed by PCR.
The heterozygous diploids were then sporulated, and the tetrads were
dissected. The tagged constructs (MEC1-HA and
PIE1-myc) expressed appropriate-sized proteins from their
own promoter and complemented their respective null mutations with
respect to cell growth and sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents.
Two-hybrid screening.
Yeast two-hybrid screening of an
S. cerevisiae expression library (a gift from P. James) was
carried out as described previously (24) using
pBD-MEC1(2-1399) as bait. After transformation with the library,
approximately 100 colonies of PJ69-4A cells carrying pBD-MEC1(2-1399)
grew on selective medium containing 10 mM 3-aminotriazole (AT). A
transformation efficiency test indicated that 4 × 106
Ura+ Leu+ transformants were obtained in this
screening. A total of 48 plasmids retested as positive, and 17 of these
were chosen for further analysis. Restriction and sequence analyses
followed by a DNA database search revealed that 12 of these plasmids
contained YDR499/PIE1.
UV radiation and drug sensitivities.
Yeast cells were
precultured in yeast extract-peptone-dextrose (YEPD) or SC medium
appropriate to select for TRP1 and/or URA3 plasmids. The cells were then diluted in YEPD and allowed to grow at
30°C for 3 h before being subjected to UV irradiation and drug treatment. The UV radiation sensitivity assay was performed as described previously (41). Methyl methanesulfonate (MMS)
sensitivity was determined as described previously (41).
Cells were incubated with MMS at 30°C for 30 min. Incubation was
terminated by addition of sodium thiosulfate to a final concentration
of 5%. The hydroxyurea (HU) sensitivity assay was performed as
described previously (38).
UV and MMS synchrony experiments.
To analyze cell cycle
delay at the G2/M transition, log-phase cultures at 30°C
were prearrested with 6 mg of
-factor per ml for 120 min, washed
with water, and then released for 120 min into YEPD containing 15 mg of
nocodazole per min to synchronize cells in G2/M. Cells
arrested in G2/M were spread on YEPD plates and irradiated
with a 254-nm UV lamp at 75 J/m2. The cells were then
washed to remove nocodazole and released into fresh YEPD containing 1%
dimethyl sulfoxide at 30°C. At timed intervals, cells were withdrawn
and stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) for microscopic
examination. An MMS synchrony experiment to monitor S-phase regulation
and a UV synchrony experiment to analyze cell cycle delay at the
G1/S transition were carried out as described previously
(31).
Immunofluorescence microscopic analysis.
Yeast cells were
grown in YEPD medium at 30°C. To examine spindle elongation at
30°C, the culture was synchronized in the G1 phase by
addition of 6 mg of
-factor per ml at 30°C for 2 h. The cells
were then washed to remove
-factor and released into YEPD containing
100 mM HU at 30°C. Aliquots of cells were removed and processed for
DNA flow cytometry analysis, viability assessment, and indirect
immunofluorescence microscopy as described previously
(41).
Immunoblotting.
Protein extracts for immunoblotting were
prepared and resolved sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) as previously described (41).
The proteins were then transferred to nylon membranes, subjected to
immunoblot analysis with the monoclonal anti-HA (3F10, 12CA5, or
16B12), anti-myc (9E10), or anti-nuclear pore complex protein (MAb414)
antibodies (4) or the polyclonal anti-Ssb1 antibodies
(obtained from S. Nishikawa), and detected using an ECL kit (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech).
Nuclear and cytoplasmic fractionation.
The nucleus and
cytoplasm were separated essentially as described previously
(3). Yeast cells were precultured in SC medium appropriate
to select for TRP1 plasmids. They were diluted in YEPD and
allowed to grow at 30°C for 3 h. Cells at an optical density at 600 nm of 100 were collected by centrifugation and incubated in 50 mM
Tris-H2SO4 (pH 9.0)-10 mM dithiothreitol at 30°C for 5 min. They were then converted into spheroplasts in 5 ml of
sorbitol buffer (1.2 M sorbitol, 40 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 10 mM
dithiothreitol) containing 500 µg of Zymolyase 100T after incubation
at 30°C. Spheroplasts were loaded on 7.5% Ficoll-sorbitol buffer
(7.5% Ficoll in 1.2 M sorbitol, 40 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], and 0.5 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride [PMSF]) and harvested by centrifugation
at 4000 × g for 5 min at 4°C. The spheroplasts were
resuspended in 7 ml of 20% Ficoll in phosphate buffer (20 mM potassium
phosphate [pH 6.5], 1 mM MgCl2, 1 mg each of leupeptin and pepstatin per ml, 0.5% aprotinin, 1 mM PMSF, 10 mM
benzamidine-HCl), gently homogenized (25 strokes in a Dounce
homogenizer), and centrifuged at 8,000 × g for 5 min.
After recentrifugation at 8,000 × g for 10 min, the
supernatant was loaded onto 30% Ficoll in phosphate buffer and
centrifuged at 24,000 rpm for 60 min in a Beckman SW60Ti rotor. The
20% Ficoll layer was recovered as a cytoplasmic fraction, and the
precipitates were suspended in lysis buffer as a nuclear fraction.
Immunoprecipitation and kinase assay.
Yeast cells were
precultured in YEPD or SC medium appropriate to select for
TRP1 and/or URA3 plasmids. The cells were then diluted in YEPD and allowed to grow at 30°C for 3 h. When
treated with MMS, the culture was incubated in 0.1% MMS for 1 h.
The cells (optical density at 600 nm = 40) were pelleted, washed,
and resuspended in 150 ml of lysis buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0],
100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM sodium orthovanadate, 1 mM dithiothreitol,
0.1% Triton X-100, 40 mM
-glycerophosphate, 15 mM
p-NO2-phenylphosphate, 1 mg of leupeptin per ml,
1 mg of pepstatin per ml, 0.5% aprotinin, 100 mg of APMSF per ml). An
equal volume of glass beads was added, and the cells were lysed by
vortexing. Extracts were clarified by 15 min of centrifugation at
4°C. The supernatant was diluted with lysis buffer and incubated at
4°C for 2 h with protein A-Sepharose beads bound with anti-HA or
anti-myc antibodies. Protein concentration was determined by a protein
assay (Bio-Rad). Immunoprecipitates were washed four times with lysis
buffer and twice with kinase buffer (20 mM sodium HEPES [pH 7.5], 10 mM MgCl2, 4 mM MnCl2). For
coimmunoprecipitation experiments, immunoprecipitates were boiled
immediately in 1 × SDS-PAGE sample buffer. For the kinase assays,
immunoprecipitates were separated into equal portions for
immunoblotting and the kinase reaction. The kinase reaction was
initiated in 50 µl of kinase buffer by the addition of 10 mCi of
[
-32P]ATP (3,000 Ci/mmol) (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech), 1 µg of glutathione S-transferase (GST)-Rad53,
and ATP to 50 µM. Reactions were terminated by addition of 5× sample
buffer and boiling for 5 min. The eluted proteins were separated by
SDS-PAGE, and the gels were dried and autoradiographed.
 |
RESULT |
Pie1 interacts physically with Mec1.
In an attempt to identify
Mec1-interacting proteins, we performed a yeast two-hybrid screen of a
budding yeast expression library. As bait we used a derivative of Mec1
lacking its kinase domain (amino acids 2 to 1399 of Mec1). We isolated
17 positive clones and found that 12 of these contained
YDR499 fused to the transcriptional activation domain. We
therefore chose YDR499 for further analysis. Hereafter,
YDR499 is designated a PIE1, encoding a protein
interacting with Mec1/Esr1. The full-length Mec1 protein was also found
to interact with Pie1 in the two-hybrid assay (Fig. 1A). The predicted PIE1 gene
product of 747 amino acids has a calculated molecular mass of 86 kD. A database search demonstrated that Pie1 has a region weakly
homologous to the S. pombe Rad26 (1) and
A. nidulans UVSD (40) proteins (Fig.
2). It has been shown that the Rad26
protein interacts physically with the ATR family protein Rad3
(12).

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Interaction between Mec1 and Pie1 in the two-hybrid
assay. (A) Pie1 interacts with Mec1 in the two-hybrid assay. Strain
PJ69-4A carrying pBD-MEC1(2-2368) was transformed with pAD-PIE1 or the
control vector. Transformants were streaked on an SC-Ura-Leu-His plate
containing 10 mM AT. (B) Identification of the Mec1 region required for
its interaction with Pie1. Strain PJ69-4A carrying pAD-PIE1 was
transformed with pBD-MEC1(2-2368), pBD-MEC1(2-1399), pBD-MEC1
(2-938), pBD-MEC1(2-500), pBD-MEC1(496-1590), or
pBD-MEC1(1586-2368). The kinase domain and central homologous region
of Mec1 are indicated as black and gray bars, respectively.
Transformants were streaked on an SC-Ura-Leu-His plate containing 10 mM
AT. Interaction with Pie1 was assessed by measuring the growth of
transformants.
|
|

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Structure and alignment of Pie1, S. pombe
Rad26, and A. nidulans UVSD. The Pie1, S. pombe
Rad26, and A. nidulans UVSD proteins contain 747, 614, and
778 amino acids, respectively. Alignment of the conserved regions of
these three proteins is shown below. Amino acids that are identical or
conserved are indicated by black and gray boxes, respectively.
|
|
To examine whether Pie1 interacts physically with Mec1 in vivo, we
performed immunoprecipitation experiments. For this purpose, we
generated HA-tagged MEC1 and myc-tagged PIE1
constructs and replaced the corresponding genomic copies with the
tagged constructs. Extracts were prepared from cells and subjected to
immunoprecipitation with anti-HA antibodies. The immunoprecipitates
were then probed with antibodies against the HA and myc epitopes. When
probed with anti-HA antibodies, bands corresponding to Mec1 were
detected in MEC1-HA cells. When immunoblotted with anti-myc
antibodies, bands corresponding to Pie1-myc were detected only in cells
expressing both Mec1-HA and Pie1-myc (Fig.
3). In the converse experiment, extracts
were subjected to immunoprecipitation with anti-myc antibodies. The
immunoprecipitates were then analyzed by immunoblotting with antibodies
against the HA and myc epitopes. When probed with anti-HA antibodies,
Pie1-myc was detected only in anti-HA immunoprecipitates from extracts
of cells expressing both Mec1-HA and Pie1-myc (Fig. 3). These
observations demonstrate that Pie1 and Mec1 physically interact in
vivo.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Interaction between Mec1 and Pie1 in vivo. Extracts were
prepared from MEC1-HA (KSC1212), PIE1-myc
(KSC1213), and MEC1-HA PIE-myc (KSC1214) cells, and
subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) with anti-HA (left panel) or
anti-myc (right panel) antibodies. The immunoprecipitates were
separated by SDS-PAGE and subjected to immunoblot analysis with anti-HA
or anti-myc antibodies.
|
|
The Mec1 protein is divided into three regions, similar to other ATR
family proteins (6). The carboxyl-terminal kinase domains
are highly conserved among the ATR family proteins, and the central
regions also exhibit significant homology. In contrast, no apparent
homology is observed among the amino-terminal regions. To delineate the
region of Mec1 that interacts with Pie1, we constructed baits
containing various fragments of MEC1 and tested their
ability to interact with Pie1 in the yeast two-hybrid system (Fig. 1B). We found that Pie1 interacts with the amino-terminal region of Mec1,
corresponding to amino acids 2 to 500, a region that is not conserved
among the ATR family members.
PIE1 is essential for cell growth.
To examine the
PIE1 function, we created a null strain by gene disruption
(see Materials and Method). A heterozygous PIE1/pie1
::TRP1 diploid was sporulated, and only two spores were viable in each tetrad. All the viable spores were Trp
,
containing the wild-type PIE1 gene. These results indicate
that PIE1 is essential for cell growth. MEC1 is
required for cell growth, in addition to checkpoint controls, and the
lethality of the mec1
mutation is suppressed by
sml1
mutations (50). To examine whether the
pie1
lethality is also rescued by the sml1
mutation, the pie1
/PIE1 sml1
/SML1 diploids were
sporulated. Trp+ cells were recovered, and all were found
to be Leu+, indicating that pie1
sml1
cells are viable (Fig. 4). The
pie1
sml1
double-mutant cells grew as well as the
wild-type and sml1
mutant cells did. Furthermore, the
sml1
mutation similarly suppressed the lethality of a
mec1
pie1
double mutation (see below). Thus, the
viability loss caused by the pie1 disruption is rescued by the sml1
mutation, suggesting that Pie1 and Mec1 have the
same function in cell growth.

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
pie1 lethality is suppressed by the
sml1 mutation. The pie1 ::TRP1/+
sml1 ::LEU2/+ diploid was sporulated and dissected on a YEPD
plate. Seven tetrads are displayed vertically. Sporulated tetrads grown
up on a YEPD plate were replica-plated to a SC-Trp or SC-Leu plate.
Cells proliferating on SC-Trp are all Leu+, indicating that
pie1 ::TRP1 sml1 ::LEU2 double mutants are viable.
|
|
Effects of the pie1
mutation on the DNA damage and
replication block checkpoints.
Suppression of pie1
lethality by the sml1
mutation allowed us to examine the
phenotype associated with a complete loss of PIE1 function.
We tested the sensitivity of pie1
mutants to HU, MMS, and
UV light and found that pie1
sml1
strains are
significantly more sensitive than sml1
strains are (Fig.
5). We then compared the sensitivity of
pie1
, mec1
, and double-mutant mec1
pie1
strains in a sml1
background. In a
sml1
background, the pie1
strain showed the
same sensitivity to HU, MMS, and UV irradiation as the
mec1
and mec1
pie1
strains did (Fig. 5),
suggesting that Pie1 and Mec1 function in the same pathway following
DNA damage and replication block.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Sensitivity of pie1 , mec1 , and
mec1 pie1 mutants to HU, MMS, and UV.
sml1 (KSC1178), pie1 sml1 (KSC1180),
mec1 sml1 (KSC1186), and mec1 pie1
sml1 (KSC1196) cells were grown to log phase and treated with
HU, MMS, or UV light. The viability of cells was estimated as described
in Materials and Methods.
|
|
We next tested whether pie1
mutants are defective in
their DNA damage and replication block checkpoints. We first examined the G2/M-phase DNA damage checkpoint by monitoring mitotic
division following UV irradiation (Fig.
6). When cell cultures were released from
nocodazole arrest after UV irradiation, wild-type cells exhibited delayed nuclear division while pie1
cells proceeded
through mitosis at the same rate as mec1
cells did.
Similarly, the pie1
strains progressed as fast as the
mec1
strains through the G1/S transition and
S phase following DNA damage (data not shown). We further examined the
DNA replication block checkpoint in pie1
mutants. Cells were synchronized with
-factor and released into medium containing HU. At 120 min after the release into HU, wild-type cells
were arrested as large budded cells with short spindles, while
one-third of pie1
and mec1
mutants
exhibited elongated spindles (Table 2).
These results indicate that pie1
mutants are as defective
as mec1
mutants in the G1-, S- and
G2/M-phase DNA damage and the replication block
checkpoints.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
G2/M-phase DNA damage checkpoint in
pie1 and mec1 mutants. sml1
(KSC1178), pie1 sml1 (KSC1180), and
mec1 sml1 (KSC1186) cells were arrested with
nocodazole and irradiated or not irradiated with UV. At the indicated
times after release of UV-irradiated (+UV) and unirradiated ( UV)
cultures from nocodazole, the percentage of uninucleate large budded
cells was scored by DAPI staining.
|
|
Rad53 is phosphorylated in response to DNA damage and replication block
in a Mec1-dependent manner, and this phosphorylation correlates with
activation of checkpoint pathways (36, 42). We therefore
examined whether PIE1 is also required for the Rad53 phosphorylation. As observed in mec1
mutants, Rad53
phophorylation following HU and MMS treatment was significantly reduced
in pie1
mutants (Fig. 7).
These results demonstrate that PIE1 and MEC1 play
similar roles in the DNA damage and replication block checkpoint controls.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
HU- and MMS-induced Rad53 modification in
pie1 and mec1 mutants. sml1
(KSC1178), pie1 sml1 (KSC1180), and mec1
sml1 (KSC1186) cells carrying YCp-RAD53-HA were left untreated
or treated with 10 mg/of HU per ml for 120 min or 0.1% MMS for 30 min
and then subjected to immunoblot analysis as described in Materials and
Methods.
|
|
Analysis of the conserved and carboxyl-terminal regions of
Pie1.
One region within Pie1 is homologous to Rad26 and UVSD
(1, 40), and no other regions exhibit significant
homology. It has been shown that the rad26.a14 mutation,
which localizes to the carboxyl terminus, confers a defect in response
to replication block but not to DNA damage (44) (Fig.
8A). We were therefore interested in
examining a role for the carboxyl-terminal Pie1 in the response to DNA
damage and replication block. Because there is no significant sequence
homology within Pie1 to Rad26 and UVSD, we constructed a truncated
mutation, pie1-
C, in which the carboxyl-terminal 47 amino
acids are deleted (Fig. 8A). We transformed the plasmid carrying the
pie1-
C mutation gene into pie1
sml1
cells and examined their sensitivity to DNA damage and HU treatment.
The cell carrying the pie1-
C mutation showed the same
sensitivity as the mutant cells carrying the control vector (Fig. 8B).
Furthermore, the pie1-
C mutation gene failed to
complement the pie1
lethality (data not shown). We next
used coimmunoprecipitation to test whether the Pie1-
C protein
interacts with Mec1. The pie1
sml1
cells expressing
Mec1-HA cells were transformed with centromeric plasmids carrying
PIE1-myc or pie1-
C-myc. Extracts were
prepared from transformants and subjected to immunoprecipitation
with anti-HA antibodies. Then the immunoprecipitates and extracts were
probed with antibodies against the HA and myc epitopes. Although cells expressed the Pie1-myc and Pie1-
C-myc mutant proteins at a similar level, Pie1-
C-myc did not coprecipitate with Mec1-HA (Fig. 8C). These results suggest that the carboxyl terminus of Pie1 is required for interaction with Mec1.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 8.
Analysis of mutations of Pie1 at the conserved domain
and the carboxyl terminus. (A) Mutations of Pie1 at the conserved and
carboxyl-terminal regions. The structures and conserved regions of Pie1
and S. pombe Rad26 are shown. The pie1-KA
mutation changes lysine to alanine at amino acid positions 177 and 178 (indicated by dots) within a conserved region. The pie1- C
gene product lacks the carboxyl-terminal 47 amino acids. An asterisk
marks the location of the rad26.a14 mutation. (B)
Sensitivity of the pie1-KA and pie1- C mutants
to HU, MMS, and UV. pie1 sml1 (KSC1234) cells were
transformed with YCpT-PIE-myc, YCpT-PIE1-KA-myc, YCpT-PIE1- C-myc, or
the control vector. The transformants were grown to log phase and
treated with HU, MMS, or UV light. The viability of cells was estimated
as described in Materials and Methods. (C) Interaction of
the Pie1-KA and Pie1- C mutant proteins with Mec1. Extracts were
prepared from MEC1-HA pie1 sml1 (KSC1286) cells
carrying YCpT-PIE-myc (WT), YCpT-PIE1-KA-myc (KA), or
YCpT-PIE1- C-myc ( C) and subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP)
with anti-HA antibodies. The extracts and immunocomplexes were
separated by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted with anti-HA or anti-myc
antibodies.
|
|
We next examined the significance of the region within Pie1 that is
homologous to Rad26 and UVSD. We constructed a mutation (pie1-KA) in which the lysines at positions 177 and 178 were
changed to alanines within a stretch of basic amino acids that is the most homologous region within Pie1 (Fig. 8A). We transformed the pie1-KA plasmid in pie1
sml1
mutants and
found that these transformants were as sensitive to HU, MMS, and UV
light as were the cells carrying the control vector (Fig. 8B).
Moreover, the pie1-KA gene did not complement the
pie1
lethality (data not shown). We also examined the
interaction of the Pie1-KA-myc mutant proteins with Mec1-HA by co
immunoprecipitation. Similar to the wild-type Pie1-myc protein, the
Pie1-KA-myc mutant protein coprecipitated with Mec1-HA (Fig. 8C). Some
short amino acid sequences rich in the basic amino acids lysine and
arginine are known to function as a nuclear localization signal
(11). It is possible that the pie1-KA mutation
might cause mislocalization of Pie1 along with Mec1. We therefore
examined the intracellular distribution of Mec1 and Pie1 in wild-type
and pie1-KA mutant cells (Fig.
9). Whole-cell extracts were fractionated into two separate cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions. Equal volumes of
these fractions and whole-cell extract were analyzed on immunoblots to
detect Mec1-HA and Pie1-myc proteins. As control for the fractionation, we assessed each fraction for the presence of the cytoplasmic heat
shock protein Ssb1 and a nuclear pore complex protein (4). Both Mec1-HA and Pie1-myc were found to exist in both cytoplasmic and
nuclear fractions from wild-type cells. The pie1-KA mutation did not affect their intracellular distribution. Moreover, the intracellular distribution of Mec1-HA was not significantly
altered in pie1
mutants (Fig. 9). These results indicate
that the region within Pie1 that is homologous to Rad26 and UVSD is
essential for Pie1 function but is not essential for its interaction
with Mec1 or for the intracellular localization of Pie1 and Mec1.

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 9.
Effect of the pie1-KA mutation on the
intracellular distribution of Mec1 and Pie1. MEC1-HA pie1
sml1 (KSC1286) cells carrying YCpT-PIE-myc, YCpT-PIE1-KA-myc,
or the control vector YCplac22 were harvested and spheroplasted.
Spheroplasts were homogenized to prepare whole-cell extracts (W) and
then separated into the cytoplasmic (C) and nuclear (N) fractions.
Samples from each fraction were separated by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted
with anti-HA, anti-myc, anti-Ssb1, or anti-nuclear pore complex (NPC)
antibodies.
|
|
Effect of the pie1
mutation on the Mec1 kinase
activity.
Members of the ATR family, for example, ATR and Rad3,
have protein kinase activities. It is possible that Mec1, like the
other family members, has a kinase activity and that the kinase
activity is controlled by Pie1. Mec1 contains the motif DXXXXN at
positions 2224 to 2229, which in conventional protein kinases plays a
critical role in catalysis (49). We therefore constructed
the kinase-negative mutation (mec1-KN) by changing amino
acids in the conserved motif DXXXXN to SXXXXS. ATM and ATR
phosphorylate the serine-glutamine/threonine-glutamine (SQ/TQ) cluster
domain on Chk2, the mammalian homolog of Rad53, in vitro
(29). Rad53 is considered to be a downstream target of
Mec1 (36, 42) and has 16 SQ/TQ motifs; 7 of them are
located in the amino-terminus, 1 is in the kinase domain, and 8 are in the carboxyl terminus. We therefore used a fusion protein consisting of
GST and the carboxyl terminus of Rad53 (GST-Rad53) as a substrate. Extracts were prepared from cells carrying YEp-Mec1-HA, YEp-MEC1-KN-HA, or the control vector. The Mec1-HA or Mec1-KN-HA proteins were immunoprecipitated from these extracts with anti-HA antibodies and
subjected to a kinase assay. GST-Rad53 was phosphorylated by Mec1-HA,
whereas phosphorylation by Mec1-KN-HA was similar to the background
level in the absence of HA-tagged proteins (Fig. 10A). GST alone was not efficiently
phosphorylated by Mec1-HA (data not shown). These results show that
Mec1 has an associated kinase activity to phosphorylate the carboxyl
terminus of Rad53. We found that the mec1-KN mutation
exhibits a phenotype very similar to the null mutation; this mutation
does not complement mec1
sml1
cells with respect to
sensitivity to HU, MMS, or UV light, nor does it complement the
lethality of the mec1
mutation (data not shown).
Together, these results indicate that Mec1 kinase activity is essential
for checkpoint controls and cell growth. Because Rad53 is activated
following DNA damage in a Mec1-dependent manner, we examined whether
DNA damage increases the kinase activity of Mec1 from
MEC1-HA cells in which the chromosomal MEC1 gene
is replaced with the tagged construct. MMS treatment, however, did not
affect Mec1-associated protein kinase activity (Fig. 10B). Since Pie1
functions in a complex with Mec1, we further asked whether Pie1 is
required for Mec1 kinase activity. We examined the kinase activity
associated with Mec1 prepared from MEC1-HA PIE1
sml1
and MEC1-HA pie1
sml1
cells. However,
phosphorylation of GST-Rad53 was not decreased in extracts from
pie1
sml1
cells compared with that in extracts from
PIE1 sml1
cells (Fig. 10C). These results suggest that
although Pie1 plays an essential role in checkpoint responses and cell
growth, its role involves functions other than regulation of Mec1
kinase activity.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 10.
Protein kinase activity associated with Mec1. Cells
grown to the mid-log phase were incubated with or without 0.1% MMS for
1 h and harvested for preparation of crude extracts. Extracts were
subjected to immunoprecipitation with anti-HA antibodies. The
immunoprecipitated HA-tagged Mec1 proteins were assayed for kinase
activity using GST-Rad53 as a substrate, as described in Materials and
Methods. In the top panel, 32P incorporation into GST-Rad53
was detected by autoradiography. In the bottom panel, the amount of the
Mec1 protein used for the kinase assay was examined by immunoblotting.
(A) mec1-1 sml1-1 (KSC783) cells carrying YEp-MEC1-HA (WT),
YEp-MEC1-KN-HA (KN), or the control vector pRS426 ( ), (B) MMS-treated
(+) or untreated ( ) sml1 (KSC1178) and MEC1-HA
sml1 (KSC1215) cells; (C) MEC1-HA sml1 (KSC1215)
and MEC1-HA pie1 sml1 (KSC1286) cells.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Genetic studies have demonstrated that Mec1 plays a critical role
in checkpoint responses and cell growth in budding yeast. However, it
is not clear how Mec1 is regulated by other proteins in the checkpoint
responses and cell growth. In an attempt to address this question, we
screened for proteins that associate with Mec1 in a two-hybrid system
and identified PIE1/YDR499. A subsequent
coimmunoprecipitation experiment revealed that Pie1 interacts
physically with Mec1 in vivo. In this paper, we provide evidence
demonstrating that Pie1 plays a critical role in checkpoint responses
and cell growth by interacting with Mec1. First, similar to
mec1
, the pie1
mutation is lethal and its
lethality is suppressed by sml1
mutations. The lethality
of mec1
pie1
double mutants is also suppressed by
sml1
mutations. Tel1 plays an overlapping role with Mec1,
and a high dosage of TEL1 can suppress lethality in
mec1
and pie1
mutants (reference
30 and data not shown). Second, pie1
sml1
cells show the same sensitivity as mec1
sml1
cells
following DNA damage and HU treatment. Furthermore, the mec1
and pie1 mutations are not additive with respective to
sensitivity to DNA damage and HU treatment. Third, the
pie1
and mec1
cells are equally defective
in all the G1, S, and G2/M damage and
replication block checkpoints. Finally, Rad53 is hyperphosphorylated
following DNA damage and replication block, and this phosphorylation is dependent on Pie1 as well as Mec1. Thus, mec1
and
pie1
mutants have identical phenotypes, indicating that
Mec1 and Pie1 function by forming a complex in checkpoint responses and
cell growth. Consistently, Paciotti et al. (32) and Rouse
and Jackson (34) have characterized YDR499,
designated DDC2 and LCD1, respectively, and shown
that Pie1/Ddc2/Lcd1 interacts with Mec1 and plays a key regulatory role
in checkpoint responses and cell growth.
To understand the regulatory role of Pie1, we examined whether Mec1 has
an associated kinase activity and whether this kinase activity is
regulated by Pie1. We first constructed a kinase-negative derivative of
MEC1 (mec1-KN). The mec1-KN mutation
was found to resemble the null mutation, because it failed to
complement the lethality of the mec1
mutation and the
sensitivity of mec1
mutants to HU, MMS, and UV light.
Consistent with the hypothesis that Rad53 functions downstream of Mec1,
there is a kinase activity associated with wild-type Mec1 that can
phosphorylate the Rad53 protein. The kinase-negative derivative of Mec1
(Mec1-KN) cannot phosphorylate the Rad53 protein. These results suggest
that Mec1 kinase activity is essential for the role of Mec1 in
checkpoint responses and cell growth. However, Mec1 activity to
phosphorylate the Rad53 protein in vitro is unaffected by DNA damage,
although Rad53 phosphorylation following DNA damage requires Mec1 in
vivo. Moreover, Mec1 kinase activity in vitro is not altered by
deletion of PIE1, although mec1
and
pie1
mutants show identical phenotypes. Mec1 exists in
both the nucleus and cytoplasm, but the pie1
mutation does not significantly affect the intracellular localization of Mec1.
So far, we have not obtained results demonstrating a regulatory role of
Pie1. The catalytic submit of DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PKcs)
also contains a kinase domain structurally related to that of the
phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, as found in the ATR family proteins
(39). Although not involved in checkpoint controls,
DNA-PKcs may serve a model for understanding the regulation of the ATR
family proteins. In vitro, DNA-PKcs is activated by binding
double-stranded DNA ends in the presence of a heterodimer composed of
the Ku70 and Ku86 subunits. In this manner, the activation of DNA-PKcs
is dependent on both specific DNA structures and regulatory cofactors.
It is possible that Pie1 targets Mec1 to specific DNA structures and/or
other DNA binding proteins to activate the Mec1 kinase activity. Such
DNA and/or proteins might be missing in our in vitro assay, so that
Mec1 kinase activity could not be affected by DNA damage or deletion of
PIE1. Alternatively, it is possible that Pie1 facilitates
the recognition by Mec1 of specific substrates involved in checkpoint
responses and cell proliferation. In this model, substrates for Mec1
might be modulated for recognition by Pie1 and then efficiently
phosphorylated by Mec1. For example, Rad9 is hyperphosphorylated and is
bound to Rad53 in response to DNA damage, and this Rad9-Rad53
interaction has been implicated in Rad53 activation (14, 43,
45). Mec1 might efficiently phosphorylate Rad53 only when it is
associated with Rad9. Finally, it remains possible that Mec1
phosphorylates Pie1 and that phosphorylated Pie1 in turn, transduces a
signal downstream in the cell growth and checkpoint responses. Paciotti
et al. (32) have shown that Pie1/Ddc2 is phosphorylated by
Mec1 following DNA damage and replication block, although the
significance of the phosphorylation has not been demonstrated.
Pie1 shares several functional properties with fission yeast Rad26. The
rad26 deletion mutation confers the same checkpoint defect
as the rad3 deletion mutation. Rad26 interacts physically with the ATR family protein Rad3 and undergoes Rad3-dependent DNA
damage-induced phosphorylation (12). In A. nidulans, mutations in uvsD confer phenotypes similar
to mutations in the ATR family member uvsB
(40). The biochemical properties of the UVSB and UVSD
proteins have not been examined yet. In addition to these functional
similarities, both the Rad26 and UVSD proteins have limitted homology
to Pie1 (1, 40). To examine the significance of the region
conserved among these proteins, we replaced two conserved basic amino
acid residues at this region of Pie1 with alanines. The resulting
mutation, pie1-KA, was very similar to the pie1
null mutation with respect to cell growth and sensitivity to HU, MMS,
and UV light. These results indicate that this homologous region is
essential for the Pie1 function and suggest that the Pie1, Rad26, and
UVSD proteins are functionally and structurally related to each other.
We therefore expect that homologs of Pie1, Rad26, and UVSD will be
found in higher eukaryotes. In D. melanogaster, mutations in
mus304 were identified to confer the same checkpoint defects
as mutations in the ATR family member mei-41
(7). Furthermore, mus304 and mei-41
were shown to act in the same genetic pathway during DNA repair and
development (7). Although searches revealed no specific
sequence homology, mus304 encodes a protein with a size
similar to Pie1 and Rad26 and with a stretch of 4 basic amino acid
residues in the corresponding region. Mus304 might be a Pie1-related protein.
The ATR family members are structurally and functionally related
proteins found in a diverse range of organisms (6). These large proteins all contain a highly conserved kinase domain at the
carboxyl terminus and a central region that displays significant homology. In Mec1, neither of these homologous regions is required for
interaction with Pie1. However, the amino-terminal Mec1, which shows no
apparent homology to the corresponding region of other ATR family
members, was found to be required for interaction with Pie1. Not
surprisingly, we also found that the carboxyl terminus of Pie1, which
likewise shows no apparent homology to Rad26 and UVSD, is required for
interaction with Mec1. It is possible that Rad26 and UVSD interact with
the amino terminus of Rad3 and UVSB, respectively. To understand the
role in the conserved region of Pie1, we examined whether the
pie1-KA mutation has an effect on its interaction with Mec1
or the intracelluar localization of Mec1 and Pie1. However, neither was
affected by the pie-KA mutation. These results indicate that
this homologous region is essential for functions of Pie1 other than
its interaction with Mec1 or intracellular localization. It will
therefore be interesting to address other aspects, for example, whether
Pie1 might interact with specific DNA structures and/or other
checkpoint proteins through this region.
In summary, we identified Pie1 as a protein that interacts physically
with Mec1 and showed that Pie1 and Mec1 function as a complex that is
required for checkpoint responses and cell growth. Our result also
suggests that Pie1 is a homologue of Rad26 and UVSD and that the region
conserved among these three proteins is essential for Pie1 function.
However, it remains to be determined exactly how Pie1 regulates Mec1
activity. Future work will focus on the interaction of the Mec1-Pie1
complex with specific DNA structures and/or other checkpoint proteins
in checkpoint responses.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
T.W. and T.K. contributed equally to this work.
We thank T. Naiki for an initial two-hybrid screening; H. Ogawa, P. James, and S. Nishikawa for materials; T. Yoshihisa for technical
suggestions and M. Lamphier for critical readings of the manuscript. We
also thank John Rouse and Steve Jackson for communicating results prior
to publication.
T.K. is a recipient of a JSPS predoctoral fellowship. This work was
supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Priority Areas
and General Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports
and Culture of Japan (K.M. and K.S.).
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of
Biological Science, Graduate School of Science, Nagoya University,
Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-0814, Japan. Phone: 81-52-789-2593. Fax:
81-52-789-2589. E-mail:
j46036a{at}nucc.cc.nagoya-u.ac.jp.
Present address: Kyowa Hakko Kogyo Co. Ltd., Machida-shi, Tokyo
194-8533, Japan.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
AI-Khodairy, F.,
E. Fotou,
K. S. Sheldrick,
D. J. F. Griffiths,
A. R. Lehmann, and A. M. Carr.
1994.
Identification of new elements involved in checkpoint and feedback controls in fission yeast.
Mol. Biol. Cell
4:147-160.
|
| 2.
|
Allen, J. B.,
Z. Zhou,
W. Siede,
E. C. Friedberg, and S. J. Elledge.
1994.
The SAD1/RAD53 protein kinase controls multiple checkpoints and DNA damage-induced transcription in yeast.
Genes Dev.
8:2416-2428[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Aris, J. P., and G. Blobel.
1991.
Isolation of yeast nuclei.
Methods Enzymol.
194:735-749[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Aris, J. P., and G. Blobel.
1989.
Yeast nuclear envelope proteins cross-react with an antibody against mammalian pore complex proteins.
J. Cell Biol.
108:2059-2067[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Banin, S.,
L. Moyal,
S. Shieh,
Y. Taya,
C. W. Anderson,
L. Chessa,
N. I. Smorodinsky,
C. Prives,
Y. Reiss,
Y. Shiloh, and Y. Ziv.
1998.
Enhanced phosphorylation of p53 by ATM in response to DNA damage.
Science
281:1674-1677[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Bentley, N. J.,
D. A. Holtzman,
G. Flaggs,
K. S. Keegan,
A. Demaggio,
J. C. Ford,
M. Hoekstra, and A. M. Carr.
1996.
The Schizosaccharomyces pombe rad3 checkpoint gene.
EMBO J.
15:6641-6651[Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Brodsky, M. H.,
J. J. Sekelsky,
G. Tsang,
R. S. Hawley, and G. M. Rubin.
2000.
mus304 encodes a novel DNA damage checkpoint protein required during Drosophila development.
Genes Dev.
14:668-678.
|
| 8.
|
Canman, C. E.,
D. S. Lim,
K. A. Cimprich,
Y. Taya,
K. Tamai,
K. Sakaguchi,
E. Appella,
M. B. Kastan, and J. D. Siliciano.
1998.
Activation of the ATM kinase by ionizing radiation and phosphorylation of p53.
Science
281:1677-1679[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Carr, A. M.
1997.
Control of cell cycle arrest by Mec1sc/Rad3sp DNA structure checkpoint pathway.
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
7:93-98[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Desany, B. D.,
A. A. Alcasabas,
J. B. Bachant, and S. J. Elledge.
1998.
Recovery from DNA replicational stress is the essential function of the S-phase checkpoint pathway.
Genes Dev.
12:2956-2970[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Dingwall, C., and R. A. Laskey.
1991.
Nuclear targeting sequences a consensus?
Trends Biochem. Sci.
16:478-481[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Edwards, R. J.,
N. J. Bentley, and A. M. Carr.
1999.
A Rad3-Rad26 complex responds to DNA damage independently of other checkpoint proteins.
Nat. Cell Biol.
1:393-398[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Elledge, S. J.
1996.
Cell cycle checkpoints: preventing an identity crisis.
Science
274:1664-1672[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Emili, A.
1998.
MEC1-dependent phosphorylation of Rad9p in response to DNA damage.
Mol. Cell
2:183-189[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Gietz, R. D., and A. Sugino.
1988.
New yeast-Escherichia coli shuttle vectors constructed with in vitro mutagenized yeast genes lacking six-base pair restriction sites.
Gene
74:527-534[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Green, C. M.,
H. Erdjument-Bromage,
P. Tempst, and N. F. Lowndes.
2000.
A novel Rad24 checkpoint protein complex closely related to replication factor C.
Curr. Biol.
10:39-42[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Guthrie, C., and G. R. Fink.
1991.
Guide to yeast genetics and molecular biology.
Academic Press, Inc., New York, N.Y.
|
| 18.
|
Hari, K. L.,
A. Santerre,
J. J. Sekelsky,
K. S. McKim,
J. B. Boyd, and R. S. Hawley.
1995.
The mei-41 gene of D. melanogaster is a structural and functional homolog of the human ataxia telangiectasia gene.
Cell
82:815-821[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Hartwell, L. H., and T. A. Weinert.
1989.
Checkpoints: controls that ensure the order of cell cycle events.
Science
246:229-234.
|
| 20.
|
James, P.,
J. Halladay, and E. A. Craig.
1996.
Genomic libraries and a host strain designed for highly efficient two-hybrid selection in yeast.
Genetics
144:1425-1436[Abstract].
|
| 21.
|
Kaiser, C.,
S. Michaelis, and A. Mitchell.
1994.
Methods in yeast genetics.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 22.
|
Kato, R., and H. Ogawa.
1994.
An essential gene, ESR1, is required for mitotic cell growth, DNA repair, and meiotic recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:3104-3112[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Keegan, K. S.,
D. A. Holtzman,
A. W. Plug,
E. R. Christenson,
E. E. Brainerd,
G. Flaggs,
N. J. Bentley,
E. M. Taylor,
M. S. Meyn,
S. B. Moss,
A. M. Carr,
T. Ashley, and M. F. Hoekstra.
1996.
The Atr and Atm protein kinases associate with different sites along meiotically pairing chromosomes.
Genes Dev.
10:2423-2437[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Kondo, T.,
K. Matsumoto, and K. Sugimoto.
1999.
Role of a complex containing Rad17, Mec3, and Ddc1 in the yeast DNA damage checkpoint pathway.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:1136-1143[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Longhese, M. P.,
M. Foiani,
M. Muzi-Falconi,
G. Lucchini, and P. Plevani.
1998.
DNA damage checkpoint in budding yeast.
EMBO J.
17:5525-5528[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Longhese, M. P.,
V. Paciotti,
R. Fraschini,
R. Zaccarini,
P. Plevani, and G. Lucchini.
1997.
The novel DNA damage checkpoint protein Ddc1p is phosphorylated periodically during the cell cycle and in response to DNA damage in budding yeast.
EMBO J.
17:5216-5226[CrossRef].
|
| 27.
|
Lydall, D., and T. Weinert.
1995.
Yeast checkpoint genes in DNA damage processing: implications for repair and arrest.
Science
270:1488-1491[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Martinho, R. G.,
H. D. Lindsay,
G. Flaggs,
A. J. DeMaggio,
M. F. Hoekstra,
A. M. Carr, and N. J. Bentley.
1998.
Analysis of Rad3 and Chk1 protein kinases defines different checkpoint responses.
EMBO J.
17:7239-7249[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Matsuoka, S.,
G. Rotman,
A. Ogawa,
Y. Shiloh,
K. Tamai, and S. J. Elledge.
2000.
Ataxia telangiectasia-mutated phosphorylates Chk2 in vivo and in vitro.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97:10389-10394[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Morrow, D. M.,
D. A. Tagle,
Y. Shiloh,
F. S. Collins, and P. Hieter.
1995.
TEL1, an S. cerevisiae homolog of the human gene mutated in ataxia telangiectasia, is functionally related to the yeast checkpoint gene MEC1.
Cell
82:831-840[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Naiki, T.,
T. Shimomura,
T. Kondo,
K. Matsumoto, and K. Sugimoto.
2000.
Rfc5, in cooperation with Rad24, controls DNA damage checkpoints throughout the cell cycle in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20:5888-5896[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Paciotti, V.,
M. Clerici,
G. Lucchini, and M. P. Longhese.
2000.
The checkpoint protein Ddc2, functionally related to S. pombe Rad26, interacts with Mec1 and is regulated by Mec1-dependent phosphorylation in budding yeast.
Genes Dev.
14:2046-2059[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Paciotti, V.,
G. Lucchini,
P. Plevani, and M. P. Longhese.
1998.
Mec1p is essential for phosphorylation of the yeast DNA damage checkpoint protein Ddc1p, which physically interacts with Mec3p.
EMBO J.
17:4199-4209[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Rouse, J., and S. P. Jackson.
2000.
LCD1: an essential gene involved in checkpoint control and regulation of the MEC1 signalling pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
EMBO J.
19:5793-5800[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Sanchez, Y.,
J. Bachant,
H. Wang,
F. Hu,
D. Liu,
M. Tetzlaff, and S. J. Elledge.
1999.
Control of the DNA damage checkpoint by Chk1 and Rad53 protein kinases through distinct mechanisms.
Science
286:1166-1171[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Sanchez, Y.,
B. A. Desany,
W. J. Jones,
Q. Liu,
B. Wang, and S. J. Elledge.
1996.
Regulation of RAD53 by the ATM-like kinase MEC1 and TEL1 in yeast cell cycle checkpoint pathways.
Science
271:357-360[Abstract].
|
| 37.
|
Savitsky, K.,
A. Bar-Shira,
S. Gilad,
G. Rotman,
Y. Ziv,
L. Vanagaite,
D. A. Tagle,
S. Smith,
T. Uziel,
S. Sfez,
M. Ashkenazi,
I. Pecker,
M. Frydman,
R. Harnik,
S. R. Patanajali,
A. Simmons,
G. A. Clines,
A. Sartiel,
R. A. Gatti,
L. Chessa,
O. Sanal,
M. F. Lavin,
N. G. J. Jaspers,
A. M. R. Taylor,
C. F. Arlett,
T. Miki,
S. M. Weissman,
M. Lovett,
F. S. Collins, and Y. Shiloh.
1995.
A single ataxia telangiectasia gene with a product similar to PI-3 kinase.
Science
268:1749-1753[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Shimomura, T.,
S. Ando,
K. Matsumoto, and K. Sugimoto.
1998.
Functional and physical interaction between Rad24 and Rfc5 in the yeast checkpoint pathways.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:5485-5491[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Smith, G. C. M., and S. P. Jackson.
1999.
The DNA-dependent protein kinase.
Genes Dev.
13:916-934[Free Full Text].
|
| 40.
|
Souza, C. P. C. D.,
X. S. Ye, and S. A. Osmani.
1999.
Checkpoint defects leading to premature mitosis also cause endoreplication of DNA in Aspergillus nidulans.
Mol. Biol. Cell
10:3661-3674[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Sugimoto, K.,
S. Ando,
T. Shimomura, and K. Matsumoto.
1997.
Rfc5, replication factor C component, is required for regulation of Rad53 protein kinase in the yeast checkpoint pathway.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:5905-5914[Abstract].
|
| 42.
|
Sun, Z.,
D. S. Fay,
F. Marini,
M. Foiani, and D. F. Stern.
1996.
Spk1/Rad53 is regulated by Mec1-dependent protein phosphorylation in DNA replication and damage checkpoint pathways.
Genes Dev.
10:395-406[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 43.
|
Sun, Z.,
J. Hsiao,
D. S. Fay, and D. F. Stern.
1998.
Rad53 FHA domain associated with phosphorylated Rad9 in the DNA damage checkpoint.
Science
281:272-274[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 44.
|
Uchiyama, M.,
I. Galli,
D. |