4.5 Article

Recruitment of RBM6 to DNA Double-Strand Breaks Fosters Homologous Recombination Repair

期刊

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGY
卷 43, 期 3, 页码 130-142

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10985549.2023.2187105

关键词

RBM6; double-strand breaks; homologous recombination repair; G-patch domain; PARP1; Rad51

向作者/读者索取更多资源

RBM6 plays an important role in DNA double-strand break repair by regulating alternative splicing of HR protein APBB1/Fe65 and promoting HR repair. RBM6 is recruited to DSB sites, and its recruitment is indirectly regulated by PARP1 activity. RBM6 interacts with Rad51, and this interaction is attenuated in RBM6 mutant lacking the G-patch domain.
DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are highly toxic lesions that threaten genome integrity and cell survival. To avoid harmful repercussions of DSBs, a wide variety of DNA repair factors are recruited to execute DSB repair. Previously, we demonstrated that RBM6 splicing factor facilitates homologous recombination (HR) of DSB by regulating alternative splicing-coupled nonstop-decay of the HR protein APBB1/Fe65. Here, we describe a splicing-independent function of RBM6 in promoting HR repair of DSBs. We show that RBM6 is recruited to DSB sites and PARP1 activity indirectly regulates RBM6 recruitment to DNA breakage sites. Deletion mapping analysis revealed a region containing five glycine residues within the G-patch domain that regulates RBM6 accumulation at DNA damage sites. We further ascertain that RBM6 interacts with Rad51, and this interaction is attenuated in RBM6 mutant lacking the G-patch domain (RBM6(del(G-patch))). Consequently, RBM6(del(G-patch)) cells exhibit reduced levels of Rad51 foci after ionizing radiation. In addition, while RBM6 deletion mutant lacking the G-patch domain has no detectable effect on the expression levels of its splicing targets Fe65 and Eya2, it fails to restore the integrity of HR. Altogether, our results suggest that RBM6 recruitment to DSB promotes HR repair, irrespective of its splicing activity.

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