1. Introduction
Currently five polymerases have been identified in
2. Evolution of the X family of DNA polymerases
The members of the X family are present in many organisms in all monophyletic taxa: Eukarya, Bacteria and Archaea, and even viruses with DNA genome [8]. The high degree of conservation at the structural and amino acid sequence levels between X family members suggests that they originate from a common ancestor.
Unlike viruses, prokaryotes and yeast, higher eukaryotes have more than one member of the X family. However, there are species in which no member of this family has been described, like the model organisms
Figure 1 shows the phylogenetic relationships between the known members of X family from different organisms. The phylogenetic tree was made using a short and highly conserved segment of the polymerization active site, in order to avoid the presence of accessory domains or small insertions or deletions that may interfere in the analysis. The results suggest that the several subfamilies that can be identified within the X family (Polß, Polλ, Polµ and TdT) have evolved from a common ancestor, perhaps to accommodate different functional requirements. The emergence of more complex organisms seems to promote the specialization of the X family members in order to increase the efficiency of the DNA synthesis processes in which they are involved. The distribution of X family DNA polymerases among different species suggests that the ancestor of the X family DNA polymerase was a Polλ-like gene, which diversified into Polß, Polµ and TdT during evolution. Polλ would have originally been involved in NHEJ to eliminate DNA damage. Subsequently, other X family DNA polymerases would have been generated in some animals and fungi through gene duplications, acquiring novel roles in DNA metabolism such as in BER and V(D)J recombination. According to very recent results [11], these evolutionary forces driving creation of new polymerases are still taking place among primates: codon-based models of gene evolution yielded statistical support for the recurrent positive selection of Polλ, among other four NHEJ genes during primate evolution: XRCC4, NBS1, Artemis, and CtIP. Moreover, analysis of the mutations on the crystal structures available for XRCC4, Nbs1, and Polλ show that residues under positive selection fall exclusively on the surface of these proteins. Studies of positive local evolution on human populations show that, indeed, a single allele of Polλ has previously been reported to be under positive selection in both Asian and Sub-Sahara African populations [12]. Also, sliding-window analyses and pairwise comparisons of several strains of
3. Comparative genomic organization of human DNA polymerases from family X
The modular organization of different members of the X family from viruses to eukaryotes indicates the existence of a conserved Polß-type core (Fig. 2), whose minimal version is the PolX from the African swine fever virus (ASFV), which contains only the palm and thumb subdomains of the polymerase domain [8]. The absence of the 8 kDa domain of both ASFV PolX and MSEV (
The presence of BRCT domains in Pol4, Polλ, Polµ and TdT relates to the role that this domain plays in processes such as V(D)J recombination and NHEJ repair. The BRCT domain of Pol4 mediates the interaction of the polymerase with factors involved in the NHEJ pathway during repair of double-strand breaks in DNA [27, 28]. Similarly, the BRCT domains of Polλ, Polµ and TdT allow these proteins to participate in both NHEJ repair and V(D)J recombination in higher eukaryotes. It is possible that subtle differences in the amino acid sequence of the BRCT domain of each polymerase have great importance in regulating the access of each DNA polymerase to a specific substrate or protein of the route.
Finally, the eukaryotic Polß (initially thought to be exclusive of mammals) has lost some accessory domains during evolution, in a crucial step for its specialization as a housekeeping DNA repair polymerase that protects against the large amount of oxidative damage present as a result of aerobic metabolism. The conservation of the 8 kDa domain (Fig. 2), where the dRP-lyase activity resides, is central for participation in the BER pathway.
4. A BRCT domain as an ancient feature required for NHEJ
The members of the X family of polymerases are recruited to form a complex with the NHEJ core factors XRCC4/Ligase IV and Ku at the DNA break [27, 29, 30]. Recent evidence has shown that BRCT domains can be specifically involved in the interaction with phospho-serine or phospho-threonine containing motifs [31, 32], an ability that may be involved in granting access of regulated proteins to the break, even though no evidence has shown to date a phosphorylation-dependent, BRCT-mediated, interaction of NHEJ factors.
Interestingly, sequence comparisons show that the BRCT of Polµ is most similar to TdT, with 39% sequence identity that includes the residues important for NHEJ-complex formation [33]. That high level of sequence conservation is also observed at the 3D- structural level in the BRCT domains of Polµ (PDB ID: 2DUN) and TdT (PDB ID: 2COE), that in turn exhibit an a/ß motif that is similar to the BRCT found in XRCC1 (PDB ID: 1CDZ), a BER repair protein. The main differences include a shorter α -helix 2 in the TdT BRCT domain, as well as the positioning of the loop connecting α -helix 2 and ß-strand 4. The electrostatic surfaces of Polµ and TdT BRCT domains are also very similar, containing both a positively charged ridge on one face of the protein, and large negatively charged regions on the opposite faces. In the Polµ BRCT the positive ridge is formed by Arg44, Arg52, Arg85 and Arg86. This positive patch has been proposed to be involved in the interaction with a phospho-modified protein [33], or most likely in the interaction with the downstream part of the DNA substrate [34]. Point mutations in several residues of the positive ridge as wells as the complete lack of the domain resulted in a diminished interaction with and activity on NHEJ substrates [34, 35]. By using the "brooch" motif (described below) to correctly orient and over-impose the crystals of the BRCT domain and the Polµ core, we found out that one of the positive patches in the BRCT domain perfectly accommodates the downstream part of the DNA substrate (Fig. 3; colored in dark blue). We then modeled the interaction of the BRCT domain of Polµ with the Ku70/Ku80 heterodimer by orienting the DNA substrate. Strikingly, the side of the BRCT domain facing the Ku heterodimer in the model was exactly the one containing the residues reported to be involved in this interaction (Fig. 3; colored in red). According to this model, the portion of the DNA substrate that would be contacted by the BRCT domain flawlessly correlates with the length of the BRCT-specific protection (6 bp) observed in our footprinting assays [34]
This DNA binding function of Polµ BRCT, independent of the core NHEJ factors, may enable a role for Polµ in the alternative NHEJ pathway, which occurs independently of Ku or Ligase IV. Polµ might bind the DNA break based on its own specificity for the 5’-P and then via the BRCT domain and using its terminal transferase activity, be in charge of the additions that create the so-called polymerase-generated microhomology. In agreement with this proposed function, recent observations indicate that Polµ BRCT is atypical in the sense of not being involved in dimerization or multimerization. In fact, comparison of the structure of Polµ BRCT with other BRCT domains that effectively dimerize shows important differences, especially regarding R2 helix [36].
The sequence conservation among BRCT domains from family X polymerases is very low, with only 10 residues conserved and five of them (His82, Val84, Leu109, Trp114, and Leu115 in human Polλ) involved in the architecture of the domain. The other five (Gly54, Arg57, Gly69, Thr81, and Val125 in human Polλ) are exposed to the solvent in the surface of the protein. One of them, Arg43 in Polµ (Arg57 in Polλ), is implicated in interactions with other components of the NHEJ complex [33].
This low sequence similarity is reflected in structural variations of the family X polymerases’ BRCT domains, which in turn influence the interactions established with other NHEJ factors, including an improved/preferential access of the polymerase to the DNA break. Deletion of the BRCT domain in the NHEJ-related polymerases [27, 29, 37], or point-mutagenesis of key-residues [33, 36], block the formation of complexes between the polymerase, Ku and XRCC4/LigaseIV at DNA ends.
The ability of X family polymerases to act during classical NHEJ thus relies on their interactions with other NHEJ factors through their BRCT domains, but PolXs have intrinsic capacities of gap-recognition and binding involving simultaneous recognition of both sides of the gap. As shown for Polß, the polymerase can bind both the template/primer part of the gap and also the template/downstream part, being the latter the strongest anchor point [38]. In the Polß co-crystal with a DNA gap this dual binding is clearly observable: contacts are established with the DNA backbone through a positively charged platform onto which the DNA is leaning. Such a dual DNA binding is even more crucial for Polλ and Polµ, polymerases not as specialized as Polß in always confronting substrates with continuous template strands (i.e. gaps), but also in charge of bridging two separate DNA ends. The ability to independently bind and orient two DNA ends is thus closely related to their function during NHEJ, but is still found in the more recently evolved Polß as an appropriate solution for gap-filling. This tight binding to both sides of the templating base forces the formation of a sharp bend of 90o in the template strand, that has been proposed to increase nucleotide selectivity and sensitivity to mismatches, and in general is a mechanistic feature used by X polymerases to improve fidelity [39].
5. A small (8 kDa) DNA binding domain, critical for NHEJ
One of the structural features that allows polymerases from X family to bind gapped and NHEJ substrates is the 8 kDa domain (Fig. 4A), located either at the N-terminus (Polß from higher eukaryotes, bacteria and archaea), or at the N-terminal portion just after the flexible linker that contains the Ser-Pro domain (Polλ, Polµ, TdT and yeast Pol4). This 8 kDa domain is involved in contacting several parts of the DNA substrate through different motifs [40], but in some of the members of the X family bears a dRP-lyase activity, highly related to the BER pathway [41, 42].
With the resolution of the first crystal structures of rat and human Polß, the 8 kDa domain was found to be highly mobile (Fig. 4B), not freely, but displaying a small number of stable positions: 1) in the absence of DNA and incoming nucleotide, the 8 kDa domain is located far away from the thumb subdomain, and the polymerase is in an open conformation; 2) in the presence of a DNA gap, the 8 kDa domain moves and comes closer to the thumb through binding of the 5’-phosphate group of the downstream strand; 3) after arrival of the nucleotide, there is a further movement of the 8 kDa domain, and Polß finally adopts the closed conformation. The model proposed originally [39] explains the formation of the 90º bend in the DNA substrate in two steps: first, binding of the 8 kDa domain to the downstream part of the gap stabilizes the initial positioning of the enzyme; secondly, upon folding of the polymerase domain and binding of the primer part of the substrate, the bend of the DNA duplex is created. This bending causes the downstream part to rotate out, exposing the 3’ end of the primer.
This two-step model is confirmed by the observations derived form the solved Polλ structures, the most indicative in this matter being the co-crystal with a 2 nt gap ([43], PDB ID: 1RZT). In this case, the 5’-P is located in its correct position and bound by the 8 kDa domain, but the place of the templating base is occupied by the second template nucleotide of the gap, i.e. the one adjacent to the downstream duplex. This causes the 3’-OH of the primer to be displaced to the -1 position relative to the catalytic position, adjacent to the NTP binding site observed in the 1 nt gap co-crystal (PDB ID: 1XSN). Therefore, the location of the polymerase domain in a gap (1-nt or longer) is dictated by the binding of the 8 kDa domain to the 5’-P, and not by interactions with the primer terminus.
This conclusion has implications of great interest for the binding of the polymerase to NHEJ substrates, since 8 kDa-mediated binding would occur irrespective of the conformation of the 3’ end. The polymerase in charge for this has to be able to take advantage of micro-homologies for aligning the 3´ ends, and the 8 kDa domain provides an anchoring point for this complicated task.
5.1. Phosphate pocket
As already noted, the main function of the 8 kDa domain is the binding of the 5’-P group of the downstream strand of the DNA substrate. In fact, polymerization rates by template-instructed polymerases of the X family are greatly enhanced when the substrate contains this 5’-P group. In the case of Polß and Polλ, the processivity is also improved on long gaps (5 nt [44, 45]). In the ternary structures of Polß (PDB ID: 1BPY), Polλ (PDB ID: 1XSN) and Polµ (PDB ID: 2IHM) this 5’-P moiety is located at a positively charged pocket where binding is mediated by several hydrogen bonding interactions with basic side chains within the pocket (Fig. 4C). However, in Polµ there are fewer interactions than in Polß or Polλ, and the binding pocket is not as positively charged (Fig. 4C). There is no structure of TdT containing a downstream strand, but this enzyme still conserves the 8 kDa domain, that could be used to coordinate terminal addition of N-nucleotides with the joining of the two DNA ends generated during V(D)J recombination.
5.2. HhH domain
The 8 kDa domain contains another structural motif implicated in DNA binding, the helix-hairpin-helix (HhH) motif. These motifs bind single- or double-stranded DNA in a sequence independent manner, with the aid of a coordinated metal cation [46, 47]. In Polß, Polλ and Polµ structures, this HhH interacts with the downstream part of the substrate, suggesting that its function is the stabilization of the bent DNA thereby facilitating the positioning of the two DNA ends in a NHEJ reaction.
The structures of the 8 kDa HhH motifs from the X family enzymes are not exactly the same: in Polß and Polλ this motif is similar to those found in other repair enzymes, with the GxG sequence of the hairpin and other protein residues being conserved. In Polµ and TdT, on the other hand, one of the helices is distorted, probably as a consequence of the lack of primary sequence conservation in the hairpin (CLG in TdT, HFG and YLG in mouse and human Polµ, respectively).
5.3. Polλ dRP lyase allows repair of “dirty” DSBs
The 8 kDa domains of Polß and Polλ harbor an intrinsic dRP lyase activity that is required during single-nucleotide BER to remove the residual 5’-deoxyribose-phospate moiety left by the AP-endonuclease after elimination of the nitrogenous base. This reaction proceeds through a ß-elimination mechanism
6. Polμ: A “Jekyll & Hide” DNA polymerase at the edge between genomic stability and variability
Polµ is a DNA polymerase belonging to the X family with a strong similarity to TdT, its closest counterpart in the X family. They share 42% identity at the amino acid sequence, and also have a very similar structural organization: their N-terminal portion contains a nuclear localization sequence, followed by a BRCT domain and then the Polß-core structure already mentioned.
Regarding Polµ biochemical properties, it displays a certain terminal transferase activity [7], although it is primarily a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase [7, 52] and its activity increases strongly in the presence of a template strand of DNA. It is also known that both types of polymerization are stimulated
Although the
On the other hand, Polµ preferential expression in lymphoid tissues, especially in the germinal centers of secondary lymphoid organs, suggests a specific role of this polymerase in processes occurring in these regions. Its resemblance to TdT at the structural level, and its ability to conduct untemplated nucleotide additions, together with the fact that TdT is not expressed in secondary lymphoid organs, allowed to propose a function for Polµ in somatic hypermutation in the germinal centers [52], which occurs in these regions as an additional mechanism for diversification of the immune response [84]. Moreover, Polµ is present also in the thymus and bone marrow, and thus may be required during the normal process of V(D)J recombination as DNA-dependent polymerase to generate palindromic sequences (P sequences) at the ends of the coding fragments, or during gap-filling reactions required for coupling N additions to the DNA ends [52]. It was recently demonstrated an
7. A mobile loop in Polμ provides the ability to join non–homologous DNA ends
Template instruction is a general feature of most members of the X family, with the exception of TdT. TdT is the only known fully template-independent DNA polymerase, as it is able to add nucleotides to a primer DNA molecule in the absence of a template strand. This feature is crucial for its function in V(D)J recombination, where TdT adds nucleotides to the recombinational junctions of immunoglobulins and TCR receptor genes, generating variability as it creates new information [87, 88]. Interestingly, Polµ shows hybrid biochemical properties: it has an intrinsic terminal transferase activity, but it is strongly activated by a template DNA chain [7].
Understanding the structural and functional basis of the template-independence of TdT had to await the resolution of the crystal structure of the Polß-like core of TdT [89]. A loop region between ß-strands 3 and 4, referred to as Loop 1, has a similar position in all three TdT structures, and is located in a region of the DNA binding cleft that would normally be occupied by the template strand (Fig. 6A). Therefore, this loop would preclude binding of any DNA substrate possessing a template strand, thus explaining its null activity on these substrates. On that basis, and by extrapolation of the TdT structural model to Polµ, it was predicted that Loop 1, specifically present in these two enzymes, could be directly responsible for their template-independent terminal transferase activity, but in Polµ Loop 1 must be flexible enough to also allow template-directed polymerization [80]. In agreement with this prediction, when the crystal structure of Polµ bound to a gapped DNA was solved [40], Loop 1 was disordered suggesting conformational flexibility (Fig. 6A). In this structure, the DNA duplex was bound in the usual fashion within the DNA binding cleft. It was then clear that Loop 1 of Polµ cannot occupy the same position as that of TdT when a template strand is present. A comparison of the ends of the ß-strands flanking the loop shows that TdT’s Loop 1 extrudes upwards, toward the DNA binding cleft, while that of Polµ appears to turn downwards, away from the cleft [40]. Although no crystal structure is available of Polµ with a single stranded or 3’-protruding DNA substrate, it is likely that Loop 1 would then be found in the same conformation as in TdT, i.e. interacting with the primer strand, somehow mimicking a template strand. The structural evidence suggested that Loop 1 in Polµ may adopt different conformations depending on the nature of the substrate: the inherent flexibility of this loop in Polµ is distinct from TdT and suggests how Polµ can accommodate different substrates. Studies including the Loop 1 chimeras on Polµ [80] and TdT [90] confirmed this hypothesis: replacement of the TdT Loop 1 with that of Polµ is sufficient to allow template-dependent additions, while the reciprocal chimera (Polµ with the TdT Loop 1) is much less inclined to perform template-dependent additions.
The equivalent regions in Polß and Polλ would be less likely to interfere with binding of the template strand because they have a much shorter Loop 1: small enough in Polß to be described as a turn and of intermediate length in Polλ (Fig. 6B). Consistent with this idea, when Loop 1 in Polµ is shortened to a length similar to that of Polλ, the altered polymerase has higher catalytic efficiency on template-containing substrates, but is incapable of template-independent synthesis [29, 80]. Consistent with all this, Polλ has a strongly reduced ability to catalyze template-independent synthesis, but retains the ability to perform template-instructed additions. Polλ Loop 1 may be involved in a function somehow related to that in Polµ: modulation of fidelity by controlling dNTP-induced movements of the template strand and 3’-primer terminus in the transition from an inactive to an active conformation of the enzyme [91]. In fact, dNTP binding induces Polλ to transition from an inactive to an active conformation: ß-strands 3 and 4 partially unravel to form Loop 1, a nine-residue loop that repositions as the DNA template strand assumes its active conformation (Fig. 6B). Such a "fidelity checkpoint" would then be related to the energetic penalty of changing the structure of these ß-strands, that would only be overcome in the case of the formation of a correct match.
The role of Loop 1 during terminal transferase additions has been now established, but a more in depth study of how Polµ fixes and/or orients this mobile part of the protein in accordance with the substrate on which it is polymerizing is necessary. In the case of TdT, residue Phe401 (corresponding to Phe385 in Polµ), is involved in maintaining the fixed position of Loop 1
8. A single arginine in Polμ limits terminal transferase to favor fidelity during NHEJ
Having now a general idea of how these two polymerases, Polµ and TdT, are specially designed to perform this untemplated additions of nucleotide units, another question still remains: why and how the terminal transferase activity of TdT is much higher than that of Polµ? Combined structural and functional evidences for both Polµ and TdT indicate that there is one residue modulating the terminal transferase activity of both enzymes. That residue (Arg387 in Polµ and Lys403 in TdT) tunes the catalytic efficiency of the terminal transferase reaction, by regulating the rate-limiting step. Judging by the structural data available, this residue could be establishing dual and alternative interactions during the catalytic cycle of both Polµ and TdT: when the primer is bound at the unproductive position (TdT crystal 1KDH), the residue is interacting with the primer strand, while in the Polµ crystal in which the primer strand is correctly positioned in a productive complex (2IHM), the arginine is interacting with the -3 position of the template strand (Fig. 8B). In the case of Polµ, and assuming an alternative interaction as that seen in TdT, Arg387 acts as a brake for the necessary movement of the primer, to limit nucleotide additions before end bridging. In fact, the single change of this residue for the TdT counterpart (Polµ mutant R387K) showed an increase in untemplated additions that ranged from 10- to 100-fold, reaching levels comparable to those of TdT itself [93]. Interestingly, mutant R387K produced a very specific blockage at position +4 when continuous terminal transferase extension of a blunt end was tested [93]. This situation is such that, in a 3-protrusion of 4 nt, the second proposed protein-DNA interaction for this residue cannot occur, since the -3 position of the template strand is not available. In these substrates (ssDNA, 3’ protrusions longer than 3 nt), this residue must be adopting a new partner for this second interaction, most surely a portion of the protein that is now located in place of the template strand: Loop 1. TdT Loop 1 contains a histidine (His400) that completely superimposes with the -3 position of the template strand, and this histidine is surely acting as a partner for Lys403 when it is not interacting with the primer (catalytically active configuration; Fig. 8A. left panel). In agreement with this, our results measuring TdT activity on substrates ranging from blunt to 11 nt 3’-protruding indicate that polymerization was inhibited when the protrusion was shorter than 3 nt (these substrates would not allow correct positioning of Loop 1 and His400). A similar protein-protein interaction between Arg387 and Loop 1 is surely occurring in Polµ when the -3 position of the template is not available (Fig. 8B, right panel), and it is distorted when the arginine is mutated to alanine, as indicated by the completely defective terminal transferase activity of mutant R387A [92].
Interestingly, the equivalent residue in human Polλ (Lys472) is also involved in regulating the catalytic cycle by means of inhibitory interactions with the primer strand [91]. Recent results suggest that Lys472 may help to modulate template-dependent synthesis. In the wild type Polλ binary complex (1XSL), Lys472 is within H-bonding distance of the 3’-O of the primer terminal nucleotide. Such hydrogen bond between Lys472 and the primer terminus that could stabilize the inactive conformation must be disrupted in order for the 3’-O to assume its catalytically competent position. A weakened interaction between Lys472 and the primer terminus would allow the 3’-O to more easily adopt a conformation that would support catalysis with an incorrect nucleotide bound, reducing the discrimination between correct and incorrect incorporation [94].
Thus, Arg387 plays a key role in modulating template-independent synthesis by Polµ, having a dual role: it allows terminal transferase additions to occur, but also acts as a brake that limits these additions. Substituting the homologous lysine in TdT with arginine or alanine [90] also results in loss of template-independent activity, although the properties of the two TdT mutants are not identical. In the case of TdT, residue Lys403 likely establishes a weaker interaction with the primer compared to its orthologue Arg387 in Polµ. Thus, TdT has been optimized to efficiently overcome the rate-limiting step of the terminal transferase, to exclusively perform creative synthesis.
What is the reason for this limited terminal transferase activity in Polµ? Our results indicate that when a templating base is provided
Is this the physiological role of the terminal transferase activity of Polµ? NHEJ of short incompatible ends can be accurate in many cases, but imprecise in others depending on both the length and sequence of each protrusion. For the latter cases, when a templating base is not in a proper register, untemplated terminal transferase addition in a NHEJ context provides a valid, although mutagenic, solution that would be conceptually similar to translesion DNA synthesis. Besides, it cannot be ruled out that Polµ’s terminal transferase can extend a single short 3’-protrusion to facilitate end joining of this fraction of non-complementary ends. There is also
9. From Polμ to TdT: A new variability–generation mechanism for our immune system
Polµ and TdT are the most closely related of the four members of the human X family, with a 42% identity at the level of the aminoacid sequence. Although the branch of the phylogenetic tree of the X family that contains these two enzymes appeared much sooner than that of Polß, the strict template-independent activity of TdT appears to be a recent evolutionary event that coincides with the development of V(D)J recombination in mammals (Fig. 9). TdT shares the common Polß-like core with 8 kDa, fingers, palm and thumb and also possess the C-terminal BRCT domain that allows recruitment by the Ku proteins to the site of the break. But there are some differences: even though TdT still conserves a positively charged pocket to bind a downstream 5’-P, it contains the lowest amount of positive charges of all the members of the family, and, equal to what happens in Polµ, it has lost the residues essential for the dRP-lyase activity. This first modification, together with the tightly regulated expression of TdT confined to primary lymphoid tissues including thymus and bone marrow [96-98], already indicates that TdT, even though devoted to work at DSBs, is not able to deal with damaged nucleotides and the break points must be “clean”, as they are in the case of programmed breaks such as those occurring during the development of the immune response. TdT has been in fact engineered through evolution to “misbehave” and break almost every rule that can apply to a conventional DNA polymerase: it incorporates nucleotides in a template independent manner, using only single stranded DNA [99, 100] or dsDNA with a 3’-overhang longer than four nucleotides [86]. This strict preference for the DNA substrate is dictated by its long Loop 1, of about the same length as the one present in Polµ, but immobilized by several interactions not present in Polµ, such as the ones established between Loop 1 and the small thumb loop [92]. The position of Loop 1 in the crystal structure completely over-imposes with the template strand from the Polµ ternary complex, thus explaining why the length of the single stranded primer needs to be of at least 4 nucleotides for an efficient reaction to take place. This protein piece helps locate the nucleotide in place, and probably is to be blamed for the different order of substrate binding displayed by TdT in contrast with other polymerases: efficient polymerization for a template-dependent polymerase would be optimal through the strictly ordered binding of DNA substrate prior to dNTP, as the converse order of dNTP binding prior to DNA would be error-prone, being correct only once out of four times. Indeed, numerous steady-state and pre-steady state studies have validated that all template-dependent polymerases obey this mechanism [101]. The order by which TdT binds DNA and dNTP is indeed random as determined through a series of initial velocity studies [102]: TdT forms the catalytic competent ternary complex
Despite all the similarities between Polµ and TdT, such as the loss of the dRP-lyase activity, the ability to incorporate ribonucleotides and the presence of Loop 1, Polµ has remained preferentially a template-directed polymerase. In the first place, being a more ancient product of evolution than TdT means that its function had to be a more general one: Polµ is devoted mainly to its DNA repair function in the NHEJ pathway. The differential expression patterns of TdT and Polµ also speak in favor of this hypothesis: even though Polµ is strongly expressed in lymphoid tissues in humans, in contrast to TdT, a basal expression of Polµ is observed in a wide range of tissues, more specifically in the brain [7], that suffers from a high level of oxidative damage. Also, the structural features of Polµ support its role as a template-directed NHEJ polymerase: a flexible Loop 1, held but not constrained by several other modules in the protein (the thumb loop, the arginine helix), helps to stabilize gaps in the template strand without blocking the use of the templating base. Also, a specific arginine residue (Arg387), present only in Polµ, acts as a “brake” during the terminal transferase catalytic cycle [93], limiting the number of untemplated additions and keeping the polymerase in a “stand-by” mode for a longer time, awaiting the arrival of the templating base.
Taking advantage of the Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde duality of Polµ as a template-directed and also template-free polymerase, its appearance in the phylogenetic tree of the X family probably was the starter’s pistol shot to the process of generating variability during development of the adaptive immune system response, without losing a DNA repair function. In fact, it has been demonstrated that Polµ still participates in the DJH rearrangements in mice embryos, where TdT is still not expressed [86]. Based on its DNA-dependent polymerization ability, which TdT lacks, Polµ also fills-in small sequence gaps at the coding ends and contributes to the ligation of highly processed ends, frequently found in the embryo, by pairing two internal microhomology sites. Also, Polµ is involved in V(D)J recombination at immunoglobulin k light-chain loci, after synthesis of the N-regions [85]. The lack of Polµ leads to alterations that induce a profound defect in the peripheral B cell compartment which results in an average 40% reduction in the splenic B cell fraction in Polµ knock-out mice. Polµ appears, therefore, as a key element contributing to the relative homogeneity in size of light chain CDR3 and taking part in Ig gene rearrangement at a stage where TdT is not expressed [85]. Polµ has also been shown to be up regulated in germinal centers after immunization, and although it is not a critical partner, Polµ modulates the
10. From Polλ to Polß: Losing the BRCT and evolving base excision repair
The similarity between yeast Pol4 and Polλ, which share the same additional domains (Fig. 2), together with the extraordinary evolutionary conservation of the versions of Polλ present in various higher eukaryotes and in plants (
Members of the human X family of DNA polymerases have specialized in different processes of DNA synthesis associated with repair. Such processes are basically three: 1) base excision repair (BER), carried out mainly by Polß, although Polλ seems to have a role in specific situations; 2) non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), in which, according to the type of substrate generated, Polλ or Polµ could be involved; 3) V(D)J recombination, involving Polλ, Polµ and TdT, with different roles. Subtle differences in the biochemical properties of X family members seem to be crucial for performing one role and not other. Therefore, the members of this family have diversified to be able to carry out non-redundant tasks, achieving a high degree of specialization that has resulted in a high degree of efficiency of each polymerase on its specific function.
Polλ, as the member of the family more closely related to the common ancestor, bears many of the specific modifications needed to perform a high number of functions: it has a BRCT domain needed for interactions with the NHEJ components, and it harbors an 8 kDa domain that acts both as the main DNA binding domain through the 5’-P pocket and as the container of the dRP-lyase activity needed for an efficient performance during BER. Moreover, it contains a long
As a younger member of the family, Polß is the polymerase that has lost the majority of these features, to be focused on enhancing the efficiency of just one reaction: the filling-in of short gaps during BER. For that, it has strengthened the interactions with the DNA substrate through the 5’-P binding pocket, being the most positively charged in this region of the four human enzymes, and it has maintained the dRP-lyase activity and gained an AP-lyase activity, precious for its dedicated job as a BER polymerase. It also maintains a long
11. In vivo deficiency models for the X family polymerases: Non–redundant roles in DNA repair and immune system development
The biochemical characteristics of the four members of the X family of polymerases provide strong hints as to what physiological roles they might be performing. To obtain direct evidence of their
Initially, two deficiency models were generated for Pol β. The first one eliminated the enzyme from T cells but no differences could be observed between Pol β -deficient and wild-type animals [120]. In the second case, a complete knock-out was generated but the homozygous embryos were unviable due to apoptosis of post-mitotic neurons, as a consequence of defective DNA SSB repair [117].
In the case of Pol λ, again two mouse models were reported at the same time. One of them showed a very dramatic phenotype of male infertility due to cilia immobility [130], which was later attributed to disruption of a neighboring gene rather than to deletion of Pol λ itself [131]. The second deficiency model was tested initially for somatic hypermutation and this process was not affected [132], but it was later shown that Pol λ -/- mice lack diversity in their antibody pools, specifically regarding the N-additions at the junctions in the heavy chain of the TCR receptors [95]. The data indicate that Pol λ might act before TdT during heavy chain rearrangement, suggesting a non-redundant role for Pol λ during V(D)J recombination. Using fibroblasts from the Pol λ -/- mice it was shown that this polymerase has a role in the BER pathway to protect cells from oxidative damage [133], and that it can act as a back-up in the absence of Pol β [134]. Moreover, Pol λ is responsible for the majority of the error-free gap-filling in the presence of the 8oxoG lesion in DNA [135].
In 1993 two independent groups published two deficiency mouse models for TdT, reaching very similar conclusions: the TCR receptors of B- and T-lymphocytes had fewer or none N-additions and thus the antibody repertoire was less diverse, maintaining the fetal phenotype in the adult animal [136, 137]. Furthermore, in the absence of TdT, homology-directed repair was detected during V(D)J recombination. Later it was shown that TdT is responsible for 90% of the diversity of the α β TCR receptor repertoire [138].
Mice deficient for Polµ have been also studied, and they are viable and fertile [132]. These mice are defective in immunoglobulin light chain rearrangements and thus development of the bone marrow and B cell differentiation are compromised [85]. A different mouse model was reported with a normal immune response but impaired centroblast development, due to defects in somatic hypermutation and V(D)J recombination [105]. These mice are hypersensitive to γ-irradiation due to a defective DSB repair also in non-hematopoietic tissues [139]. Studies of the embryonic stage, when TdT is still not expressed, indicated that Polµ is responsible for the observed N-additions at the post-gastrulation DJH joints during immunoglobulin gene rearrangements [86]. These results support the roles of Polµ during hematopoietic development and the processes of somatic hypermutation and class-switch recombination, during the generation of extra diversity in the immune system and, finally, its contribution to genomic stability through repair of DSBs
12. A case of convergent evolution: Comparison of the characteristics shared by bacterial and eukaryotic NHEJ polymerases
Conventional replicative and lesion bypass DNA polymerases extend off dsDNA substrates, containing both primer and template strands, in a 5’ to 3’ direction. In contrast, polymerases involved in DSB repair must be capable of binding and extending off non-canonical DNA substrates, including 3’ over-hanging termini lacking continuous primer and template strands. Recent studies on the bacterial NHEJ polymerases have revealed some of the unusual activities associated with these repair enzymes that enable DNA extension under the most extreme conditions. For example, a homodimeric arrangement of the mycobacterial NHEJ polymerases can facilitate the association of two incompatible 3’-protruding DNA ends,
Another example of the common characteristics of the prokaryotic and eukaryotic NHEJ polymerases is the presence of a binding pocket for the 5’-P group of the downstream piece of DNA (Fig. 11B). This pocket, which contains residues Lys16 and Lys26, is missing in AEPs from
Although recent studies have provided unique insights into polymerase-mediated orchestration of break synapsis, the order of substrate binding events and mechanism by which these NHEJ polymerases catalyze end-extension is still poorly understood. To address this question, in collaboration with Prof. Doherty (GDSC, University of Sussex), we elucidated the functional meaning of a novel crystal structure of a pre-ternary intermediate of
Is the pre-ternary complex physiologically relevant for prokaryotic NHEJ polymerase extension reactions? Although the pre-ternary complex lacks an incoming primer strand, which provides the attacking nucleophile (3’-OH), a comparison of the positioning of the nucleotide base, phosphate tail, active site ligands and divalent metal ions to those in the active site of a polymerase ternary complex (Polλ) provides compelling evidence that the PolDom pre-ternary complex is catalytically competent (Fig. 11A). The possibility of preforming a pre-ternary complex in solution by incubating the necessary components (PolDom, DNA end, complementary nucleotide and activating metal ions) in the absence of a primer, allowed us to demonstrate its physiological relevance in accelerating NHEJ reactions, probably by providing a “ready to use” primer binding site. By testing the activity of the pre-ternary PolDom complex with different ssDNA primers, we concluded that the minimal primer utilizable by these enzymes is a dinucleotide, as PolDom was not proficient at polymerizing off a single nucleotide “primer”. This fact indicates that, although PolDom is evolutionarily related to replicative AEPs, its physiological activity as a primase has effectively been lost and, instead, these polymerases have evolved to have a more restricted capacity to bind short incoming DNA termini, enabling them to perform more specialized roles in NHEJ break repair processes. The innate ability of AEPs to accept short primers may have influenced evolutionary selection of these enzymes by prokaryotes to become the NHEJ polymerase. Indeed, many bacteria encode additional AEP orthologues whose physiological roles have yet to be determined. Is pre-ternary complex formation also relevant for eukaryotic NHEJ polymerases? It has been demonstrated that human Polµ can catalyze NHEJ extensions on very short and non-complementary DNA ends [29, 144], a reaction that can take advantage of a limited terminal transferase activity [93], and that can occur with both dNTPs and NTPs [145]. It is likely that formation of a Polµ pre-ternary complex, triggered by the strong recognition of a 5´-recessive phosphate and a reinforced avidity for the incoming nucleotide (both properties also intrinsic to Polµ), would be beneficial to carry out non-complementary NHEJ of minimally processed ends in eukaryotes, although this remains to be proven.
From a mechanistic point of view, our study of PolDom identified a conserved loop (loop 2), which plays a prominent role in the activation of the catalytic center. The conformation of loop 2 changes significantly, upon the templated-binding of the correct incoming nucleotide, which induces the rotation of Arg220 side-chain (~180°) away from the active site in the pre-ternary complex. Mutation of this invariant residue abolished the extension activity but, significantly, did not alter enzyme binding to other DNA substrates, such as gapped DNA. A comparison of the structures of the PolDom-DNA binary
This phenylalanine-mediated (Phe64) stacking interaction with the templating base in the pre-ternary complex also promotes the movement of the incoming nucleotide (UTP) into the active site and, together with the loss of specific contacts (e.g. Arg246, Lys175, Lys52) promotes the correct repositioning of the α-phosphate group of the incoming nucleotide for catalysis. This re-oriented α-phosphate moiety, together with Asp139, forms a second metal binding site (A) not present in the binary structure, which is required for the two metal catalytic mechanism common to all DNA polymerases [147]. The binding of the second metal, in turn, promotes breakage of the salt bridge between Arg220 and Asp139, repositioning this aspartate into a catalytically favorable alignment with the other catalytic aspartates, the α-phosphate group and the two bound metal ions, to form an activated pre-ternary intermediate awaiting the arrival of the nucleophile (3’-OH of the primer strand). The catalytic incompetence of the R220A mutant highlights the importance of the interaction of Arg220 with Asp139. We propose that the maintenance of this amino acid pairing provides a significant barrier to catalysis until the enzyme becomes optimally bound to DNA, metals, and the correct incoming templated nucleotide. Once these are bound within the active site, a sequence of structural rearrangements promotes the binding of a second metal ion (A). The affinity of Asp139 for this second metal promotes the loss of interaction with Arg220, leading to expulsion of loop 2 from the active site, which results in full activation of the catalytic center. The movement of loop 2 away from the active site, most likely, promotes this activation step in two ways. The first consequence is that breaking the salt bridge is irreversible, leading to the release of the acidic side-chain of Asp139, which is involved in the binding of the second metal (A) within the active site, ensuring that it is optimally poised for catalysis. The second notable consequence, induced by the reorientation of loop 2, is a significant change in the ridge that surrounds the active site, which most likely allows the 3’-OH group of the incoming primer strand to bind in the active site and form the complete ternary complex. Further steps of catalysis, PPi release, and ligation would lead to the conclusion of the NHEJ process. A scheme of the different complexes formed during the whole NHEJ cycle is depicted in figure 12. It is remarkable how, despite the different origins of PolDom and Polß, a similar mechanism of prevention of catalysis exists in both of them: an arginine residue contacts one of the catalytic aspartates, keeping it in an unproductive conformation that does not allow catalysis until binding of the nucleotide.
We have intensively studied the loops and flexible elements in Polµ, and examined the structure and the mutagenesis studies we have performed on PolDom, reaching the conclusion that both enzymes rely on those movable pieces to perform their most specific activities. As an even more striking example of convergent evolution, PolDom possesses a prominent surface ß-hairpin structure, loop 1, which is specific to NHEJ AEPs. Conserved residues in loop 1 interact with the 3’ protrusion of NHEJ substrates and orient the synapsis of the ends [140]. Mutation of the apical residues of loop 1 to alanine did not affect binding to a primer-containing (gap) substrate, but abolished the ability of PolDom to form a synaptic complex [140] and, consequently, to catalyze trans-directed additions. Loop 1 in Polµ is also specific for binding and activity on NHEJ substrates [80, 92], through its function in the stabilization of the synapsis of two DNA ends.
13. Conclusion
In recent years, structural genomics has given rise to a vast array of knowledge, which nonetheless needs to be interpreted correctly as a range of still snapshots of a movie that, if seen, would show the highly complex and ever-moving machines that polymerases are. Helped by the biochemistry, and placed in context by the
Acknowledgments
We thank Dr. Miguel Garcia-Diaz for very interesting and insightful conversations, Dr. Antonio Bernad for providing us with up-to-date information regarding the mouse deficiency-models, Dr. Thomas Kunkel, Dr. Katharyzna Bebenek and Dr. Dale Ramsden for ten very pleasant years of parallel and coordinated research, and all the members of the Blanco lab for their dedicated work.
References
- 1.
andBebenek K T. A Kunkel Functions of DNA polymerases. Adv Protein Chem,2004 137 165 - 2.
Burgers P. M et al Eukaryotic DNA polymerases: proposal for a revised nomenclature. J Biol Chem,2001 43487 43490 - 3.
Hubscher U andG Maga S Spadari Eukaryotic DNA polymerases. Annu Rev Biochem,2002 133 163 - 4.
Pavlov Y. I andP. V Shcherbakova I. B Rogozin Roles of DNA polymerases in replication, repair, and recombination in eukaryotes. Int Rev Cytol,2006 41 132 - 5.
Ohmori H et al The Y-family of DNA polymerases. Mol Cell,2001 7 8 - 6.
Garcia-diaz M et al DNA polymerase lambda (Pol lambda), a novel eukaryotic DNA polymerase with a potential role in meiosis. J Mol Biol,2000 851 867 - 7.
Dominguez O et al DNA polymerase mu (Pol mu), homologous to TdT, could act as a DNA mutator in eukaryotic cells. EMBO J,2000 1731 1742 - 8.
Oliveros M et al Characterization of an African swine fever virus 20-kDa DNA polymerase involved in DNA repair. J Biol Chem,1997 30899 30910 - 9.
Takeuchi R et al Drosophila DNA polymerase zeta interacts with recombination repair protein 1, the Drosophila homologue of human abasic endonuclease 1. J Biol Chem,2006 11577 11585 - 10.
Uchiyama Y et al Distribution and roles of X-family DNA polymerases in eukaryotes. Biochimie,2009 165 170 - 11.
Demogines A et al Ancient and recent adaptive evolution of primate non-homologous end joining genes. PLoS Genet,2010 e1001169 - 12.
Kelley J. L et al Targeted resequencing of two genes, RAGE and POLL, confirms findings from a genome-wide scan for adaptive evolution and provides evidence for positive selection in additional populations. Hum Mol Genet,2009 779 784 - 13.
andSawyer S. L H. S Malik Positive selection of yeast nonhomologous end-joining genes and a retrotransposon conflict hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2006 17614 17619 - 14.
Bruton R. K et al C-terminal-binding protein interacting protein binds directly to adenovirus early region 1A through its N-terminal region and conserved region 3. Oncogene,2007 7467 7479 - 15.
andEvans J. D P Hearing Relocalization of the Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 complex by the adenovirus E4 ORF3 protein is required for viral replication. J Virol,2005 6207 6215 - 16.
Jayaram S et al E1B 55k-independent dissociation of the DNA ligase IV/XRCC4 complex by E4 34k during adenovirus infection. Virology,2008 163 170 - 17.
Kilzer J. M et al Roles of host cell factors in circularization of retroviral dna. Virology,2003 460 467 - 18.
Li L et al Role of the non-homologous DNA end joining pathway in the early steps of retroviral infection. EMBO J,2001 3272 3281 - 19.
andLin C. W A Engelman The barrier-to-autointegration factor is a component of functional human immunodeficiency virus type 1 preintegration complexes. J Virol,2003 5030 5036 - 20.
Stracker T. H andC. T Carson M. D Weitzman Adenovirus oncoproteins inactivate the Mre11-Rad50-NBS1 DNA repair complex. Nature,2002 348 352 - 21.
Weitzman M. D et al Interactions of viruses with the cellular DNA repair machinery. DNA Repair (Amst),2004 1165 1173 - 22.
Pitcher R. S et al Structure and function of a mycobacterial NHEJ DNA repair polymerase. J Mol Biol,2007 391 405 - 23.
Garcia-escudero R et al DNA polymerase X of African swine fever virus: insertion fidelity on gapped DNA substrates and AP lyase activity support a role in base excision repair of viral DNA. J Mol Biol,2003 1403 1412 - 24.
Taladriz S et al Nuclear DNA polymerase beta from Leishmania infantum. Cloning, molecular analysis and developmental regulation. Nucleic Acids Res,2001 3822 3834 - 25.
Bebenek K et al Biochemical properties of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA polymerase IV. J Biol Chem,2005 20051 20058 - 26.
Gonzalez-barrera S et al Characterization of SpPol4, a unique X-family DNA polymerase in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nucleic Acids Res,2005 4762 4774 - 27.
andTseng H. M A. E Tomkinson A physical and functional interaction between yeast Pol4 and Dnl4-Lif1 links DNA synthesis and ligation in nonhomologous end joining. J Biol Chem,2002 45630 45637 - 28.
andTseng H. M A. E Tomkinson Processing and joining of DNA ends coordinated by interactions among Dnl4/Lif1, Pol4, and FEN-1. J Biol Chem,2004 47580 47588 - 29.
Nick McElhinny S.A., et al.,A gradient of template dependence defines distinct biological roles for family X polymerases in nonhomologous end joining. Mol Cell,2005 357 366 - 30.
Lee J. W et al Implication of DNA polymerase lambda in alignment-based gap filling for nonhomologous DNA end joining in human nuclear extracts. J Biol Chem,2004 805 811 - 31.
Manke I. A et al BRCT repeats as phosphopeptide-binding modules involved in protein targeting. Science,2003 636 639 - 32.
Yu X et al The BRCT domain is a phospho-protein binding domain. Science,2003 639 642 - 33.
Derose E. F et al Solution structure of polymerase mu’s BRCT Domain reveals an element essential for its role in nonhomologous end joining. Biochemistry,2007 12100 12110 - 34.
Martin M. J andR Juarez L Blanco DNA-binding determinants promoting NHEJ by human Polmu. Nucleic Acids Res,2012 11389 11403 - 35.
Matsumoto T et al BRCT domain of DNA polymerase mu has DNA-binding activity and promotes the DNA polymerization activity. Genes Cells,2012 790 806 - 36.
Mueller G. A et al A comparison of BRCT domains involved in nonhomologous end-joining: introducing the solution structure of the BRCT domain of polymerase lambda. DNA Repair (Amst),2008 1340 1351 - 37.
andFan W X Wu DNA polymerase lambda can elongate on DNA substrates mimicking non-homologous end joining and interact with XRCC4-ligase IV complex. Biochem Biophys Res Commun,2004 1328 1333 - 38.
Prasad R andW. A Beard S. H Wilson Studies of gapped DNA substrate binding by mammalian DNA polymerase beta. Dependence on 5’-phosphate group. J Biol Chem,1994 18096 18101 - 39.
Pelletier H et al Crystal structures of human DNA polymerase beta complexed with DNA: implications for catalytic mechanism, processivity, and fidelity. Biochemistry,1996 12742 12761 - 40.
Moon A. F et al Structural insight into the substrate specificity of DNA Polymerase mu. Nat Struct Mol Biol,2007 45 53 - 41.
Garcia-diaz M et al Identification of an intrinsic 5’-deoxyribose-5-phosphate lyase activity in human DNA polymerase lambda: a possible role in base excision repair. J Biol Chem,2001 34659 34663 - 42.
Prasad R et al Human DNA polymerase beta deoxyribose phosphate lyase. Substrate specificity and catalytic mechanism. J Biol Chem,1998 15263 15270 - 43.
Garcia-diaz M et al A structural solution for the DNA polymerase lambda-dependent repair of DNA gaps with minimal homology. Mol Cell,2004 561 572 - 44.
andSinghal R. K S. H Wilson Short gap-filling synthesis by DNA polymerase beta is processive. J Biol Chem,1993 15906 15911 - 45.
Garcia-diaz M et al DNA polymerase lambda, a novel DNA repair enzyme in human cells. J Biol Chem,2002 13184 13191 - 46.
Doherty A. J andL. C Serpell C. P Ponting The helix-hairpin-helix DNA-binding motif: a structural basis for non-sequence-specific recognition of DNA. Nucleic Acids Res,1996 2488 2497 - 47.
andMullen G. P S. H Wilson DNA polymerase beta in abasic site repair: a structurally conserved helix-hairpin-helix motif in lesion detection by base excision repair enzymes. Biochemistry,1997 4713 4717 - 48.
Sobol R. W et al The lyase activity of the DNA repair protein beta-polymerase protects from DNA-damage-induced cytotoxicity. Nature,2000 807 810 - 49.
andBeard W. A S. H Wilson Structure and mechanism of DNA polymerase Beta. Chem Rev,2006 361 382 - 50.
Garcia-diaz M et al Structure-function studies of DNA polymerase lambda. DNA Repair (Amst),2005 1358 1367 - 51.
Prasad R et al Structural insight into the DNA polymerase beta deoxyribose phosphate lyase mechanism. DNA Repair (Amst),2005 1347 1357 - 52.
Ruiz J. F et al DNA polymerase mu, a candidate hypermutase? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci,2001 99 109 - 53.
Ruiz J. F et al Overexpression of human DNA polymerase mu (Pol mu) in a Burkitt’s lymphoma cell line affects the somatic hypermutation rate. Nucleic Acids Res,2004 5861 5873 - 54.
Zhang Y et al Highly frequent frameshift DNA synthesis by human DNA polymerase mu. Mol Cell Biol,2001 7995 8006 - 55.
Nick McElhinny S.A. and D.A. Ramsden,Polymerase mu is a DNA-directed DNA/RNA polymerase. Mol Cell Biol,2003 2309 2315 - 56.
Ruiz J. F et al Lack of sugar discrimination by human Pol mu requires a single glycine residue. Nucleic Acids Res,2003 4441 4449 - 57.
Lieber M. R et al The mechanism of vertebrate nonhomologous DNA end joining and its role in V(D)J recombination. DNA Repair (Amst),2004 817 826 - 58.
Ferguson D. O et al The nonhomologous end-joining pathway of DNA repair is required for genomic stability and the suppression of translocations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2000 6630 6633 - 59.
Heidenreich E et al Non-homologous end joining as an important mutagenic process in cell cycle-arrested cells. EMBO J,2003 2274 2283 - 60.
Walker J. R andR. A Corpina J Goldberg Structure of the Ku heterodimer bound to DNA and its implications for double-strand break repair. Nature,2001 607 614 - 61.
Dvir A et al Ku autoantigen is the regulatory component of a template-associated protein kinase that phosphorylates RNA polymerase II. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,1992 11920 11924 - 62.
andGottlieb T. M S. P Jackson The DNA-dependent protein kinase: requirement for DNA ends and association with Ku antigen. Cell,1993 131 142 - 63.
andDynan W. S S Yoo Interaction of Ku protein and DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit with nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res,1998 1551 1559 - 64.
Chen L et al Interactions of the DNA ligase IV-XRCC4 complex with DNA ends and the DNA-dependent protein kinase. J Biol Chem,2000 26196 26205 - 65.
Defazio L. G et al Synapsis of DNA ends by DNA-dependent protein kinase. EMBO J,2002 3192 3200 - 66.
Yaneva M andT Kowalewski M. R Lieber Interaction of DNA-dependent protein kinase with DNA and with Ku: biochemical and atomic-force microscopy studies. EMBO J,1997 5098 5112 - 67.
Kramer K. M et al Two different types of double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae are repaired by similar RAD52-independent, nonhomologous recombination events. Mol Cell Biol,1994 1293 1301 - 68.
andMoore J. K J. E Haber Cell cycle and genetic requirements of two pathways of nonhomologous end-joining repair of double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol,1996 2164 2173 - 69.
andRoth D. B J. H Wilson Nonhomologous recombination in mammalian cells: role for short sequence homologies in the joining reaction. Mol Cell Biol,1986 4295 4304 - 70.
andWilson T. E M. R Lieber Efficient processing of DNA ends during yeast nonhomologous end joining. Evidence for a DNA polymerase beta (Pol4)-dependent pathway. J Biol Chem,1999 23599 23609 - 71.
Ma Y et al Hairpin opening and overhang processing by an Artemis/DNA-dependent protein kinase complex in nonhomologous end joining and V(D)J recombination. Cell,2002 781 794 - 72.
andHefferin M. L A. E Tomkinson Mechanism of DNA double-strand break repair by non-homologous end joining. DNA Repair (Amst),2005 639 648 - 73.
Karimi-busheri F et al Molecular characterization of a human DNA kinase. J Biol Chem,1999 24187 24194 - 74.
Chappell C et al Involvement of human polynucleotide kinase in double-strand break repair by non-homologous end joining. EMBO J,2002 2827 2832 - 75.
Grawunder U et al Activity of DNA ligase IV stimulated by complex formation with XRCC4 protein in mammalian cells. Nature,1997 492 495 - 76.
Schar P et al A newly identified DNA ligase of Saccharomyces cerevisiae involved in RAD52-independent repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Genes Dev,1997 1912 1924 - 77.
andTeo S. H S. P Jackson Identification of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA ligase IV: involvement in DNA double-strand break repair. EMBO J,1997 4788 4795 - 78.
Wilson T. E andU Grawunder M. R Lieber Yeast DNA ligase IV mediates non-homologous DNA end joining. Nature,1997 495 498 - 79.
Ramsden D. A Polymerases in nonhomologous end joining: building a bridge over broken chromosomes. Antioxid Redox Signal,2011 2509 2519 - 80.
Juarez R et al A specific loop in human DNA polymerase mu allows switching between creative and DNA-instructed synthesis. Nucleic Acids Res,2006 4572 4582 - 81.
Ma Y et al A biochemically defined system for mammalian nonhomologous DNA end joining. Mol Cell,2004 701 713 - 82.
Ahnesorg P andP Smith S. P Jackson XLF interacts with the XRCC4-DNA ligase IV complex to promote DNA nonhomologous end-joining. Cell,2006 301 313 - 83.
Hentges P et al Evolutionary and functional conservation of the DNA non-homologous end-joining protein, XLF/Cernunnos. J Biol Chem,2006 37517 37526 - 84.
Papavasiliou F et al V(D)J recombination in mature B cells: a mechanism for altering antibody responses. Science,1997 298 301 - 85.
Bertocci B et al Immunoglobulin kappa light chain gene rearrangement is impaired in mice deficient for DNA polymerase mu. Immunity,2003 203 211 - 86.
Gozalbo-lopez B et al A role for DNA polymerase mu in the emerging DJH rearrangements of the postgastrulation mouse embryo. Mol Cell Biol,2009 1266 1275 - 87.
Bentolila L. A et al The two isoforms of mouse terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase differ in both the ability to add N regions and subcellular localization. EMBO J,1995 4221 4229 - 88.
Bentolila L. A et al Extensive junctional diversity in Ig light chain genes from early B cell progenitors of mu MT mice. J Immunol,1999 2123 2128 - 89.
Delarue M et al Crystal structures of a template-independent DNA polymerase: murine terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase. EMBO J,2002 427 439 - 90.
Romain F et al Conferring a template-dependent polymerase activity to terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase by mutations in the Loop1 region. Nucleic Acids Res,2009 4642 4656 - 91.
Bebenek K et al Loop 1 modulates the fidelity of DNA polymerase lambda. Nucleic Acids Res,2010 5419 5431 - 92.
Martin M. J Exclusive Polymerases Repairing Double Strand Breaks. The same magics from bacteria to man. ,2011 Universidad Autonoma de Madrid. - 93.
Andrade P et al Limited terminal transferase in human DNA polymerase mu defines the required balance between accuracy and efficiency in NHEJ. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2009 16203 16208 - 94.
Bebenek K et al The frameshift infidelity of human DNA polymerase lambda. Implications for function. J Biol Chem,2003 34685 34690 - 95.
Bertocci B et al Nonoverlapping functions of DNA polymerases mu, lambda, and terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase during immunoglobulin V(D)J recombination in vivo. Immunity,2006 31 41 - 96.
Bollum F. J Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase as a hematopoietic cell marker. Blood,1979 1203 1215 - 97.
Coleman M. S andJ. J Hutton F. J Bollum Terminal riboadenylate transferase in human lymphocytes. Nature,1974 407 409 - 98.
Kunkel T. A et al Rearrangements of DNA mediated by terminal transferase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,1986 1867 1871 - 99.
Bollum F. J Mammalian enzymes of desoxyribonucleic acid synthesis. Ann N Y Acad Sci,1959 792 793 - 100.
Bollum F. J Chemically Defined Templates and Initiators for Deoxypolynucleotide Synthesis. Science,1964 560 - 101.
andBenkovic S. J C. E Cameron Kinetic analysis of nucleotide incorporation and misincorporation by Klenow fragment of Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I. Methods Enzymol,1995 257 269 - 102.
Coleman,Deibel M. R Jr andM. S Biochemical properties of purified human terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase. J Biol Chem,1980 4206 4212 - 103.
Brissett N. C et al Structure of a preternary complex involving a prokaryotic NHEJ DNA polymerase. Mol Cell,2011 221 231 - 104.
Roychoudhury R Enzymic synthesis of polynucleotides. Oligodeoxynucleotides with one 3’-terminal ribonucleotide as primers for polydeoxynucleotide synthesis. J Biol Chem,1972 3910 3917 - 105.
Lucas D et al Polymerase mu is up-regulated during the T cell-dependent immune response and its deficiency alters developmental dynamics of spleen centroblasts. Eur J Immunol,2005 1601 1611 - 106.
Dianova I. I et al XRCC1-DNA polymerase beta interaction is required for efficient base excision repair. Nucleic Acids Res,2004 2550 2555 - 107.
Gryk M. R et al Mapping of the interaction interface of DNA polymerase beta with XRCC1. Structure,2002 1709 1720 - 108.
Marintchev A et al Domain specific interaction in the XRCC1-DNA polymerase beta complex. Nucleic Acids Res,2000 2049 2059 - 109.
Fortini P et al Different DNA polymerases are involved in the short- and long-patch base excision repair in mammalian cells. Biochemistry,1998 3575 3580 - 110.
Sobol R. W et al Requirement of mammalian DNA polymerase-beta in base-excision repair. Nature,1996 183 186 - 111.
andSobol R. W S. H Wilson Mammalian DNA beta-polymerase in base excision repair of alkylation damage. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol,2001 57 74 - 112.
andKimura S K Sakaguchi DNA repair in plants. Chem Rev,2006 753 766 - 113.
Uchiyama Y andY Suzuki K Sakaguchi Characterization of plant XRCC1 and its interaction with proliferating cell nuclear antigen. Planta,2008 1233 1241 - 114.
Radford S. J et al Heteroduplex DNA in meiotic recombination in Drosophila mei-9 mutants. Genetics,2007 63 72 - 115.
Alseth I et al Biochemical characterization and DNA repair pathway interactions of Mag1-mediated base excision repair in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nucleic Acids Res,2005 1123 1131 - 116.
Hirose F et al Difference in the expression level of DNA polymerase beta among mouse tissues: high expression in the pachytene spermatocyte. Exp Cell Res,1989 169 180 - 117.
Sugo N et al Neonatal lethality with abnormal neurogenesis in mice deficient in DNA polymerase beta. EMBO J,2000 1397 1404 - 118.
andNakamura J J. A Swenberg Endogenous apurinic/apyrimidinic sites in genomic DNA of mammalian tissues. Cancer Res,1999 2522 2526 - 119.
McNeill,Wilson D. M Rd andD. R Base excision repair and the central nervous system. Neuroscience,2007 1187 1200 - 120.
Gu H et al Deletion of a DNA polymerase beta gene segment in T cells using cell type-specific gene targeting. Science,1994 103 106 - 121.
Allinson S. L andDianova I. I G. L Dianov DNA polymerase beta is the major dRP lyase involved in repair of oxidative base lesions in DNA by mammalian cell extracts. EMBO J,2001 6919 6926 - 122.
Sugo N et al p53 deficiency rescues neuronal apoptosis but not differentiation in DNA polymerase beta-deficient mice. Mol Cell Biol,2004 p. 9470-7. - 123.
Cabelof D. C et al Haploinsufficiency in DNA polymerase beta increases cancer risk with age and alters mortality rate. Cancer Res,2006 7460 7465 - 124.
Allen D et al Mutagenesis is elevated in male germ cells obtained from DNA polymerase-beta heterozygous mice. Biol Reprod,2008 824 831 - 125.
Kidane D et al DNA polymerase beta is critical for genomic stability of sperm cells. DNA Repair (Amst),2011 390 397 - 126.
Niimi N et al Decreased mutant frequency in embryonic brain of DNA polymerase beta null mice. Mutagenesis,2006 55 59 - 127.
Senejani A. G et al Y265C DNA polymerase beta knockin mice survive past birth and accumulate base excision repair intermediate substrates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2012 6632 6637 - 128.
Washington S. L et al A genetic system to identify DNA polymerase beta mutator mutants. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,1997 1321 1326 - 129.
Opresko P. L andJ. B Sweasy K. A Eckert The mutator form of polymerase beta with amino acid substitution at tyrosine 265 in the hinge region displays an increase in both base substitution and frame shift errors. Biochemistry,1998 2111 2119 - 130.
Kobayashi Y et al Hydrocephalus, situs inversus, chronic sinusitis, and male infertility in DNA polymerase lambda-deficient mice: possible implication for the pathogenesis of immotile cilia syndrome. Mol Cell Biol,2002 2769 2776 - 131.
Zariwala M et al Investigation of the possible role of a novel gene, DPCD, in primary ciliary dyskinesia. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol,2004 428 434 - 132.
Bertocci B et al Cutting edge: DNA polymerases mu and lambda are dispensable for Ig gene hypermutation. J Immunol,2002 3702 3706 - 133.
Braithwaite E. K et al DNA polymerase lambda protects mouse fibroblasts against oxidative DNA damage and is recruited to sites of DNA damage/repair. J Biol Chem,2005 31641 31647 - 134.
Braithwaite E. K et al DNA polymerase lambda mediates a back-up base excision repair activity in extracts of mouse embryonic fibroblasts. J Biol Chem,2005 18469 18475 - 135.
Maga G et al Replication protein A and proliferating cell nuclear antigen coordinate DNA polymerase selection in 8-oxo-guanine repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,2008 20689 20694 - 136.
Gilfillan S et al Mice lacking TdT: mature animals with an immature lymphocyte repertoire. Science,1993 1175 1178 - 137.
Komori T et al Lack of N regions in antigen receptor variable region genes of TdT-deficient lymphocytes. Science,1993 1171 1175 - 138.
Cabaniols J. P et al Most alpha/beta T cell receptor diversity is due to terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase. J Exp Med,2001 1385 1390 - 139.
Lucas D et al Altered hematopoiesis in mice lacking DNA polymerase mu is due to inefficient double-strand break repair. PLoS Genet,2009 e1000389 - 140.
Brissett N. C et al Structure of a NHEJ polymerase-mediated DNA synaptic complex. Science,2007 456 459 - 141.
andZhu H S Shuman Substrate specificity and structure-function analysis of the 3’-phosphoesterase component of the bacterial NHEJ protein, DNA ligase D. J Biol Chem,2006 13873 13881 - 142.
Della M et al Mycobacterial Ku and ligase proteins constitute a two-component NHEJ repair machine. Science,2004 683 685 - 143.
andYakovleva L S Shuman Nucleotide misincorporation, 3’-mismatch extension, and responses to abasic sites and DNA adducts by the polymerase component of bacterial DNA ligase D. J Biol Chem,2006 25026 25040 - 144.
Davis B. J andJ. M Havener D. A Ramsden End-bridging is required for pol mu to efficiently promote repair of noncomplementary ends by nonhomologous end joining. Nucleic Acids Res,2008 3085 3094 - 145.
Martin M. J et al Ribonucleotides and manganese ions improve non-homologous end joining by human Polmu. Nucleic Acids Res,2012 - 146.
Johnson K. A The kinetic and chemical mechanism of high-fidelity DNA polymerases. Biochim Biophys Acta,2010 1041 1048 - 147.
andBrautigam C. A T. A Steitz Structural and functional insights provided by crystal structures of DNA polymerases and their substrate complexes. Curr Opin Struct Biol,1998 54 63