| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, June 2008, p. 3905-3916, Vol. 28, No. 12
0270-7306/08/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.02116-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Cell Cycle Control Laboratory, Marie Curie Research Institute, The Chart, Oxted, Surrey RH8 0TL, United Kingdom
Received 28 November 2007/ Returned for modification 8 January 2008/ Accepted 7 April 2008
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C), a large (20S) multisubunit E3 ligase, catalyzes the final step of ubiquitylation of cell cycle proteins in mitosis and the G1 phase (28, 36, 47). Although the critical targets are securin/Pds1/Cut2 and cyclin B/Clb2/Cdc13, which regulate sister chromatid separation and mitotic exit, respectively, a number of substrates have been identified since its discovery. These include proteins associated with the control of spindle function, Xkid1, Ase1, Kip1, Cin8, and Aurora A, as well as geminin and Cdc6, which regulate origin licensing for DNA replication (12, 32, 37), which verifies that APC/C is a key regulator of the cell cycle.
APC/C function requires the binding of the WD40-containing Fizzy family of activator proteins Fizzy/Cdc20/Slp1 and Fizzy-related (FZR)/Cdh1/Ste9 as well as the mitosis-specific phosphorylation of several subunits (28, 36, 47). Fizzy/Cdc20 associates with the mitotic APC/C from prophase to early anaphase, whereas FZR/Cdh1 associates with the APC/C from late anaphase into G1 and G0 to activate APC/C. This sequential and exclusive binding of APC/C with activators partly explains why substrates are destroyed at different times during mitotic progression/exit and interphase. In addition, the timing of APC/C substrate degradation is dependent upon short destruction motifs in their primary sequences, such as the destruction box (D-box) and the KEN-box (12, 36, 47). The D-box, first identified in the N terminus of cyclin B (11), is present in many APC/C substrates destroyed at anaphase, and can be recognized by both Fizzy/Cdc20- and FZR/Cdh1-activated APC/C. In contrast, an alternative destruction motif, the KEN-box (40), is more often, although not exclusively, present in substrates recognized by FZR/Cdh1-APC/C. Hence, substrates containing the D-box are degraded before those containing KEN-box because Fizzy/Cdc20-APC/C is active before FZR/Cdh1-APC/C.
Double-strand breaks (DSBs) are dangerous lesions that can lead to genomic instability if the damage is left unrepaired or is misrepaired. Eukaryotic cells repair DSBs either by nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) or by homologous recombination (HR), which are regulated through the cell cycle (17, 49). In yeasts, error-prone NHEJ functions in G1 phase when the sister chromatid is not available, whereas error-free HR is the major pathway for repair of DSBs from late S phase through G2 phase, when the sister chromatid is available as a template. The HR pathway relies upon processing of the DSB by 5'-to-3' exonucleases. The resulting single-strand DNA ends first are bound by the single-strand DNA binding protein RPA, which is subsequently replaced by the Rad51 recombinase. This switch from RPA to the helical Rad51 nucleoprotein filament requires additional factors, including Rad52, Rad54, Rad55, and Rad57. Upon formation, the filament can then search for homologous duplex donor DNA, which it invades to form a displacement loop (D-loop). The invading strand is subsequently extended by DNA polymerase, and either the D-loop can capture the second end to form a double Holiday junction (HJ) or the newly synthesized strand is displaced to undergo synthesis-dependent strand annealing with the free DNA end (21, 35, 45, 53).
In meiosis, the HR pathway establishes the HJs that physically connect the maternal and paternal chromosomes. These connections are required for accurate separation of the homologous chromosome pairs in the first meiotic division (MI). Subsequent HJ resolution results in gene conversion with or without reciprocal exchange of chromosome arms, contributing to the generation of genetic diversity (33, 38).
Using a cell-free APC/C-dependent destruction assay, we have identified the Schizosaccharomyces pombe homolog of Rad54, Rhp54, as a new APC/C substrate. We show that Rhp54 destruction only occurs once per cell cycle, in G1 phase, and requires the APC/C activator FZR/Ste9 and an amino-terminal KEN-box. Regulation of Rhp54 destruction by APC/C is physiologically important for DSB repair and homologous recombination since a stable version of Rhp54 results in hypersensitivity to DNA-damaging agents as well as suppression of interhomolog recombination in meiosis.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Synchronous cultures. The wee1-50 strain was grown overnight at 25°C in YE media plus peptone and adenine and uracil (YEP + AU). Cells were synchronized at 25°C using a JE-5.0 elutriation system (Beckman Instruments, Inc.) and then shifted to 36°C. Samples were taken every 20 min for protein extraction and for flow cytometry analysis for G1 DNA content. To induce synchronous meiosis, homozygous diploid (h–/h–) cells were grown in Edinburgh minimal media 2 (EMM2) to mid-log phase, washed with EMM2 minus NH4Cl (EMM2-N), and grown in EMM2-N at 25°C for 15 h. Then, the culture was shifted to 34°C to induce meiosis. Cells were collected every 20 min and analyzed by microscopy and immunoblotting.
Antibodies. For preparation of rabbit polyclonal antibodies against Rhp54, the His6-tagged N-terminal 90 residues of Rhp54 (Rhp54N90) were expressed in Escherichia coli and purified using Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) beads under denaturing conditions as described by the supplier (Qiagen). The Rhp54N90 protein was further gel purified and used to immunize rabbits (BioGenes; Germany). The following antibodies were used in this study: anti-Apc3/Cdc27 (1:200; BD Biosciences, United Kingdom), anti-myc (4A6, 1:500; Upstate, NY), anti-Cdc2 (monoclonal antibody Y100, 1:3,000), anti-Cdc13 (1:200), anti-Rhp54 (1:200), anti-human Rad51 (1:200; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), anti-PSTAIRE (1:10,000; a gift from Y. Nagahama, Japan), and anti-HA (12CA5, 1:3,000; Roche). To deplete APC/C, monoclonal antibody AF3.1 (anti-Apc3) was used (54).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The KEN-box is required for Rhp54 ubiquitylation and destruction.
Inspection of the Rhp54 sequence revealed not only the KENxP motif but also one more KEN-box-like motif and four D-box-like motifs (RXXL, where X is any amino acid) (Fig. 2A). We next investigated which motif was responsible for Rhp54 destruction. Mutation of the KENXP motif (residues 26 to 30) KEN26 to AAA (Rhp54Km) stabilized Rhp54 (Fig. 2B). Consistently, truncation of the amino-terminal 94 residues (Rhp54
N94), removing two D-box-like motifs as well as the KENXP motif but leaving two D-box like motifs and an additional KEN-box-like motif in the C-terminal portion of the protein, also stabilized the protein, whereas mutation of a residue adjacent to the KEN-box (lysine 22 to alanine; Rhp54L22A), did not affect degradation (Fig. 2B). Thus, only the KEN-box (residues 26 to 28) is apparently required for FZR-dependent destruction of Rhp54 in vitro. Also, we investigated whether this destruction module can be transferable, so we fused the amino-terminal 50 residues of Rhp54 containing the KEN-box onto the nondegradable S. cerevisiae Rad54 (Rhp54N50-ScRad54). Remarkably, addition of the KEN box was sufficient to catalyze the degradation of Rhp54N50-ScRad54 in an FZR-dependent manner (Fig. 2C). Furthermore, we examined whether Rhp54 was ubiquitylated in vivo. Myc-tagged wild-type or KEN-box mutant Rhp54 and His6-tagged ubiquitin were coexpressed in fission yeast cells in which ubiquitylated proteins were stabilized by a conditional mutation in the S4 (mts2) subunit of the 26S proteasome, and the ubiquitylated proteins were isolated under denaturing conditions using Ni-NTA beads and analyzed (Fig. 2D). Ubiquitylated Rhp54 bands were observed only when His6-tagged ubiquitin was coexpressed (lanes 1 and 2), whereas such bands were reduced three- to approximately fourfold in the Rhp54Km protein (lanes 3 and 4). Taken together, these results indicate that Rhp54 is a novel substrate of the FZR-APC/C, whose polyubiquitylation is dependent upon an amino-terminal KEN-box.
|
strain and checked the half-life of Rhp54 since the S. pombe FZR homolog is ste9+ (also known as srw1+) (18). Rhp54 remained stable if ste9+ was deleted (lanes 11 to 15, Fig. 3B), indicating that Rhp54 destruction in vivo is dependent upon Ste9, mimicking our in vitro data. As a control, endogenous Cdc13 was also stabilized. To show that this stability was dependent upon APC/C, a temperature-sensitive allele of the S. pombe Apc6 subunit, cut9-665, was combined with cdc10, which again resulted in the stabilization of Rhp54 as well as Cdc13 (lanes 6 to 10, Fig. 3B). We also investigated the half-life of the KEN-box mutant of Rhp54 (Rhp54Km) in cdc10-arrested cells and found that Rhp54Km was stable even in G1 phase when Ste9-APC/C is active (Fig. 3C). In addition, synchronization in G1 via nitrogen starvation further highlighted these observations with low Rhp54 levels in comparison with asynchronous cells. Rhp54Km levels remained high (Fig. 3D). Thus, we conclude that Rhp54 destruction in S. pombe is dependent upon an amino-terminal KEN-box.
|
Effects of stabilization of Rhp54 in haploid cells and in diploid cells.
We next sought to investigate the biological importance of Rhp54 destruction. To this end, we integrated a c-myc epitope-tagged version of rhp54Km as well as wild-type rhp54+ into the rhp54 locus, allowing expression from the native promoter. However, the rhp54Km mutation did not have a profound effect on vegetative growth; e.g., cell length and doubling time reflected the wild type at various temperatures (data not shown). Also, the rhp54Km cells did not show any sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents compared with the wild type (Fig. 4A), whereas the rhp54
mutant was extremely sensitive to HU, CPT, bleomycin, MMS, and UV (Fig. 4A), as reported previously (30). In agreement with this, expression of rhp54+ from an nmt1 promoter did not show any discernible phenotype. Since G1 cells use the NHEJ pathway rather than the HR pathway to repair DSBs, we next asked whether the presence of HR pathway protein Rhp54 in G1 affects NHEJ efficiency by using a plasmid-based circularization assay (24). The NHEJ assay exploits transformation of yeast cells with a replication origin-containing plasmid that is linearized within sequences that lack homology to the yeast genome. Transformation efficiency is dependent upon plasmid circularization via NHEJ. An uncut plasmid is transformed in parallel to normalize for differences in transformation efficiency. As shown in Fig. 4B, cells expressing nondegradable Rhp54 (rhp54Km) showed NHEJ activity almost as efficient as that of wild-type cells, regardless of whether cells were asynchronously growing or arrested in G1, where NHEJ levels are high as expected (10). These results suggest that stabilization of Rhp54 has no apparent effects on NHEJ. Not surprisingly, deletion of rhp54 (rhp54
) also did not affect NHEJ activity, whereas ku70
cells showed NHEJ deficiency.
|
APC/C-dependent destruction of Rhp54 is important for the repair of DSBs in the absence of Srs2.
To understand better the importance of Rhp54 destruction, epistasis analysis was performed. In support of our hypothesis, we found that an srs2
rhp54Km double mutant was hypersensitive to HU and CPT and slightly sensitive to bleomycin (Fig. 5A) but not to UV (data not shown). It is already known that an srs2
rhp54
double mutant is synthetically lethal and that this lethality can be rescued by the additional deletion of rhp51, suggesting that the lethality is caused by uncontrolled Rad51 activity (9). Similarly, to determine whether the sensitivity is dependent on Rhp51, we made an srs2
rhp54Km rhp51
triple mutant, which was no more sensitive to DNA-damaging agents than the rhp51
single mutant (Fig. 5A). Since Srs2 has been reported to prevent or limit potentially deleterious recombination by disassembly of the nucleofilament as antirecombinase (20, 50), it is possible that in the absence of srs2, nondegradable Rhp54 (Rhp54Km) whose levels are enhanced pushes inappropriate HR in a Rad51-dependent manner. To reinforce this notion, the amino-terminal 70 residues of S. pombe cyclin B (N70) were fused to Rhp54Km and integrated into the rhp54 locus, allowing APC/C-dependent destruction of the fusion protein, N70-Rhp54Km, in G1 phase (Fig. 5B). Strikingly, addition of N70 to Rhp54Km rescued the synergistic effect with srs2
(Fig. 5B and C), underscoring the importance of APC/C-dependent Rhp54 destruction for the proper repair of DSBs in the absence of Srs2 protein.
|
rhp54Km double mutant shows synergistic effects using an HR assay (34). This involves the recovery of Ade+ recombinants from strains containing intrachromosomal recombination substrate consisting of a tandem direct repeat of ade6 heteroalleles separated by a his3+ gene. The frequency of Ade+ recombinants depends on HR, and the inclusion of the his3+ gene allowed us to differentiate between deletion (His–) and conversion (His+) types of recombination. We found in the rhp54Km strain the Ade+ recombinant frequency was similar to that in wild type, whereas the frequency of Ade+ recombinants in the srs2
mutant was approximately twofold higher than that in the wild type, and
60% of these recombinants were conversion types (Fig. 5D). The latter result is in agreement with previous reports (9). Notably, when rhp54Km was combined with the srs2
mutant, the frequency of Ade+ recombinants in the srs2
rhp54Km double mutant became more than fourfold higher than that in the wild type, and
65% of these were conversion types. These results suggest that the increased sensitivity of the srs2
rhp54Km mutant to HU, CPT, and bleomycin probably reflects an increase in the occurrence of deleterious recombination. Presumably, in the single rhp54Km strain, the antirecombinase function of Srs2 is able to suppress most of such uncontrolled recombination.
Rhp54 destruction regulates meiotic recombination.
In the haploid vegetative cell cycle, the sister chromatid is the preferred template for HR, whereas in meiosis, it is the homologous chromosome. To support this favored mode of interhomolog recombination, there is one more Rad54 homolog in S. pombe, Rdh54 (5). We asked whether stabilization of Rhp54 plays a role in preventing unwanted recombination between sister chromatids in meiosis. To assess interhomolog recombination, we utilized strains with two sets of interhomolog alleles (his4-239 ade6-M26 x lys4-95 ade6-52) in chromosomes 2 and 3, respectively (Fig. 6A). Interhomolog recombination was measured by the rate of Lys+ His+ prototroph as well as Ade+ prototroph formation. Sister chromatid recombination was measured by the recombination rate within a tandem direct repeat of ade6 heteroalleles separated by a his3+ gene (Fig. 6C) (5, 34). In this system, only when sister chromatid recombination occurs do Ade+ prototrophs recover from the ade–/his+/ade– heteroallele. We investigated these recombination rates in the presence of nondegradable Rhp54 (rhp54Km) or in rdh54
as well as wild-type cells (Fig. 6). Intriguingly, rhp54Km suppressed interhomolog recombination approximately twofold (Fig. 6B). Conversely, rhp54Km promotes sister chromatid recombination two- to threefold compared with the wild type (Fig. 6D). These results suggest that Rhp54 destruction prevents unwanted sister chromatid recombination. Moreover, these characteristic traits of rhp54Km are very similar to those of rdh54
. Since Rdh54, but not Rhp54, has been proposed to promote interhomolog recombination during meiosis (5), destruction of Rhp54 is likely to be required for proper Rdh54 function in meiosis. Altogether, our results suggest that Rhp54 destruction is physiologically important for accurate HR repair and meiotic recombination in S. pombe.
|
2 h). Intriguingly, Rhp54 levels slightly degraded just before anaphase I and mostly at anaphase II in meiosis, which is similar to other APC/C substrates such as Cdc13/cyclin B and Cut2/securin, suggesting that Rhp54 is degraded by APC/C in meiosis as well (Fig. 7B). In contrast, Rhp54Km levels were relatively high even in prestarved G1 cells (Fig. 7B, right panel, time zero), increased around premeiotic S phase, and remained high. These elevated levels of Rhp54Km did not affect meiotic progression or APC/C activity since the destruction profiles of Cdc13 and Cut2 are indistinguishable from those in cells expressing wild-type Rhp54. These results suggest that defects of nondegradable Rhp54 in meiotic recombination are a consequence of entering meiosis and/or progressing through meiosis with uncontrolled high levels of Rhp54. It may be noteworthy that a component of the HR pathway, Rhp51, was relatively constant throughout meiosis in diploid cells expressing Rhp54 or Rhp54Km.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Rhp54 is a member of the SNF2/SWI2 superfamily (46) and functions in HR for the repair of DSBs. HR relies on the presence of homolog/sister chromatid to act as a substrate for error-free repair and thus operates from late S through to the end of G2. In contrast, NHEJ is an error-prone process involving the direct sealing of broken ends. In yeast, NHEJ functions for repair only when DSBs arise during G1, when the sister chromatid is not available. In mammalian cells, NHEJ is the main pathway for repair in both G1 and G2 cells, although HR is suppressed in G1 cells as it is in yeast. The suppression of HR during the G1 period of the cell cycle is likely to reflect cyclin-Cdk levels. It has been shown that cyclin B regulates HR (1, 4, 13, 16) and that HR and NHEJ are reciprocally regulated during the mitotic cell cycle (10, 44). Cdk activity in S. cerevisiae has been shown to directly regulate DNA processing (1, 16).
In S. pombe, the CtIP homolog Ctp1, which is essential for Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN)-dependent DNA processing that initiates HR, has recently been shown to be regulated by Cdc10-dependent periodical transcription at G1/S combined with ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis (22). Cdc10-dependent transcription is initiated by an increase in Cdk activity and ensures that Ctp1 is predominantly present in the S and G2 phases. Thus, low levels of Ctp1 during G1 have been proposed to restrict the initiation of HR during the G1 phase. Here we show that another HR protein, Rhp54, is independently regulated by APC/C, which is itself stimulated by high Cdk and which then negatively regulates Cdk1/Cdc2 kinase. Thus, it is likely that APC/C is involved in the switching between NHEJ and HR via ubiquitylating HR proteins or positive regulators of HR.
We would speculate that stabilizing Rhp54 protein in G1 might increase the use of inappropriate HR during this stage of the cell cycle, possibly resulting in increased cell death in response to genotoxic stress. However, the rhp54Km mutant did not increase sensitivity of cells to DNA-damaging agents, unless recombination was further deregulated by concomitant deletion of srs2
. Double mutants showed hypersensitivity to HU and CPT (Fig. 5). Srs2 is an SF1 (superfamily 1) DNA helicase, which prevents recombination by dissociating Rhp51/Rad51 nucleoprotein filaments and channels DNA lesions to the postreplication repair pathway (20, 50). Since rhp54Km stimulates sister chromatid recombination, the hypersensitivity of the srs2
rhp54Km mutant is presumably due to deleterious recombination, which may occur prematurely during DNA replication. Most importantly, since addition of cyclin B D-box (N70) to rhp54Km clearly rescues the sensitivity to DNA damage (Fig. 5C), APC/C must regulate DSB repair by ubiquitylating Rhp54 in G1.
Unlike the rhp54
mutant, in a haploid state, the rhp54Km strain does not show any profound phenotype or sensitivity to genotoxic reagents. However, when in a diploid state, the rhp54Km strain shows sensitivity to a variety of DNA-damaging agents, HU, bleomycin, MMS, and UV (Fig. 4). These results resemble that of the S. cerevisiae Rad54 homolog in meiosis, Rdh54/Tid1. The rdh54
diploid cells, but not the rdh54
haploid cells, show MMS sensitivity (19). In addition, Rdh54 functions in meiotic recombination between homologous chromosomes (5, 19). Thus, rdh54
in meiosis shows a decrease in interhomolog recombination as well as an increase in the more mitotic sister-chromatid recombination. When Rhp54 destruction is blocked, rhp54Km showed a similar effect on meiotic recombination (Fig. 6). Rdh54 functions with the Rad51 homolog in meiosis, Dmc1, which is dependent upon Rad51 for function (42). The reflection of the rdh54
phenotype in rhp54Km suggests that Rhp54 could be hindering Rdh54-Dmc1 function by binding and sequestering Rhp51, thereby preventing Dmc1 focus formation. This possibility is consistent with roles of Rad54 at a presynaptic phase of HR, promoting/facilitating Rad51 nucleofilament formation (26, 53), as well as in later phases, aiding strand invasion and homologous DNA pairing (39, 43, 56).
In conclusion, we have uncovered a novel role for APC/C; APC/C is a regulator of HR, destroying a key recombinase ancillary factor, Rhp54, in G1 to control HR for the repair of DSBs as well as proper meiotic recombination. Neither S. cerevisiae Rad54 nor its human homologs (Rad54A and Rad54B) were destroyed in our cell-free destruction system, highlighting that alternative systems exist to control HR. It should be noted that there are differences between the organisms with regard to meiosis and meiotic recombination. Unlike S. cerevisiae and humans, S. pombe strains do not form a synaptonemal complex during meiosis for the pairing of homologous chromosomes, and instead, telomere-led chromosome movement for some hours in the elongated (known as "horsetail") nucleus facilitates the alignment of homologous chromosomes and promotes their pairing and recombination (6-8, 41, 51). These differences may in part explain why we could only find the S. pombe Rad54 to be a substrate of APC/C. Recently, S. cerevisiae Hed1 has been reported to inhibit the formation of Rad51-Rad54 complex, thereby facilitating Dmc1-Rdh54-dependent interhomolog recombination (3, 48). Since meiosis is initiated when Rhp54 levels are absent (Fig. 7), it is tempting to speculate that Rhp54 destruction in G1 might play a role in switching to the Rdh54-dependent pathway in S. pombe (Fig. 6), although it still remains possible that a Hed1 homolog (equivalent) exists and functions in a similar way to S. cerevisiae Hed1. Furthermore, in humans, Rad51AP1 (Rad51-associated protein 1) has been shown to enhance Rad51 recombinase activity and a knockdown impaired D-loop formation and genomic integrity (52), which are similar properties to Rad54 (15). The importance of controlling HR is underscored by the observation that in BRCA1-deficient breast tumors, not only Rad51 but also Rad54 and Rad51AP1 are overexpressed to promote cancer development (25). Therefore, it is conceivable that programmed proteolysis of HR factors may add one more layer to precisely control the pathway.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported by Marie Curie Cancer Care and the Association for International Cancer Research.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published ahead of print on 21 April 2008. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Benito, J., C. Martin-Castellanos, and S. Moreno. 1998. Regulation of the G1 phase of the cell cycle by periodic stabilization and degradation of the p25rum1 CDK inhibitor. EMBO J. 17:482-497.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Busygina, V., M. G. Sehorn, I. Y. Shi, H. Tsubouchi, G. S. Roeder, and P. Sung. 2008. Hed1 regulates Rad51-mediated recombination via a novel mechanism. Genes Dev. 22:786-795.
4. Caspari, T., J. M. Murray, and A. M. Carr. 2002. Cdc2-cyclin B kinase activity links Crb2 and Rqh1-topoisomerase III. Genes Dev. 16:1195-1208.
5. Catlett, M. G., and S. L. Forsburg. 2003. Schizosaccharomyces pombe Rdh54 (TID1) acts with Rhp54 (RAD54) to repair meiotic double-strand breaks. Mol. Biol. Cell 14:4707-4720.
6. Chikashige, Y., D. Q. Ding, H. Funabiki, T. Haraguchi, S. Mashiko, M. Yanagida, and Y. Hiraoka. 1994. Telomere-led premeiotic chromosome movement in fission yeast. Science 264:270-273.
7. Chikashige, Y., D. Q. Ding, Y. Imai, M. Yamamoto, T. Haraguchi, and Y. Hiraoka. 1997. Meiotic nuclear reorganization: switching the position of centromeres and telomeres in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. EMBO J. 16:193-202.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Ding, D. Q., A. Yamamoto, T. Haraguchi, and Y. Hiraoka. 2004. Dynamics of homologous chromosome pairing during meiotic prophase in fission yeast. Dev. Cell 6:329-341.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Doe, C. L., and M. C. Whitby. 2004. The involvement of Srs2 in post-replication repair and homologous recombination in fission yeast. Nucleic Acids Res. 32:1480-1491.
10. Ferreira, M. G., and J. P. Cooper. 2004. Two modes of DNA double-strand break repair are reciprocally regulated through the fission yeast cell cycle. Genes Dev. 18:2249-2254.
11. Glotzer, M., A. W. Murray, and M. W. Kirschner. 1991. Cyclin is degraded by the ubiquitin pathway. Nature 349:132-138.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Harper, J. W., J. L. Burton, and M. J. Solomon. 2002. The anaphase-promoting complex: it's not just for mitosis any more. Genes Dev. 16:2179-2206.
13. Henderson, K. A., K. Kee, S. Maleki, P. A. Santini, and S. Keeney. 2006. Cyclin-dependent kinase directly regulates initiation of meiotic recombination. Cell 125:1321-1332.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Hershko, A., and A. Ciechanover. 1998. The ubiquitin system. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 67:425-479.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Heyer, W. D., X. Li, M. Rolfsmeier, and X. P. Zhang. 2006. Rad54: the Swiss Army knife of homologous recombination? Nucleic Acids Res. 34:4115-4125.
16. Ira, G., A. Pellicioli, A. Balijja, X. Wang, S. Fiorani, W. Carotenuto, G. Liberi, D. Bressan, L. Wan, N. M. Hollingsworth, J. E. Haber, and M. Foiani. 2004. DNA end resection, homologous recombination and DNA damage checkpoint activation require CDK1. Nature 431:1011-1017.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Khanna, K. K., and S. P. Jackson. 2001. DNA double-strand breaks: signaling, repair and the cancer connection. Nat. Genet. 27:247-254.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Kitamura, K., H. Maekawa, and C. Shimoda. 1998. Fission yeast Ste9, a homolog of Hct1/Cdh1 and Fizzy-related, is a novel negative regulator of cell cycle progression during G1-phase. Mol. Biol. Cell 9:1065-1080.
19. Klein, H. L. 1997. RDH54, a RAD54 homologue in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, is required for mitotic diploid-specific recombination and repair and for meiosis. Genetics 147:1533-1543.[Abstract]
20. Krejci, L., S. Van Komen, Y. Li, J. Villemain, M. S. Reddy, H. Klein, T. Ellenberger, and P. Sung. 2003. DNA helicase Srs2 disrupts the Rad51 presynaptic filament. Nature 423:305-309.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Krogh, B. O., and L. S. Symington. 2004. Recombination proteins in yeast. Annu. Rev. Genet. 38:233-271.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Limbo, O., C. Chahwan, Y. Yamada, R. A. de Bruin, C. Wittenberg, and P. Russell. 2007. Ctp1 is a cell-cycle-regulated protein that functions with Mre11 complex to control double-strand break repair by homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 28:134-146.[CrossRef][Medline]
23. Lorca, T., A. Castro, A. M. Martinez, S. Vigneron, N. Morin, S. Sigrist, C. Lehner, M. Doree, and J. C. Labbe. 1998. Fizzy is required for activation of the APC/cyclosome in Xenopus egg extracts. EMBO J. 17:3565-3575.[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Manolis, K. G., E. R. Nimmo, E. Hartsuiker, A. M. Carr, P. A. Jeggo, and R. C. Allshire. 2001. Novel functional requirements for non-homologous DNA end joining in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. EMBO J. 20:210-221.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Martin, R. W., B. J. Orelli, M. Yamazoe, A. J. Minn, S. Takeda, and D. K. Bishop. 2007. RAD51 up-regulation bypasses BRCA1 function and is a common feature of BRCA1-deficient breast tumors. Cancer Res. 67:9658-9665.
26. Mazin, A. V., A. A. Alexeev, and S. C. Kowalczykowski. 2003. A novel function of Rad54 protein. Stabilization of the Rad51 nucleoprotein filament. J. Biol. Chem. 278:14029-14036.
27. Moreno, S., A. Klar, and P. Nurse. 1991. Molecular genetic analysis of fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Methods Enzymol. 194:795-823.[Medline]
28. Morgan, D. O. 2007. The cell cycle: principles of control. New Science Press, London, United Kingdom.
29. Muris, D. F., K. Vreeken, A. M. Carr, J. M. Murray, C. Smit, P. H. Lohman, and A. Pastink. 1996. Isolation of the Schizosaccharomyces pombe RAD54 homologue, rhp54+, a gene involved in the repair of radiation damage and replication fidelity. J. Cell Sci. 109:73-81.[Abstract]
30. Muris, D. F., K. Vreeken, H. Schmidt, K. Ostermann, B. Clever, P. H. Lohman, and A. Pastink. 1997. Homologous recombination in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe: different requirements for the rhp51+, rhp54+ and rad22+ genes. Curr. Genet. 31:248-254.[CrossRef][Medline]
31. Murray, A. W., M. J. Solomon, and M. W. Kirschner. 1989. The role of cyclin synthesis and degradation in the control of maturation promoting factor activity. Nature 339:280-286.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Nakayama, K. I., and K. Nakayama. 2006. Ubiquitin ligases: cell-cycle control and cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 6:369-381.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Neale, M. J., and S. Keeney. 2006. Clarifying the mechanics of DNA strand exchange in meiotic recombination. Nature 442:153-158.[CrossRef][Medline]
34. Osman, F., I. R. Tsaneva, M. C. Whitby, and C. L. Doe. 2002. UV irradiation causes the loss of viable mitotic recombinants in Schizosaccharomyces pombe cells lacking the G2/M DNA damage checkpoint. Genetics 160:891-908.
35. Pâques, F., and J. E. Haber. 1999. Multiple pathways of recombination induced by double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 63:349-404.
36. Peters, J. M. 2006. The anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome: a machine designed to destroy. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7:644-656.[CrossRef][Medline]
37. Peters, J. M. 2002. The anaphase-promoting complex: proteolysis in mitosis and beyond. Mol. Cell 9:931-943.[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Petronczki, M., M. F. Siomos, and K. Nasmyth. 2003. Un menage a quatre: the molecular biology of chromosome segregation in meiosis. Cell 112:423-440.[CrossRef][Medline]
39. Petukhova, G., S. Stratton, and P. Sung. 1998. Catalysis of homologous DNA pairing by yeast Rad51 and Rad54 proteins. Nature 393:91-94.[CrossRef][Medline]
40. Pfleger, C. M., and M. W. Kirschner. 2000. The KEN box: an APC recognition signal distinct from the D box targeted by Cdh1. Genes Dev. 14:655-665.
41. Roeder, G. S. 1997. Meiotic chromosomes: it takes two to tango. Genes Dev. 11:2600-2621.
42. Shinohara, M., S. L. Gasior, D. K. Bishop, and A. Shinohara. 2000. Tid1/Rdh54 promotes colocalization of rad51 and dmc1 during meiotic recombination. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:10814-10819.
43. Solinger, J. A., G. Lutz, T. Sugiyama, S. C. Kowalczykowski, and W. D. Heyer. 2001. Rad54 protein stimulates heteroduplex DNA formation in the synaptic phase of DNA strand exchange via specific interactions with the presynaptic Rad51 nucleoprotein filament. J. Mol. Biol. 307:1207-1221.[CrossRef][Medline]
44. Sonoda, E., H. Hochegger, A. Saberi, Y. Taniguchi, and S. Takeda. 2006. Differential usage of non-homologous end-joining and homologous recombination in double strand break repair. DNA Repair (Amsterdam) 5:1021-1029.[CrossRef]
45. Sugawara, N., X. Wang, and J. E. Haber. 2003. In vivo roles of Rad52, Rad54, and Rad55 proteins in Rad51-mediated recombination. Mol. Cell 12:209-219.[CrossRef][Medline]
46. Thoma, N. H., B. K. Czyzewski, A. A. Alexeev, A. V. Mazin, S. C. Kowalczykowski, and N. P. Pavletich. 2005. Structure of the SWI2/SNF2 chromatin-remodeling domain of eukaryotic Rad54. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 12:350-356.[CrossRef][Medline]
47. Thornton, B. R., and D. P. Toczyski. 2006. Precise destruction: an emerging picture of the APC. Genes Dev. 20:3069-3078.
48. Tsubouchi, H., and G. S. Roeder. 2006. Budding yeast Hed1 down-regulates the mitotic recombination machinery when meiotic recombination is impaired. Genes Dev. 20:1766-1775.
49. van Gent, D. C., J. H. Hoeijmakers, and R. Kanaar. 2001. Chromosomal stability and the DNA double-stranded break connection. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2:196-206.[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Veaute, X., J. Jeusset, C. Soustelle, S. C. Kowalczykowski, E. Le Cam, and F. Fabre. 2003. The Srs2 helicase prevents recombination by disrupting Rad51 nucleoprotein filaments. Nature 423:309-312.[CrossRef][Medline]
51. Wells, J. L., D. W. Pryce, and R. J. McFarlane. 2006. Homologous chromosome pairing in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Yeast 23:977-989.[CrossRef][Medline]
52. Wiese, C., E. Dray, T. Groesser, J. San Filippo, I. Shi, D. W. Collins, M. S. Tsai, G. J. Williams, B. Rydberg, P. Sung, and D. Schild. 2007. Promotion of homologous recombination and genomic stability by RAD51AP1 via RAD51 recombinase enhancement. Mol. Cell 28:482-490.[CrossRef][Medline]
53. Wolner, B., S. van Komen, P. Sung, and C. L. Peterson. 2003. Recruitment of the recombinational repair machinery to a DNA double-strand break in yeast. Mol. Cell 12:221-232.[CrossRef][Medline]
54. Yamano, H., J. Gannon, H. Mahbubani, and T. Hunt. 2004. Cell cycle-regulated recognition of the destruction box of cyclin B by the APC/C in Xenopus egg extracts. Mol. Cell 13:137-147.[CrossRef][Medline]
55. Yamano, H., C. Tsurumi, J. Gannon, and T. Hunt. 1998. The role of the destruction box and its neighbouring lysine residues in cyclin B for anaphase ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis in fission yeast: defining the D-box receptor. EMBO J. 17:5670-5678.[CrossRef][Medline]
56. Zhang, Z., H. Y. Fan, J. A. Goldman, and R. E. Kingston. 2007. Homology-driven chromatin remodeling by human RAD54. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14:397-405.[CrossRef][Medline]
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| J. Bacteriol. | J. Virol. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|
| Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. | Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | All ASM Journals |
|---|