Received 19 July 2000/Returned for modification 18 August
2000/Accepted 27 October 2000
Inactivation of DNA mismatch repair by mutation or by
transcriptional silencing of the MLH1 gene results in
genome instability and cancer predisposition. We recently found
(P. V. Shcherbakova and T. A. Kunkel, Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:3177-3183, 1999) that an elevated spontaneous mutation rate can
also result from increased expression of yeast MLH1.
Here we investigate the mechanism of this mutator effect. Hybridization
of poly(A)+ mRNA to DNA microarrays containing 96.4% of
yeast open reading frames revealed that MLH1
overexpression did not induce changes in expression of other genes
involved in DNA replication or repair. MLH1
overexpression strongly enhanced spontaneous mutagenesis in yeast
strains with defects in the 3'
5' exonuclease activity of replicative
DNA polymerases
and
but did not enhance the mutation rate in
strains with deletions of MSH2, MLH1, or
PMS1. This suggests that overexpression of
MLH1 inactivates mismatch repair of replication errors.
Overexpression of the PMS1 gene alone caused a moderate
increase in the mutation rate and strongly suppressed the mutator
effect caused by MLH1 overexpression. The mutator effect
was also reduced by a missense mutation in the MLH1 gene
that disrupted Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction. Analytical ultracentrifugation experiments showed that purified Mlh1p forms a homodimer in solution, albeit with a Kd of 3.14 µM, 36-fold
higher than that for Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimerization. These observations
suggest that the mismatch repair defect in cells overexpressing
MLH1 results from an imbalance in the levels of Mlh1p
and Pms1p and that this imbalance might lead to formation of
nonfunctional mismatch repair complexes containing Mlh1p homodimers.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Mismatch repair (MMR) is an
important and powerful mutation avoidance mechanism in prokaryotes and
eukaryotes. A major function of MMR proteins is to correct mismatches
arising during DNA replication and recombination (reviewed in
references 2, 20, 29, and 44). In Escherichia
coli, the early steps in MMR require the products of the
mutS and mutL genes. These genes are conserved in
eukaryotes, which contain multiple MutS and MutL homologs that are
proposed to function early in MMR. Repair of mismatches in DNA involves
either of two complexes of MutS homologs. The MSH2-MSH6 heterodimer
participates in the repair of base-base mismatches and
insertion-deletion mismatches involving a small number of nucleotides,
while MSH2-MSH3 is responsible mainly for repair of insertion-deletion
mismatches involving a larger number of nucleotides. MMR also requires
complexes of MutL homologs, three of which have been described for both
yeast and humans. One is a heterodimer of Mlh1p and Pms1p in yeast
(36) or of MLH1 and PMS2 in humans (26) that
has been designated hMutL
. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer forms a complex with
Msh2p-Msh6p or Msh2p-Msh3p bound to mismatched DNA in vitro (12,
13). This suggests that the Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer participates
in correcting mismatches recognized by both Msh2p-Msh6p and
Msh2p-Msh3p. Yeast Mlh1p has been also shown to interact with two other
MutL homologs, Mlh3p and Mlh2p, presumably forming heterodimers
(46), and human MLH1 protein has been shown to interact
with the human MLH3, a homolog of yeast Mlh3p (27). The
yeast Mlh1p-Mlh3p complex was suggested by genetic data to participate
in Msh2p-Msh3p-dependent repair of insertion-deletion mispairs
(10). A minor role in correcting frameshift intermediates
has been also proposed for the yeast Mlh1p-Mlh2p heterodimer
(14). Human MLH1 protein also interacts with human PMS1 to
form a heterodimer designated hMutL
(24, 37), although
the function of this complex in MMR or other processes remains to be established.
Mutations in MMR genes can inactivate MMR and thus strongly elevate
spontaneous mutation rates, especially addition and deletion mutations
in short, repetitive (microsatellite) sequences. These MMR gene
mutations also predispose humans and mice to tissue-specific cancers.
In addition to inactivation via gene mutation, MMR activity can also be
modulated by changes in expression of MMR genes. For example,
hypermethylation of the human MLH1 promoter results in lack
of the MLH1 gene expression, loss of MMR activity, and
microsatellite instability (16, 18). An increasing number
of reports describe a correlation between human MLH1
promoter hypermethylation and sporadic colon, gastric, and endometrial
cancers with microsatellite instability (see, for example, references
9, 16, 23, and 45). Conversely, MMR activity can be
reduced by increased expression of MMR genes. Thus,
methotrexate-resistant human cell lines that overproduce MSH3 have a
base substitution mutator phenotype (8). Extracts of these
cells are defective in repairing base-base mismatches, and repair can
be restored by addition of purified hMSH2-hMSH6 complex. The MMR defect
was suggested to result from diminished MSH2-MSH6 levels due to
sequestration of MSH2 by excess MSH3 (8, 28).
Elevated mutation rates have also been reported in yeast strains
overproducing either of two eukaryotic MutL homologs. Expression of the
PMS1 gene from a multicopy plasmid in a wild-type yeast strain produced a 10-fold increase in the reversion rate of the hom3-10 frameshift mutation (21). More
recently, we found that increased expression of the yeast
MLH1 gene produced a strong mutator phenotype for several
genetic markers, with the mutation rate approaching that of a
mlh1 deletion strain (39). These mutator
effects are in contrast to results with the yeast MSH2 gene,
which does not confer hypermutability when overexpressed in wild-type
yeast strains (7).
In this study, we explore the mechanism of the Mlh1p-induced mutator
effect. Using hybridization to DNA microarrays, we show that
overexpression of MLH1 does not induce changes in expression of other genes involved in DNA repair or replication. While Mlh1p is
required to repair replication errors, it also participates in other
DNA transactions including recombination and transcription-coupled nucleotide excision repair (17, 22, 46) which can modulate the mutation rate. To determine if the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype was due to failure to correct DNA replication errors, here we have
examined effects of MLH1 overexpression in strains defective in genes controlling either DNA replication or MMR. The data suggest that the mutator phenotype of MLH1-overexpressing strains
results from inactivation of MMR dependent on MSH2,
MLH1, and PMS1 genes. We also show that the
Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype can be suppressed by overexpression of
PMS1 or by a missense mutation in the MLH1 gene
that disrupts Mlh1p interaction with Pms1p. Finally, we show that
purified Mlh1p is capable of forming a homodimer in solution, a finding
which suggests that MMR in cells overexpressing MLH1 could
be disrupted by nonfunctional MMR complexes containing Mlh1p homodimers.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Strains.
S. cerevisiae strain E134
(MAT
ade5
lys2::InsEA14 trp1-289 his7-2
leu2-3,112 ura3-52) and its mlh1
derivative have
been described previously (39). A deletion of the
PMS1 gene was constructed in the E134 strain as described
elsewhere (31). DAG60 is isogenic to E134 but contains a
msh2::kanMX disruption
(4). Wild-type strains CG379-3-29RL (MAT
ade5 lys2-Tn5-13 trp1-289 his7-2 leu2-3,112 ura3
bik1::ura3-29RL) and 8C-YUNI101
(MATa ade2-1 trp1-1 his7-2 leu2-3,112
ura3
bik1::ura3-29RL) will be
described elsewhere (Y. I. Pavlov, P. V. Shcherbakova, and
T. A. Kunkel, submitted for publication). The pol2-4
mutant of CG379-3-29RL was constructed as previously described
(30). The pol3-01 mutant of 8C-YUNI101 constructed as described elsewhere (31) was kindly
provided by Y. I. Pavlov (National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences). A diploid heterozygous for the pol3-01
mutation and an isogenic wild-type diploid were constructed by crossing
the E134 strain to the pol3-01 mutant of 8C-YUNI101 or the
original 8C-YUNI101 strain. Haploid strains with missense mutations in
the MLH1 gene were constructed by replacing the chromosomal
wild-type MLH1 gene of the E134 strain with the mutant
alleles as previously described (39). Strains CG1945 and
Y187 for the two-hybrid analysis were purchased from Clontech
Laboratories, Inc.
Plasmids.
Plasmid pMMR75, containing the MLH1
gene under the control of the ADH1 promoter, and the
URA3-based integrative plasmid YIpMLH1 have been described
previously (39). A control vector for MLH1 overexpression experiments was constructed by digestion of pMMR75 with
SacI and BamHI that cut out the MLH1
open reading frame (ORF) followed by self-ligation of the blunt-ended
vector. Missense mutations in the MLH1 gene were made in
pMMR75 and YIpMLH1 by site-directed PCR mutagenesis as previously
described (39). The presence of mutations was confirmed by
partial sequencing of the MLH1 gene as described elsewhere
(39). We used the pAM58 plasmid (31) for
disruption of the PMS1 gene and the pJB1 plasmid (30) for making the pol2-4 mutation. Plasmid
pAC12 (4) was used for MSH2 overexpression.
Plasmid pMMR84, containing the PMS1 ORF, was a gift from L. Prakash (University of Texas). To create a plasmid overexpressing
PMS1 from the galactose-inducible GAL10 promoter,
the PMS1 ORF from pMMR84 was amplified by PCR using primers
5'-TTA GGT ACC ATG ACA CAA ATT CAT CAG-3' (forward) and 5'-TTT GGT ACC TCA TAT TTC GTA ATC C-3' (reverse). The
primers introduced a KpnI restriction enzyme site at each
end. After digestion with KpnI, the PCR product was ligated
into the KpnI site of YEp181SPGAL (4) to
generate pMH8.
Plasmids pGAD424 and pGBT9 were purchased from Clontech Laboratories,
Inc. To construct pGAD424-yPMS1, the PMS1 ORF was amplified by PCR as described above using primers 5'-TTT GGA TCC GCA TGA CAC
AAA TTC ATC AG -3' (forward) and 5'-TTT TTT GTC GAC TCA TAT TTC GTA ATC C-3' (reverse), which introduced a BamHI
restriction site at the 5' end and a SalI restriction site
at the 3' end. Following digestion with BamHI and
SalI, the PCR product was ligated into the corresponding
sites of pGAD424 to create a translational fusion between
PMS1 and the GAL4 transcriptional activation
domain. In a similar fashion, the MLH1 ORF was amplified by
PCR from pMMR75 using primers 5'-TTT GGA TCC TTA TGT CTC TCA GAA
TAA AAG C-3' (forward) and 5'-CAT TCA GTC GAC TTA ACA CCT
CTC AAA AAC-3' (reverse) and ligated into the BamHI
and SalI sites of pGBT9 to create a translational fusion
between MLH1 and the GAL4 DNA binding domain. To
confirm that no mutations were introduced during PCR, the entire coding
regions of MLH1 and PMS1 in all constructs were
sequenced using an ABI Prism 377 DNA sequencer.
Microarray hybridizations.
cDNA microarray chips containing
6,226 yeast ORFs were prepared as previously described (5,
15). Briefly, primers specific for each ORF (Research Genetics,
Birmingham, Ala.) were used to amplify yeast cDNAs from genomic DNA in
a 100-µl PCR mixture using AmpliTaq (PE Biosystems, Foster City,
Calif.) and Pfu polymerases (Stratagene, La Jolla, Calif.).
The PCR products were analyzed on 2% agarose gels to ensure
amplification of the desired product, which was then ethanol
precipitated. The overall success rate of the reactions based on the
size and purity of PCR products was approximately 99.5%. The purified
cDNAs were resuspended in ArrayIt buffer (Telechem, San Jose, Calif.)
and spotted onto poly-L-lysine-coated glass slides
using a modified, robotic DNA arrayer (Beecher Instruments, Bethesda,
Md.). Total RNA was extracted from the E134 strain containing the
pMMR75 plasmid or control vector by hot acid phenol extraction. A cell
pellet from ~100 to 150 ml of culture was resuspended in 4 ml of
buffer containing 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 10 mM EDTA, and 0.5% sodium
dodecyl sulfate (SDS); mixed with 4 ml of acid (pH 4.5) phenol; and
incubated at 65°C for 1 h with occasional vigorous vortexing.
The mixture was then cooled on ice for 10 min and centrifuged at 4°C
for 10 min. The aqueous phase was reextracted with phenol at room
temperature and extracted once with chloroform, and RNA was ethanol
precipitated. A poly(A)+ RNA-enriched
fraction was isolated from total RNA by using the Oligotex mRNA Midi
kit from Qiagen. RNA (2 to 4 µg) was labeled with Cyanine 3 (Cy3)- and Cy5-conjugated dUTP (Amersham, Piscataway, N.J.)
using a reverse transcription reaction and hybridized to a yeast cDNA
microarray chip (4). cDNA chips were scanned using an Axon
scanner (Axon Instruments, Foster City, Calif.), and images were
analyzed using the Array Suite software (Scanalytics, Fairfax, Va.).
The relative fluorescence intensity was measured for each labeled RNA,
and a ratio of the intensity of each fluor bound to each probe was
calculated. The amount of autofluorescence generated in the Cy3 channel
was measured, and a minimum intensity cutoff was set just above this
value. Hybridizations were conducted on two independently obtained
pools of RNA, two times on one pool and once on another pool.
Mutation rate measurements.
Reversion of his7-2
and lys2::InsEA14 alleles was
used to monitor changes in the spontaneous mutation rate. The
his7-2 frameshift mutation reverts mainly via +1 insertions
and
2 deletions in the wild-type strain and almost exclusively via +1
insertions in a run of seven A · T base pairs in the
mlh1 strain (39). The
lys2::InsEA14 mutation reverts
via loss of a single base pair in a run of 14 A · T base pairs
(41). Rates of His+ and
Lys+ reversion were measured by fluctuation
analysis as previously described (39). To estimate the
effect of PMS1 or MSH2 overexpression on the
mutation rate, strains containing corresponding plasmids were grown in
medium containing 2% galactose instead of glucose.
Antibodies to yeast MMR proteins.
A part of the yeast
MLH1 gene corresponding to 200 C-terminal amino acids and a
part of the yeast PMS1 gene corresponding to 125 N-terminal
amino acids were amplified by PCR using primers that introduced an
XhoI restriction site at the 5' end and a KpnI restriction site at the 3' end. Following digestion with
XhoI and KpnI, the PCR products were ligated into
the corresponding sites of pRSET (Invitrogen). Expression of the
resulting constructs in Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) produced
histidine-tagged insoluble polypeptides that were purified using
Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid (Ni-NTA) chromatography (Qiagen) under
denaturing conditions with minor modifications. Briefly, cells from a
1-liter culture were disrupted by sonication, and the pellet was
separated from soluble proteins by centrifugation and solubilized in
buffer containing 8 M urea, 100 mM
NaH2PO4, and 10 mM Tris-HCl
(pH 8.0). The solution was then clarified by centrifugation and applied
to an NTA-Ni2+ agarose column (1.79 cm2 by 5 cm). Further purification steps were the
same as those in the Qiagen protocol. Fractions containing purified
peptides were diluted stepwise to a urea concentration of 2 M and used
to raise polyclonal antiserum in rabbits. Polyclonal antibodies to
yeast Msh2p have been described previously (7).
Immunoblot analysis of yeast extracts.
Transformants of the
E134 strain with pMMR75, pMH8, pAC12, or combinations of these plasmids
were grown to an optical density at 600 nm of 0.8 to 0.9 in 50 ml of
standard dropout media (38) selective for the plasmids. To
induce PMS1 and MSH2 expression, strains
containing corresponding plasmids were grown in medium containing 2%
galactose instead of glucose. Cells were harvested by centrifugation,
resuspended in an equal volume of lysis buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH
7.6], 1 mM EDTA, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM
-mercaptoethanol, 1 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride), and disrupted by vortexing with an
equal volume of 0.5-mm glass beads (BioSpec Products, Inc.). Cell
debris was pelleted by centrifugation, and supernatants were stored at
80°C. The extracts were subjected to electrophoresis in a 4 to 20%
gradient polyacrylamide gel (Novex) and transferred to a polyvinylidene
difluoride membrane (Novex). The blots were incubated in 1% nonfat dry
milk for 30 min; probed with a 1:1,000 dilution of anti-Mlh1p,
anti-Pms1p, or anti-Msh2p polyclonal serum for 1 h; washed three
times with 1% nonfat dry milk plus 0.5% bovine serum albumin; and
incubated with a 1:1,000 dilution of alkaline phosphatase-conjugated
goat anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (Oncogene Research Products) for 30 min. The bands were visualized by using a Western Blue-stabilized
substrate (Promega).
Yeast two-hybrid assays.
Yeast strains CG1945 and Y187 were
cotransformed with pGAD424 containing the wild-type PMS1
gene and pGBT9 containing wild-type or mutant alleles of the
MLH1 gene. Transformants were selected on media lacking
tryptophan and leucine. Interactions were determined by the ability of
the corresponding combination of proteins to induce expression of the
HIS3 reporter gene in CG1945 or the lacZ reporter
gene in Y187. For the HIS3 expression assay, CG1945
transformants were plated onto medium lacking tryptophan, leucine, and
histidine and supplemented with 5 mM 3-amino-1,2,4-triazole. For the
-galactosidase activity assay, Y187 transformants were grown to
saturation in medium lacking tryptophan and leucine, and the cultures
were then dispensed into the wells of a 96-well microtiter plate.
Aliquots of the cultures from each well were transferred using a 48-pin replicator onto a nitrocellulose filter (Schleicher & Schuell BA85)
placed on the surface of a petri dish containing
Trp
Leu
dropout medium.
The plate was incubated at 30°C for 2 days. The filter was then
frozen in liquid nitrogen and incubated at 30°C on filter paper
soaked in buffer containing
5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-
-D-galactopyranoside (X-Gal) and 2-mercaptoethanol, as recommended by the supplier (Clontech
Laboratories, Inc.).
Analytical ultracentrifugation.
The associative behavior of
Mlh1p and the Mlh1p-Pms1p complex was studied by equilibrium analytical
ultracentrifugation in a BeckmanCoulter XL-A analytical
ultracentrifuge. The studies were carried out at 4°C using 12-mm
optical path length carbon-filled Epon double-sector centerpieces and
quartz windows in the cells in a four-place rotor. Equilibrium was
considered to have been attained when scans taken 24 h apart did
not vary. The time to equilibrium was significantly extended because of
the presence of 5% glycerol in the buffer. The buffer contained 150 mM
NaCl, 5% glycerol, 0.1 mM EDTA, 15 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, and 25 mM
NaPO4 (pH 7.6). The buffer density, 1.02207 g cm
3, was measured in an Anton Paar DMA 5000 density meter. The compositional partial specific volumes and the
extinction coefficients at 280 nm were calculated from the amino acid
compositions using the consensus values of Perkins (35).
Values of 0.734 and 0.726 cm3
g
1 for the partial specific volumes and 48,820 and 49,570 M
1 cm
1 for
the extinction coefficients were obtained for the Mlh1p and Pms1p
monomers, respectively. The rotor speeds used were 8,000 and 10,000 rpm
for the study of the Mlh1p monomer-dimer equilibrium and 15,000 rpm for
the study of the more complex Mlh1p-Pms1p homodimer-heterodimer equilibrium reaction. Data were analyzed by fitting the equilibrium concentration distributions as functions of the radius with several mathematical models by nonlinear least-squares curve fitting using the
mathematical modeling system MLAB (Civilized Software, Silver Spring,
Md.).
A model for the Mlh1p equilibrium distribution is as follows:
|
(1)
|
|
(2)
|
where the subscripts 1 and 2 for
cr,
cb, A, and
refer to
the two different rotor speeds; cr is
the total concentration expressed as absorbency at 280 nm; cb is the concentration of monomer at
the radial position of the cell bottom,
rb, similarly expressed and is a local
fitting parameter; M is the molar mass of monomer,
87,060 Da;
is a small baseline error term and is a local fitting
parameter; and ln K1,2 is the natural
logarithm of the molar equilibrium constant for dimer formation and is
a global fitting parameter, common to both data sets.
E1,2 = 1.2E/2, where E is the molar extinction
coefficient of Mlh1p, 48,820 M
1 cm
1, and ln
K1,2
ln E1,2 = ln
k1,2, the equilibrium constant on an
absorbency scale. E is multiplied by 1.2 because the
optical path length is 1.2 cm. A = (1
*
)
2/2RT, where
* is the
compositional partial specific volume,
is the solvent density,
is the rotor angular velocity in radians per second, R
is the gas constant, and T is the absolute temperature.
A model for the Mlh1p-Pms1p equilibrium distribution is as
follows:
|
(3)
|
In this model, the subscript A refers to Mlh1p and
the subscript B refers to Pms1p.
AA, MA,
E1,2, and ln
K1,2 have the same values as those
used for Mlh1p alone; EA,B = (1.2EMlh1)(1.2EPms1)/(1.2EMlh1 + 1.2EPms1); and
EMlh1 and
MA have the same values as above, while
EPms1 = 49,570 M
1 cm
1 and
MB = 99,343 Da. Thus,
cb,A,
cb,B, ln
KAB, and
are the fitting parameters. A
model similar to this but eliminating
cb,A as a fitting parameter has
been developed by invoking conservation of mass (25).
Given that the Mlh1p-Pms1p complex exists in a 1:1 molar stoichiometry, this is a particularly useful model, since the elimination of a
parameter reduces the returned errors of the other parameter values and
is a more highly constrained model; for these reasons it was applied here.
 |
RESULTS |
Genome-wide analysis of gene expression in strains overproducing
Mlh1p.
Overexpression of the yeast MLH1 gene in a
wild-type strain causes a strong increase in the mutation rate that is
dependent on the MLH1 expression level (39).
This mutator effect could be caused by excess of Mlh1p per se or
indirectly through changes in regulation of other genes controlling DNA
repair or replication. We therefore used hybridization to DNA
microarrays containing 96.4% of the yeast ORFs to determine if
Mlh1p-overproducing strains displayed any changes in expression of
genes other than MLH1. The mRNA from each strain
E134
containing pMMR75 or E134 containing the control vector
was labeled
with either Cy3- or Cy5-deoxyuridine and hybridized in a
competitive reaction on a single cDNA array. Gene expression
differences between the two strains were expressed as ratios of the
intensities of the hybridized cDNAs. The complete data set is available
on the Internet at http://dir.niehs.nih.gov/microarray/datasets. Analysis of plots of Cy3 intensity versus Cy5 intensity showed that
there was a very tight distribution of the ratios of all of the targets
(Fig. 1), indicating that minimal change
in gene expression occurred upon overexpression of MLH1. In
fact, of ~6,200 ORFs, only 9 showed a more than twofold increase or
decrease in mRNA level in three replicate experiments (Table
1). The greatest elevation of mRNA level
(~20-fold) was observed for the MLH1 gene and was
consistent with the increase in protein level (see below). None of the
other known MMR genes was induced or repressed in the strain
overproducing Mlh1p (Table 1).

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Genome-wide analysis of gene expression in a yeast
strain overproducing Mlh1p and an isogenic wild-type strain. The mRNA
of strain E134 containing plasmid pMMR75 was labeled with
Cy3-deoxyuridine, and mRNA of strain E134 containing the control vector
was labeled with Cy5-deoxyuridine. Cy5 intensity values are plotted
against Cy3 intensity values for each hybridized cDNA. Open circles
correspond to individual cDNAs. The dashed lines indicate twofold
differences in hybridization intensity. The R value
represents a Pearson correlation coefficient calculated for the
log2(Cy3) values versus the log2(Cy5) values.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1.
Relative mRNA levels for MMR genes and ORFs that showed
increased or reduced expression in an Mlh1p-overproducing
strain
|
|
Of the eight other genes that showed altered mRNA level, none was
expected to control DNA replication or repair. An increase in mRNA
level was observed for the YLR162W ORF, which encodes a
protein of 118 amino acids with no known function or significant similarity to any known protein (Table 1). We have found that the 3'
half of this ORF is 96% identical to a part of the gene encoding 25S
rRNA. The yeast rRNA genes are organized in a cluster containing about
100 to 200 repeating units. The number of repeats depends on the strain
and can also vary within a single strain (47). Since rRNA
was abundant in the RNA preparations used for the hybridizations, the
4.3-fold increase in hybridization intensity for the YLR162W
ORF likely reflects changes in the number and/or expression of the rRNA
genes rather than induction of expression of this ORF.
Four Ty1 ORFs corresponding to TYA proteins showed more than twofold
increases in mRNA level in all three experiments (Table 1). Two
additional TYA ORFs showed more than twofold-increased hybridization intensities in two of the three experiments. Since different Ty1 elements are nearly identical, the primers designed to
amplify specific TYA ORFs for the microarray chips
likely amplified a mixture of ORFs, which could hybridize to
virtually any Ty1 transcript. Thus, increased levels of Ty1 transcripts
in the MLH1-overexpressing strain could not be interpreted
as induction of expression of any particular ORFs but rather indicate
general changes in Ty1 distribution and/or expression.
Two ORFs, TRP1 and YDR008C, showed more than
twofold reductions in mRNA level in the strain
overexpressing MLH1. The TRP1 gene was present
both on the MLH1-overexpressing plasmid pMMR75 and on the
control vector. The 2.4-fold decrease in the TRP1 mRNA level
could reflect a lower plasmid copy number in cells overexpressing MLH1. The YDR008C ORF, which is described
as a questionable ORF in the MIPS yeast database, overlaps with the
TRP1 ORF. Thus, the 2.5-fold reduction in hybridization
intensity for this ORF could result from the reduced level of the
TRP1 transcript in cells overproducing Mlh1p.
MMR is inactivated in strains overexpressing
MLH1.
To determine if the Mlh1p-induced mutator
phenotype results from suppression of MMR, we overexpressed
MLH1 in strains with disruptions of genes known to be
required for MMR and in strains with mutations that reduce the
intrinsic 3'
5' exonuclease activities of replicative DNA polymerases
and
. These exonucleases proofread replication errors, and this
proofreading and MMR act in series to correct mismatches
(31, 32). If the Mlh1p-induced mutator effect results from
inhibition of MMR, then the MLH1-overexpressing plasmid
should not elevate the mutation rate in strains which are MMR deficient
due to mutations in MLH1, PMS1, or
MSH2. However, Mlh1p-induced suppression of MMR would lead
to a synergistic increase in the mutation rate in strains with the
exonuclease defects because in these strains more polymerase errors
would remain uncorrected by proofreading.
We introduced plasmid pMMR75 expressing the MLH1 gene from
the ADH1 promoter into strains bearing deletions of
MLH1, PMS1, or MSH2 or mutations that
reduce the 3'
5' exonuclease activity of DNA polymerases
(pol2-4) or
(pol3-01). Reversion of the his7-2 frameshift mutation was used to estimate the effects
of MLH1 overexpression on the mutation rate in these
strains. The his7-2 mutation is a deletion of one nucleotide
in a run of eight adenines in the HIS7 gene
(39). It reverts mainly via +1 insertions and
2
deletions in wild-type strains and predominantly via +1 insertions in
the A7 run in MMR-deficient strains
(39). Deletion of MLH1, PMS1, or
MSH2 led to an ~200-fold elevation in the
His+ reversion rate (Table
2), consistent with earlier observations (19, 32, 39). The presence of the plasmid expressing
MLH1 had negligible effects on the reversion rates of the
mlh1, pms1, and msh2 strains (Table
2). It is interesting that the plasmid overexpressing wild-type
MLH1 does not complement the MMR defect in the
mlh1 deletion strain, although this defect could be readily complemented by a single copy of the wild-type MLH1 gene in
diploid strains (39).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 2.
Effect of MLH1 overexpression on mutation rate
in strains with defects in MMR or exonucleolytic
proofreading
|
|
A mutation in the exonuclease domain of DNA polymerase
,
pol2-4, increased the His+ reversion
rate more than eightfold, in agreement with the reported mutator
phenotype of the pol2-4 strain (30).
Overexpression of MLH1 in this strain resulted in a 150-fold
increase in the reversion rate (Table 2; 1,300 × 10
8 versus 8.7 × 10
8). This effect is similar to the
Mlh1p-induced increase in the reversion rate observed with wild-type
strains. Likewise, the 15-fold mutator effect of the pol2-4
mutation in the presence of the MLH1-overexpressing plasmid
(Table 2; 1,300 × 10
8 versus 83 × 10
8) is similar to the previously reported 10- to 20-fold effect of this mutation in isogenic wild-type strains
(30, 32) and consistent with the more than eightfold
effect of pol2-4 in the wild-type strain observed in this
study (Table 2). The His+ reversion rate in the
pol2-4 mutant in the presence of the
MLH1-overexpressing plasmid (1,300 × 10
8) was indistinguishable from the previously
described His+ reversion rate in an isogenic
pol2-4 pms1 double mutant (1,000 × 10
8 [32]). The multiplicity of
the mutator effects of the pol2-4 mutation and
MLH1 overexpression suggests that both error-correcting mechanisms have been inactivated, the latter by overexpression of
MLH1.
The pol3-01 mutation in the exonuclease domain of DNA
polymerase
is incompatible with pms1 or msh2
deletions in haploid strains (31, 42), which has been
suggested (31) to reflect a catastrophically high mutation
rate. In line with the hypothesis that MLH1 overexpression
confers an MMR defect, the pMMR75 plasmid transformed a
pol3-01 haploid strain with low efficiency in comparison to
transformation of this strain with a control vector or transformation of an isogenic wild-type strain with pMMR75 (data not shown). To
overcome this incompatibility, we overexpressed the MLH1
gene in a diploid strain that is heterozygous for the
pol3-01 mutation. Heterozygosity for pol3-01
leads to a moderate mutator phenotype (31) (Table 2;
41 × 10
8 versus 2.5 × 10
8). Similar to the effect of MLH1
overexpression in the pol2-4 mutant, the presence of the
pMMR75 plasmid in the POL3/pol3-01 diploid caused
a synergistic increase in the His+ reversion rate
(Table 2). The 56-fold increase observed upon MLH1
overexpression in the heterozygous strain (Table 2; 2,300 × 10
8 versus 41 × 10
8) is similar to the 64-fold increase in the
wild-type diploid strain, and the 14-fold mutator effect of
heterozygosity for pol3-01 in the presence of the
MLH1-overexpressing plasmid (Table 2; 2,300 × 10
8 versus 160 × 10
8) is similar to its effect in the control
diploid (16-fold; Table 2; 41 × 10
8
versus 2.5 × 10
8), again consistent with
suppression of two error-correcting mechanisms acting in series.
Suppression of the mutator phenotype by overexpression of
PMS1
One hypothesis to explain the Mlh1p-induced
suppression of MMR is that excess Mlh1p interferes with protein-protein
interactions that are needed for efficient MMR. A prime candidate is
Pms1p, since Mlh1p interacts with Pms1p to form the MutL
heterodimer that functions in MMR (36). To test if the Mlh1p-induced
mutator effect can be suppressed by increased production of Pms1p, we introduced plasmid pMH8 expressing the PMS1 gene from
the GAL10 promoter into the strain containing pMMR75 or
a control vector. Overproduction of both Mlh1p and Pms1p in the
transformants was confirmed by immunoblot analysis (Fig.
2, left and middle panels).

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Overexpression of yeast MLH1,
PMS1, and MSH2. (Left) Extracts (40 µg)
from strain E134 (wild type), its mlh1 deletion mutant,
and E134 containing plasmid pMMR75 were probed with anti-Mlh1p
antibodies. (Middle) Extracts (20 µg) from strain E134, its
pms1 deletion mutant, and E134 containing plasmid pMH8
were probed with anti-Pms1p antibodies. (Right) Extracts (40 µg) from
strain E134, its msh2 deletion mutant, and E134
containing plasmid pAC12 were probed with anti-Msh2p antibodies.
|
|
It has been reported previously (21) that expression of
PMS1 from a high-copy-number plasmid in a wild-type yeast
strain produced a 10-fold increase in the rate of reversion of the
hom3-10 allele, which scores single-base deletions in
a run of seven A · T base pairs. Similarly, we observed that the
pMH8 plasmid alone conferred an 8-fold increase in the
his7-2 reversion rate, which measures single-base
additions in a run of seven A · T base pairs, and a 180-fold
increase in the rate of
lys2::InsEA14 reversion, which
measures single-base deletions in a run of 14 A · T base pairs
(Table 3). Thus, the mutator effect of
PMS1 overexpression was much weaker than that of
MLH1 overexpression (39) (Tables 2 and 3). Both
proteins were produced at much higher levels in cells harboring the
expression plasmids than in control cells (Fig. 2). Since the specific
activity of the antibodies is not known, direct comparison of Mlh1p and
Pms1p levels could not be done in these experiments. Thus, the
differences in Mlh1p- and Pms1p-induced mutator effects may or may not
reflect different levels of overexpression.
Overexpressing PMS1 in the Mlh1p-overproducing strain
strongly reduced the mutator effect due to Mlh1p overproduction. The decrease was 93-fold for Lys+ reversion (Table 3;
590 × 10
8 versus 55,000 × 10
8) and 15-fold for His+
reversion (Table 3; 6.5 × 10
8 versus
99 × 10
8). However, concomitant
overproduction of both MutL homologs did not return the reversion rate
to that of the wild-type yeast strain but rather yielded a rate similar
to that observed in the strain overexpressing Pms1p alone.
In contrast to suppression of the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype by
overexpression of PMS1, overexpressing MSH2 from
the GAL1 promoter does not suppress the mutator phenotype
conferred by MLH1 overexpression (Table 3). Overproduction
of Msh2p in the cells bearing both MLH1- and
MSH2-overexpressing plasmids was confirmed by immunoblot
analysis (Fig. 2, right panel). The Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype was
also unaffected by the presence of a yeast MSH6 expression
plasmid (data not shown). Thus, the ability to suppress Mlh1p-induced
spontaneous mutagenesis is specific for PMS1.
Effect of mlh1 missense mutations on the mutator
phenotype.
To investigate the functional requirements for the
Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype, we next examined the effects of three mlh1 missense mutations on the ability of Mlh1p to confer a
mutator phenotype (Fig. 3). By homology
to the E. coli MutL protein, four conserved motifs in the
N-terminal region of Mlh1p are suggested to be important for ATP
hydrolysis involved in MMR function (1, 33). We previously
showed (39) that a missense mutation that changes amino
acid residue 65 from isoleucine to asparagine in motif II (Fig. 3A and
B) results in a strong mutator phenotype characteristic of complete
loss of MMR function. Also, a homologous change in human MLH1 is
associated with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC)
(40). When the I65N mutation was introduced into the
MLH1 gene on the pMMR75 plasmid, it did not have a
significant effect on the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype (Fig. 3C).
This strongly implies that the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype does not
require intact Mlh1p function. It also implies that the proposed ATPase
activity of Mlh1p is not important for the mutator effect.


View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Effect of mlh1 missense mutations on the
Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype. (A) Schematic representation of the
yeast Mlh1 protein. The location of the putative ATP-binding domain is
indicated by homology to the E. coli MutL, with regions
I, II, III, and IV corresponding to the conserved ATP binding motifs
(1, 33). The Pms1p interaction region and the C-terminal
homology (CTH) motif were described by Pang et al. (34).
The location of the missense mutations that were made in the
MLH1 overexpression vector is indicated. (B) Alignment
of the amino acid sequences of the E. coli MutL, the
S. cerevisiae Mlh1p, and human MLH1. Invariant amino
acids are boxed. The amino acid substitutions studied here are
indicated below the alignments. (C) Mutator phenotypes of strains
overexpressing mlh1 missense alleles. The data are the
rates of Lys+ reversion in strain E134 containing pMMR75 or
its derivatives with mutations in MLH1 and are the
medians for at least nine independent cultures with error bars
indicating 95% confidence limits.
|
|
To determine if Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction is necessary for the mutator
effect, we created two different amino acid changes in the C-terminal
region of Mlh1p that is involved in the interaction with Pms1p
(34). The two mutations R672P and A694T (Fig. 3A and B)
were chosen by homology to HNPCC-associated mutations in the human MLH1
which have been shown to cause more than 95% reduction in the ability
of MLH1 to interact with PMS2 (11). The A694T substitution
in Mlh1p did not have any effect on the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype
(Fig. 3C). However, the R672P change clearly reduced the mutator effect
of MLH1 overexpression, eightfold for Lys+ reversion and fourfold for
His+ reversion.
To check if the effects of the two C-terminal mutations on the
Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype correlate with their effects on
Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction, we tested the mutant variants of proteins for
interaction using the yeast two-hybrid system. The R672P and A694T
mutations were introduced into the MLH1 gene fused to the sequence of the Gal4 DNA binding domain in the pGBT9 plasmid, and the
interaction was tested in the CG1945 strain containing a
HIS3 reporter gene. As shown in Fig.
4A, the R672P substitution in Mlh1p
reduced the interaction with Pms1p to a level below detection, while
Mlh1p-A694T retained the ability to interact with Pms1p. We also
examined the effect of the missense mutations on Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction using the lacZ reporter gene in a Y187 yeast
strain. Again, we did not detect any interaction of the Mlh1p-R672P
with Pms1p (Fig. 4B). Mlh1p-A694T retained the ability to interact with
Pms1p, although this ability was reduced in comparison to the wild-type
Mlh1p as judged by slower development of blue color in the
-galactosidase filter assay (Fig. 4B). Thus, the effect of these
mlh1 missense mutations on the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype reflected their ability to disrupt Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction.


View larger version (79K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Effect of amino acid substitutions in the C-terminal
region of Mlh1p on interaction with Pms1p in the yeast two-hybrid
system and the spontaneous mutation rate. (A) The CG1945 strain was
cotransformed with pGAD424-yPMS1 and pGBT9 containing wild-type or
mutant alleles of the MLH1 gene. The transformants were
grown on medium lacking tryptophan, leucine, and histidine and
supplemented with 5 mM 3-amino-1,2,4-triazole. (-), pGBT9 with no
MLH1. (B) The Y187 strain was cotransformed with
pGAD424-yPMS1 and pGBT9 containing wild-type or mutant alleles of the
MLH1 gene. The transformants were tested for
-galactosidase activity using the color filter assay described in
Materials and Methods. (C) Spontaneous mutation rates (relative to the
wild type) in strain E134 and its derivatives with mutations in
chromosomal MLH1.
|
|
To determine whether suppression of the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype
and disruption of the Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction by the R672P mutation
also correlated with the effect of this mutation on MMR efficiency in
vivo, we replaced the chromosomal MLH1 allele in the E134
strain with the mlh1-R672P allele and measured the spontaneous mutation rate in this mutant. Similarly, a haploid mlh1-A694T mutant was constructed to look for any possible
mutator effect of this mutation that did not suppress the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype and only slightly reduced interaction with Pms1p. The
R672P mutation increased the rate of Lys+ and
His+ reversion and Canr
mutation 11,000-fold, 60-fold, and 16-fold, respectively; this effect
is similar to the mutator effect of a mlh1 deletion (Fig. 4C) and is characteristic of a complete MMR defect. The A694T mutation
did not have a significant effect on mutation rate for any of the three
markers, suggesting that MMR was not significantly reduced in this
mutant. Taken together, our data show that the R672P substitution in
Mlh1p disrupts Mlh1p-Pms1p interaction, resulting in MMR defect, and
reduces the ability of the overexpressed protein to interfere with MMR,
while the A694T mutation does not have a strong effect on Mlh1p-Pms1p
interaction, does not impair MMR, and does not affect the Mlh1p-induced
mutator phenotype.
Purified Mlh1p can form homodimers in solution.
The results on
suppression of the Mlh1p-induced mutator phenotype by overexpression of
PMS1 or by the R672P substitution in Mlh1p led us to
hypothesize that excess Mlh1p produces a mutator effect through
formation of a Mlh1p-Mlh1p homodimer that could replace the Mlh1p-Pms1p
heterodimer in protein-protein interactions, thus resulting in
nonfunctional MMR complexes. To determine if Mlh1p is capable of
forming homodimers, we studied the associative behavior of Mlh1p by
equilibrium analytical ultracentrifugation. For comparison, the
assembly state of the Mlh1p-Pms1p complex was also studied. The yeast
Mlh1p and the Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer were purified as described
elsewhere (M. C. Hall and T. A. Kunkel, submitted for
publication), and the ultracentrifugation experiments were performed as
described in Materials and Methods. The data for Mlh1p were analyzed by
globally fitting the data sets at 8,000 and 10,000 rpm with several
mathematical models including a monomer, a dimer, monomer-dimer
equilibrium, and more complex associations. The data obtained for Mlh1p
were most consistent with the monomer-dimer model described by
equations 1 and 2 (see Materials and Methods). The results of the joint
fit of the data for Mlh1p at 8,000 and 10,000 rpm are shown in Fig.
5A. The value of ln
K12 obtained by global fitting is
12.671 ± 0.060, corresponding to a
Kd of 3.14 ± 0.19 µM and a
G° of
6.98 ± 0.03 kcal
mol
1. The excellent distribution of the
residuals illustrated in Fig. 5A attests to the quality of the fit and
the appropriateness of the model. In contrast, the distribution of
residuals and plots themselves showed gross systematic deviations from
the data sets when a model describing a monomeric protein was used
(data not shown). Similarly to the analysis of Mlh1p data, the more
complex Mlh1p-Pms1p association was analyzed by fitting several
mathematical models to the data. A model that best describes the
Mlh1p-Pms1p data takes into account both Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimerization
and Mlh1p-Mlh1p homodimerization and is given by equation 3 (see
Materials and Methods). The fit of this mathematical model to the data
of the Mlh1p-Pms1p complex is shown in Fig. 5B. The value of ln
KAB obtained by fitting this model is
16.258 ± 0.408, corresponding to a
Kd of 86.9 ± 36.4 nM for the
Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer and a
G° of
8.95 ± 0.22 kcal mol
1. The distribution of the residuals
illustrated in Fig. 5B indicates that the quality of the fit is
adequate and that the model is appropriate. Of particular significance
is the fact that there is a difference of almost 2 kcal
mol
1 between the free-energy change for the
formation of the Mlh1p-Mlh1p homodimer and the free-energy change for
the formation of the Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer, reflecting the fact that
the bond strength for the formation of the heterodimer is 36 times
greater than that for the homodimer.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Analytical ultracentrifugation of purified Mlh1p and
Mlh1p-Pms1p complex. (A) Concentration distributions as functions of
radius for Mlh1p at equilibrium at 8,000 rpm (squares) and at 10,000 rpm (triangles) at 4°C. The distributions of the residuals for the
two fits are shown at the top. (B) Concentration distribution as a
function of radius for the Mlh1p-Pms1p complex at equilibrium at 15,000 rpm at 4°C. The distribution of the residuals is shown at the top.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
It is now well established that DNA mismatch repair can be
inactivated by mutations in any of several different MMR genes, by
diminished expression of the human MLH1 gene, or by
imbalanced expression of human MutS homologs. This study extends the
latter mechanism to eukaryotic MutL homologs, by demonstrating that
imbalanced expression of yeast MLH1 and PMS1
genes leads to a spontaneous mutator phenotype that reflects reduced
postreplication mismatch repair capacity. We have shown that
overexpression of the MLH1 gene does not induce changes in
expression of any other genes involved in DNA repair or replication,
suggesting that an excess of Mlh1p per se was causing inactivation of
MMR. The importance of a proper balance in the relative amounts of
eukaryotic MMR proteins was first appreciated in studies of a
methotrexate-resistant human cell line that overexpresses
MSH3 (8, 28). Those studies provided strong
evidence that overproduced MSH3 protein sequestered most of the
available MSH2 into a MSH2-MSH3 (MutS
) complex. This reduced the
amount of the MSH2-MSH6 (MutS
) heterodimer, resulting in diminished
MutS
-dependent repair of base-base mismatches and a strong base
substitution mutator phenotype. Our results suggesting that MMR
activity can also be strongly reduced by overexpression of
MLH1 further emphasize the importance to genome stability of maintaining the appropriate level of key MMR proteins.
The ~4,000-fold increase in reversion of the
lys2::InsEA14 allele in the
strain overexpressing MLH1 (39) (Table 2) is
much stronger than the increases in single msh6 or
msh3 mutants, which are only 190-fold and 6-fold,
respectively (42). The strong Mlh1p-induced mutator effect
is in fact characteristic of strains with deletions of mlh1,
pms1, msh2 (Table 2), or both msh3 and msh6 (42). This indicates that overexpression
of MLH1 inactivates both the MutS
- and the
MutS
-dependent MMR pathways. This situation is obviously different
from overexpression of human MSH3, which selectively inactivates
MutS
-dependent repair. Within the framework of existing MMR models
(10, 20), inactivation of both pathways is not easily
rationalized by sequestration of a known functional partner. Current
evidence indicates that Mlh1p is essential for both the MutS
- and
the MutS
-dependent MMR pathways, and Mlh1p is the invariant
component of all three MutL-related heterodimers identified to date in
yeast: Mlh1-Pms1 (36), Mlh1-Mlh3 (10), and
Mlh1-Mlh2 (46). Thus, overexpression of Mlh1p would be
expected to permit formation of all three MutL heterodimers.
This suggests that the Mlh1p-induced suppression of MMR results from
excess Mlh1p that does not participate in heterodimer formation. The
excess Mlh1p could interfere with MMR by nonproductive binding to any
of several other essential MMR proteins with which MutL
may
interact. These include MutS homologs and PCNA (12, 13,
43). Relevant here is that increased expression of
PMS1 (Table 3) and the mlh1-R672P missense
mutation (Fig. 3) that disrupts interaction with Pms1p (Fig. 4) both
suppress the Mlh1p-induced mutator effect. These data are consistent
with possible formation of a Mlh1p-Mlh1p homodimer that could replace
the Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer in protein-protein interactions, thus
resulting in nonfunctional MMR complexes. Indeed, the analytical
ultracentrifugation experiments showed that Mlh1p is capable of forming
a homodimer in solution (Fig. 5A), although the
Kd for the homodimer formation is 36-fold
higher than the Kd for Mlh1p-Pms1p
heterodimerization. Thus, if the Mlh1p-Mlh1p homodimer inhibiting MMR
can be formed in vivo, its abundance in wild-type yeast cells must be
low in comparison to the Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer, yet increased in
cells overexpressing MLH1. Overproduction of Pms1p together
with Mlh1p would then shift the homodimer-to-heterodimer ratio and thus
restore MMR. The homodimerization could occur via C-terminal
interactions similar to those involved in Mlh1p-Pms1p
heterodimerization (34) or homodimerization in E. coli MutL (6). The mlh1-R672P mutation impairing Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimerization might then also affect homodimerization, thus reducing the mutator effect of MLH1
overexpression. We could not directly examine the effect of the R672P
mutation on the ability of Mlh1p to form a homodimer because the
protein with this substitution became insoluble during the course of
purification. It is also possible that dimer formation is not required
for the excess Mlh1p to interact with MutS homologs and/or other MMR
proteins and that MMR is inhibited by protein complexes containing
Mlh1p monomers. However, the effect of suppression of the mutator
phenotype by the R672P mutation argues against this possibility.
Overexpression of the PMS1 gene from the strong
GAL10 promoter conferred a clear mutator phenotype (Table 3)
that is less severe than that produced by MLH1
overexpression from the ADH1 promoter. While both proteins
are clearly overexpressed at high levels (Fig. 2), the relative amounts
of Mlh1p and Pms1p produced are uncertain since the specific activities
of the two antibodies are not known. Thus, it remains possible that
Pms1p is produced less efficiently than is Mlh1p. Alternatively, excess
Pms1p might inactivate MMR in a manner different from Mlh1p. According
to the logic described above for human MSH3, the Pms1p-induced mutator phenotype could result from sequestration of Mlh1p into an
Mlh1p-Pms1p heterodimer, thus suppressing Mlh1p-Mlh3p- or
Mlh1p-Mlh2p- dependent repair.
The Mlh1p- and Pms1p-induced increases in the spontaneous mutation rate
suggest that expression of the partners in MutL complexes required for
MMR may be strictly regulated to maintain genome stability. Just as MMR
gene mutations or diminished human MLH1 gene expression is
associated with cancer susceptibility, so too might inactivation of MMR
by imbalanced gene expression. This need not require the high
expression levels described here. We previously demonstrated increased
mutagenesis induced by substantially lower expression of
MLH1 (39). Moreover, the absolute levels of the
partners may be less important than their relative ratios, with smaller
expression changes but in opposite directions being capable of
destabilizing the genome. A recent study of MMR gene regulation in
human cells showed that MLH1 is expressed at levels three to
five times lower than that for MSH2 or MSH6, and
PMS2 is expressed slightly less than MLH1
(3). This might suggest that MutL-related complexes
function at a step that is rate limiting in human MMR, and quantitative
changes in the MMR components could be a potential source of genome
instability. Potentially adverse consequences of excess Mlh1p are
implied by a recent report showing that apoptosis is induced in a human
cell line when the human MLH1 gene is expressed from the
cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter (48). However,
MLH1 overexpression is not necessarily incompatible with
survival, since human MLH1 expressed from the same CMV
promoter in Mlh1-deficient mouse embryonic fibroblasts reduced
spontaneous mutagenesis (2). Further studies will be
required to determine if imbalanced expression of human MutL homologs
decreases the stability of mammalian genomes and/or is associated with
increased cancer susceptibility.
We thank Youri Pavlov for providing yeast strains, Louise Prakash
for pMMR84, Michelle Feldman for assistance in plasmid construction, Kate Johnson and Pat Hurban for optimization of the yeast ORFs, Lee
Bennett for help in the statistical analysis of the microarray hybridizations, Wilfried Kramer for helpful discussions, and Youri Pavlov and Leroy Worth for critically reading the manuscript.
| 1.
|
Ban, C., and W. Yang.
1998.
Crystal structure and ATPase activity of MutL: implications for DNA repair and mutagenesis.
Cell
95:541-552[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Buermeyer, A. B.,
C. Wilson-Van Patten,
S. M. Baker, and R. M. Liskay.
1999.
The human MLH1 cDNA complements DNA mismatch repair defects in Mlh1-deficient mouse embryonic fibroblasts.
Cancer Res.
59:538-541[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Chang, D. K.,
L. Ricciardiello,
A. Goel,
C. L. Chang, and C. R. Boland.
2000.
Steady-state regulation of the human DNA mismatch repair system.
J. Biol. Chem.
275:18424-18431[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Clark, A. B.,
M. E. Cook,
H. T. Tran,
D. A. Gordenin,
M. A. Resnick, and T. A. Kunkel.
1999.
Functional analysis of human MutS and MutS complexes in yeast.
Nucleic Acids Res.
27:736-742[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
DeRisi, J. L.,
V. R. Iyer, and P. O. Brown.
1997.
Exploring the metabolic and genetic control of gene expression on a genomic scale.
Science
278:680-686[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Drotschmann, K.,
A. Aronshtam,
H. J. Fritz, and M. G. Marinus.
1998.
The Escherichia coli MutL protein stimulates binding of Vsr and MutS to heteroduplex DNA.
Nucleic Acids Res.
26:948-953[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Drotschmann, K.,
A. B. Clark,
H. T. Tran,
M. A. Resnick,
D. A. Gordenin, and T. A. Kunkel.
1999.
Mutator phenotypes of yeast strains heterozygous for mutations in the MSH2 gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96:2970-2975[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Drummond, J. T.,
J. Genschel,
E. Wolf, and P. Modrich.
1997.
DHFR/MSH3 amplification in methotrexate-resistant cells alters the hMutS /hMutS ratio and reduces the efficiency of base-base mismatch repair.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:10144-10149[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Esteller, M.,
R. Levine,
S. B. Baylin,
L. H. Ellenson, and J. G. Herman.
1998.
MLH1 promoter hypermethylation is associated with the microsatellite instability phenotype in sporadic endometrial carcinomas.
Oncogene
17:2413-2417[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Flores-Rozas, H., and R. D. Kolodner.
1998.
The Saccharomyces cerevisiae MLH3 gene functions in MSH3-dependent suppression of frameshift mutations.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:12404-12409[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Guerrette, S.,
S. Acharya, and R. Fishel.
1999.
The interaction of the human MutL homologues in hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer.
J. Biol. Chem.
274:6336-6341[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Habraken, Y.,
P. Sung,
L. Prakash, and S. Prakash.
1997.
Enhancement of MSH2-MSH3-mediated mismatch recognition by the yeast MLH1-PMS1 complex.
Curr. Biol.
7:790-793[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Habraken, Y.,
P. Sung,
L. Prakash, and S. Prakash.
1998.
ATP-dependent assembly of a ternary complex consisting of a DNA mismatch and the yeast MSH2-MSH6 and MLH1-PMS1 protein complexes.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:9837-9841[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Harfe, B. D.,
B. K. Minesinger, and S. Jinks-Robertson.
2000.
Discrete in vivo roles for the MutL homologs Mlh2p and Mlh3p in the removal of frameshift intermediates in budding yeast.
Curr. Biol.
10:145-148[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Hauser, N. C.,
M. Vingron,
M. Scheideler,
B. Krems,
K. Hellmuth,
K.-D. Entian, and J. D. Hoheisel.
1998.
Transcriptional profiling on all open reading frames of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Yeast
14:1209-1221[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Herman, J. G.,
A. Umar,
K. Polyak,
J. R. Graff,
N. Ahuja,
J. P. Issa,
S. Markowitz,
J. K. Willson,
S. R. Hamilton,
K. W. Kinzler,
M. F. Kane,
R. D. Kolodner,
B. Vogelstein,
T. A. Kunkel, and S. B. Baylin.
1998.
Incidence and functional consequences of hMLH1 promoter hypermethylation in colorectal carcinoma.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:6870-6875[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Hunter, N., and R. H. Borts.
1997.
Mlh1 is unique among mismatch repair proteins in its ability to promote crossing-over during meiosis.
Genes Dev.
11:1573-1582[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Kane, F. M.,
M. Loda,
G. M. Gaida,
J. Lipman,
R. Mishra,
H. Goldman,
J. M. Jessup, and R. Kolodner.
1997.
Methylation of the hMLH1 promoter correlates with lack of expression of hMLH1 in sporadic colon tumors and mismatch repair-defective human tumor cell lines.
Cancer Res.
57:808-811[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Kirchner, J. M.,
H. Tran, and M. A. Resnick.
2000.
A DNA polymerase mutant that specifically causes +1 frameshift mutations within homonucleotide runs in yeast.
Genetics
155:1623-1632[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Kolodner, R.
1996.
Biochemistry and genetics of eukaryotic mismatch repair.
Genes Dev.
10:1433-1442[Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Kramer, W.,
B. Fartmann, and E. C. Ringbeck.
1996.
Transcription of mutS and mutL-homologous genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae during the cell cycle.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
252:275-283[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Leadon, S. A., and A. V. Avrutskaya.
1998.
Requirement for DNA mismatch repair proteins in the transcription-coupled repair of thymine glycols in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mutat. Res.
407:177-187[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Leung, S. Y.,
S. T. Yuen,
L. P. Chung,
K. M. Chu,
A. S. Chan, and J. C. Ho.
1999.
hMLH1 promoter methylation and lack of hMLH1 expression in sporadic gastric carcinomas with high-frequency microsatellite instability.
Cancer Res.
59:159-164[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Leung, W. K.,
J. J. Kim,
L. Wu,
J. L. Sepulveda, and A. R. Sepulveda.
2000.
Identification of a second MutL DNA mismatch repair complex (hPMS1 and hMLH1) in human epithelial cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
275:15728-15732[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Lewis, M. S.
1991.
Ultracentrifugal analysis of a mixed association. Appendix to S. P. Becerra, A. Kumar, M. S. Lewis, S. G. Widen, J. Abbotts, E. M. Karawya, S. H. Hughes, J. Shiloach, and S. H. Wilson. Protein-protein interactions of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase: implications of central and C-terminal regions in subunit binding.
Biochemistry
30:11707-11719[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Li, G. M., and P. Modrich.
1995.
Restoration of mismatch repair to nuclear extracts of H6 colorectal tumor cells by a heterodimer of human MutL homologs.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:1950-1954[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Lipkin, S. M.,
V. Wang,
R. Jacoby,
S. Banerjee-Basu,
A. D. Baxevanis,
H. T. Lynch,
R. M. Elliott, and F. S. Collins.
2000.
MLH3: a DNA mismatch repair gene associated with mammalian microsatellite instability.
Nat. Genet.
24:27-35[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Marra, G.,
I. Iaccarino,
T. Lettieri,
G. Roscilli,
P. Delmastro, and J. Jiricny.
1998.
Mismatch repair deficiency associated with overexpression of the MSH3 gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:8568-8573[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Modrich, P., and R. Lahue.
1996.
Mismatch repair in replication fidelity, genetic recombination, and cancer biology.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65:101-133[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Morrison, A.,
J. B. Bell,
T. A. Kunkel, and A. Sugino.
1991.
Eukaryotic DNA polymerase amino acid sequence required for 3' 5' exonuclease activity.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:9473-9477[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Morrison, A.,
A. L. Johnson,
L. H. Johnston, and A. Sugino.
1993.
Pathway correcting DNA replication errors in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
EMBO J.
12:1467-1473[Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Morrison, A., and A. Sugino.
1994.
The 3' 5' exonucleases of both DNA polymerases and participate in correcting errors of DNA replication in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
242:289-296[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Mushegian, A. R.,
D. E. Bassett, Jr.,
M. S. Bo |