Strand-specific ChIP-seq at DNA breaks distinguishes ssDNA versus dsDNA binding and refutes single-stranded nucleosomes.

In a first step of DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair by homologous recombination, DNA ends are resected such that single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) overhangs are generated. ssDNA is specifically bound by RPA and other factors, which constitutes a ssDNA-domain on damaged chromatin. The molecular organization of this ssDNA and the adjacent dsDNA domain is crucial during DSB signaling and repair. However, data regarding the presence of nucleosomes, the most basic chromatin components, in the ssDNA domain have been contradictory. Here, we use site-specific induction of DSBs and chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by strand-specific sequencing to analyze in vivo binding of key DSB repair and signaling proteins to either the ssDNA or dsDNA domain. In the case of nucleosomes, we show that recently proposed ssDNA nucleosomes are not a major, persistent species, but that nucleosome eviction and DNA end resection are intrinsically coupled. These results support a model of separated dsDNA-nucleosome and ssDNA-RPA domains during DSB repair.

Quantitative mechanisms of DNA damage sensing and signaling.

DNA damage occurs abundantly during normal cellular proliferation. This necessitates that cellular DNA damage response and checkpoint pathways monitor the cellular DNA damage load and that DNA damage signaling is quantitative. Yet, how DNA lesions are counted and converted into a quantitative response remains poorly understood. We have recently obtained insights into this question investigating DNA damage signaling elicited by single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). Intriguingly, our findings suggest that local and global DNA damage signaling react differentially to increasing amounts of DNA damage. In this mini-review, we will discuss these findings and put them into perspective of current knowledge on the DNA damage response.

Nucleosome Remodeling by Fun30SMARCAD1 in the DNA Damage Response.

Many cellular pathways are dedicated to maintain the integrity of the genome. In eukaryotes, the underlying DNA transactions occur in the context of chromatin. Cells utilize chromatin and its dynamic nature to regulate those genome integrity pathways. Accordingly, chromatin becomes restructured and modified around DNA damage sites. Here, we review the current knowledge of a chromatin remodeler Fun30SMARCAD1, which plays a key role in genome maintenance. Fun30SMARCAD1 promotes DNA end resection and the repair of DNA double-stranded breaks (DSBs). Notably, however, Fun30SMARCAD1 plays additional roles in maintaining heterochromatin and promoting transcription. Overall, Fun30SMARCAD1 is involved in distinct processes and the specific roles of Fun30SMARCAD1 at DSBs, replication forks and sites of transcription appear discordant at first view. Nonetheless, a picture emerges in which commonalities within these context-dependent roles of Fun30SMARCAD1 exist, which may help to gain a more global understanding of chromatin alterations induced by Fun30SMARCAD1.

Quantitative sensing and signalling of single-stranded DNA during the DNA damage response.

The DNA damage checkpoint senses the presence of DNA lesions and controls the cellular response thereto. A crucial DNA damage signal is single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), which is frequently found at sites of DNA damage and recruits the sensor checkpoint kinase Mec1-Ddc2. However, how this signal - and therefore the cell's DNA damage load - is quantified, is poorly understood. Here, we use genetic manipulation of DNA end resection to induce quantitatively different ssDNA signals at a site-specific double strand break in budding yeast and identify two distinct signalling circuits within the checkpoint. The local checkpoint signalling circuit leading to γH2A phosphorylation is unresponsive to increased amounts of ssDNA, while the global checkpoint signalling circuit, which triggers Rad53 activation, integrates the ssDNA signal quantitatively. The global checkpoint signal critically depends on the 9-1-1 and its downstream acting signalling axis, suggesting that ssDNA quantification depends on at least two sensor complexes.

A cell cycle-independent mode of the Rad9-Dpb11 interaction is induced by DNA damage.

Budding yeast Rad9, like its orthologs, controls two aspects of the cellular response to DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) - signalling of the DNA damage checkpoint and DNA end resection. Rad9 binds to damaged chromatin via modified nucleosomes independently of the cell cycle phase. Additionally, Rad9 engages in a cell cycle-regulated interaction with Dpb11 and the 9-1-1 clamp, generating a second pathway that recruits Rad9 to DNA damage sites. Binding to Dpb11 depends on specific S/TP phosphorylation sites of Rad9, which are modified by cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK). Here, we show that these sites additionally become phosphorylated upon DNA damage. We define the requirements for DNA damage-induced S/TP phosphorylation of Rad9 and show that it is independent of the cell cycle or CDK activity but requires prior recruitment of Rad9 to damaged chromatin, indicating that it is catalysed by a chromatin-bound kinase. The checkpoint kinases Mec1 and Tel1 are required for Rad9 S/TP phosphorylation, but their influence is likely indirect and involves phosphorylation of Rad9 at S/TQ sites. Notably, DNA damage-induced S/TP phosphorylation triggers Dpb11 binding to Rad9, but the DNA damage-induced Rad9-Dpb11 interaction is dispensable for recruitment to DNA damage sites, indicating that the Rad9-Dpb11 interaction functions beyond Rad9 recruitment.

A cell cycle-regulated Slx4-Dpb11 complex promotes the resolution of DNA repair intermediates linked to stalled replication.

A key function of the cellular DNA damage response is to facilitate the bypass of replication fork-stalling DNA lesions. Template switch reactions allow such a bypass and involve the formation of DNA joint molecules (JMs) between sister chromatids. These JMs need to be resolved before cell division; however, the regulation of this process is only poorly understood. Here, we identify a regulatory mechanism in yeast that critically controls JM resolution by the Mus81-Mms4 endonuclease. Central to this regulation is a conserved complex comprising the scaffold proteins Dpb11 and Slx4 that is under stringent control. Cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation of Slx4 by Cdk1 promotes the Dpb11-Slx4 interaction, while in mitosis, phosphorylation of Mms4 by Polo-like kinase Cdc5 promotes the additional association of Mus81-Mms4 with the complex, thereby promoting JM resolution. Finally, the DNA damage checkpoint counteracts Mus81-Mms4 binding to the Dpb11-Slx4 complex. Thus, Dpb11-Slx4 integrates several cellular inputs and participates in the temporal program for activation of the JM-resolving nuclease Mus81.