4.5 Article

Histone H3 Lysine 56 Acetylation and the Response to DNA Replication Fork Damage

期刊

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 1, 页码 154-172

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/MCB.05415-11

关键词

-

资金

  1. Danish Natural Science Research Council
  2. Alfred Benzon Foundation
  3. Villum Kann Rasmussen Foundation
  4. Agence Nationale de la Recherche
  5. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale
  6. Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute [FRN-018450]
  7. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [FRN-79392]
  8. Canadian Centre for Excellence in Commercialization and Research
  9. Canadian Foundation for Innovation
  10. Fonds de la Recherche en Sante du Quebec

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, histone H3 lysine 56 acetylation (H3K56ac) occurs in newly synthesized histones that are deposited throughout the genome during DNA replication. Defects in H3K56ac sensitize cells to genotoxic agents, suggesting that this modification plays an important role in the DNA damage response. However, the links between histone acetylation, the nascent chromatin structure, and the DNA damage response are poorly understood. Here we report that cells devoid of H3K56ac are sensitive to DNA damage sustained during transient exposure to methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) or camptothecin but are only mildly affected by hydroxyurea. We demonstrate that, after exposure to MMS, H3K56ac-deficient cells cannot complete DNA replication and eventually segregate chromosomes with intranuclear foci containing the recombination protein Rad52. In addition, we provide evidence that these phenotypes are not due to defects in base excision repair, defects in DNA damage tolerance, or a lack of Rad51 loading at sites of DNA damage. Our results argue that the acute sensitivity of H3K56ac-deficient cells to MMS and camptothecin stems from a failure to complete the repair of specific types of DNA lesions by recombination and/or from defects in the completion of DNA replication.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据