Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Archive
  • About the Journal
    • About EC
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • FAQ
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Eukaryotic Cell
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Archive
  • About the Journal
    • About EC
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • FAQ
Articles

Contrasting Roles of Checkpoint Proteins as Recombination Modulators at Fob1-Ter Complexes with or without Fork Arrest

Bidyut K. Mohanty, Narendra K. Bairwa, Deepak Bastia
Bidyut K. Mohanty
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: bastia@musc.edu mohanty@musc.edu
Narendra K. Bairwa
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Deepak Bastia
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: bastia@musc.edu mohanty@musc.edu
DOI: 10.1128/EC.00382-08
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIG. 1.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 1.

    Effect of checkpoint genes on plasmid integration into and excision from the Ter sites of rDNA. (A) Schematic representation of the plasmid integration and excision assays; the plasmid pBB3NTS (pBB-Hyg) contained EXP sequence (which includes the Ter sites and the E-pro promoter). (B) Autoradiogram of a Southern blot showing the intracellular distribution of the reporter plasmid pBB-Hyg DNA resolved without nicking the DNA in an 0.5% agarose gel; a labeled plasmid-specific probe was used for detection of the plasmid DNA. integ., integrated; uninteg., unintegrated; SC, supercoiled DNA; WT, wild type. The lanes are self-explanatory. (C) Autoradiogram of a Southern blot showing the DNA samples shown in panel B but after nicking with NB.BsrD1. (D) Same as in panel B except that the DNA samples were digested with FspI; the lanes from left to right are as labeled in panels B and C. (E) Same as in panel C but probed with labeled chromosomal rDNA to identify the location of the integrated plasmid bands. (F) Kinetics of excision of pBB3NTS (URA3) plasmid rDNA from strains containing the integrated form of the plasmid reporter. Effects of individual deletions of the checkpoint genes tof1, mrc1, and rad9 (all present in a sir2Δ background) on loss of URA3 plasmid as a function of time of growth in nonselective medium. The nine lanes in panels D and E correspond exactly to the nine lanes in panels B and C.

  • FIG. 2.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 2.

    Contribution of the interplay between TOF1 and RRM3 to plasmid integration and excision. (A) Autoradiogram of a representative Southern blot showing the effect of tof1Δ rrm3Δ double deletions on plasmid integration (pBB-Hyg) in comparison with the single deletions, all in a common sir2Δ background after three and six serial streakings and growth in the selective medium. (B) Effects of single and double deletions (tof1Δ, rrm3Δ, and tof1Δ rrm3Δ) on pBB3NTS (URA3) plasmid excision. (C) Autoradiograms of 2D gels showing replication fork arrest at Ter in different strains; the arrows show the termination spots generated by fork arrest at the two closely spaced Ter1 and Ter2 sites. WT, wild type.

  • FIG. 3.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 3.

    Impact of deletions of genes involved in HR and NHEJ on plasmid integration and excision. (A) Autoradiogram of a representative Southern blot of nicked DNA showing the status of intracellular plasmid DNA pBB3NTS (URA3) in isogenic strains containing various deletions. The lanes are self-explanatory. (B) Plasmid excision kinetics showing the impact of various deletions of recombination genes on the excision of pBB3NTS (URA3). (C) Effect of deletions of two structure-specific endonucleases (slx4Δ, mus81Δ, and slx4Δ mus81Δ) on plasmid pBB3NTS (URA3) integration; the lanes are self-explanatory. WT, wild type.

  • FIG. 4.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 4.

    Impact of deletions of genes encoding checkpoint proteins and recombination proteins on HOT1 activity. (A) Schematic diagram showing the HOT1 assay; the E elements (containing the Fob1 binding site) and the I elements are shown; recombination between the flanking his4 genes excises URA3, which has no ARS and therefore is eliminated from the cells. (B) HOT1 activity in the absence of checkpoint adapter proteins. (C) HOT1 activity in the absence of MEC1 and RAD53. (D) HOT1 activity in different strains with individual deletions of the various members of the RAD52 epistasis group. WT, wild type.

  • FIG. 5.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 5.

    Schematic diagram that summarizes the data on the impact of various checkpoint proteins and members of the RAD52 epistasis group on plasmid integration and excision at Ter and on HOT1 activity. The heavy arrows at RAD52 and lighter ones at RAD54 and RAD59 indicate that RAD52 was absolutely essential for both plasmid integration and HOT1 activity; the latter genes played a stimulatory role in HOT1 recombination. The question mark next to MRC1 in the plasmid integration/excision pathway indicates that the inhibitory effect was rather modest compared with that of the wild type. Previous work has shown that RAD50 was partially required for HOT1 activity. The heavy arrow next to MEC1 indicates that this gene makes a significant positive contribution to HOT1 activity.

Tables

  • Figures
  • TABLE 1.

    Yeast strains

    StrainGenotypeSource
    W303 MAT a (leu2-3,112 trp1-1 can1-100 ura3-1 ade2-1 his3-11,15)R. Rothstein
    LPY11W303a sir2Δ:HIS3L. Pillus
    Lfob1LPY11 fob1Δ:G418This study
    Lcsm3LPY11 csm3Δ:G418This study
    Ltof1LPY11 tof1Δ:G418This study
    Lmrc1LPY11 mrc1Δ:G418This study
    Lrad9LPY11 rad9Δ:G418This study
    Lrad50LPY11 rad50Δ:G418This study
    Lrad51LPY11 rad51Δ:G418This study
    Lrad52LPY11 rad52Δ:G418This study
    Lrad54LPY11 rad54Δ:G418This study
    Lrad55LPY11 rad55Δ:G418This study
    Lrad59LPY11 rad59Δ:G418This study
    Lrrm3LPY11 rrm3Δ:G418This study
    Ltr13LPY11 tof1Δ:G418 (crelox G418 lost) rrm3Δ:G418This study
    Lmus81LPY11 mus81Δ:G418This study
    Lslx4LPY11 slx4Δ:G418This study
    Lms9LPY11 mus81Δ:G418 (crelox G418 lost) slxΔ:G418This study
    WDHY1638W303 RAD5 sml1Δ mec1ΔW. D. Heyer
    Lmec1WDHY1638 sir2Δ:G418This study
    W2105-17bW303 sml1Δ:URA3 rad53Δ:HIS3 rad5R. Rothstein
    Lrad53W2105-17b sir2Δ:G418This study
    K5665RLK1-3C MATα his4-260 ade2-1 ura3-52 canRR. Keil
    Kfob1K5665 fob1Δ:G418This study
    Kcsm3K5665 csm3Δ:G418This study
    Ktof1K5665 tof1Δ:G418This study
    Kmrc1K5665 mrc1Δ:G418This study
    Krad9K5665 rad9Δ:G418This study
    Krad51K5665 rad51Δ:G418This study
    Krad52K5665 rad52Δ:G418This study
    Krad54K5665 rad54Δ:G418This study
    Krad55K5665 rad55Δ:G418This study
    Krad59K5665 rad59Δ:G418This study
    Krrm3K5665 rrm3Δ:G418This study
    Ktr1K5665 rrm3Δ:G418 (crelox G418 lost) tof1Δ:G418This study
    Ksml1K5665 sml1Δ:G418This study
    Kmec1K5665 sml1Δ:G418 (crelox G418 lost) mec1ΔThis study
    Krad53K5665 sml1Δ:G418 (crelox G418 lost) rad53ΔThis study
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Contrasting Roles of Checkpoint Proteins as Recombination Modulators at Fob1-Ter Complexes with or without Fork Arrest
Bidyut K. Mohanty, Narendra K. Bairwa, Deepak Bastia
Eukaryotic Cell Apr 2009, 8 (4) 487-495; DOI: 10.1128/EC.00382-08

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Email

Thank you for sharing this Eukaryotic Cell article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Contrasting Roles of Checkpoint Proteins as Recombination Modulators at Fob1-Ter Complexes with or without Fork Arrest
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Eukaryotic Cell
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Eukaryotic Cell.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Contrasting Roles of Checkpoint Proteins as Recombination Modulators at Fob1-Ter Complexes with or without Fork Arrest
Bidyut K. Mohanty, Narendra K. Bairwa, Deepak Bastia
Eukaryotic Cell Apr 2009, 8 (4) 487-495; DOI: 10.1128/EC.00382-08
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Cell Cycle Proteins
DNA Replication
DNA-Binding Proteins
Recombination, Genetic
Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About EC
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript to mSphere

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 1535-9778; Online ISSN: 1535-9786