Replisome-mediated homeostasis of DNA/RNA hybrids in eukaryotic genomes is critical for cell fates and chromatin stability

During DNA replication, forks often stall upon encountering obstacles blocking their progression. Cells will act to speedily remove or overcome such barriers, thus allowing complete synthesis of chromosomes. This is the case for R-loops, DNA/RNA hybrids that arise during transcription. One mechanism to remove such R-loops involve DNA/RNA helicases. Here, I have shown that one such helicase, Sen1, associates with replisome components during S phase in the model organism S. cerevisiae. I demonstrate that the N-terminal domain of Sen1 is both sufficient and necessary for the interaction of the protein with the replisome. I also identified Ctf4 as one of at least two replisome interactors of Sen1. By mutational analysis, a mutant of Sen1 (Sen1-3) that cannot interact with the replisome was created. This mutant is healthy on its own but is lethal in the absence of both RNase H1 and H2. Overexpression of the sen1-3 allele from the constitutive ACT1 promoter is able to suppress this synthetic lethality, suggesting that Sen1 travels with replisomes in order to be quickly recruited at sites of R-loops that impair fork progression so as to remove those R-loops. In some cases, cells exploit fork stalling for biologically important processes. This is the case in Sz. pombe, where an imprint prevents complete DNA replication, triggering cell-type switching. This imprint is dependent on Pol1, a component of the replisome. Importantly, a single imprinting-defective allele of pol1 has been identified to date. Using in vitro assays, I have shown that this Pol1 mutant has reduced affinity for its substrates and is a correspondingly poor polymerase. By generating novel alleles of pol1, I have also demonstrated that switching-deficiency correlates with the affinity of Pol1 for its substrates in vivo. Finally, two interactors of Pol1 (Mcl1Ctf4 and Spp1Pri1 ) have been shown to have switching defects. S. cerevisiae and Sz. pombe have similar yet distinct genetic nomenclature conventions. Given that both model organisms were used in this study, it is important to highlight the conventions for both organisms to prevent confusion. In S. cerevisiae, wildtype gene names are expressed as a three letter, uppercase and italic name followed by a number (e.g. SEN1). The three letter name often corresponds to the screen through which the gene in question was originally identified. Mutants are generally designated with the same three letter but in lower case (unless the mutant is dominant) and with an allele designation (e.g. sen1∆, sen1-1 and sen1-2). Because of historical context, the allele designations vary in format (e.g. leu2-3,112 is a mutant of LEU2). Protein names are given as a three letter name with the first letter in uppercase (e.g. Sen1). This is also true for mutant proteins, with the added allele designation (e.g Sen1-1 and Sen1-2). In this study, I have generated constructs of the SEN1 gene and these constructs are referred to as SEN1 (X-Y), where X and Y refer to the first and last residues being encoded for. The corresponding proteins are referred to as Sen1 (X-Y). Different promoters have been used and, where appropriate, the promoters are expressed similarly to their wildtype gene names (e.g. GAL1, SEN1 and ACT1). In Sz. pombe, wildtype gene names are expressed as a three letter, lowercase and italic name followed by a number (e.g. pol1). Mutants are generally designated in the same format but with an allele designation. Like in S. cerevisiae, the allele designation varies widely (e.g. pol1-1, pol1-H4 and pol1-ts13). Additionally, because of the historical context, some (but not all) alleles of pol1 are referred to as swi7 to reflect the fact that they are defective for cell-type switching. Similar to the situation in S. cerevisiae, proteins names are given as a three letter name with the first letter in uppercase for both wildtype and mutants (e.g. Pol1 and Swi7-1). Sometimes, for the sake of comparison, genes or proteins are referred to their S. cerevisiae orthologues (e.g. swi1TOF1 and Swi1Tof1 , respectively). Several protein tags have been used in this study. When written in gene form, they were written in capital letters and italicized, irrespective of the host (e.g. 5FLAG) and when in protein form, they were written in capital, irrespective of the host (e.g. 5FLAG)

Limiting homologous recombination at stalled replication forks is essential for cell viability: DNA2 to the rescue

The disease-associated nuclease–helicase DNA2 has been implicated in DNA end-resection during DNA double-strand break repair, Okazaki fragment processing, and the recovery of stalled DNA replication forks (RFs). Its role in Okazaki fragment processing has been proposed to explain why DNA2 is indispensable for cell survival across organisms. Unexpectedly, we found that DNA2 has an essential role in suppressing homologous recombination (HR)-dependent replication restart at stalled RFs. In the absence of DNA2-mediated RF recovery, excessive HR-restart of stalled RFs results in toxic levels of abortive recombination intermediates that lead to DNA damage-checkpoint activation and terminal cell-cycle arrest. While HR proteins protect and restart stalled RFs to promote faithful genome replication, these findings show how HR-dependent replication restart is actively constrained by DNA2 to ensure cell survival. These new insights disambiguate the effects of DNA2 dysfunction on cell survival, and provide a framework to rationalize the association of DNA2 with cancer and the primordial dwarfism disorder Seckel syndrome based on its role in RF recovery

Sen1 is recruited to replication forks via Ctf4 and Mrc1 and promotes genome stability

DNA replication and RNA transcription compete for the same substrate during S phase. Cells have evolved several mechanisms to minimize such conflicts. Here, we identify the mechanism by which the transcription termination helicase Sen1 associates with replisomes. We show that the N terminus of Sen1 is both sufficient and necessary for replisome association and that it binds to the replisome via the components Ctf4 and Mrc1. We generated a separation of function mutant, sen1-3, which abolishes replisome binding without affecting transcription termination. We observe that the sen1-3 mutants show increased genome instability and recombination levels. Moreover, sen1-3 is synthetically defective with mutations in genes involved in RNA metabolism and the S phase checkpoint. RNH1 overexpression suppresses defects in the former, but not the latter. These findings illustrate how Sen1 plays a key function at replication forks during DNA replication to promote fork progression and chromosome stability

Disease-associated DNA2 nuclease–helicase protects cells from lethal chromosome under-replication

DNA2 is an essential nuclease–helicase implicated in DNA repair, lagging-strand DNA synthesis, and the recovery of stalled DNA replication forks (RFs). In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, dna2Δ inviability is reversed by deletion of the conserved helicase PIF1 and/or DNA damage checkpoint-mediator RAD9. It has been suggested that Pif1 drives the formation of long 5′-flaps during Okazaki fragment maturation, and that the essential function of Dna2 is to remove these intermediates. In the absence of Dna2, 5′-flaps are thought to accumulate on the lagging strand, resulting in DNA damage-checkpoint arrest and cell death. In line with Dna2’s role in RF recovery, we find that the loss of Dna2 results in severe chromosome under-replication downstream of endogenous and exogenous RF-stalling. Importantly, unfaithful chromosome replication in Dna2-mutant cells is exacerbated by Pif1, which triggers the DNA damage checkpoint along a pathway involving Pif1’s ability to promote homologous recombination-coupled replication. We propose that Dna2 fulfils its essential function by promoting RF recovery, facilitating replication completion while suppressing excessive RF restart by recombination-dependent replication (RDR) and checkpoint activation. The critical nature of Dna2’s role in controlling the fate of stalled RFs provides a framework to rationalize the involvement of DNA2 in Seckel syndrome and cancer

The S phase checkpoint promotes the Smc5/6 complex dependent SUMOylation of Pol2, the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase ε

Replication fork stalling and accumulation of single-stranded DNA trigger the S phase checkpoint, a signalling cascade that, in budding yeast, leads to the activation of the Rad53 kinase. Rad53 is essential in maintaining cell viability, but its targets of regulation are still partially unknown. Here we show that Rad53 drives the hyper-SUMOylation of Pol2, the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase ε, principally following replication forks stalling induced by nucleotide depletion. Pol2 is the main target of SUMOylation within the replisome and its modification requires the SUMO-ligase Mms21, a subunit of the Smc5/6 complex. Moreover, the Smc5/6 complex co-purifies with Pol ε, independently of other replisome components. Finally, we map Pol2 SUMOylation to a single site within the N-terminal catalytic domain and identify a SUMO-interacting motif at the C-terminus of Pol2. These data suggest that the S phase checkpoint regulate Pol ε during replication stress through Pol2 SUMOylation and SUMO-binding abilit