4.8 Article

PIP degron proteins, substrates of CRL4Cdt2, and not PIP boxes, interfere with DNA polymerase η and κ focus formation on UV damage

Journal

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages 3692-3706

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkt1400

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer
  2. Ministry of Higher Education and Research [MNERT grant]
  3. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale (FRM)
  4. Fondation ARC pour la Recherche sur le Cancer
  5. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) is a well-known scaffold for many DNA replication and repair proteins, but how the switch between partners is regulated is currently unclear. Interaction with PCNA occurs via a domain known as a PCNA-Interacting Protein motif (PIP box). More recently, an additional specialized PIP box has been described, the ' PIP degron ', that targets PCNA-interacting proteins for proteasomal degradation via the E3 ubiquitin ligase CRL4(Cdt2). Here we provide evidence that CRL4(Cdt2)-dependent degradation of PIP degron proteins plays a role in the switch of PCNA partners during the DNA damage response by facilitating accumulation of translesion synthesis DNA polymerases into nuclear foci. We show that expression of a nondegradable PIP degron (Cdt1) impairs both Pol eta and Pol kappa focus formation on ultraviolet irradiation and reduces cell viability, while canonical PIP box-containing proteins have no effect. Furthermore, we identify PIP degron-containing peptides from several substrates of CRL4(Cdt2) as efficient inhibitors of Pol eta foci formation. By site-directed mutagenesis we show that inhibition depends on a conserved threonine residue that confers high affinity for PCNA-binding. Altogether these findings reveal an important regulative role for the CRL4(Cdt2) pathway in the switch of PCNA partners on DNA damage.

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