FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2071909648> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2071909648 endingPage "13639" @default.
• W2071909648 startingPage "13634" @default.
• W2071909648 abstract "The XPF/ERCC1 heterodimer is a DNA structure-specific endonuclease that participates in nucleotide excision repair and homology-dependent recombination reactions, including DNA single strand annealing and gene targeting. Here we show that XPF/ERCC1 is stably associated with hRad52, a recombinational repair protein, in human cell-free extracts and that these factors interact directly via the N-terminal domain of hRad52 and the XPF protein. Complex formation between hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 concomitantly stimulates the DNA structure-specific endonuclease activity of XPF/ERCC1 and attenuates the DNA strand annealing activity of hRad52. Our results reveal a novel role for hRad52 as a subunit of a DNA structure-specific endonuclease and are congruent with evidence implicating both hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 in a number of homologous recombination reactions. We propose that the ternary complex of hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 is the active species that processes recombination intermediates generated during the repair of DNA double strand breaks and in homology-dependent gene targeting events. The XPF/ERCC1 heterodimer is a DNA structure-specific endonuclease that participates in nucleotide excision repair and homology-dependent recombination reactions, including DNA single strand annealing and gene targeting. Here we show that XPF/ERCC1 is stably associated with hRad52, a recombinational repair protein, in human cell-free extracts and that these factors interact directly via the N-terminal domain of hRad52 and the XPF protein. Complex formation between hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 concomitantly stimulates the DNA structure-specific endonuclease activity of XPF/ERCC1 and attenuates the DNA strand annealing activity of hRad52. Our results reveal a novel role for hRad52 as a subunit of a DNA structure-specific endonuclease and are congruent with evidence implicating both hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 in a number of homologous recombination reactions. We propose that the ternary complex of hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 is the active species that processes recombination intermediates generated during the repair of DNA double strand breaks and in homology-dependent gene targeting events. In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Rad1 and Rad10 proteins form a stable complex with DNA structure-specific endonuclease activity (1Tomkinson A.E. Bardwell A.J. Bardwell L. Tappe N.J. Friedberg E.C. Nature. 1993; 362: 860-862Google Scholar, 2Bardwell A.J. Bardwell L. Tomkinson A.E. Friedberg E.C. Science. 1994; 265: 2082-2085Google Scholar). During the removal of DNA lesions by nucleotide excision repair (NER), 1The abbreviations used are: NER, nucleotide excision repair; GST, glutathione S-transferase; SSA, single strand annealing; hRad52, human Rad52; yRad52, yeast Rad52. Rad1-Rad10 complex makes the 5′ incision in a bubble structure generated as a result of localized unwinding of the damaged DNA (2Bardwell A.J. Bardwell L. Tomkinson A.E. Friedberg E.C. Science. 1994; 265: 2082-2085Google Scholar, 3Davies A.A. Friedberg E.C. Tomkinson A.E. Wood R.D. West S.C. J. Biol. Chem. 1995; 270: 24638-24641Google Scholar). A stable interaction with the DNA damage recognition protein Rad14 appears to mediate the specific recruitment of Rad1/Rad10 to the damaged strand (4Guzder S. Sung P. Prakash L. Prakash S. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 8903-8910Google Scholar). Interestingly, unlike the other members of the RAD3 epistasis group that constitute the yeast NER pathway, the RAD1 and RAD10 genes also participate in specialized forms of mitotic recombination including the single strand annealing (SSA) pathway of recombination between direct sequence repeats and the integration of plasmid DNA into homologous chromosomal sequences (reviewed in Ref. 5Praksash S. Prakash L. Mutat. Res. 2000; 451: 13-24Google Scholar). In mammalian NER, XPF/ERCC1, the equivalent of Rad1/Rad10, interacts with XPA, the equivalent of Rad14, and makes the 5′ incision in the damaged strand (6Park C.H. Bessho T. Matsunaga T. Sancar A. J. Biol. Chem. 1995; 270: 22657-22660Google Scholar, 7van Duin M. de Wit J. Odijk H. Westerveld A. Yasui A. Koken M.H.M. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Bootsma D. Cell. 1986; 44: 913-923Google Scholar, 8Sijbers A.M. de Laat W.L. Ariza R.R. Biggerstaff M. Wei Y.-F. Moggs J.G. Carter K.C. Shell B.K. Evans E. de Jong M.C. Rodemakers S. de Rooij J. Jaspers N.G.J. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Wood R.D. Cell. 1996; 86: 811-822Google Scholar, 9Brookman K.W. Lamerdin J.E. Thelen M.P. Hwang M. Reardon J.T. Sancar A. Zhou Z.Q. Walter C.A. Parris C.N. Thompson L.H. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1996; 16: 6553-6562Google Scholar, 10de Laat W.L. Appeldoorn E. Jaspers N.G. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 7835-7842Google Scholar, 11Bessho T. Sancar A. Thompson L.H. Thelen M.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 3833-3837Google Scholar, 12Matsunaga T. Park C.-H. Bessho T. Mu D. Sancar A. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 11047-11050Google Scholar). Similar to its yeast counterpart, XPF/ERCC1 is multifunctional, participating in intrachromosomal recombination between direct sequence repeats, the repair of DNA interstrand cross-links, and gene targeting (13Niedernhofer L.J. Essers J. Weeda G. Beverloo B. de Wit J. Muijtens M. Odijk H. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Kanaar R. EMBO J. 2001; 20: 6540-6549Google Scholar, 14Westerveld A. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. van Duin M. de Wit J. Odijk H. Pastink A. Wood R.D. Bootsma D. Nature. 1984; 310: 425-429Google Scholar, 15Sargent R.G. Rolig R.L. Kilburn A.E. Adair G.M. Wilson J.H. Nairn R.S. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1997; 94: 13122-13127Google Scholar, 16Hoy C.A. Thompson L.H. Mooney C.L. Salazar E.P. Cancer Res. 1985; 45: 1737-1743Google Scholar, 17Adair G.M. Rolig R. Moore-Faver D. Zabelshansky M. Wilson J.H. Nairn R.S. EMBO J. 2000; 19: 5552-5561Google Scholar). Although the XPF/ERCC1 endonuclease removes non-homologous single strand tails during targeted homologous recombination and SSA (17Adair G.M. Rolig R. Moore-Faver D. Zabelshansky M. Wilson J.H. Nairn R.S. EMBO J. 2000; 19: 5552-5561Google Scholar), a recent study (13Niedernhofer L.J. Essers J. Weeda G. Beverloo B. de Wit J. Muijtens M. Odijk H. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Kanaar R. EMBO J. 2001; 20: 6540-6549Google Scholar) has revealed that XPF/ERCC1 is still required for gene targeting even when the targeting construct is homologous with the genomic locus. At the present time it is not known how XPF/ERCC1 is recruited to the specific recombination intermediates generated during SSA and targeted homologous recombination. In yeast, the majority of DNA double strand breaks are repaired by recombinational repair pathways mediated by the products of genes in the RAD52 epistasis group (18Symington L. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2002; 630: 630-670Google Scholar, 19Krejci L. Chen L. Van Komen S. Sung P. Tomkinson A. Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol. 2003; 75: 159-201Google Scholar). Within this epistasis group, inactivation of the RAD52 gene results in the most severe phenotype (18Symington L. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2002; 630: 630-670Google Scholar, 19Krejci L. Chen L. Van Komen S. Sung P. Tomkinson A. Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol. 2003; 75: 159-201Google Scholar). Interestingly, genetic studies have implicated Rad52 in the same types of specialized mitotic recombination, SSA and homology-dependent integration of plasmid DNA, as the Rad1/Rad10 endonuclease (20Sugawara N. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1992; 12: 563-575Google Scholar, 21Fishman-Lobell J. Rudin N. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1992; 12: 1291-1303Google Scholar). Although inactivation of vertebrate RAD52 homologs does not significantly affect cellular sensitivity to agents that cause DNA double-strand breaks, these mutant cell lines are defective in the targeting of DNA molecules to homologous chromosomal loci, although to a lesser extent than that observed in yeast rad52 mutants (22Yamaguchi-Iwai Y. Sonoda E. Buerstedde J.M. Bezzubova O. Morrison C. Takata M. Shinohara A. Takeda S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 11: 6430-6435Google Scholar, 23Rijkers T. ven den Ouweland J. Morolli B. Rolink A.G. Baarends W.M. van Sloun P.H.P. Lohman P. Patsink A. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 18: 6423-6429Google Scholar). Eukaryotic Rad52 protein contains a conserved N-terminal domain that binds to DNA and self-associates to form a heptameric ring structure (24Stasiak A.Z. Larquet E. Stasiak A. Muller S. Engel A. van Dyck E. West S.C. Egelman E.H. Curr. Biol. 2000; 10: 337-340Google Scholar, 25Shinohara A. Shinohara M. Ohta T. Matsuda S. Ogawa T. Genes Cells. 1998; 3: 145-156Google Scholar, 26Singleton M.R. Wentzell L.M. Liu Y. West S.C. Wigley D.B. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002; 99: 13492-13497Google Scholar, 27Kagawa W. Kurumizaka H. Ishitani R. Fukai S. Nureki O. Shibata T. Yokoyama S. Mol. Cell. 2002; 10: 359-371Google Scholar). Consistent with their role in SSA, both human (h) and yeast (y) Rad52 proteins promote the renaturation of complementary DNA single strands (28Mortensen U.H. Bendixen C. Sunjevaric I. Rothstein R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1996; 93: 10729-10734Google Scholar, 29Reddy G. Golub E.I. Radding C.M. Mutat. Res. 1997; 377: 53-59Google Scholar). In this study, we provide evidence that the function of the XPF/ERCC1 DNA structure-specific endonuclease is modulated by a direct interaction with hRad52. These results reveal a novel role for hRad52 in recombination and suggest a mechanism for the targeting and activation of the XPF/ERCC1 endonuclease in recombination reactions. Fractionation of HeLa Extract by Immunoaffinity Chromatography with XPF Antibody—XPF antibodies (NeoMarkers, 50 μg) and anti-His6 antibodies (Clontech, 50 μg) were coupled to protein A beads (Invitrogen, 50 μl) as described (30Harlow E. Lane D. Antibodies: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY1988: 522-523Google Scholar). The beads were incubated with cell-free extract (500 μg, total protein) from HeLa cells (31Manley J.L. Fire A. Cano A. Sharp P.A. Gefter M.L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1980; 77: 3855-3859Google Scholar) for 1 h at 4 °C in 500 μl of Buffer A (25 mm HEPES-KOH, pH 7.8, 100 mm KCl, 1 mm MgCl2, 0.1 mm EDTA, 12.5% glycerol, 1 mm dithiothreitol). After washing the beads with 137 mm NaCl, 2.7 mm KCl, 10 mm Na2HPO4, 2 mm KH2PO4, pH 7.2, bound proteins were eluted in a stepwise fashion with 50 μl of Buffer A containing 0.2, 0.5, 1 m KCl and then 0.2 m glycine, pH 2.0. Aliquots (10 μl) of the eluates were separated by SDS-PAGE, and XPF, ERCC1, and hRad52 were detected by immunoblotting. ERCC1 antibodies were from Neomarkers, and hRad52 antibodies (32Chen G. Yuan S.-S.F. Liu W. Xu Y. Arlinghaus R. Baltimore D. Gasser P.J. Park M.S. Sung P. Lee E.Y.-H.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 12748-12752Google Scholar) were a gift from Dr. Eva Lee. Immunoprecipitation—HeLa cells were lysed in Buffer B (50 mm Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 300 mm NaCl, 2 mm EDTA, and 1% Nonidet P-40) containing a mixture of protease and phosphatase inhibitors (1 mm benzamidine-HCl, 1 mm phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 10 μg/ml aprotinin, 100 mm sodium fluoride, 1 mm sodium orthovanadate, and 1 mm β-glycerophosphate) and a final concentration of 20 μg/ml ethidium bromide. Clarified lysates (2 mg) were incubated with protein G beads (Amersham Biosciences, 20 μl) and either anti-hRad52 rabbit antiserum (2 μl), pre-immune antiserum (2 μl), anti-XPF antiserum (2 μl), or anti-ERCC1 antiserum (2 μl, Santa Cruz Biotechnology) for 2 h at 4 °C. After extensive washing with Buffer B, immunoprecipitated proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE, and XPF was detected by immunoblotting. Purification of Recombinant hRad52—Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) cells harboring pET28b-hRad52 that encodes hRad52 with a C-terminal His6 tag were grown in Terrific Broth (33Ausubel F.M. Brent R. Kingston R. Morre D. Seidman J. Smith A. Struhl K. Current Protocols in Molecular Biology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York1994: 3Google Scholar) and induced with 1 mm isopropylthiogalactoside for 5 h at 30 °C. Cells were lysed in 50 mm Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 10% sucrose, 10 mm EDTA, 600 mm KCl, containing a mixture of protease inhibitors (1 mm benzamidine-HCl, 1 mm phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride, 0.4 μg/ml aprotinin, 0.5 μg/ml leupeptin, 0.7 μg/ml pepstatin) using a French press. After centrifugation (100,000 × g, 60 min), ammonium sulfate (0.32 g/ml) was added to the cleared lysate. The resulting precipitate was collected by centrifugation (18,000 × g, 30 min) and then resuspended in Buffer C (50 mm potassium phosphate, pH 7.4, 10% glycerol, 0.5 mm EDTA, 1 mm β-mercaptoethanol) containing the mixture of protease inhibitors. The conductivity of the protein solution was adjusted to that of 100 mm KCl with Buffer C and then mixed with nickel nitrilotriacetic acid-agarose beads (Qiagen) pre-equilibrated with Buffer C containing 100 mm KCl and 50 mm imidazole. After being poured into a column, the beads were washed extensively with the same buffer, followed by the sequential elution of bound hRad52 with 200 and 500 mm imidazole in Buffer C containing 100 mm KCl. Fractions containing hRad52 were loaded onto an 8-ml Source S column (Amersham Biosciences) and eluted with a linear gradient from 100 to 600 mm KCl in Buffer C. Nearly homogenous hRad52 (∼11 mg from a 1-liter culture) was stored in small aliquots at -80 °C. The hRad52 open reading frame was subcloned from pET28b-hRad52 into pTAG (34Ron D. Dressler H. BioTechniques. 1992; 13: 866-868Google Scholar) to generate the plasmid pTAG-hRad52 that expresses full-length hRad52 as a glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusion protein. Fragments of the hRad52 open reading frame that encode the N-terminal domain (residues 1–176) and the remainder (residues 177–418) of hRad52 were introduced into pTAG to generate the plasmids, pTAG-hRad52N and pTAG-hRad52C, that express the hRad52 fragments as GST fusion proteins. Plasmids encoding GST and GST-hRad52 fusion proteins were introduced into BL21(DE3) cells. When cultures grown at 25 °C reached A600 ∼0.8, 1 mm isopropylthiogalactoside was added, and growth continued for 4 h. Cells were harvested by centrifugation, resuspended in Buffer D (50 mm Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 250 mm KCl, 10% glycerol, 1 mm EDTA) containing the mixture of protease inhibitors, and lysed by sonication. After centrifugation (100,000 × g, 60 min), the lysate was rocked for 1 h with glutathione-Sepharose beads (Amersham Biosciences) at 4 °C. The beads were collected by centrifugation and then washed extensively with Buffer D. Bound proteins were eluted with Buffer C containing 10 mm reduced glutathione. Fractions containing either GST or GST fusion proteins were stored at -80 °C. Purification of Recombinant yRad52—His-tagged yRad52 was purified from E. coli as described previously (35Song B. Sung P. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 15895-15904Google Scholar). Purification of Recombinant XPF/ERCC1—The XPF-ERCC1 complex was overexpressed in and purified from E. coli as described (36Kuraoka I. Kobertz W.R. Ariza R.R. Biggerstaff M. Essigmann J.M. Wood R.D. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 26632-26636Google Scholar), except the cobalt column was omitted and Superdex 200 (Amersham Biosciences) was used for the gel filtration step. Approximately 3 μg of nearly homogenous XPF-ERCC1 complex was obtained from a 1-liter culture. In Vitro Transcription and Translation—The plasmids pTB-E1 and pTB-F that encode ERCC1 and XPF, respectively (11Bessho T. Sancar A. Thompson L.H. Thelen M.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 3833-3837Google Scholar), were used as templates to synthesize 35S-labeled ERCC1 and XPF by coupled in vitro transcription and translation using the T7 Quick-coupled TnT kit from Promega. Pull-down Assays—Glutathione-Sepharose beads (10 μl) and purified recombinant XPF/ERCC1 (13 pmol) were incubated with either GST-hRad52 (25 pmol) or GST (25 pmol) in 250 μl of Buffer D (50 mm HEPES-KOH, pH 7.5, 100 mm KCl, 1 mm EDTA, 0.05% Nonidet P-40) with or without 20 μg/ml ethidium bromide for 30 min at 4 °C. Beads were collected by centrifugation and then washed extensively with Buffer D. Proteins were released from the beads by the addition of SDS sample buffer followed by incubation at 95 °C for 5 min. After separation by SDS-PAGE, ERCC1 and XPF were detected by immunoblotting. Glutathione-Sepharose beads, GST fusion proteins and in vitro translated ERCC1 and XPF were incubated in 50 mm Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 150 mm KCl, 1 mm EDTA, 0.5% Nonidet P-40 as described above. Labeled proteins that bound to the beads were separated by SDS-PAGE and then detected by PhosphorImaging analysis (Amersham Biosciences). DNA Substrates—Thd following oligonucleotides were purchased from Operon: Ya, 5′-ACGTTGTAAAACGACGGCCAGTGAATTCGAGCTCGGTACCCGGAGATCCTCTAGAGTCGACCTGCAGTGGCTT-3′, and Yb, 5′-CCTAACAGTACTTGATCAGAGCTCTTCGAGAATTTTACCGAGCTCGAATTCACTGGCCGTCGTTTTACAACGT-3′. The underlines in Ya and Yb are complementary. Ya (200 pmol) was labeled with [γ-32P]ATP (PerkinElmer Life Sciences, 6000 Ci/mmol) by T4 polynucleotide kinase (New England Biolabs). Labeled Ya was annealed with Yb (400 pmol) in 10 mm Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 50 mm NaCl, 0.1 mm EDTA by heating at 70 °C for 5 min followed by slow cooling to room temperature. The splayed arm substrate was purified after electrophoresis through a 5% non-denaturing polyacrylamide gel as described previously (11Bessho T. Sancar A. Thompson L.H. Thelen M.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 3833-3837Google Scholar). Endonuclease Assay—XPF-ERCC1 complex (0.4 pmol) was pre-incubated on ice for 5 min with the indicated amount of hRad52 (0–4.4 pmol) in 10 mm HEPES-KOH, pH 7.8, 15 mm KCl, 1 mm MgCl2, 0.1 mg/ml bovine serum albumin, 4.5% glycerol, 0.3 mm dithiothreitol in a final volume of 10 μl. After the addition of labeled DNA substrate (3 fmol), reaction mixtures were incubated at 37 °C for the indicated times. Reactions were stopped by the addition of EDTA to a final concentration of 2 mm. After phenol/chloroform extraction and ethanol precipitation, reaction products were separated by denaturing PAGE. Labeled oligonucleotides in the dried gel were detected and quantitated by PhosphorImaging analysis (Amersham Biosciences). Single Strand Annealing—The assay (reaction volume 50 μl) was performed essentially as described (37Krejci L. Song B. Bussen W. Rothstein R. Mortensen U.H. Sung P. J. Biol. Chem. 2002; 277: 40132-40141Google Scholar). For reactions containing both XPF/ERCC1 (0.5 pmol) and hRad52 or yRad52 (3.6 pmol), the proteins were preincubated on ice for 5 min. For zero time point samples, the reaction components were mixed directly in stop buffer. Specific Association between XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52 in Human Cell Extracts—To identify proteins that associate with XPF/ERCC1, we fractionated a HeLa cell extract by immunoaffinity chromatography with either anti-XPF antibodies or anti-His6 antibodies as the ligand. As expected, both XPF and ERCC1 were specifically retained by the anti-XPF beads and detected in the 1 m KCl and 0.2 m glycine eluates by immunoblotting (Fig. 1A, compare lanes 3 and 4 with lanes 7 and 8). Interestingly, hRad52 was detected in the 1 m KCl eluate from the anti-XPF beads (Fig. 1A, lane 3) but not in an equivalent fraction from either the anti-His6 beads (Fig. 1A, lane 7) or protein A-agarose beads alone (data not shown). To provide further evidence for a specific association between XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52, we fractionated a HeLa nuclear extract by hRad52 affinity chromatography. ERCC1 specifically bound to the hRad52 beads and was eluted by the same ionic conditions that disrupted the association between hRad52 and the anti-XPF beads (data not shown). Because both the XPF-ERCC1 complex and hRad52 bind to DNA, their association in the affinity chromatography experiments may have been mediated by DNA in the extract. To examine this issue, proteins were immunoprecipitated from a HeLa cell extract in the presence of ethidium bromide to disrupt DNA-protein interactions (Fig. 1B). As expected, XPF was immunoprecipitated by XPF antibodies and by antibodies specific for its partner protein, ERCC1 (Fig. 1B). In accord with the affinity chromatography experiments, XPF was specifically co-immunoprecipitated by hRad52 antibody (Fig. 1B). Together these results strongly suggest that XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52 stably associate under physiological conditions. Direct Physical Interaction between the DNA Binding Domain of hRad52 and the XPF Subunit of the XPF-ERCC1 Complex—To determine whether there is a direct interaction between hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1, we performed pull-down assays with purified recombinant XPF/ERCC1 (Fig. 2A, lane 2) and GST-hRad52. XPF/ERCC1 bound to glutathione-Sepharose beads liganded by GST-hRad52 but not to beads liganded by GST (Fig. 2B, compare lanes 2 and 3). A similar result was obtained when the pull-down assays were carried out in the presence of ethidium bromide (Fig. 2B, lanes 4 and 5) confirming that the association between XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52 is not mediated by DNA. The interaction of hRad52 with the subunits of the XPF-ERCC1 complex was examined in pull-down assays using in vitro translated polypeptides. Labeled XPF bound to GST-hRad52 beads but not to either GST-yRad52 or GST beads alone (Fig. 2C, lanes 2–4). In contrast, no specific binding of in vitro translated ERCC1 to GST-hRad52 beads was observed (data not shown). To map the region of hRad52 that interacts with XPF, we expressed and purified the N- and C-terminal domains of hRad52 as GST fusion proteins. XPF bound to full-length hRad52 and its N-terminal domain but not to the C-terminal domain (Fig. 2D). Together, these results demonstrate that XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52 physically interact in a species-specific reaction that is mediated by the XPF subunit of the XPF-ERCC1 complex and the N-terminal DNA binding domain of hRad52. hRad52 Stimulates the DNA Structure-specific Endonuclease Activity of XPF/ERCC1—To elucidate the functional consequences of the interaction between hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1, the effect of purified hRad52 (Fig. 3A, lane 2) on the nuclease activity of XPF/ERCC1 was examined. In these assays we used the preferred DNA substrate of XPF/ERCC1, a splayed arm structure formed that is cleaved by XPF/ERCC1 at the duplex/single strand junction releasing the 3′ single-stranded tail (3Davies A.A. Friedberg E.C. Tomkinson A.E. Wood R.D. West S.C. J. Biol. Chem. 1995; 270: 24638-24641Google Scholar, 8Sijbers A.M. de Laat W.L. Ariza R.R. Biggerstaff M. Wei Y.-F. Moggs J.G. Carter K.C. Shell B.K. Evans E. de Jong M.C. Rodemakers S. de Rooij J. Jaspers N.G.J. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Wood R.D. Cell. 1996; 86: 811-822Google Scholar, 10de Laat W.L. Appeldoorn E. Jaspers N.G. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 7835-7842Google Scholar, 11Bessho T. Sancar A. Thompson L.H. Thelen M.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 3833-3837Google Scholar, 12Matsunaga T. Park C.-H. Bessho T. Mu D. Sancar A. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 11047-11050Google Scholar, 38Rodriguez K. Wang Z. Friedberg E.C. Tomkinson A.E. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 20551-20558Google Scholar). Pre-incubation of the DNA substrate with increasing amounts of hRad52 progressively inhibited XPF/ERCC1 nuclease activity (Fig. 3B, lanes 4–7). In contrast, pre-incubation of XPF/ERCC1 with the same amounts of hRad52 before mixing with the DNA substrate stimulated nuclease activity (Fig. 3B, lanes 10–13). Maximal stimulation occurred at a ratio of about 6 hRad52 molecules to 1 XPF-ERCC1 complex (Fig. 3B). Further increases in the amount of hRad52 progressively reduced nuclease activity (data not shown). At the optimum ratio, hRad52 enhanced the initial rate of endonucleolytic cleavage catalyzed by XPF/ERCC1 about 3-fold (Fig. 3C). Because hRad52 forms a heptameric ring (24Stasiak A.Z. Larquet E. Stasiak A. Muller S. Engel A. van Dyck E. West S.C. Egelman E.H. Curr. Biol. 2000; 10: 337-340Google Scholar, 25Shinohara A. Shinohara M. Ohta T. Matsuda S. Ogawa T. Genes Cells. 1998; 3: 145-156Google Scholar), these results suggest that a single XPF/ERCC1 heterodimer interacts with the hRad52 heptamer to yield a ternary complex that has increased nuclease activity. To provide further support for this model, we examined the effect of yRad52, which has similar biochemical properties to hRad52 but does not appear to bind XPF (Fig. 2C). In contrast to hRad52 (Fig. 3B, lanes 10–13), pre-incubation of XPF/ERCC1 with increasing amounts of yRad52 inhibited nuclease activity (Fig. 3D, lanes 5–8). Thus, the increased endonuclease activity of XPF/ERCC1 is dependent upon a specific physical interaction with hRad52. Because Rad52 is a DNA-binding protein, we considered the possibility that the interaction of hRad52 with XPF/ERCC1 may change the DNA substrate specificity of this endonuclease. A duplex Y structure was not cleaved by XPF/ERCC1 either with or without hRad52 (data not shown). In contrast, hRad52 did stimulate the weak cleavage activity of XPF/ERCC1 on a duplex substrate with a 3′ single strand flap, but the degree of stimulation was similar to that observed with the preferred splayed arm substrate (data not shown). Thus, under the reaction conditions used, hRad52 does not seem to alter DNA substrate specificity of XPF/ERCC1. XPF/ERCC1 Attenuates the DNA Strand Annealing Activity of hRad52—The ability of eukaryotic Rad52 to bind to single strand DNA and to promote the annealing of complementary DNA single strands (25Shinohara A. Shinohara M. Ohta T. Matsuda S. Ogawa T. Genes Cells. 1998; 3: 145-156Google Scholar, 28Mortensen U.H. Bendixen C. Sunjevaric I. Rothstein R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1996; 93: 10729-10734Google Scholar) is consistent with the involvement of this factor in SSA (21Fishman-Lobell J. Rudin N. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1992; 12: 1291-1303Google Scholar, 28Mortensen U.H. Bendixen C. Sunjevaric I. Rothstein R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1996; 93: 10729-10734Google Scholar, 29Reddy G. Golub E.I. Radding C.M. Mutat. Res. 1997; 377: 53-59Google Scholar, 39Fishman-Lobell J. Haber J.E. Science. 1992; 258: 480-484Google Scholar, 40Benson F.E. Baumann P. West S.C. Nature. 1998; 335: 337-338Google Scholar, 41New J.H. Sugiyama T. Zaitseva E. Kowalczykowski S.C. Nature. 1998; 391: 407-410Google Scholar, 42Shinohara A. Ogawa T. Nature. 1998; 391: 404-407Google Scholar, 43Sung P. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 28194-28197Google Scholar). Because XPF/ERCC1 interacts with the DNA binding domain of hRad52, we examined whether this interaction modulates the ability of hRad52 to anneal complementary DNA single strands. As expected (28Mortensen U.H. Bendixen C. Sunjevaric I. Rothstein R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1996; 93: 10729-10734Google Scholar, 29Reddy G. Golub E.I. Radding C.M. Mutat. Res. 1997; 377: 53-59Google Scholar), both hRad52 and yRad52 promoted the annealing of complementary DNA single strands, whereas XPF/ERCC1 had no significant annealing activity (Fig. 4). Interestingly, pre-incubation with XPF/ERCC1 markedly attenuated the strand annealing activity of hRad52 (Fig. 4) but had no effect on strand annealing by yRad52 (Fig. 4). Thus, inhibition of hRad52-mediated strand annealing is dependent upon a specific physical interaction with XPF/ERCC1, suggesting that the binding of hRad52 to DNA and to XPF/ERCC1 are mutually exclusive. Taken together our results provide evidence that hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 form a stable ternary complex that cleaves specific recombination intermediates. During NER, protein-protein interactions with XPA and RPA position XPF/ERCC1 to make the 5′ incision in the damaged DNA strand (6Park C.H. Bessho T. Matsunaga T. Sancar A. J. Biol. Chem. 1995; 270: 22657-22660Google Scholar, 7van Duin M. de Wit J. Odijk H. Westerveld A. Yasui A. Koken M.H.M. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Bootsma D. Cell. 1986; 44: 913-923Google Scholar, 8Sijbers A.M. de Laat W.L. Ariza R.R. Biggerstaff M. Wei Y.-F. Moggs J.G. Carter K.C. Shell B.K. Evans E. de Jong M.C. Rodemakers S. de Rooij J. Jaspers N.G.J. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Wood R.D. Cell. 1996; 86: 811-822Google Scholar, 9Brookman K.W. Lamerdin J.E. Thelen M.P. Hwang M. Reardon J.T. Sancar A. Zhou Z.Q. Walter C.A. Parris C.N. Thompson L.H. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1996; 16: 6553-6562Google Scholar, 10de Laat W.L. Appeldoorn E. Jaspers N.G. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 7835-7842Google Scholar, 11Bessho T. Sancar A. Thompson L.H. Thelen M.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 3833-3837Google Scholar, 12Matsunaga T. Park C.-H. Bessho T. Mu D. Sancar A. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 11047-11050Google Scholar). In contrast, the molecular mechanisms that underlie the recruitment and activation of XPF/ERCC1 in homology-dependent recombination reactions have not been identified. Here we have shown an association between XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52 in human cell extracts and demonstrated a direct interaction between XPF and the N-terminal DNA binding domain of hRad52. The physical link between XPF/ERCC1 and hRad52 is congruent with results from genetic studies in mammalian cells (21Fishman-Lobell J. Rudin N. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1992; 12: 1291-1303Google Scholar, 22Yamaguchi-Iwai Y. Sonoda E. Buerstedde J.M. Bezzubova O. Morrison C. Takata M. Shinohara A. Takeda S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 11: 6430-6435Google Scholar, 23Rijkers T. ven den Ouweland J. Morolli B. Rolink A.G. Baarends W.M. van Sloun P.H.P. Lohman P. Patsink A. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 18: 6423-6429Google Scholar, 39Fishman-Lobell J. Haber J.E. Science. 1992; 258: 480-484Google Scholar, 44Schiestl R.H. Prakash S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1988; 8: 3619-3626Google Scholar, 45Schiestl R.H. Prakash S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1990; 10: 2485-2491Google Scholar, 46Aguilera A. Klein H.L. Genetics. 1989; 122: 503-517Google Scholar, 47Thomas B.J. Rothstein R. Genetics. 1989; 123: 725-738Google Scholar, 48Ivanov E.L. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1995; 15: 2245-2251Google Scholar) and S. cerevisiae (21Fishman-Lobell J. Rudin N. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1992; 12: 1291-1303Google Scholar, 22Yamaguchi-Iwai Y. Sonoda E. Buerstedde J.M. Bezzubova O. Morrison C. Takata M. Shinohara A. Takeda S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 11: 6430-6435Google Scholar, 23Rijkers T. ven den Ouweland J. Morolli B. Rolink A.G. Baarends W.M. van Sloun P.H.P. Lohman P. Patsink A. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 18: 6423-6429Google Scholar, 39Fishman-Lobell J. Haber J.E. Science. 1992; 258: 480-484Google Scholar, 44Schiestl R.H. Prakash S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1988; 8: 3619-3626Google Scholar, 45Schiestl R.H. Prakash S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1990; 10: 2485-2491Google Scholar, 46Aguilera A. Klein H.L. Genetics. 1989; 122: 503-517Google Scholar, 47Thomas B.J. Rothstein R. Genetics. 1989; 123: 725-738Google Scholar, 48Ivanov E.L. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1995; 15: 2245-2251Google Scholar), implicating these proteins in mitotic recombination pathways that include SSA and the integration of DNA molecules into homologous chromosomal sequences. The yeast Rad1/Rad10 endonuclease removes non-homologous 3′ single strand tails from recombination intermediates that would otherwise prevent completion of the recombination event (39Fishman-Lobell J. Haber J.E. Science. 1992; 258: 480-484Google Scholar, 48Ivanov E.L. Haber J.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1995; 15: 2245-2251Google Scholar). Similar studies with Chinese hamster ovary ercc1 mutant cell lines have provided evidence that the XPF-ERCC1 complex also participates in intrachromosomal recombination between direct sequence repeats and removes non-homologous single strand tails in homology-mediated gene targeting events (15Sargent R.G. Rolig R.L. Kilburn A.E. Adair G.M. Wilson J.H. Nairn R.S. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1997; 94: 13122-13127Google Scholar, 17Adair G.M. Rolig R. Moore-Faver D. Zabelshansky M. Wilson J.H. Nairn R.S. EMBO J. 2000; 19: 5552-5561Google Scholar). However, more recently, it was found that ERCC1 is also essential for targeted gene replacement in mouse ES cells even when the ends of the targeting construct are homologous with the genomic locus (13Niedernhofer L.J. Essers J. Weeda G. Beverloo B. de Wit J. Muijtens M. Odijk H. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Kanaar R. EMBO J. 2001; 20: 6540-6549Google Scholar). Thus, it appears that XPF/ERCC1 plays a critical role in the processing of a different type of recombination intermediate that does not have a non-homologous single strand tail, namely the heteroduplex intermediate that is generated as a result of stalled branch migration during gene targeting (13Niedernhofer L.J. Essers J. Weeda G. Beverloo B. de Wit J. Muijtens M. Odijk H. Hoeijmakers J.H.J. Kanaar R. EMBO J. 2001; 20: 6540-6549Google Scholar). Based on the biochemical properties of eukaryotic Rad52 (28Mortensen U.H. Bendixen C. Sunjevaric I. Rothstein R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1996; 93: 10729-10734Google Scholar, 29Reddy G. Golub E.I. Radding C.M. Mutat. Res. 1997; 377: 53-59Google Scholar), it has been assumed that it would be involved in the annealing of complementary DNA single strands to generate the DNA structures that are subsequently recognized and cleaved by Rad1/Rad10 in yeast and XPF/ERCC1 in mammalian cells. Although our studies do not exclude the involvement hRad52 in the strand annealing reaction, they have revealed a novel and unexpected role for Rad52 at a different and later stage in these pathways, the cleavage of recombination intermediates. Specifically we have shown that hRad52 and XPF/ERCC1 form a stable complex in human cell extracts. Because formation of this ternary complex not only enhances the structure-specific endonuclease activity of XPF/ERCC1 but also inhibits DNA binding by hRad52, we suggest that the role of hRad52 in the ternary complex is to recruit, via protein-protein interactions, the DNA structure-specific endonuclease to specific recombination intermediates generated during SSA and in gene targeting. We thank Dr. Rick Wood for the XPF/ERCC1 expression plasmid and purification protocol, Dr. Eva Lee for hRad52antibodies, and Wendy Bussen for assistance with the strand annealing assay. We are grateful to Dr. Sang Eun Lee for discussions and critical review of the manuscript." @default.
• W2071909648 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2071909648 creator A5011361633 @default.
• W2071909648 creator A5051816777 @default.
• W2071909648 creator A5056118954 @default.
• W2071909648 creator A5089139894 @default.
• W2071909648 creator A5090899284 @default.
• W2071909648 date "2004-04-01" @default.
• W2071909648 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W2071909648 title "Physical and Functional Interaction between the XPF/ERCC1 Endonuclease and hRad52" @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1486857702 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1532653491 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1604305208 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1970977612 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1977918604 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1991617089 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1992398829 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W1998993673 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2000983378 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2001591499 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2002295835 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2006611386 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2013230822 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2018299695 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2019083635 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2020840616 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2022100127 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2024172421 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2028138760 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2035994249 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2039876512 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2048906582 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2052483270 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2060710645 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2062028908 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2076705043 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2089841991 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2093595958 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2102265131 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2109113345 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2112823568 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2117848425 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2118211036 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2132803630 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2150149139 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2152173447 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2157616199 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2166182249 @default.
• W2071909648 cites W2260251515 @default.
• W2071909648 doi "https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m313779200" @default.
• W2071909648 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14734547" @default.
• W2071909648 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W2071909648 type Work @default.
• W2071909648 sameAs 2071909648 @default.
• W2071909648 citedByCount "93" @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482012 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482013 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482014 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482015 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482016 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482017 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482018 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482019 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482020 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482021 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482022 @default.
• W2071909648 countsByYear W20719096482023 @default.
• W2071909648 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2071909648 hasAuthorship W2071909648A5011361633 @default.
• W2071909648 hasAuthorship W2071909648A5051816777 @default.
• W2071909648 hasAuthorship W2071909648A5056118954 @default.
• W2071909648 hasAuthorship W2071909648A5089139894 @default.
• W2071909648 hasAuthorship W2071909648A5090899284 @default.
• W2071909648 hasBestOaLocation W20719096481 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C104451858 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C134935766 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C2777028655 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C2779309665 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C552990157 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C104451858 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C134935766 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C185592680 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C2777028655 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C2779309665 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C54355233 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C552990157 @default.
• W2071909648 hasConceptScore W2071909648C86803240 @default.
• W2071909648 hasIssue "14" @default.
• W2071909648 hasLocation W20719096481 @default.
• W2071909648 hasOpenAccess W2071909648 @default.
• W2071909648 hasPrimaryLocation W20719096481 @default.
• W2071909648 hasRelatedWork W1828691184 @default.
• W2071909648 hasRelatedWork W1903732681 @default.
• W2071909648 hasRelatedWork W1991523530 @default.
• W2071909648 hasRelatedWork W2002128513 @default.

• next