Eukaryotic mismatch repair (MMR) utilizes single-strand breaks as signals to target the strand to be repaired. DNA-bound PCNA is also presumed to direct MMR. The MMR capability must be limited to a post-replicative temporal window during which the signals are available. However, both identity of the signal(s) involved in the retention of this temporal window and the mechanism that maintains the MMR capability after DNA synthesis remain unclear. Using Xenopus egg extracts, we discovered a mechanism that ensures long-term retention of the MMR capability. We show that DNA-bound PCNA induces strand-specific MMR in the absence of strand discontinuities. Strikingly, MutSα inhibited PCNA unloading through its PCNA-interacting motif, thereby extending significantly the temporal window permissive to strand-specific MMR. Our data identify DNA-bound PCNA as the signal that enables strand discrimination after the disappearance of strand discontinuities, and uncover a novel role of MutSα in the retention of the post-replicative MMR capability.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.15155.001

SUMMARY DNA interstrand crosslinks (ICLs) that are repaired in non-dividing cells must be recognized independently of replication-associated DNA unwinding. Using cell-free extracts from Xenopus eggs that support neither replication nor transcription, we establish that ICLs are recognized and processed by the mismatch repair (MMR) machinery. We find that ICL repair requires MutSα (MSH2–MSH6) and the mismatch recognition FXE motif in MSH6, strongly suggesting that MutSα functions as an ICL sensor. MutSα recruits MutLα and EXO1 to ICL lesions, and the catalytic activity of both these nucleases is essential for ICL repair. As anticipated for a DNA unwinding-independent recognition process, we demonstrate that least distorting ICLs fail to be recognized and repaired by the MMR machinery. This establishes that ICL structure is a critical determinant of repair efficiency outside of DNA replication.

No abstract

Post-replicative correction of replication errors by the mismatch repair (MMR) system is critical for suppression of mutations. Although the MMR system may need to handle nucleosomes at the site of chromatin replication, how MMR occurs in the chromatin environment remains unclear. Here, we show that nucleosomes are excluded from a >1-kb region surrounding a mismatched base pair in egg extracts. The exclusion was dependent on the Msh2-Msh6 mismatch recognition complex but not the Mlh1-containing MutL homologs and counteracts both the HIRA- and CAF-1 (chromatin assembly factor 1)-mediated chromatin assembly pathways. We further found that the Smarcad1 chromatin remodeling ATPase is recruited to mismatch-carrying DNA in an Msh2-dependent but Mlh1-independent manner to assist nucleosome exclusion and that Smarcad1 facilitates the repair of mismatches when nucleosomes are preassembled on DNA. In budding yeast, deletion of, the homolog of Smarcad1, showed a synergistic increase of spontaneous mutations in combination with or deletion but no significant increase with deletion. Genetic analyses also suggested that the function of Fun30 in MMR is to counteract CAF-1. Our study uncovers that the eukaryotic MMR system has an ability to exclude local nucleosomes and identifies Smarcad1/Fun30 as an accessory factor for the MMR reaction.

In the initial steps of DNA mismatch repair, MutS recognizes a mismatched base and recruits the latent endonuclease MutL onto the mismatch-containing DNA in concert with other proteins. MutL then cleaves the error-containing strand to introduce an entry point for the downstream excision reaction. Because MutL has no intrinsic ability to recognize a mismatch and discriminate between newly synthesized and template strands, the endonuclease activity of MutL is strictly regulated by ATP-binding in order to avoid nonspecific degradation of the genomic DNA. However, the activation mechanism for its endonuclease activity remains unclear. In this study, we found that the coexistence of a mismatch, ATP and MutS unlocks the ATP-binding-dependent suppression of MutL endonuclease activity. Interestingly, ATPase-deficient mutants of MutS were unable to activate MutL. Furthermore, wild-type MutS activated ATPase-deficient mutants of MutL less efficiently than wild-type MutL. We concluded that ATP hydrolysis by MutS and MutL is involved in the mismatch-dependent activation of MutL endonuclease activity.