Down-Regulation of Rad51 Activity during Meiosis in Yeast Prevents Competition with Dmc1 for Repair of Double-Strand Breaks

45Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Interhomolog recombination plays a critical role in promoting proper meiotic chromosome segregation but a mechanistic understanding of this process is far from complete. In vegetative cells, Rad51 is a highly conserved recombinase that exhibits a preference for repairing double strand breaks (DSBs) using sister chromatids, in contrast to the conserved, meiosis-specific recombinase, Dmc1, which preferentially repairs programmed DSBs using homologs. Despite the different preferences for repair templates, both Rad51 and Dmc1 are required for interhomolog recombination during meiosis. This paradox has recently been explained by the finding that Rad51 protein, but not its strand exchange activity, promotes Dmc1 function in budding yeast. Rad51 activity is inhibited in dmc1Δ mutants, where the failure to repair meiotic DSBs triggers the meiotic recombination checkpoint, resulting in prophase arrest. The question remains whether inhibition of Rad51 activity is important during wild-type meiosis, or whether inactivation of Rad51 occurs only as a result of the absence of DMC1 or checkpoint activation. This work shows that strains in which mechanisms that down-regulate Rad51 activity are removed exhibit reduced numbers of interhomolog crossovers and noncrossovers. A hypomorphic mutant, dmc1-T159A, makes less stable presynaptic filaments but is still able to mediate strand exchange and interact with accessory factors. Combining dmc1-T159A with up-regulated Rad51 activity reduces interhomolog recombination and spore viability, while increasing intersister joint molecule formation. These results support the idea that down-regulation of Rad51 activity is important during meiosis to prevent Rad51 from competing with Dmc1 for repair of meiotic DSBs. © 2014 Liu et al.

Figures

  • Table 1. Two-hybrid interactions between DMC1 and dmc1-T159A.
  • Figure 1. Biochemical characterization of recombinant Dmc1-T159A protein. A. For Dmc1 and Dmc1-T159A, 2.5 mg of each protein were analyzed by SDS-polyacrylimide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) and Coomassie staining. B. The stability of Dmc1 filaments on bead-immobilized ssDNA was assessed by exposing the filaments to RPA and measuring the amount of Dmc1 retained on the beads (n = 3, +/2 standard error). Proteins were monitored by SDS-PAGE and Coomassie staining. The experiments were performed with different Ca2+ concentrations as indicated. Rfa2, the 30 kDa subunit of RPA is indicated. The histogram shows the percent of Dmc1 protein that remained associated with the beads after challenge by RPA as determined by band desitometry. C. (i) Schematic of the strand exchange recombination assay. (ii) Strand exchange activity of Dmc1 and Dmc1T159A was monitored using 2, 4, or 8 mM protein in the presence of either 10 mM or 1 mM Ca2+. The histogram indicates the percent of radioactively labeled oligonucleotide that was incorporated into the slower migrating product by strand exchange (n = 3, +/2 standard error). At 1 mM Ca2+, the inhibition of strand exchange seen at elevated concentrations of wild-type Dmc1 is likely due to coating of the dsDNA substrate by the recombinase, thereby blocking access of the ssDNA filament. D. Dmc1 and Dmc1-T159A interactions with Rad54 and Rdh54 were assayed by pull-down experiments. S-tagged Rad54 or Rdh54 (2 mg each) was incubated with 1.2 mg Dmc1 or Dmc1-T159A. The S-tagged protein was captured on Sprotein agarose resin, which was washed and the protein eluted with SDS. S = supernatant after collecting the beads, W = supernatant obtained from washing the beads, E = eluate from beads. The ‘‘-’’ indicates that no tagged protein was added to the reaction. E. (i) Schematic of the D-loop recombination assay. (ii) Homologous DNA pairing activity of Dmc1 and Dmc1-T159A was assessed by a D-loop formation assay (n = 3, +/2 standard error). 0.5 or 1.0 mM of Dmc1 or Dmc1-T159A was combined with 0, 150, or 250 nM of Rdh54. The histogram shows the percent of radioactive ssDNA that is incorporated into the slower migrating D-loop product via homologous pairing. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004005.g001
  • Figure 3. Meiotic progression and crossover formation in various dmc1-T159A SK1 strains. Wild-type, hed1D RAD54-T132A, dmc1-T159A, dmc1-T159A hed1D and dmc1-T159A hed1D RAD54-T132A diploids were transferred to Spo medium at 30uC at 0 hr and samples were taken at two hour intervals. Color coding is the same as in Figure 2. A. Meiotic progression was measured by staining the nuclei with DAPI and counting the fraction of bi-nucleate (MI) and tetranucleate (MII) cells. B. Crossovers and DSBs at the HIS4/LEU2 hotspot. The DNA was digested with XhoI and probed as described in [64]. P1 and P2 represent the parental fragments and CO1 and CO2 represent the two products of reciprocal recombination. Numbers above each lane indicate the hours after transfer to Spo medium. C. Quantitation of the crossover and DSBs bands shown in Panel B. A replicate of this experiment is shown in Figure S1. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004005.g003
  • Table 2. Various phenotypes obtained from sequencing tetrads from various strains derived from the S288c/YJM789 background.
  • Figure 4. Meiotic joint molecule analysis in various SK1 dmc1-T159A ndt80D strains. ndt80D (NH2188), hed1D ndt80D RAD54-T132A (NH2223::pHN104(S/N)2, dmc1-T159A ndt80D (NH2235), dmc1-T159A hed1D ndt80D (NH2190) and dmc1-T159A hed1D ndt80D RAD54-T132A (NH2193) diploids were transferred to Spo medium for nine hours to arrest the cells in pachytene and the DNA was crosslinked with psoralen, extracted and digested with XhoI. Color coding is the same as in Figure 2. A. Southern blots of two-dimensional gels probed to detect interhomolog JMs (indicated by black arrows) and intersister JMs (indicated by red arrows) as described in [64]. B. Quantitation of the ratio of interhomolog:intersister joint molecules in the gels shown in A averaged with a second replicate. Error bars indicate the standard error. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004005.g004
  • Table 3. S. cerevisiae strainsa.

References Powered by Scopus

Additional modules for versatile and economical PCR-based gene deletion and modification in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

4453Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

To err (meiotically) is human: The genesis of human aneuploidy

1943Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Three new dominant drug resistance cassettes for gene disruption in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

1476Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Meiotic recombination: The essence of heredity

558Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

DNA strand exchange and RecA homologs in meiosis

188Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The meiotic checkpoint network: Step-by-step through meiotic prophase

140Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Liu, Y., Gaines, W. A., Callender, T., Busygina, V., Oke, A., Sung, P., … Hollingsworth, N. M. (2014). Down-Regulation of Rad51 Activity during Meiosis in Yeast Prevents Competition with Dmc1 for Repair of Double-Strand Breaks. PLoS Genetics, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1004005

Readers over time

‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2505101520

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 29

58%

Researcher 12

24%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27

52%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 22

42%

Chemistry 2

4%

Social Sciences 1

2%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0