Active Site Mutations in Mammalian DNA Polymerase δ Alter Accuracy and Replication Fork Progression*

DNA polymerase δ (pol δ) is one of the two main replicative polymerases in eukaryotes; it synthesizes the lagging DNA strand and also functions in DNA repair. In previous work, we demonstrated that heterozygous expression of the pol δ L604G variant in mice results in normal life span and no apparent phenotype, whereas a different substitution at the same position, L604K, is associated with shortened life span and accelerated carcinogenesis. Here, we report in vitro analysis of the homologous mutations at position Leu-606 in human pol δ. Four-subunit human pol δ variants that harbor or lack 3′ → 5′-exonucleolytic proofreading activity were purified from Escherichia coli. The pol δ L606G and L606K holoenzymes retain catalytic activity and processivity similar to that of wild type pol δ. pol δ L606G is highly error prone, incorporating single noncomplementary nucleotides at a high frequency during DNA synthesis, whereas pol δ L606K is extremely accurate, with a higher fidelity of single nucleotide incorporation by the active site than that of wild type pol δ. However, pol δ L606K is impaired in the bypass of DNA adducts, and the homologous variant in mouse embryonic fibroblasts results in a decreased rate of replication fork progression in vivo. These results indicate that different substitutions at a single active site residue in a eukaryotic polymerase can either increase or decrease the accuracy of synthesis relative to wild type and suggest that enhanced fidelity of base selection by a polymerase active site can result in impaired lesion bypass and delayed replication fork progression.

[1]  Sven Diederichs,et al.  The hallmarks of cancer , 2012, RNA biology.

[2]  Tom Royce,et al.  A comprehensive catalogue of somatic mutations from a human cancer genome , 2010, Nature.

[3]  Jesse J Salk,et al.  Optimization of DNA polymerase mutation rates during bacterial evolution , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  K. Eckert,et al.  DNA structure and the Werner protein modulate human DNA polymerase delta-dependent replication dynamics within the common fragile site FRA16D , 2009, Nucleic acids research.

[5]  R. Goldsby,et al.  DNA polymerase ε and δ proofreading suppress discrete mutator and cancer phenotypes in mice , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Laura C. Greaves,et al.  Mitochondrial DNA mutations and ageing. , 2009, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[7]  L. Loeb,et al.  High fidelity and lesion bypass capability of human DNA polymerase delta. , 2009, Biochimie.

[8]  Jesse J Salk,et al.  Cancer genome sequencing--an interim analysis. , 2009, Cancer research.

[9]  E. Friedberg,et al.  Y-family DNA polymerases in mammalian cells , 2009, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences.

[10]  Y. Matsumoto,et al.  Proofreading exonuclease activity of human DNA polymerase δ and its effects on lesion-bypass DNA synthesis , 2009, Nucleic acids research.

[11]  L. Samson,et al.  Aag-initiated base excision repair drives alkylation-induced retinal degeneration in mice , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  G. Parmigiani,et al.  Integrated analysis of homozygous deletions, focal amplifications, and sequence alterations in breast and colorectal cancers , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  L. Loeb,et al.  DNA polymerases and human disease , 2008, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[14]  T. Prolla,et al.  DNA deletions and clonal mutations drive premature aging in mitochondrial mutator mice , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[15]  L. Loeb,et al.  Mutation at the Polymerase Active Site of Mouse DNA Polymerase δ Increases Genomic Instability and Accelerates Tumorigenesis , 2007, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[16]  John Herrick,et al.  Replication fork velocities at adjacent replication origins are coordinately modified during DNA replication in human cells. , 2007, Molecular biology of the cell.

[17]  Juno Choe,et al.  Highly Tolerated Amino Acid Substitutions Increase the Fidelity of Escherichia coli DNA Polymerase I* , 2007, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[18]  J. Bielas,et al.  LOH-proficient embryonic stem cells: a model of cancer progenitor cells? , 2007, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[19]  E. Birney,et al.  Patterns of somatic mutation in human cancer genomes , 2007, Nature.

[20]  T. Prolla,et al.  Mitochondrial point mutations do not limit the natural lifespan of mice , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[21]  A. Bensimon,et al.  Upregulation of Error-Prone DNA Polymerases Beta and Kappa Slows Down Fork Progression Without Activating the Replication Checkpoint , 2007, Cell cycle.

[22]  T. Kunkel,et al.  Inefficient Proofreading and Biased Error Rates during Inaccurate DNA Synthesis by a Mutant Derivative of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA Polymerase δ* , 2007, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[23]  Lawrence D True,et al.  Human cancers express a mutator phenotype , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  K. Eckert,et al.  DNA Polymerases and Human Diseases , 2006, Radiation research.

[25]  P. Modrich Mechanisms in Eukaryotic Mismatch Repair* , 2006, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[26]  L. Loeb,et al.  Efficiency of carcinogenesis with and without a mutator mutation , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  C. Mathews DNA precursor metabolism and genomic stability , 2006, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[28]  Jung-Suk Sung,et al.  Roles of base excision repair subpathways in correcting oxidized abasic sites in DNA , 2006, The FEBS journal.

[29]  L. Loeb,et al.  Mutator Phenotypes Caused by Substitution at a Conserved Motif A Residue in Eukaryotic DNA Polymerase δ* , 2006, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[30]  T. Kunkel,et al.  The Multiple Biological Roles of the 3′→5′ Exonuclease of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA Polymerase δ Require Switching between the Polymerase and Exonuclease Domains , 2005, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[31]  Tomas Lindahl,et al.  Repair and genetic consequences of endogenous DNA base damage in mammalian cells. , 2004, Annual review of genetics.

[32]  C. Kisker,et al.  Lesion (in)tolerance reveals insights into DNA replication fidelity , 2004, The EMBO journal.

[33]  G. Maga,et al.  Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA): a dancer with many partners , 2003, Journal of Cell Science.

[34]  Samuel H. Wilson,et al.  Structural insights into the origins of DNA polymerase fidelity. , 2003, Structure.

[35]  R. Goldsby,et al.  High incidence of epithelial cancers in mice deficient for DNA polymerase δ proofreading , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  Xiaoqing Lu,et al.  Direct Interaction of Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen with the Small Subunit of DNA Polymerase δ* , 2002, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[37]  U. Hübscher,et al.  The 3′–5′ exonucleases , 2002, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[38]  L. Loeb,et al.  In vivo mutagenesis by Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I. Ile(709) in motif A functions in base selection. , 2001, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[39]  L. Loeb,et al.  A Single Highly Mutable Catalytic Site Amino Acid Is Critical for DNA Polymerase Fidelity* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[40]  P. Burgers,et al.  Structure and Processivity of Two Forms of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA Polymerase δ* , 1998, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[41]  R. Hindges,et al.  Regulation of DNA replication and repair proteins through interaction with the front side of proliferating cell nuclear antigen , 1998, The EMBO journal.

[42]  B. Ames,et al.  Oxidative Decay of DNA* , 1997, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[43]  L. Reha-Krantz,et al.  Dynamics of bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase function: identification of amino acid residues that affect switching between polymerase and 3' --> 5' exonuclease activities. , 1995, Journal of molecular biology.

[44]  T. Kunkel,et al.  Effect of reaction pH on the fidelity and processivity of exonuclease-deficient Klenow polymerase. , 1993, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[45]  G. Klarmann,et al.  Template-directed pausing of DNA synthesis by HIV-1 reverse transcriptase during polymerization of HIV-1 sequences in vitro. , 1993, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[46]  M. Boosalis,et al.  DNA polymerase insertion fidelity. Gel assay for site-specific kinetics. , 1987, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[47]  A Kornberg,et al.  The polymerase subunit of DNA polymerase III of Escherichia coli. II. Purification of the alpha subunit, devoid of nuclease activities. , 1985, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[48]  M. DePamphilis,et al.  The role of palindromic and non-palindromic sequences in arresting DNA synthesis in vitro and in vivo. , 1984, Journal of molecular biology.

[49]  L. Loeb,et al.  Errors in DNA replication as a basis of malignant changes. , 1974, Cancer research.

[50]  P. Modrich,et al.  Mismatch repair in replication fidelity, genetic recombination, and cancer biology. , 1996, Annual review of biochemistry.

[51]  S. Creighton,et al.  Gel fidelity assay measuring nucleotide misinsertion, exonucleolytic proofreading, and lesion bypass efficiencies. , 1995, Methods in enzymology.

[52]  T. Kunkel,et al.  Analyzing fidelity of DNA polymerases. , 1995, Methods in enzymology.

[53]  T. Kunkel,et al.  DNA replication fidelity. , 1992, The Journal of biological chemistry.