Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Biophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Received 24 October 2005/ Returned for modification 20 November 2005/ Accepted 19 April 2006
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
/primase) in S. cerevisiae and S. pombe (19, 48). Pol-
/primase is the only enzyme in eukaryotic cells capable of initiating DNA synthesis de novo (6). The interaction between Mcm10 and pol-
is likely direct and mediated through the catalytic subunit, Cdc17/Pol1 (19). Importantly, Mcm10 is required to stabilize Cdc17/Pol1 in budding yeast. In the absence of Mcm10, the catalytic subunit of pol-
is rapidly degraded (48).
In S. cerevisiae, Mcm10 binds chromatin in a cell cycle-dependent manner (48). It associates with DNA after origin licensing (22, 48, 50, 64). Origin licensing is accomplished by loading the Mcm2-7 complex onto replication origins (2, 13, 14). This process ensures that replication origins are not activated more than once during S phase and is thus crucial for maintaining genome integrity (5). Once bound to replication origins, Mcm10 appears to coordinate multiple steps in the assembly of the replication complex. It has been implicated in the activation of the replicative helicase by regulating the Cdc7/Dbf4-dependent phosphorylation of Mcm2-7 (36) and the subsequent recruitment of Cdc45 (22, 50, 64), which is required for DNA unwinding (61). Upon DNA unwinding, replication protein A stabilizes single-stranded DNA and likely provides a molecular signal for pol-
/primase (stabilized in a complex with Mcm10) to assemble onto the DNA (57). In this process, Mcm10 presumably positions pol-
/primase next to ORC, via a direct Mcm10-ORC interaction, where replication initiates (3, 4). However, Mcm10 is not only required to facilitate the initiation of DNA replication; it is also essential for elongation, at least in budding yeast (48). This might be simply explained by the finding that pol-
/primase is displaced from chromatin in the absence of Mcm10 (48).
To ensure timely replication of the entire genome, a polymerase switch occurs from the nonprocessive pol-
/primase to pol-
and pol-
that cooperate with a trimeric sliding clamp, the processivity factor proliferation cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) (42). PCNA is the eukaryotic counterpart of the prokaryotic ß clamp. While pol-
associates with DNA even before recruitment of pol-
(43, 45) and likely facilitates leading strand synthesis (20, 60), pol-
might be responsible for Okazaki fragment synthesis on the lagging strand (21). Both pol-
and pol-
interact with PCNA through a common PCNA-interacting protein (PIP) motif, the PIP box, which has the following consensus motif: QXX(M/L/I)XX(F/Y)(F/Y) (62). Strikingly, Mcm10 also has a close match to the PIP box, which is highly conserved in other species, although in humans it more closely resembles the prokaryotic ß-clamp binding consensus motif (11, 38). In S. cerevisiae, an eight-amino-acid stretch, 239QHTLDVYI246, corresponds to a 7/8 match to the PIP box. In a previous study that tested all proteins containing an 8/8 match to the PIP box (51), Mcm10 was not identified as a potential PCNA-interacting protein because it did not fulfill the search criteria. The significance of this putative PIP box is unclear, however, as another study that identified a match to the prokaryotic ß-clamp binding site in Mcm10/Cdc23 of S. pombe tested for binding between purified S. pombe Mcm10 and S. pombe PCNA but failed to detect a physical interaction (19).
Besides the two polymerases mentioned above, a large number of replication and repair proteins have been shown to interact with PCNA (42, 59). Two domains in PCNA, the interdomain connector loop (IDCL) and the carboxy terminus, contribute to the formation of a large hydrophobic pocket which might be induced upon interaction with the PIP box (23). This was best illustrated in two cocrystallization studies of PCNA with the cell cycle inhibitor p21 (23) and the flap endonuclease Fen1 (49), respectively, and is further supported by numerous genetic analyses (1, 8, 17). Interestingly, PIP boxes embedded in different protein complexes might facilitate distinct primary interactions with either the IDCL or the C-terminal residues of the hydrophobic pocket (16, 59).
In this study, we demonstrate that Mcm10 interacts with PCNA in S. cerevisiae. Moreover, our results indicate that PCNA recognizes only the diubiquitinated form of Mcm10 and not the unmodified protein. Posttranslational modification of Mcm10 is cell cycle regulated and occurs in G1 and S phase. Furthermore, we provide evidence that the PIP box in Mcm10 facilitates the interaction with the carboxy terminus of PCNA. Importantly, a tyrosine-to-alanine mutation in the seventh position of the PIP box abolishes binding to PCNA in a two-hybrid system. The same PIP box mutation abolishes cell growth in budding yeast, suggesting that Mcm10 binding to PCNA serves an essential function during DNA replication.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
1 trp1
63 his3
200 lys2
Bgl hom3-10 ade2
1 ade8 LEU2.POL30) and RDKY3556 (ura3-52 leu2
1 trp1
63 his3
200 lys2
Bgl hom3-10 ade2
1 ade8 LEU2.pol30-104) were a gift from Richard Kolodner. A triple-HA-epitope gene fusion construct, a mcm10-PIP box (L242A) mutant, was integrated at the endogenous loci in RDKY3552 (ABy142) and RDKY3556 (ABy143). A triple-HA-tagged mcm10-PIP box (Y245A) mutant was integrated at the endogenous locus in RDKY3556 (ABy144). The ABy145 strain was constructed by transforming pRS316-Mcm10 plasmid (MCM10 URA3) into RDKY3552. ABy146 and ABy147 were constructed by integrating triple-HA-tagged mcm10-PIP box (L242A and Y245A) mutants into the endogenous locus in ABy145. A nine-Myc-tagged gene fusion of Mcm10 was integrated at the endogenous loci in RDKY3552 (ABy210) and RDKY3556 (ABy199). A nine-Myc-tagged mcm10-PIP box (Y245A) mutant was integrated at the endogenous loci in RDKY3556 (ABy200) and ABy145 (ABy201). DK1 (MATa ade 2-1 ura3-1 his3-11,15 trp1-1 can1-100 ERG6::LEU2) was a gift from Deanna Koepp. ABy198 was generated by integrating Myc-tagged MCM10 at the endogenous locus in DK1. ABy212 was generated by transforming pGal-HA-Clb2 (GAL-HA-CLB2) plasmid (gift from Deanna Koepp) into DK1. ABy211 was constructed by transforming pRS423gal-Mcm10-3HA plasmid (GAL-MCM10-3HA) and YEp105 (Myc-tagged ubiquitin gene) into ABy021. Coimmunoprecipitations. Cells were arrested in S phase with 200 mM hydroxyurea (HU), and whole-cell extracts (WCEs) were prepared as described previously (10) except that N-ethylmaleimide (NEM) was added to a final concentration of 5 mM. For samples treated with DNase I, 10 mM MgCl2 was added with 150 kU DNase I for 5 min on ice. Immunoprecipitations were performed with antibodies to Myc (9E11), HA (12CA5), PCNA (PC10), or immunoglobulin G (IgG) (Oncogene Research Products) for 2 h at 4°C. Antibodies used for Western blotting were against Mcm10, Myc (9E11 used for coimmunoprecipitations [co-IPs] and immunoblots if not indicated otherwise and 9E10 used for immunoblots as indicated), HA (16B12), PCNA (Neomarkers), and ubiquitin (P4G7-H11).
Histone association assay. Cells were cross-linked with formaldehyde and sonicated to fragment the chromatin, and then histone H3 was immunoprecipitated as described previously (47, 48). The cross-links were reversed by boiling, and histone-associated proteins were analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and Western blotting (48). Antibodies used for detection were anti-Myc (9E11) and anti-histone H3 (Abcam).
WCE preparation using lyticase. Asynchronous yeast cultures (W303 and ABy021) were grown overnight at 30°C. Cells were converted to spheroplasts as reported previously (15). Spheroplasts were lysed in SNH buffer (0.4 M sorbitol [pH 7.5], 150 mM NaCl, and 50 mM HEPES-KOH [pH 7.5], including standard protease inhibitors, such as 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 µg/ml leupeptin, 1 µg/ml pepstatin A, 1 mM benzamidine, and 5 mM NEM as indicated) by addition of Triton X-100 to 0.2%. WCEs were fractionated into supernatant and pellet after centrifugation at 15,000 x g for 15 min at 4°C. The insoluble pellet was resuspended in 500 µl of SNH buffer. To 100 µl of either soluble supernatant or insoluble pellet, 100 µl of 2x Laemmli buffer was added, boiled, and fractionated on SDS-PAGE for Western blotting.
Flow cytometry. Flow cytometry was performed as described previously (48) using a Becton Dickinson FACSCalibur.
Yeast two-hybrid assays.
The L40 [MATa his3
200 trp1-901 leu2-3,112 ade2 LYS2::(lexAop)4-HIS3 URA3::(lexAop)8-lacZ GAL4] yeast strain was cotransformed with a LexA fusion construct (TRP1) and a Gal4 fusion prey construct (LEU2) using the polyethylene glycol-lithium acetate method. Transformants were selected on synthetic complete (SC) medium plates lacking leucine and tryptophan grown for 2 to 4 days at 30°C and then transferred to triple dropout plates (SC-Leu-Trp-His) at 30°C. Finally, lacZ reporter gene expression was studied using SC-Leu-Trp-His plates containing 80 µg/ml X-Gal (5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-ß-D-galactopyranoside) at 30°C for 2 to 3 days. The two-hybrid plasmids used in this study, pBL240 (Gal4 activation domain, POL30) and pBTM.M10 (LexA binding domain, MCM10), have been previously described (11, 30). Amino acid substitutions in the putative PIP box of Mcm10 (L242A, L242Y, and Y245A) and in the C terminus and interdomain connector loop of PCNA (A251V, Y133A, and Y133L) were introduced by site-directed mutagenesis using a QuikChange kit (Stratagene).
Verification of bait and prey expression by Western blot analysis. Ten-milliliter cultures of the yeast strain L40 carrying prey and bait constructs were grown overnight in liquid SC-Leu-Trp-His medium to an optical density of 0.6 at 600 nm. Trichloroacetic acid (TCA)-precipitated proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting using anti-LexA (Invitrogen) and anti-PCNA (Neomarkers) antibodies, which confirmed the expression of the wild-type and mutant Mcm10 and PCNA proteins, respectively.
Preparation of WCEs from yeast two-hybrid strains for quantification of ß-galactosidase activity. A published method (51) was modified for preparation of WCEs. A single colony from the yeast two-hybrid strain of interest was inoculated into 10 ml of liquid SC-Leu-Trp-His medium and grown overnight at 30°C to an optical density of 1.2 to 1.5 at 600 nm. Cells were pelleted and washed once with 25 ml of ice-cold, distilled water and once with 1 ml of ice-cold P buffer (50 mM sodium phosphate [pH 7.7], 300 mM sodium acetate, 10% glycerol, 1 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, 500 nM dithiothreitol, 1 µg/ml pepstatin A, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 0.5 µg/ml leupeptin, and 1 mM benzamidine). The cells were resuspended in 100 µl of P buffer and lysed in a beater in the presence of an equal amount of acid-washed glass beads. The extract was centrifuged, and the resulting supernatant was transferred to a fresh tube. The supernatant was further cleared by centrifugation for 1 h at 14,000 rpm at 4°C. ß-Galactosidase activity in cleared WCEs was measured using a ß-galactosidase assay kit from Invitrogen. ß-Galactosidase activity and total protein (Bradford assay) were determined in duplicates from at least three transformants for each two-hybrid strain. The interaction between Pol32 and PCNA served as a positive control (30).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
and the other with PCNA.
In a previous report, we showed that budding-yeast Mcm10 exists in a complex with pol-
(48). In the course of these studies, we observed that Mcm10 is present in two different molecular weight forms in asynchronously growing cells, as an Mcm10-specific antibody detected two proteins in both the soluble and the insoluble fractions of a WCE with sizes of 66 and 82 kDa, respectively (Fig. 1a). No higher-molecular-weight forms of Mcm10 were observed (Fig. 1a). We detected the 82-kDa band only when we added a large excess of a cocktail of freshly prepared protease inhibitors that contained NEM, an inhibitor of cysteine proteases that is often used to block deubiquitinating enzymes (18). When we conducted co-IP experiments with WCEs from S-phase-arrested cells expressing an HA-tagged gene for the catalytic subunit of pol-
, CDC17/POL1, and Myc-tagged MCM10, we pulled down only the unmodified form of Mcm10 (Fig. 1b). Since Mcm10 contains a close match to the canonical PIP box, we performed similar experiments utilizing PCNA-specific antibodies. Surprisingly, in these assays, we exclusively coimmunoprecipitated the modified form of Mcm10 (Fig. 2a). The interaction between Mcm10 and PCNA was confirmed by performing the reverse co-IP experiment (Fig. 2b). Although PCNA is known to be posttranslationally modified (32), we observed only unmodified PCNA interacting with Mcm10. Moreover, association of Mcm10 and PCNA was detectable in extracts that had been treated with DNase I, suggesting that the interaction was not mediated by DNA (Fig. 2c).
|
|
-factor in G1, synchronized with HU in S phase, synchronized with nocodazole in G2/M, or left untreated. Total protein was TCA precipitated, and Mcm10 was detected with Myc-specific antibodies. This analysis revealed that the high-molecular-weight form of Mcm10 was present in G1 and S phase of the cell cycle but not at the G2/M transition (Fig. 3). Taken together, these results suggested that Mcm10 is modified in a cell cycle-dependent manner and that this modification directs Mcm10 towards a different interaction partner, namely, PCNA.
|
82-kDa protein in WCEs from nontagged cells). Immunoprecipitation with Myc-specific antibodies and subsequent immunoblotting with ubiquitin-specific antibodies revealed that the two higher-molecular-weight forms corresponded to mono- and diubiquitinated Mcm10 (Fig. 4c). As mentioned earlier, when we lysed cells with glass beads (which process is not as gentle as spheroplast lysis) and omitted NEM, we observed only unmodified Mcm10 (data not shown). We then attempted to cooverexpress Mcm10-3HA and Myc-tagged ubiquitin in an effort to up-regulate the production of diubiquitinated Mcm10. Under these conditions, we detected two higher-molecular-weight forms of Mcm10 in TCA precipitates (Fig. 4d); however, we were unable to immunoprecipitate significant amounts of mono- or diubiquitinated Mcm10 (data not shown), suggesting that these modified forms of Mcm10 are highly unstable when Mcm10 is overexpressed. Based on the data shown in Fig. 4d, we inferred that the ratio of diubiquitinated to unmodified Mcm10 was approximately the same regardless of whether Mcm10 was overexpressed or expressed from its endogenous promoter (compare Fig. 4b and d). Since we detected only diubiquitinated Mcm10 but not monoubiquitinated Mcm10 in wild-type cells (Fig. 1a), except when we omitted NEM in the preparation of WCEs (Fig. 4c), we concluded that diubiquitination is the predominant modification of Mcm10. Together, these results demonstrate that a fraction of the cellular Mcm10 pool is diubiquitinated and that the amount of diubiquitinated Mcm10 is tightly regulated.
|
mutants, which are sensitive to the proteasome inhibitor MG132 (34). Deletion of ERG6 did not significantly affect S-phase progression (data not shown). Regardless of whether cells were grown in the presence or absence of MG132, we did not detect any differences in the amounts of unmodified and diubiquitinated Mcm10, nor did we detect any higher-molecular-weight bands that would have been consistent with polyubiquitination (Fig. 5a). In contrast, the B-type cyclin Clb2, a known target of the 26S proteasome (66), was stabilized in the presence of MG132 (Fig. 5b). In an independent experiment, we examined Mcm10-9Myc in cells, which overexpressed mutant ubiquitin that carried arginine substitutions in either K29, K48, K63, or all seven lysine residues and thus inhibited the formation of ubiquitin chains (26). We did not detect an accumulation of unmodified or diubiquitinated Mcm10 (Fig. 5c). Moreover, we did not observe any conversion of diubiquitinated to monoubiquitinated Mcm10, suggesting that Mcm10 is monoubiquitinated at two distinct residues (Fig. 5c). Together, these results argue that Mcm10 is not turned over by polyubiquitination and subsequent 26S proteasome-mediated degradation.
|
-factor and then released at a low temperature to slow down cell cycle progression. Samples were taken in 15-min intervals and split in half, and cell cycle progression was analyzed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (Fig. 6a). In parallel, cells were cross-linked with formaldehyde and sonicated. The soluble fraction of this WCE was used for immunoprecipitation with histone H3-specific antibodies to pull down bulk chromatin. Precipitates were boiled and subsequently analyzed by Western blotting. Both forms of Mcm10 were bound to chromatin in G1 and S phase (Fig. 6b). Upon S-phase completion, however, both forms were displaced from DNA and reloaded only when cells had gone through mitosis and entered the subsequent G1 phase. Dissociation from chromatin was unaffected by addition of MG132 (Fig. 6c and d), arguing that it was not regulated by proteasome-mediated degradation. In fact, it seems unlikely that any of the steps required for S-phase completion are dependent on the 26S proteasome, as the presence of MG132 did not impede the ability to release from a HU block and progress through S phase (Fig. 6c and data not shown). With regard to the function of Mcm10, we conclude from these results that both unmodified and diubiquitinated Mcm10 play a role on chromatin during S phase.
|
complex (30). Mcm10 and PCNA showed a moderately strong interaction that was significantly higher than that of the negative controls but not as strong as the interaction between PCNA and Pol32 (Fig. 7c). We obtained the same results when we tested Mcm10 and PCNA in the opposite vectors (data not shown). Importantly, this interaction was decreased to 6.75% of the initial binding activity when we paired Mcm10 with the carboxy-terminal A251V mutant of PCNA. We observed a similar decrease in binding activity for wild-type PCNA and the two mcm10-PIP box (L242A and Y245A) mutants (Fig. 7c). Interestingly, when we combined the mcm10-PIP box Y245A mutant, which was mutated at the seventh position of the motif, with the carboxy-terminal PCNA A251V mutant, binding was partially restored to 50% of the wild-type interaction, indicating that these residues might interact directly with each other (Fig. 7c). This was not the case for the mcm10-PIP box L242A mutant, which carried a substitution at position 4. These results argue that the residues at positions 4 and 7 of the PIP box in Mcm10 are important for the interaction with PCNA. Moreover, the data document that the carboxy terminus in PCNA significantly contributes to the interaction with Mcm10.
|
Mcm10 binding to PCNA serves an essential function in vivo. To evaluate whether mutations in MCM10, which interfere with PCNA binding in yeast two-hybrid assays, showed any phenotype in vivo, we integrated the mcm10-L242A and mcm10-Y245A alleles into the endogenous MCM10 loci of wild-type cells and pol30-A251V mutants, respectively. Surprisingly, we were unable to isolate viable mcm10-Y245A mutants. This is somewhat unusual, because most PIP box mutations, even those in essential genes such as DNA ligase I, are viable (46). Consistent with our two-hybrid results, we obtained viable mcm10-Y245A pol30-A251V double mutants, arguing that it is indeed the inability to interact with PCNA that causes the growth defect. To confirm the phenotype of the mcm10-Y245A allele, we introduced a plasmid-borne MCM10 gene into cells before we integrated mcm10-Y245A at the endogenous MCM10 locus. We then triggered the loss of the MCM10 transgene by plating cells on fluoroorotic acid (FOA)-containing medium. While wild-type and mcm10-L242A cells retained viability, mcm10-Y245A cells did not grow on FOA, consistent with the notion that this specific allele of MCM10 is defective for cell proliferation (Fig. 8a).
|
Ubiquitination of Mcm10 occurs independently of its interaction with PCNA. Having identified a mutation in Mcm10 that abrogates the binding to PCNA, we then asked whether the diubiquitination of Mcm10 occurred dependently or independently of the interaction with PCNA. To this end, we compared the statuses of Myc-tagged wild-type Mcm10 and Mcm10-Y245A (Fig. 9a). in cells that expressed a nontagged copy of MCM10 from a plasmid to keep the mcm10-Y245A mutants alive. In both cases, Mcm10 was diubiquitinated, arguing that ubiquitination of Mcm10 occurred independently of the interaction with PCNA (Fig. 9b). In a second set of experiments, we also tested whether the PCNA A251V mutant, which binds to Mcm10-Y245A in yeast two-hybrid assays (Fig. 7c), interacted with unmodified or ubiquitinated Mcm10. The data shown in Fig. 9c and d document that both Mcm10 and Mcm10-Y245A were diubiquitinated when bound to PCNA. From the results presented in Fig. 9, we concluded that diubiquitination of Mcm10 is a prerequisite for PCNA binding rather than a consequence of the interaction.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
/primase (9, 24, 25, 27, 33, 36). In the course of our experiments, we discovered that Mcm10 is posttranscriptionally modified by diubiquitination and that diubiquitinated Mcm10 binds to PCNA but not to pol-
/primase. Interactions with Mcm2-7 subunits, Dbf4, and the catalytic subunit of pol-
do not require ubiquitination of Mcm10 and are likely mediated through surfaces that map to the conserved core of Mcm10 (19, 25, 27, 36). This core region (amino acids 147 to 356) includes a predicted oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide binding (OB) fold domain (spanning amino acids 201 to 297) (http://scop.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/scop/), consistent with the ability to bind single-stranded DNA (19), and a zinc finger domain (309CX10CX11CX2H335), which has been implicated in the formation of higher-order Mcm10 complexes (11). The PIP box of Mcm10 (239QHTLDVYI246) lies within the OB fold directly in the center of the protein. This is unusual among PCNA-interacting proteins as the majority of them (with the exception of Pol2) contain a PIP box at either the N or the C terminus (16, 51, 59). Therefore, it is possible that ubiquitination induces a conformational change, which exposes the normally buried PIP box and allows Mcm10 to interact with PCNA (Fig. 10). This happens seemingly at the expense of rendering other interaction domains nonfunctional (e.g., diubiquitinated Mcm10 does not interact with pol-
). Because the majority of Mcm10 is required to stabilize the catalytic subunit of pol-
(48), it makes sense that only a small fraction of Mcm10 is ubiquitinated in the cell. Indeed, the amount of diubiquitinated Mcm10 appears to be tightly regulated. Even when we overexpressed Mcm10, the normal ratio of diubiquitinated to unmodified protein was not altered, although ubiquitin was overexpressed at the same time. This suggests that the cell somehow measures the total pool of Mcm10 and diubiquitinates a given fraction, regardless of how much diubiquitinated Mcm10 is necessary for the interaction with PCNA. This notion is also consistent with our finding that diubiquitination of Mcm10 occurs independently of its interaction with PCNA, as a mutant form of Mcm10, unable to bind PCNA, was still ubiquitinated. It is also interesting that we did not detect any polyubiquitinated forms of Mcm10, arguing that the cell cycle-dependent turnover of ubiquitinated Mcm10 likely requires deubiquitinating enzymes rather than 26S proteasome activity. In the same vein, we did not find any evidence that unmodified Mcm10 is turned over by proteasomal degradation, as had been reported previously for its human counterpart (28). This is also true for other replication factors, such as Cdt1, which is polyubiquitinated and degraded in humans (interestingly, upon binding to PCNA) (52) but not proteolytically regulated, by nuclear import and export, in budding yeast (56).
|
/
to pol-
, which is specialized in translesion synthesis (32, 37). Other examples are the mono- and diubiquitination of mammalian Orc1 (39), which help to recycle the protein; the nonproteolytic, ubiquitin-mediated inactivation of geminin, a component of the replication-licensing system in metazoa (38, 39); and the diubiquitination of the death effector domain containing DNA binding protein that occurs in a tissue-specific manner and regulates its interaction with other proteins (35). In the particular case of Mcm10, we postulate that the ubiquitin-driven interaction with PCNA may be evolutionarily conserved. First, human Mcm10 is modified at the G1/S transition, and the molecular-weight forms are consistent with mono- and diubiquitination (28). Similar to what we have shown for budding yeast, in humans both ubiquitinated and unmodified Mcm10 associate with chromatin at the G1/S transition and throughout S phase (28, 29). The only difference is that in humans, the mono- but not the diubiquitinated form of Mcm10 binds DNA (28). Second, the PIP box in Mcm10 appears to be conserved throughout evolution, making it likely that this motif mediates binding to PCNA in other species as well. In humans, the motif more closely resembles the consensus motif for prokaryotic ß-clamp-interacting proteins, QLXLF (12, 41). An earlier report on S. pombe Mcm10 was the first to identify the putative PCNA interaction motif (19). Subsequent studies, however, with purified Mcm10 and purified PCNA failed to detect binding between these two proteins (19). We believe that this result is easily explained by the fact that Mcm10 was expressed in Escherichia coli and thus was not posttranscriptionally modified. Clearly, future studies are needed to prove that the interaction between Mcm10 and PCNA is evolutionarily conserved. A functional PIP box in Mcm10 is essential for cell growth. While a match to the canonical PIP box (QXXM/I/LXXF/YF/Y) is a good diagnostic marker for potential PCNA binding proteins, many factors that carry even a complete match to the consensus motif fail to interact with PCNA (31, 53). On the other hand, there are several examples of proteins that do not have a PIP box and interact with PCNA through a so-called KA motif (65). Thus, it was important to demonstrate that the interaction between Mcm10 and PCNA was truly mediated through Mcm10's PIP box. Our two-hybrid analysis suggested that tyrosine 245 in Mcm10 interacts directly with alanine 251 in the C terminus of PCNA. While the Y245A substitution in Mcm10 and the A251V substitution in PCNA are not reciprocal, they exchange a long hydrophobic side chain for a shorter one and vice versa, which explains the partial rescue of the interaction. In addition, we have shown that this interaction is crucial for cell growth, since the mcm10-Y245A allele fails to support cell proliferation. This result was entirely unexpected because corresponding PIP box mutations in other essential replication factors, such as DNA ligase I or Pol2, show no interference with cell growth at all (16, 46). Therefore, our data argue that Mcm10 regulates an essential function of PCNA during DNA replication.
Possible function of the Mcm10-PCNA interaction during DNA replication.
Because we have previously shown that Mcm10 is required for the stability of the catalytic subunit of pol-
(48), we considered the possibility that Mcm10 might also be necessary to stabilize PCNA. However, our preliminary studies suggest that this is not the case (S. Das-Bradoo and A.-K. Bielinsky, unpublished results). Thus, we believe that Mcm10 regulates PCNA on a different level. It is known that PCNA targets many different proteins and has a dynamic change in binding partners during lagging strand synthesis (42, 59, 63). Therefore, one possible role of Mcm10 might be to position PCNA in such a way that it is accessible to the correct protein at the right time. A second possible role for Mcm10 might be in loading PCNA onto DNA in vivo. These processes are facilitated by the clamp loader replication factor C (RFC) (58). While no interaction between RFC subunits and Mcm10 has been reported, both function in close proximity on the lagging strand template. RFC targets primed DNA on which it subsequently loads PCNA (58). Pol-
/primase, which is associated with Mcm10 at the replication fork (48), is in fact the only activity in the cell capable of producing primed DNA templates that are recognized by RFC. Since the interaction between diubiquitinated Mcm10 and PCNA is independent of DNA, it is conceivable that Mcm10 might assist in the recruitment of PCNA to the primed lagging strand template (Fig. 10) before RFC loads PCNA onto DNA. In support of this hypothesis, a previous study has shown that the S. pombe homolog of MCM10, cdc23+, interacts genetically with cdc24+, an essential protein required for DNA replication that interacts with RFC and PCNA (55). Because cdc24+ lacks a functional homolog in S. cerevisiae, it will be interesting to explore whether Mcm10 contributes to DNA replication by providing an analogous cdc24+ function in budding yeast.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported by grants from the NIH (GM074917) and ACS (RSG0216601) to A.-K.B.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Bell, S. P., and A. Dutta. 2002. DNA replication in eukaryotic cells. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 71:333-374.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Bielinsky, A. K., and S. A. Gerbi. 1999. Chromosomal ARS1 has a single leading strand start site. Mol. Cell 3:477-486.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Bielinsky, A. K., and S. A. Gerbi. 1998. Discrete start sites for DNA synthesis in the yeast ARS1 origin. Science 279:95-98.
5. Blow, J. J., and A. Dutta. 2005. Preventing re-replication of chromosomal DNA. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6:476-486.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Burgers, P. M. 1998. Eukaryotic DNA polymerases in DNA replication and DNA repair. Chromosoma 107:218-227.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Burich, R., and M. Lei. 2003. Two bipartite NLSs mediate constitutive nuclear localization of Mcm10. Curr. Genet. 44:195-201.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Chen, C., B. J. Merrill, P. J. Lau, C. Holm, and R. D. Kolodner. 1999. Saccharomyces cerevisiae pol30 (proliferating cell nuclear antigen) mutations impair replication fidelity and mismatch repair. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:7801-7815.
9. Christensen, T. W., and B. K. Tye. 2003. Drosophila Mcm10 interacts with members of the prereplication complex and is required for proper chromosome condensation. Mol. Biol. Cell 14:2206-2215.
10. Cobb, J. A., L. Bjergbaek, K. Shimada, C. Frei, and S. M. Gasser. 2003. DNA polymerase stabilization at stalled replication forks requires Mec1 and the RecQ helicase Sgs1. EMBO J. 22:4325-4336.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Cook, C. R., G. Kung, F. C. Peterson, B. F. Volkman, and M. Lei. 2003. A novel zinc finger is required for Mcm10 homocomplex assembly. J. Biol. Chem. 278:36051-36058.
12. Dalrymple, B. P., K. Kongsuwan, G. Wijffels, N. E. Dixon, and P. A. Jennings. 2001. A universal protein-protein interaction motif in the eubacterial DNA replication and repair systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:11627-11632.
13. Diffley, J. F. X., J. H. Cocker, S. J. Dowell, and A. Rowley. 1994. Two steps in the assembly of complexes at yeast replication origins in vivo. Cell 78:303-316.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Diffley, J. F. X., and K. Labib. 2002. The chromosome replication cycle. J. Cell Sci. 115:869-872.
15. Donovan, S., J. Harwood, L. S. Drury, and J. F. X. Diffley. 1997. Cdc6p-dependent loading of Mcm proteins onto pre-replicative chromatin in budding yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:5611-5616.
16. Dua, R., D. L. Levy, C. M. Li, P. M. Snow, and J. L. Campbell. 2002. In vivo reconstitution of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA polymerase
in insect cells. Purification and characterization. J. Biol. Chem. 277:7889-7896.
17. Eissenberg, J. C., R. Ayyagari, X. V. Gomes, and P. M. Burgers. 1997. Mutations in yeast proliferating cell nuclear antigen define distinct sites for interaction with DNA polymerase
and DNA polymerase
. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:6367-6378.[Abstract]
18. Ellison, M. J., and M. Hochstrasser. 1991. Epitope-tagged ubiquitin. A new probe for analyzing ubiquitin function. J. Biol. Chem. 266:21150-21157.
19. Fien, K., Y. S. Cho, J. K. Lee, S. Raychaudhuri, I. Tappin, and J. Hurwitz. 2004. Primer utilization by DNA polymerase
-primase is influenced by its interaction with Mcm10p. J. Biol. Chem. 279:16144-16153.
20. Fukui, T., K. Yamauchi, T. Muroya, M. Akiyama, H. Maki, A. Sugino, and S. Waga. 2004. Distinct roles of DNA polymerases
and
at the replication fork in Xenopus egg extracts. Genes Cells 9:179-191.
21. Garg, P., C. M. Stith, N. Sabouri, E. Johansson, and P. M. Burgers. 2004. Idling by DNA polymerase
maintains a ligatable nick during lagging-strand DNA replication. Genes Dev. 18:2764-2773.
22. Gregan, J., K. Lindner, L. Brimage, R. Franklin, M. Namdar, E. A. Hart, S. J. Aves, and S. E. Kearsey. 2003. Fission yeast Cdc23/Mcm10 functions after pre-replicative complex formation to promote Cdc45 chromatin binding. Mol. Biol. Cell 14:3876-3887.
23. Gulbis, J. M., Z. Kelman, J. Hurwitz, M. O'Donnell, and J. Kuriyan. 1996. Structure of the C-terminal region of p21WAF1/CIP1 complexed with human PCNA. Cell 87:297-306.[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Hart, E. A., J. A. Bryant, K. Moore, and S. J. Aves. 2002. Fission yeast Cdc23 interactions with DNA replication initiation proteins. Curr. Genet. 41:342-348.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Homesley, L., M. Lei, Y. Kawasaki, S. Sawyer, T. Christensen, and B. K. Tye. 2000. Mcm10 and the MCM2-7 complex interact to initiate DNA synthesis and to release replication factors from origins. Genes Dev. 14:913-926.
26. Horak, J., and D. H. Wolf. 2001. Glucose-induced monoubiquitination of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae galactose transporter is sufficient to signal its internalization. J. Bacteriol. 183:3083-3088.
27. Izumi, M., K. Yanagi, T. Mizuno, M. Yokoi, Y. Kawasaki, K. Y. Moon, J. Hurwitz, F. Yatagai, and F. Hanaoka. 2000. The human homolog of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mcm10 interacts with replication factors and dissociates from nuclease-resistant nuclear structures in G2 phase. Nucleic Acids Res. 28:4769-4777.
28. Izumi, M., F. Yatagai, and F. Hanaoka. 2001. Cell cycle-dependent proteolysis and phosphorylation of human Mcm10. J. Biol. Chem. 276:48526-48531.
29. Izumi, M., F. Yatagai, and F. Hanaoka. 2004. Localization of human Mcm10 is spatially and temporally regulated during the S phase. J. Biol. Chem. 279:32569-32577.
30. Johansson, E., P. Garg, and P. M. Burgers. 2004. The Pol32 subunit of DNA polymerase
contains separable domains for processive replication and proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) binding. J. Biol. Chem. 279:1907-1915.
31. Jonsson, Z. O., R. Hindges, and U. Hubscher. 1998. Regulation of DNA replication and repair proteins through interaction with the front side of proliferating cell nuclear antigen. EMBO J. 17:2412-2425.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Kannouche, P. L., J. Wing, and A. R. Lehmann. 2004. Interaction of human DNA polymerase
with monoubiquitinated PCNA: a possible mechanism for the polymerase switch in response to DNA damage. Mol. Cell 14:491-500.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Kawasaki, Y., S. Hiraga, and A. Sugino. 2000. Interactions between Mcm10p and other replication factors are required for proper initiation and elongation of chromosomal DNA replication in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Cells 5:975-989.[Abstract]
34. Lee, D. H., and A. L. Goldberg. 1996. Selective inhibitors of the proteasome-dependent and vacuolar pathways of protein degradation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Biol. Chem. 271:27280-27284.
35. Lee, J. C., O. Schickling, A. H. Stegh, R. G. Oshima, D. Dinsdale, G. M. Cohen, and M. E. Peter. 2002. DEDD regulates degradation of intermediate filaments during apoptosis. J. Cell Biol. 158:1051-1066.
36. Lee, J. K., Y. S. Seo, and J. Hurwitz. 2003. The Cdc23 (Mcm10) protein is required for the phosphorylation of minichromosome maintenance complex by the Dfp1-Hsk1 kinase. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:2334-2339.
37. Lehmann, A. R. 2005. Replication of damaged DNA by translesion synthesis in human cells. FEBS Lett. 579:873-876.[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Li, A., and J. J. Blow. 2004. Non-proteolytic inactivation of geminin requires CDK-dependent ubiquitination. Nat. Cell Biol. 6:260-267.[Medline]
39. Li, C. J., and M. L. DePamphilis. 2002. Mammalian Orc1 protein is selectively released from chromatin and ubiquitinated during the S-to-M transition in the cell division cycle. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:105-116.
40. Liang, D. T., and S. L. Forsburg. 2001. Characterization of Schizosaccharomyces pombe mcm7+ and cdc23+ (MCM10) and interactions with replication checkpoints. Genetics 159:471-486.
41. Lopez de Saro, F. J., R. E. Georgescu, and M. O'Donnell. 2003. A peptide switch regulates DNA polymerase processivity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:14689-14694.
42. Maga, G., and U. Hübscher. 2003. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA): a dancer with many partners. J. Cell Sci. 116:3051-3060.
43. Masumoto, H., A. Sugino, and H. Araki. 2000. Dpb11 controls the association between DNA polymerases
and
and the autonomously replicating sequence region of budding yeast. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:2809-2817.
44. Merchant, A. M., Y. Kawasaki, Y. Chen, M. Lei, and B. K. Tye. 1997. A lesion in the DNA replication initiation factor Mcm10 induces pausing of elongation forks through chromosomal replication origins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:3261-3271.[Abstract]
45. Mimura, S., T. Masuda, T. Matsui, and H. Takisawa. 2000. Central role for cdc45 in establishing an initiation complex of DNA replication in Xenopus egg extracts. Genes Cells 5:439-452.[Abstract]
46. Refsland, E. W., and D. M. Livingston. 2005. Interactions among DNA ligase I, the flap endonuclease and proliferating cell nuclear antigen in the expansion and contraction of CAG repeat tracts. Genetics 171:923-934.
47. Ricke, R., and A. K. Bielinsky. 2005. Easy detection of chromatin binding proteins by the histone association assay. Biol. Proced. Online 7:60-69.[CrossRef][Medline]
48. Ricke, R. M., and A. K. Bielinsky. 2004. Mcm10 regulates the stability and chromatin association of DNA polymerase-
. Mol. Cell 16:173-185.[CrossRef][Medline]
49. Sakurai, S., K. Kitano, H. Yamaguchi, K. Hamada, K. Okada, K. Fukuda, M. Uchida, E. Ohtsuka, H. Morioka, and T. Hakoshima. 2005. Structural basis for recruitment of human flap endonuclease 1 to PCNA. EMBO J. 24:683-693.[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Sawyer, S. L., I. H. Cheng, W. Chai, and B. K. Tye. 2004. Mcm10 and Cdc45 cooperate in origin activation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Mol. Biol. 340:195-202.[CrossRef][Medline]
51. Schmidt, K. H., K. L. Derry, and R. D. Kolodner. 2002. Saccharomyces cerevisiae RRM3, a 5' to 3' DNA helicase, physically interacts with proliferating cell nuclear antigen. J. Biol. Chem. 277:45331-45337.
52. Senga, T., U. Sivaprasad, W. Zhu, J. H. Park, E. E. Arias, J. C. Walter, and A. Dutta. 2006. PCNA is a cofactor for Cdt1 degradation by CUL4/DDB1-mediated N-terminal ubiquitination. J. Biol. Chem. 281:6246-6252.
53. Shibahara, K., and B. Stillman. 1999. Replication-dependent marking of DNA by PCNA facilitates CAF-1-coupled inheritance of chromatin. Cell 96:575-585.[CrossRef][Medline]
54. Solomon, N. A., M. B. Wright, S. Chang, A. M. Buckley, L. B. Dumas, and R. F. Gaber. 1992. Genetic and molecular analysis of DNA43 and DNA52: two new cell-cycle genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 8:273-289.[CrossRef][Medline]
55. Tanaka, H., K. Tanaka, H. Murakami, and H. Okayama. 1999. Fission yeast Cdc24 is a replication factor C- and proliferating cell nuclear antigen-interacting factor essential for S-phase completion. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:1038-1048.