4.8 Article

DNA-damage tolerance mediated by PCNA•Ub fusions in human cells is dependent on Rev1 but not Polη

Journal

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
Volume 41, Issue 15, Pages 7356-7369

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkt542

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Chinese National 973 Project [2013CB911003]
  2. Capital Normal University 211 Special Fund [10531182313]
  3. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP-93612]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In response to replication-blocking lesions, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) can be sequentially ubiquitinated at the K164 residue, leading to two modes of DNA-damage tolerance, namely, translesion DNA synthesis (TLS) and error-free lesion bypass. Although the majority of reported data support a model whereby monoubiquitinated PCNA enhances its affinity for TLS polymerases and hence recruits them to the damage sites, this model has also been challenged by several observations. In this study, we expressed the PCNA-164R and ubiquitin (UB) fusion genes in an inducible manner in an attempt to mimic PCNA monoubiquitination in cultured human cells. It was found that expression of both N- and C-terminal PCNA center dot Ub fusions conferred significant tolerance to ultraviolet (UV)-induced DNA damage. Surprisingly, depletion of Pol eta, a TLS polymerase dedicated to bypassing UV-induced pyrimidine dimers, did not alter tolerance conferred by PCNA center dot Ub. In contrast, depletion of Rev1, another TLS polymerase serving as a scaffold for the assembly of the TLS complex, completely abolished PCNA center dot Ub-mediated damage tolerance. Similar genetic interactions were confirmed when UV-induced monoubiquitination of endogenous PCNA is abolished by RAD18 deletion. Hence, PCNA center dot Ub fusions bypass the requirement for PCNA monoubiquitination, and UV damage tolerance conferred by these fusions is dependent on Rev1 but independent of Pol eta.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available