Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan 2;85(1):78-90.e3.
doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2024.11.006. Epub 2024 Dec 3.

Two-ended recombination at a Flp-nickase-broken replication fork

Affiliations

Two-ended recombination at a Flp-nickase-broken replication fork

Rajula Elango et al. Mol Cell. .

Abstract

Replication fork collision with a DNA nick can generate a one-ended break, fostering genomic instability. The opposing fork's collision with the nick could form a second DNA end, enabling conservative repair by homologous recombination (HR). To study mechanisms of nickase-induced HR, we developed the Flp recombinase "step arrest" nickase in mammalian cells. A Flp-nick induces two-ended, BRCA2/RAD51-dependent short tract gene conversion (STGC), BRCA2/RAD51-independent long tract gene conversion, and discoordinated two-ended invasions. HR pathways induced by a replication-independent break and the Flp-nickase differ in their dependence on BRCA1, MRE11, and CtIP. To determine the origin of the second DNA end during Flp-nickase-induced STGC, we blocked the opposing fork using a Tus/Ter replication fork barrier (RFB). Flp-nickase-induced STGC remained robust and two ended. Thus, a single replication fork's collision with a Flp-nick triggers two-ended HR, possibly reflecting replicative bypass of lagging strand nicks. This response may limit genomic instability during replication of nicked DNA.

Keywords: BRCA1; Camptothecin; DNA nick; DNA-protein crosslink; Flp recombinase; Tus/Ter; break-induced replication; homologous recombination; replication fork breakage; replication stress.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. FlpH305L-induced HR products.
A. FlpH305L binding to the F13-FRT site generates DPC nicks on either strand. Pink: non-incising Flp monomers. Dark red: incising Flp monomer; active site tyrosine (Y) is shown. Flp monomers a and a′, but not b, mediate recombination at FRT. Lower panel: sequence of F13 FRT site in HR reporter, with incision sites of Flp monomers a and a′ shown. B. HR outcomes detected by reporter. STGC generates GFP+RFP outcome; LTGC generates GFP+RFP+ outcome. C. Orientation of the Rosa26 HR reporter with respect to a replication fork TEL to CEN. D. STGC frequencies induced by I-SceI and Flp mutants. Flp-YF/HL: Y343F/H305L double mutant. Data shows mean and s.e.m. of 6 independent experiments (n=6). Unpaired t-test: ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001. E. and F. LTGC products (E) and ratio of LTGC:Total GFP+ frequencies (F) from the same experiments as in D (n=6). * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; **** P < 0.0001. See also Supplemental Figure S1.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Rad51 dependence of FlpH305L-induced repair products.
A and B. I-SceI induced (A) and FlpH305L-induced (B) STGC in parental Xrcc4fl/fl and Xrcc4−/− reporter cells. Data shows mean and s.e.m. of 4 independent experiments (n=4). Unpaired t-test: ns: not significant; *** P < 0.001. C-F. Brca1fl/hyg FRT-F13 HR reporter cells were co-transfected with FlpH305L and siRNAs shown. B2: Brca2. R51: Rad51. Data shows mean and s.e.m. of 8 independent experiments (n=8). Unpaired t-test: * P < 0.05; **** P < 0.0001. C. STGC. D. LTGC. E. Ratio of LTGC:Total GFP+. F. GFPRFP+ outcome. See also Supplemental Figure S2.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Analysis of FlpH305L-induced GFPRFP+ products.
A. Southern blot analysis of FlpH305L-induced GFPRFP+ clones. Genomic DNA was digested in vitro with BglII (B) or with BglII+I-SceI (B+I), GFP probe. Note: all clones except #3 and #4 (red *) contain two I-SceI sites. Clones #3 and #4 may contain three I-SceI sites, generating double intensity 3538 bp band. B. Deduced structure of major FlpH305L-induced GFPRFP+ products. Green lines: sequences hybridizing with GFP probe. C. Hypothetical dual invasion mechanism underlying FlpH305L-induced GFPRFP+ outcome. Original sites of left and right DNA ends are marked L and R, respectively. See also Supplemental Figure S3.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.. Brca1 exon 11 is dispensable for FlpH305L-induced STGC.
Data pooled from 6 independent Cre-exposed Brca1fl/hyg clones and 6 independent Cre-exposed Brca1Δ11/hyg clones. Data shows mean and s.e.m. of 6 independent experiments (n=6). Unpaired t-test: ns: not significant; * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001; **** P < 0.0001. A. Left panel: STGC. Right panel: Western blot of full-length p220 BRCA1 in Brca1fl/hyg cells. Note absence of p220 BRCA1 in Brca1Δ11/hyg cells. *: background bands. B. LTGC. C. Ratio of LTGC:Total GFP+. D. GFPRFP+ outcome. E. Brca1fl/hyg clone #12 and Brca1Δ11/hyg clone #8 (see Supplemental Figure S4) were co-transfected with siRNAs shown, together with either FlpH305L or I-SceI. Data shows mean and s.e.m. from 4 independent experiments (n=4), with analysis by unpaired t-test. Right panel: western blot showing depletion of full-length p220 BRCA1 in Brca1fl/hyg cells transfected with siBrca1 vs. siLuc control. B1: Brca1. See also Supplemental Figure S5.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Impact of MRE11 and CtIP on FlpH305L-induced HR.
A. and B. Brca1fl/hyg FRT-F13 HR reporter cells were co-transfected with either FlpH305L (A) or I-SceI (B), together with siRNAs shown. Data shows mean and s.e.m. of 5 independent experiments (n=5). Unpaired t-test: ns: not significant; * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001; **** P < 0.0001. C. Western blot of MRE11 in cells treated with the siRNAs shown. β-tubulin: loading control. D. Western blot of CtIP in cells treated with the siRNAs shown. *: background band. β-tubulin: loading control.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.. FlpH305L-induced STGC is the product of a single fork collision with the Flp-nick.
A. Upper panel: Classical model predicts that only one-ended breaks form at the Flp-nick site. Collision of each converging fork with the nick generates two DNA ends, enabling repair by two-ended HR. Lower panel: Classical model predicts that Tus/Ter RFB will prevent formation of a second DNA end at the Flp-nick site. B.E. Data pooled from 5 independent Brca1fl/hyg clones targeted with the F13FRT-HR reporter carrying an additional 6xTer array positioned to establish a Tus-mediated RFB to block the leftward fork. Data shows mean and s.e.m. of 5 independent experiments (n=5). Unpaired t-test: ns: not significant; **** P < 0.0001. B. FlpH305L-induced STGC is unaffected by activation of the Tus/Ter RFB. C. and D. FlpH305L-induced LTGC frequencies (C), and ratio of LTGC:Total GFP+ (D). E. FlpH305L-induced GFP RFP+ products. F. Southern blot analysis of FlpH305L-induced STGC products generated in presence of the Tus/Ter RFB. gDNA digested with BglII; see Supplemental Figure S1F for expected fragment sizes. M: MW markers. P: parental reporter cells. Note that all FlpH305L-induced STGCs are the product of two-ended HR in the presence of the Tus/Ter RFB. See also Supplemental Figure S6.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.. Model: distinct outcomes of fork collision with a lagging or leading strand Flp-nick.
A. Lagging strand Flp-nick. The CMG replicative helicase bypasses a lagging strand Flp-nick, allowing replication to continue beyond the nick site. The two-ended break is generated with no contribution from the opposing (leftward) replication fork and is repaired by STGC. Non-incising Flp monomers: pink. Incising Flp monomer: dark red, active site tyrosine (Y) shown. B. Leading strand Flp-nick. A Flp-nick on the leading strand exposes a free 5’ end of the leading parental strand, leading to loss of CMG from chromatin and formation of a one-ended break, favoring LTGC or chromosome rearrangement.

Update of

References

    1. Pommier Y, Sun Y, Huang SN, and Nitiss JL (2016). Roles of eukaryotic topoisomerases in transcription, replication and genomic stability. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 17, 703–721. 10.1038/nrm.2016.111. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Caldecott KW (2024). Causes and consequences of DNA single-strand breaks. Trends Biochem Sci 49, 68–78. 10.1016/j.tibs.2023.11.001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Strathern JN, Weinstock KG, Higgins DR, and McGill CB (1991). A novel recombinator in yeast based on gene II protein from bacteriophage f1. Genetics 127, 61–73. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kuzminov A. (2001). Single-strand interruptions in replicating chromosomes cause double-strand breaks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98, 8241–8246. 10.1073/pnas.131009198. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cortés-Ledesma F, and Aguilera A. (2006). Double-strand breaks arising by replication through a nick are repaired by cohesin-dependent sister-chromatid exchange. EMBO Rep 7, 919–926. 10.1038/sj.embor.7400774. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources