1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
  2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
Download icon

Rad52-Rad51 association is essential to protect Rad51 filaments against Srs2, but facultative for filament formation

  1. Emilie Ma
  2. Pauline Dupaigne
  3. Laurent Maloisel
  4. Raphaël Guerois
  5. Eric Le Cam
  6. Eric Coïc  Is a corresponding author
  1. CEA-Université Paris Saclay, France
  2. Institut Gustave Roussy, France
Research Article
  • Cited 12
  • Views 2,379
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2018;7:e32744 doi: 10.7554/eLife.32744

Abstract

Homology search and strand exchange mediated by Rad51 nucleoprotein filaments are key steps of the homologous recombination process. In budding yeast, Rad52 is the main mediator of Rad51 filament formation, thereby playing an essential role. The current model assumes that Rad51 filament formation requires the interaction between Rad52 and Rad51. However, we report here that Rad52 mutations that disrupt this interaction do not affect γ-ray- or HO endonuclease-induced gene conversion frequencies. In vivo and in vitro studies confirmed that Rad51 filaments formation is not affected by these mutations. Instead, we found that Rad52-Rad51 association makes Rad51 filaments toxic in Srs2-deficient cells after exposure to DNA damaging agents, independently of Rad52 role in Rad51 filament assembly. Importantly, we also demonstrated that Rad52 is essential for protecting Rad51 filaments against dissociation by the Srs2 DNA translocase. Our findings open new perspectives in the understanding of the role of Rad52 in eukaryotes.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Emilie Ma

    Institut de Biologie François Jacob, IRCM, CEA-Université Paris Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Pauline Dupaigne

    Signalisation, Noyaux et Innovation en Cancérologie, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Laurent Maloisel

    Institut de Biologie François Jacob, IRCM, CEA-Université Paris Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Raphaël Guerois

    CEA-Université Paris Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Eric Le Cam

    Signalisation, Noyaux et Innovation en Cancérologie, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Eric Coïc

    Institut de Biologie François Jacob, IRCM, CEA-Université Paris Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France
    For correspondence
    eric.coic@cea.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9549-8969

Funding

Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives (Recurrent funding)

  • Raphaël Guerois
  • Eric Coïc

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Recurrent funding)

  • Eric Le Cam

Fondation ARC pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (SFI20121205689)

  • Eric Coïc

Ligue Contre le Cancer (2015-16)

  • Eric Coïc

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-15-CE11-0008-01)

  • Raphaël Guerois

Region Ile-de-France (DIM Nano-K No F13012333)

  • Eric Le Cam

Fondation ARC pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (PJA 20141201772)

  • Eric Coïc

Ligue Contre le Cancer (2016-2017)

  • Eric Le Cam

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-13-BSV8-0022)

  • Eric Le Cam

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Andrés Aguilera, CABIMER, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain

Publication history

  1. Received: October 12, 2017
  2. Accepted: June 30, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 9, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 23, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2018, Ma et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,379
    Page views
  • 334
    Downloads
  • 12
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yongjian Huang et al.
    Research Article

    The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a receptor tyrosine kinase that couples the binding of extracellular ligands, such as EGF and transforming growth factor-α (TGF-α), to the initiation of intracellular signaling pathways. EGFR binds to EGF and TGF-α with similar affinity, but generates different signals from these ligands. To address the mechanistic basis of this phenomenon, we have carried out cryo-EM analyses of human EGFR bound to EGF and TGF-α. We show that the extracellular module adopts an ensemble of dimeric conformations when bound to either EGF or TGF-α. The two extreme states of this ensemble represent distinct ligand-bound quaternary structures in which the membrane-proximal tips of the extracellular module are either juxtaposed or separated. EGF and TGF-α differ in their ability to maintain the conformation with the membrane-proximal tips of the extracellular module separated, and this conformation is stabilized preferentially by an oncogenic EGFR mutation. Close proximity of the transmembrane helices at the junction with the extracellular module has been associated previously with increased EGFR activity. Our results show how EGFR can couple the binding of different ligands to differential modulation of this proximity, thereby suggesting a molecular mechanism for the generation of ligand-sensitive differential outputs in this receptor family.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Jasmin Mertins et al.
    Research Article Updated

    SNARE proteins have been described as the effectors of fusion events in the secretory pathway more than two decades ago. The strong interactions between SNARE domains are clearly important in membrane fusion, but it is unclear whether they are involved in any other cellular processes. Here, we analyzed two classical SNARE proteins, syntaxin 1A and SNAP25. Although they are supposed to be engaged in tight complexes, we surprisingly find them largely segregated in the plasma membrane. Syntaxin 1A only occupies a small fraction of the plasma membrane area. Yet, we find it is able to redistribute the far more abundant SNAP25 on the mesoscale by gathering crowds of SNAP25 molecules onto syntaxin clusters in a SNARE-domain-dependent manner. Our data suggest that SNARE domain interactions are not only involved in driving membrane fusion on the nanoscale, but also play an important role in controlling the general organization of proteins on the mesoscale. Further, we propose these mechanisms preserve active syntaxin 1A–SNAP25 complexes at the plasma membrane.