Vaccinia Virus Arrests and Shifts the Cell Cycle

Modulation of the host cell cycle is a common strategy used by viruses to create a proreplicative environment. To facilitate viral genome replication, vaccinia virus (VACV) has been reported to alter cell cycle regulation and trigger the host cell DNA damage response. However, the cellular factors and viral effectors that mediate these changes remain unknown. Here, we set out to investigate the effect of VACV infection on cell proliferation and host cell cycle progression. Using a subset of VACV mutants, we characterise the stage of infection required for inhibition of cell proliferation and define the viral effectors required to dysregulate the host cell cycle. Consistent with previous studies, we show that VACV inhibits and subsequently shifts the host cell cycle. We demonstrate that these two phenomena are independent of one another, with viral early genes being responsible for cell cycle inhibition, and post-replicative viral gene(s) responsible for the cell cycle shift. Extending previous findings, we show that the viral kinase F10 is required to activate the DNA damage checkpoint and that the viral B1 kinase and/or B12 pseudokinase mediate degradation of checkpoint effectors p53 and p21 during infection. We conclude that VACV modulates host cell proliferation and host cell cycle progression through temporal expression of multiple VACV effector proteins. (209/200.

Phosphorylation of the MBF Repressor Yox1p by the DNA Replication Checkpoint Keeps the G1/S Cell-Cycle Transcriptional Program Active

Background: In fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe G1/S cell-cycle regulated transcription depends upon MBF. A negative feedback loop involving Nrm1p and Yox1p bound to MBF leads to transcriptional repression as cells exit G1 phase. However, activation of the DNA replication checkpoint response during S phase results in persistent expression of MBF-dependent genes.Methodology/Principal Findings: This report shows that Yox1p binding to MBF is Nrm1-dependent and that Yox1p and Nrm1p require each other to bind and repress MBF targets. In response to DNA replication stress both Yox1p and Nrm1p dissociate from MBF at promoters leading to de-repression of MBF targets. Inactivation of Yox1p is an essential part of the checkpoint response. Cds1p (human Chk2p) checkpoint protein kinase-dependent phosphorylation of Yox1p promotes its dissociation from the MBF transcription factor. We establish that phosphorylation of Yox1p at Ser114, Thr115 is required for maximal checkpoint-dependent activation of the G1/S cell-cycle transcriptional program.Conclusions/Significance: This study shows that checkpoint-dependent phosphorylation of Yox1p at Ser114, Thr115 results in de-repression of the MBF transcriptional program. The remodeling of the cell cycle transcriptional program by the DNA replication checkpoint is likely to comprise an important mechanism for the avoidance of genomic instability

The Fission Yeast Homeodomain Protein Yox1p Binds to MBF and Confines MBF-Dependent Cell-Cycle Transcription to G1-S via Negative Feedback

The regulation of the G1- to S-phase transition is critical for cell-cycle progression. This transition is driven by a transient transcriptional wave regulated by transcription factor complexes termed MBF/SBF in yeast and E2F-DP in mammals. Here we apply genomic, genetic, and biochemical approaches to show that the Yox1p homeodomain protein of fission yeast plays a critical role in confining MBF-dependent transcription to the G1/S transition of the cell cycle. The yox1 gene is an MBF target, and Yox1p accumulates and preferentially binds to MBF-regulated promoters, via the MBF components Res2p and Nrm1p, when they are transcriptionally repressed during the cell cycle. Deletion of yox1 results in constitutively high transcription of MBF target genes and loss of their cell cycle–regulated expression, similar to deletion of nrm1. Genome-wide location analyses of Yox1p and the MBF component Cdc10p reveal dozens of genes whose promoters are bound by both factors, including their own genes and histone genes. In addition, Cdc10p shows promiscuous binding to other sites, most notably close to replication origins. This study establishes Yox1p as a new regulatory MBF component in fission yeast, which is transcriptionally induced by MBF and in turn inhibits MBF-dependent transcription. Yox1p may function together with Nrm1p to confine MBF-dependent transcription to the G1/S transition of the cell cycle via negative feedback. Compared to the orthologous budding yeast Yox1p, which indirectly functions in a negative feedback loop for cell-cycle transcription, similarities but also notable differences in the wiring of the regulatory circuits are evident

The proteasome controls ESCRT-III–mediated cell division in an archaeon

INTRODUCTION: Eukaryotes likely arose from a symbiotic partnership between an archaeal host and an alpha-proteobacterium, giving rise to the cell body and the mitochondria, respectively. Because of this, a number of proteins controlling key events in the eukaryotic cell division cycle have their origins in archaea. These include ESCRT-III proteins, which catalyze the final step of cytokinesis in many eukaryotes and in the archaeon Sulfolobus acidocaldarius. However, to date, no archaeon has been found that harbors homologs of cell cycle regulators, like cyclin-dependent kinases and cyclins, which order events in the cell cycle across all eukaryotes. Thus, it remains uncertain how key events in the archaeal cell cycle, including division, are regulated. RATIONALE: An exception to this is the 20S proteasome, which is conserved between archaea and eukaryotes and which regulates the eukaryotic cell cycle through the degradation of cyclins. To explore the function of the 20S proteasome in the archaeon S. acidocaldarius, we determined its structure by crystallography and carried out in vitro biochemical analyses of its activity with and without inhibition. The impact of proteasome inhibition on cell division and cell cycle progression was examined in vivo by flow cytometry and super-resolution microscopy. Following up with mass spectrometry, we identified proteins degraded by the proteasome during division. Finally, we used molecular dynamics simulations to model the mechanics of this process. RESULTS: Here, we present a structure of the 20S proteasome of S. acidocaldarius to a resolution of 3.7 Å, which we used to model its sensitivity to the eukaryotic inhibitor bortezomib. When this inhibitor was added to synchronous cultures, it was found to arrest cells mid-division, with a stable ESCRT-III division ring positioned at the cell center between the two separated and prereplicative nucleoids. Proteomics was then used to identify a single archaeal ESCRT-III homolog, CdvB, as a key target of the proteasome that must be degraded to enable division to proceed. Examining the localization patterns of CdvB and two other archaeal ESCRT-III homologs, CdvB1 and CdvB2, by flow cytometry and super-resolution microscopy revealed the sequence of events that leads to division. First, a CdvB ring is assembled. This CdvB ring then templates the assembly of the contractile ESCRT-III homologs, CdvB1 and CdvB2, to form a composite division ring. Cell division is then triggered by proteasome-mediated degradation of CdvB, which allows the CdvB1:CdvB2 copolymer to constrict, pulling the membrane with it. During constriction, the CdvB1:CdvB2 copolymer is disassembled, thus vacating the membrane neck to drive abscission, yielding two daughter cells with diffuse CdvB1 and CdvB2. CONCLUSION: This study reveals a role for the proteasome in driving structural changes in a composite ESCRT-III copolymer, enabling the stepwise assembly, disassembly, and contraction of an ESCRT-III–based division ring. Although it is not yet clear how proteasomal inhibition prevents S. acidocaldarius cells from resetting the cell cycle to initiate the next S phase, these data strengthen the case for the eukaryotic cell cycle regulation having its origins in archaea

Induction of APOBEC3 exacerbates DNA replication stress and chromosomal instability in early breast and lung cancer evolution

APOBEC3 enzymes are cytosine deaminases implicated in cancer. Precisely when APOBEC3 expression is induced during cancer development remains to be defined. Here we show that specific APOBEC3 genes are upregulated in breast DCIS, and in pre-invasive lung cancer lesions coincident with cellular proliferation. We observe evidence of APOBEC3-mediated subclonal mutagenesis propagated from TRACERx pre-invasive to invasive NSCLC lesions. We find that APOBEC3B exacerbates DNA replication stress and chromosomal instability through incomplete replication of genomic DNA, manifested by accumulation of mitotic ultrafine bridges and 53BP1 nuclear bodies in the G1 phase of the cell cycle. Analysis of TRACERx NSCLC clinical samples and mouse lung cancer models, revealed APOBEC3B expression driving replication stress and chromosome missegregation. We propose that APOBEC3 is functionally implicated in the onset of chromosomal instability and somatic mutational heterogeneity in pre-invasive disease, providing fuel for selection early in cancer evolution

Stb1 Collaborates with Other Regulators To Modulate the G1-Specific Transcriptional Circuit▿

G1-specific transcription in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae depends upon SBF and MBF. Whereas inactivation of SBF-regulated genes during the G1/S transition depends upon mitotic B-type cyclins, inactivation of MBF has been reported to involve multiple regulators, Nrm1 and Stb1. Nrm1 is a transcriptional corepressor that inactivates MBF-regulated transcription via negative feedback as cells exit G1 phase. Cln/cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)-dependent inactivation of Stb1, identified via its interaction with the histone deacetylase (HDAC) component Sin3, has also been reported to inactivate MBF-regulated transcription. This report shows that Stb1 is a stable component of both SBF and MBF that binds G1-specific promoters via Swi6 during G1 phase. It is important for the growth of cells in which SBF or MBF is inactive. Although dissociation of Stb1 from promoters as cells exit G1 correlates with Stb1 phosphorylation, phosphorylation is only partially dependent upon Cln1/2 and is not involved in transcription inactivation. Inactivation depends upon Nrm1 and Clb/CDK activity. Stb1 inactivation dampens maximal transcriptional induction during late G1 phase and also derepresses gene expression in G1-phase cells prior to Cln3-dependent transcriptional activation. The repression during G1 also depends upon Sin3. We speculate that the interaction between Stb1 and Sin3 regulates the Sin3/HDAC complex at G1-specific promoters

Sensory-motor training targeting motor dysfunction and muscle weakness in long-term care elderly combined with motivational strategies : a single blind randomized controlled study

Background: This study evaluated the effects of a combined innovative training regime consisting of stochastic resonance whole-body vibration (SR-WBV) and a dance video game (DVG) on physical performance and muscle strength in long-term-care dwelling elderly. Methods: Thirthy long-term-care elderly were randomly allocated to an intervention group (IG; n = 16) receiving combined SR-WBV training and DVG, or a sham group (SG; n = 14). IG performed five sets one minute of SR-WBV, with one minute rest between sets (base frequency 3 Hz up to 6 Hz, Noise 4) during the first five weeks on three days per week. From week five to eight a DVG was added to SR-WBV for IG on three days per week. SG performed a five-set SR-WBV program (1 Hz, Noise 1) lasting five times one minute, with one minute rest in between, three days a week. From week five to eight stepping exercises on a trampoline were added on three days per week. Primary outcome: Short physical performance battery (SPPB). Secondary outcome: isometric maximal voluntary contraction (IMVC), and sub phases of IMVC (Fsub), isometric rate of force development (IRFD) and sub time phases of IRFD (IRFDsub) were measured at baseline, after four and eight weeks. ANOVA with repeated measures was used for analyses of time and interaction effects and MANOVA determined between group intervention effects. Results: Between group effects revealed significant effects on the SPPB primary outcome after four weeks F(1, 27) = 6.17; p = 0.02) and after eight weeks F(1,27) = 11.8; p = 0.002). Secondary muscle function related outcome showed significant between group effects in IG on IRFD, Fsub 30 ms, 100 ms, 200 ms and IRFDsub 0-30 ms, 0-50 ms, 0-100 ms and 100-200 ms compared to SG (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Eight weeks SR-WBV and DVG intervention improved lower extremity physical function and muscle strength compared to a sham intervention in long-term-care elderly. SR-WBV and DVG seems to be effective as a training regime for skilling up in long-term-care elderly