DNA single-strand break repair and spinocerebellar ataxia with axonal neuropathy-1

DNA single-strand breaks (SSBs) are the commonest DNA lesions arising spontaneously in cells, and if not repaired may block transcription or may be converted into potentially lethal/clastogenic DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Recently, evidence has emerged that defects in the rapid repair of SSBs preferentially impact the nervous system. In particular, spinocerebellar ataxia with axonal neuropathy (SCAN1) is a human disease that is associated with mutation of TDP1 (tyrosyl DNA phosphodiesterase 1) protein and with a defect in repairing certain types of SSBs. Although SCAN1 is a rare neurodegenerative disorder, understanding the molecular basis of this disease will lead to better understanding of neurodegenerative processes. Here we review recent progress in our understanding of TDP1, single-strand break repair (SSBR), and neurodegenerative disease

On binding specificity of (6–4) photolyase to a T(6–4)T DNA photoproduct

Different factors lead to DNA damage and if it is not repaired in due time, the damaged DNA could initiate mutagenesis and cancer. To avoid this deadly scenario, specific enzymes can scavenge and repair the DNA, but the enzymes have to bind first to the damaged sites. We have investigated this binding for a specific enzyme called (6–4) photolyase, which is capable of repairing certain UV-induced damage in DNA. Through molecular dynamics simulations we describe the binding between photolyase and the DNA and reveal that several charged amino acid residues in the enzyme, such as arginines and lysines turn out to be important. Especially R421 is crucial, as it keeps the DNA strands at the damaged site inside the repair pocket of the enzyme separated. DNA photolyase is structurally highly homologous to a protein called cryptochrome. Both proteins are biologically activated similarly, namely through flavin co-factor photoexcitation. It is, however, striking that cryptochrome cannot repair UV-damaged DNA. The present investigation allowed us to conclude on the small but, apparently, critical differences between photolyase and cryptochrome. The performed analysis gives insight into important factors that govern the binding of UV-damaged DNA and reveal why cryptochrome cannot have this functionality