4.5 Article

Replication Factor C Recruits DNA Polymerase δ to Sites of Nucleotide Excision Repair but Is Not Required for PCNA Recruitment

Journal

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 30, Issue 20, Pages 4828-4839

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/MCB.00285-10

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EU [LSHG-CT-2005- 512113, MRTN-CT-2003-503618]
  2. ZON-MW [912-03- 012, 917-46-364]
  3. ALW [805.3.42-P, 805.47.190]
  4. ESF [ALW-855.01.074, 805.47.193]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) operates through coordinated assembly of repair factors into pre- and postincision complexes. The postincision step of NER includes gap-filling DNA synthesis and ligation. However, the exact composition of this NER-associated DNA synthesis complex in vivo and the dynamic interactions of the factors involved are not well understood. Using immunofluorescence, chromatin immunoprecipitation, and live-cell protein dynamic studies, we show that replication factor C (RFC) is implicated in postincision NER in mammalian cells. Small interfering RNA-mediated knockdown of RFC impairs upstream removal of UV lesions and abrogates the downstream recruitment of DNA polymerase delta. Unexpectedly, RFC appears dispensable for PCNA recruitment yet is required for the subsequent recruitment of DNA polymerases to PCNA, indicating that RFC is essential to stably load the polymerase clamp to start DNA repair synthesis at 3' termini. The kinetic studies are consistent with a model in which RFC exchanges dynamically at sites of repair. However, its persistent localization at stalled NER complexes suggests that RFC remains targeted to the repair complex even after loading of PCNA. We speculate that RFC associates with the downstream 5' phosphate after loading; such interaction would prevent possible signaling events initiated by the RFC-like Rad17 and may assist in unloading of PCNA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available