About this item:

612 Views | 632 Downloads

Author Notes:

Corresponding author: Gray F. Crouse, Department of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America. Email: gcrouse@biology.emory.edu.

Conceived and designed the experiments: GFC.

Performed the experiments: NVR.

Analyzed the data: NVR GFC.

Wrote the paper: NVR GFC.

We thank Sue Jinks-Robertson, Nayun Kim, and Mike Liskay for plasmids and strains.

We thank Natasha Degtyareva, Kirill Lobachev, Francesca Storici, and Rachelle Spell for helpful comments on the manuscript.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Subjects:

Research Funding:

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health [R01 GM80754 to GFC].

Different Roles of Eukaryotic MutS and MutL Complexes in Repair of Small Insertion and Deletion Loops in Yeast

Journal Title:

PLoS Genetics

Volume:

Volume 9, Number 10

Publisher:

, Pages e1003920-e1003920

Type of Work:

Article | Final Publisher PDF

Abstract:

DNA mismatch repair greatly increases genome fidelity by recognizing and removing replication errors. In order to understand how this fidelity is maintained, it is important to uncover the relative specificities of the different components of mismatch repair. There are two major mispair recognition complexes in eukaryotes that are homologues of bacterial MutS proteins, MutSα and MutSβ, with MutSα recognizing base-base mismatches and small loop mispairs and MutSβ recognizing larger loop mispairs. Upon recognition of a mispair, the MutS complexes then interact with homologues of the bacterial MutL protein. Loops formed on the primer strand during replication lead to insertion mutations, whereas loops on the template strand lead to deletions. We show here in yeast, using oligonucleotide transformation, that MutSα has a strong bias toward repair of insertion loops, while MutSβ has an even stronger bias toward repair of deletion loops. Our results suggest that this bias in repair is due to the different interactions of the MutS complexes with the MutL complexes. Two mutants of MutLα, pms1-G882E and pms1-H888R, repair deletion mispairs but not insertion mispairs. Moreover, we find that a different MutL complex, MutLγ, is extremely important, but not sufficient, for deletion repair in the presence of either MutLα mutation. MutSβ is present in many eukaryotic organisms, but not in prokaryotes. We suggest that the biased repair of deletion mispairs may reflect a critical eukaryotic function of MutSβ in mismatch repair.

Copyright information:

© 2013 Romanova, Crouse.

Export to EndNote