Abstract

DNA double strand breaks are the most deleterious type of DNA damage. In this work, we show that SIRT6 directly recognizes DNA damage through a tunnel-like structure, with high affinity for double strand breaks. SIRT6 relocates to sites of damage independently of signalling and known sensors. It activates downstream signalling for double strand break repair by triggering ATM recruitment, H2AX phosphorylation and the recruitment of proteins of Homologous Recombination and Non-Homologous End Joining pathways. Our findings indicate that SIRT6 plays a previously uncharacterized role as a DNA damage sensor, a critical factor in initiating the DNA damage response (DDR). Moreover, other Sirtuins share some DSB binding capacity and DDR activation. SIRT6 activates the DDR before the repair pathway is chosen, and prevents genomic instability. Our findings place SIRT6 as a sensor of DSB, and pave the road to dissecting the contributions of distinct double strand break sensors in downstream signalling.

Data availability

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

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Lior Onn

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Miguel Portillo

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Stefan Ilic

    Department of Chemistry, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Gal Cleitman

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Daniel Stein

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Shai Kaluski

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Ido Shirat

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Zeev Slobodnik

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Monica Einav

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Fabian Erdel

    BioQuant, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2888-7777
  11. Barak Akabayov

    Department of Chemistry, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3882-2742
  12. Debra Toiber

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
    For correspondence
    toiber@bgu.ac.il
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1465-0130

Funding

Israel Science Foundation (188/17)

  • Debra Toiber

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

Copyright

© 2020, Onn 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

  • 9,681
    views
  • 1,085
    downloads
  • 99
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

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)

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

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

  1. Lior Onn
  2. Miguel Portillo
  3. Stefan Ilic
  4. Gal Cleitman
  5. Daniel Stein
  6. Shai Kaluski
  7. Ido Shirat
  8. Zeev Slobodnik
  9. Monica Einav
  10. Fabian Erdel
  11. Barak Akabayov
  12. Debra Toiber
(2020)
SIRT6 is a DNA double-strand break sensor
eLife 9:e51636.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51636

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51636

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Yajun Zhai, Peiyi Liu ... Gongzheng Hu
    Research Article

    Discovering new strategies to combat the multidrug-resistant bacteria constitutes a major medical challenge of our time. Previously, artesunate (AS) has been reported to exert antibacterial enhancement activity in combination with β-lactam antibiotics via inhibition of the efflux pump AcrB. However, combination of AS and colistin (COL) revealed a weak synergistic effect against a limited number of strains, and few studies have further explored its possible mechanism of synergistic action. In this article, we found that AS and EDTA could strikingly enhance the antibacterial effects of COL against mcr-1- and mcr-1+ Salmonella strains either in vitro or in vivo, when used in triple combination. The excellent bacteriostatic effect was primarily related to the increased cell membrane damage, accumulation of toxic compounds and inhibition of MCR-1. The potential binding sites of AS to MCR-1 (THR283, SER284, and TYR287) were critical for its inhibition of MCR-1 activity. Additionally, we also demonstrated that the CheA of chemosensory system and virulence-related protein SpvD were critical for the bacteriostatic synergistic effects of the triple combination. Selectively targeting CheA, SpvD, or MCR using the natural compound AS could be further investigated as an attractive strategy for the treatment of Salmonella infection. Collectively, our work opens new avenues toward the potentiation of COL and reveals an alternative drug combination strategy to overcome COL-resistant bacterial infections.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Adam D Longhurst, Kyle Wang ... David P Toczyski
    Tools and Resources

    Progression through the G1 phase of the cell cycle is the most highly regulated step in cellular division. We employed a chemogenetic approach to discover novel cellular networks that regulate cell cycle progression. This approach uncovered functional clusters of genes that altered sensitivity of cells to inhibitors of the G1/S transition. Mutation of components of the Polycomb Repressor Complex 2 rescued proliferation inhibition caused by the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib, but not to inhibitors of S phase or mitosis. In addition to its core catalytic subunits, mutation of the PRC2.1 accessory protein MTF2, but not the PRC2.2 protein JARID2, rendered cells resistant to palbociclib treatment. We found that PRC2.1 (MTF2), but not PRC2.2 (JARID2), was critical for promoting H3K27me3 deposition at CpG islands genome-wide and in promoters. This included the CpG islands in the promoter of the CDK4/6 cyclins CCND1 and CCND2, and loss of MTF2 lead to upregulation of both CCND1 and CCND2. Our results demonstrate a role for PRC2.1, but not PRC2.2, in antagonizing G1 progression in a diversity of cell linages, including chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), breast cancer, and immortalized cell lines.