73
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The Replication Checkpoint Protects Fork Stability by Releasing Transcribed Genes from Nuclear Pores

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Transcription hinders replication fork progression and stability, and the Mec1/ATR checkpoint protects fork integrity. Examining checkpoint-dependent mechanisms controlling fork stability, we find that fork reversal and dormant origin firing due to checkpoint defects are rescued in checkpoint mutants lacking THO, TREX-2, or inner-basket nucleoporins. Gene gating tethers transcribed genes to the nuclear periphery and is counteracted by checkpoint kinases through phosphorylation of nucleoporins such as Mlp1. Checkpoint mutants fail to detach transcribed genes from nuclear pores, thus generating topological impediments for incoming forks. Releasing this topological complexity by introducing a double-strand break between a fork and a transcribed unit prevents fork collapse. Mlp1 mutants mimicking constitutive checkpoint-dependent phosphorylation also alleviate checkpoint defects. We propose that the checkpoint assists fork progression and stability at transcribed genes by phosphorylating key nucleoporins and counteracting gene gating, thus neutralizing the topological tension generated at nuclear pore gated genes.

          Abstract

          Graphical Abstract

          Highlights

          ► Gene gating inactivation suppresses fork collapse in checkpoint mutants ► The Mec1 checkpoint releases transcribed chromatin from nuclear pore complexes ► Mec1 phosphorylates Mlp1 nucleoporin to release topological blocks at gated genes ► Releasing local topology by double-strand break formation counteracts fork collapse

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Systematic identification of protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by mass spectrometry.

          The recent abundance of genome sequence data has brought an urgent need for systematic proteomics to decipher the encoded protein networks that dictate cellular function. To date, generation of large-scale protein-protein interaction maps has relied on the yeast two-hybrid system, which detects binary interactions through activation of reporter gene expression. With the advent of ultrasensitive mass spectrometric protein identification methods, it is feasible to identify directly protein complexes on a proteome-wide scale. Here we report, using the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a test case, an example of this approach, which we term high-throughput mass spectrometric protein complex identification (HMS-PCI). Beginning with 10% of predicted yeast proteins as baits, we detected 3,617 associated proteins covering 25% of the yeast proteome. Numerous protein complexes were identified, including many new interactions in various signalling pathways and in the DNA damage response. Comparison of the HMS-PCI data set with interactions reported in the literature revealed an average threefold higher success rate in detection of known complexes compared with large-scale two-hybrid studies. Given the high degree of connectivity observed in this study, even partial HMS-PCI coverage of complex proteomes, including that of humans, should allow comprehensive identification of cellular networks.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Maintaining genome stability at the replication fork.

            Aberrant DNA replication is a major source of the mutations and chromosome rearrangements that are associated with pathological disorders. When replication is compromised, DNA becomes more prone to breakage. Secondary structures, highly transcribed DNA sequences and damaged DNA stall replication forks, which then require checkpoint factors and specialized enzymatic activities for their stabilization and subsequent advance. These mechanisms ensure that the local DNA damage response, which enables replication fork progression and DNA repair in S phase, is coupled with cell cycle transitions. The mechanisms that operate in eukaryotic cells to promote replication fork integrity and coordinate replication with other aspects of chromosome maintenance are becoming clear.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Exporting RNA from the nucleus to the cytoplasm.

              The transport of RNA molecules from the nucleus to the cytoplasm is fundamental for gene expression. The different RNA species that are produced in the nucleus are exported through the nuclear pore complexes via mobile export receptors. Small RNAs (such as tRNAs and microRNAs) follow relatively simple export routes by binding directly to export receptors. Large RNAs (such as ribosomal RNAs and mRNAs) assemble into complicated ribonucleoprotein (RNP) particles and recruit their exporters via class-specific adaptor proteins. Export of mRNAs is unique as it is extensively coupled to transcription (in yeast) and splicing (in metazoa). Understanding the mechanisms that connect RNP formation with export is a major challenge in the field.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cell
                Cell
                Cell
                Cell Press
                0092-8674
                1097-4172
                22 July 2011
                22 July 2011
                : 146
                : 2
                : 233-246
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Fondazione Istituto FIRC di Oncologia Molecolare (IFOM) at IFOM-IEO Campus, Via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy
                [2 ]Rockefeller University, New York, NY 10065, USA
                [3 ]New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA
                [4 ]Centro Andaluz de Biología Molecular y Medicina Regenerativa CABIMER, Universidad de Sevilla, 41004 Seville, Spain
                [5 ]Tokyo Institute of Technology, 226-8503 Yokohama City, Japan
                [6 ]Research Center for Epigenetic Disease, Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences, Tokyo University, Bunkyo-ku, 108-8639 Tokyo, Japan
                [7 ]DSBB-Università degli Studi di Milano, 20139 Milan, Italy
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author rodrigo.bermejo@ 123456ifom-ieo-campus.it
                [∗∗ ]Corresponding author marco.foiani@ 123456ifom-ieo-campus.it
                [8]

                These authors contributed equally to this work

                Article
                CELL5734
                10.1016/j.cell.2011.06.033
                3160733
                21784245
                9da6c7bd-6d76-4ba9-968f-5e669f32f321
                © 2011 ELL & Excerpta Medica.

                This document may be redistributed and reused, subject to certain conditions.

                History
                : 2 January 2011
                : 22 April 2011
                : 15 June 2011
                Categories
                Article

                Cell biology
                Cell biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article