Gene Ther
Mol Biol Vol 3, 397-412. August 1999.
Replication of simple DNA repeats
Review
Article
Maria M. Krasilnikova, George M. Samadashwily and
Sergei M. Mirkin*
Department of Molecular Genetics,
University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago IL 60607
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Corresponding Author:
Phone:(312)996-9610; Fax: (312)413-0353; E-mail:mirkin@uic.edu
Key Words: DNA repeats, inverted repeats,
DNA replication, repeat length polymorphism, replication attenuation
Abbreviations: WC, Watson-Crick; IR, inverted repeats; MR,
mirror repeats; DTR, direct tandem
repeats; S-DNA, slipped-stranded DNA
Summary
This chapter presents an overview of studies on the
replication of simple DNA repeats conducted in our laboratory during the last
seven years. The recent massive increase in available DNA sequences has led to
the clear understanding that natural DNAs, particularly in eukaryotes, are extraordinarily
enriched in different repeats (Schroth and Ho, 1995; Cox and Mirkin, 1997).
This leads to an obvious question: what are the biological functions (if any)
of these repeated elements? This problem is currently the subject of very
intense studies in many laboratories all over the world. We came to this
question after we realized that many repeated DNA sequences constitute a major
obstacle to DNA polymerization in vitro (Dayn
et. al., 1992; Samadashwily et. al., 1993; Samadashwily and Mirkin, 1994;
Krasilnikov et. al., 1997). Subsequently, we found that several such repeats
attenuate DNA replication in vivo as
well (Samadashwily et. al., 1997; Krasilnikova et. al., 1998). Based on our
data, we conclude that there are at least three mechanisms by which different
repeats inhibit replication. We believe that this may reflect a potentially
important role of repeated DNA as punctuation marks for major genetic processes
in DNA texts. Repeat-caused replication attenuation might also contribute to
the mechanisms of repeat length polymorphism seen in many human diseases.
I. Repeat types, structures and
frequencies
Based on
sequence arrangement and symmetry, three major types of simple DNA repeats are
usually considered (Fig. 1):
inverted repeats, mirror repeats, and direct tandem repeats. Inverted repeats
(IR) are DNA sequences in which DNA bases that are equidistant from the
symmetry center in a DNA strand are Watson-Crick (WC) complements to each
other. Mirror repeats (MR) are also symmetrical, but here equidistant DNA bases
are identical to each other. Finally, direct tandem repeats (DTR) are simple,
uninterrupted iterations of a core repeat unit along the DNA strand. The
distinction between the different repeat types is not absolute. There are DNA sequences
that meet criteria for all three repeat types. A well studied example is the
d(A-T)n.d(T-A)n
sequence which is simultaneously an inverted, mirror and direct tandem repeat.
The
secondary structure of repeated DNA often differs dramatically from canonical
B-DNA. The exact conformation of a repeated DNA depends on its symmetry, base
composition, DNA supercoiling, ambient conditions, etc. Below, we will briefly
summarize the best characterized structures formed by different DNA repeats.
Inverted
repeats are capable of forming cruciform structures in double stranded DNA or
hairpins in single stranded DNA (Fig. 2).
While hairpin formation in single-stranded DNA is generally energetically
favorable, cruciform formation in a double-stranded DNA is only favorable under
the influence of negative supercoiling (Lilley, 1980; Panayotatos and Wells,
1981; Mizuuchi, et. al., 1982). Indeed, to convert a duplex DNA segment into a
cruciform state, one would need to at least partially unwind it in order to
allow for self-pairing by each DNA strand. Since initial unwinding of a DNA
duplex is energy consuming, this stage represents an energetic barrier for
cruciform formation (reviewed in Sinden, 1994). In addition, the resultant
cruciform structure contains single-stranded bases in central loops and
energetically costly
Fig. 1. Different
repeat types. A: inverted repeats; B: mirror repeats; C: direct tandem repeats. Arrows of the same color represent
symmetrical sequences. Complementary sequences differ in color.
Fig. 2. Cruciform
and hairpin structures formed by inverted repeats in double- and
single-stranded DNA, respectively. Complementary halves of an inverted repeat
are red and green, single-stranded segments are orange, and the surrounding DNA is purple.
junctions between the
cruciform and the adjacent duplex DNA (4-way junctions). Altogether, this leads
to a high nucleation energy for cruciform formation, approaching 20 kcal mol-1
(reviewed in Vologodskii, 1992). Since a cruciform is topologically equivalent
to unwound DNA, its formation under torsional stress release negative
supercoils, compensating for the high nucleation cost (Vologodskii and
Frank-Kamenetskii, 1982). In fact, simple energetics calculations show that the probability
of cruciform extrusion must increase exponentially with inverted repeat length
(Benham, 1982; Vologodskii and Frank-Kamenetskii, 1982). In vivo formation of
cruciform structures was observed in several studies. The most direct evidence
was obtained by chemical probing of plasmids in E. coli cells. AT-rich inverted repeats were shown to adopt
cruciform conformation when intracellular supercoiling increased due to certain
changes in environmental conditions (McClellan, et. al., 1990; Dayn, et. al.,
1991; Zheng, et. al., 1991) or as a consequence of transcriptional activation
(Dayn, et. al., 1992). Formation of a cruciform-like structure in the enhancer
of the enkephalin gene was suggested based on chemical probing of human
intracellular DNA followed by ligation-mediated PCR (Spiro et. al., 1995).
While
mirror repeats of arbitrary composition are common in natural DNA (Schroth and
Ho, 1995; Cox and Mirkin, 1997), only one type of them, i.e.
homopurine-homopyrimidine mirror repeats (H-palindromes), has been shown to
adopt a non-B conformation. These sequences can adopt an intramolecular triplex
called H DNA (Lyamichev, et. al., 1986). To form this structure (Fig. 3), a DNA strand from one half of
the repeat folds back, forming a triplex with the duplex half of the repeat,
while its complement remains single-stranded (Mirkin et. al., 1987). Depending
on the chemical nature of the strand donated to the triplex, either pyrimidine-
or purine-rich, the resultant structures are called H-y or H-r, respectively (Fig. 3). The H-y form is built from
TA*T and CG*C+ triads (Fig. 4A), where pyrimidines from the third strand are situated in
the major groove, forming Hoogsteen hydrogen bonds with the purines of the
duplex (Hoogsteen, 1963).The extingency for cytosine protonation
makes this structure preferred under acidic pH (Mirkin and Frank-Kamenetskii,
1994). The H-r form can be built of CG*G, TA*A and, unexpectedly, TA*T triads
(Kohwi and Kohwi-Shigematsu, 1988; Beal and Dervan, 1991; Dayn, et. al., 1992).
In this case, DNA bases of the third strand form reverse Hoogsteen hydrogen
bonds with the purines of the duplex (Fig.
4B) (Hoogsteen, 1963). These triads are stable at physiological pH, but are
greatly stabilized in the presence of divalent cations (Kohwi, 1989; Bernues,
et. al., 1990; Beltran, et. al., 1993; Malkov, et. al., 1993; Martinez-Balbas
and Azorin, 1993). Like cruciform structures, a H DNA is topologically
equivalent to the completely unwound DNA and its formation requires substantial
duplex unwinding (Lyamichev, et. al., 1985). Thus it is favored in negatively
supercoiled DNA, and its formation depends exponentially on repeat length
(reviewed in Mirkin and Frank-Kamenetskii, 1994). Cloned
homopurine-homopyrimidine repeats were shown to adopt H conformation in E. coli cells when the intracellular
supercoiling increased due to mutations in topoisomerase
Fig. 3. H DNA
structure. Both H-y and H-r forms are shown. Red line: homopurine and green
line: homopyrimidine strands of an H
palindrome, respectively. Purple lines:
adjacent DNA. Black lines: Watson-Crick hydrogen bonds; stars: Hoogsteen hydrogen bonds.
Fig. 4. Triplex
forming triads. A: Hoogsteen triads
forming H-y DNA. B: reverse
Hoogsteen triads forming H-r DNA.
genes, chloramphenicol treatment, or transcriptional activation (Kohwi, et. al., 1992; Kohwi and Panchenko, 1993; Ussery and Sinden, 1993). Antibodies against triplex DNA were also shown to interact with chromosomes of permeabilized mammalian cells (Agazie, et. al., 1996).
Direct
tandem repeats (DTRs) can adopt a variety of conformations. As is obvious from
the above discussion, some DTRs can form cruciforms or H DNA as long as they
happened to be inverted repeats or H-palindromes, respectively. Another
structure, called a G-quartet (Fig. 5)
can be formed by DTRs containing tandemly arranged runs of guanines (Gellert,
et. al., 1962; Zimmerman, et. al.,
Fig. 5. Quadruplex
DNA structure. A. General overview. Black line - DNA strand, purple rectangles
- stacked G-quartets. B - Chemical structure of a G-quartet.
1975; Sen and Gilbert,
1988; Sundquist and Klug, 1989). It is built from stacked G4 blocks that are additionally stabilized
in the presence of monovalent ions (Pinnavaia, et. al., 1978; Williamson, et.
al., 1989; Murchie and Lilley, 1994; Weitzmann, et. al., 1997). This structure
is definitely formed by single-stranded G-rich DTRs, but there are also
indications that it can exist in superhelical DNA (Ahmed, et. al., 1994).
Formation of G-quartets in vivo has
never been directly demonstrated.
DTRs
consisting of regularly alternating purines and pyrimidines can adopt
left-handed Z DNA conformation (Mitsui, et. al., 1970; Pohl and Jovin, 1972;
Wang, et.
Fig. 6. Schematic
representation of slipped-stranded DNA structure (S-DNA). Red and green lines
represent complementary strands of a DTR. Purple lines - surrounding DNA.
al., 1979; reviewed in
Rich, et. al., 1984). In linear DNA, this structure is only possible under
rather exotic conditions (such as very high ionic strength) (Peck, et. al.,
1982; Singleton, et. al., 1982). In superhelical DNA, by contrast,
it is extremely favorable under physiological conditions, since its releases
twice as many supercoils per DNA base as unwound DNA, cruciforms or H DNA
(Singleton, et. al., 1982). Z-DNA was detected in bacterial cells after an
increase in DNA supercoiling due to environmental changes or transcription
(Haniford and Pulleyblank, 1983; Jaworski, et. al., 1989; Rahmouni and Wells,
1992). In permeabilized mammalian cells anti-Z antibodies specifically interact
with chromosomes, targeting upstream parts of actively transcribed genes
(Wittig, et. al., 1992; Wolfl, et. al., 1996).
Finally,
DTRs of various base compositions can adopt a structure called slipped-stranded
DNA (S-DNA) (reviewed in Sinden, 1994). This structure (Fig. 6) utilizes the multiply repeated nature of the sequence: upon
denaturing and renaturing, the complementary repeats can mispair, resulting in
a peculiar combination of double-helical stretches intervened by
single-stranded loops. In linear DNA, this conformation is thermodynamically
unfavorable but can be trapped kinetically. In superhelical DNA, it might
become favorable given the release of substantial torsional tension. It is
worth noting, that for core repeated units of certain base compositions, the
loops can be additionally stabilized by hydrogen bonds of both WC and non-WC
nature (Pearson and Sinden, 1996). This would certainly make S-DNA more favorable.
For example, formation of S-DNA was suggested for expandable (CXG)n
trinucleotide repeats in linear or superhelical DNA upon denaturing/renaturing
(Pearson and Sinden, 1996; Chen, et. al., 1998; Mariappan, et. al., 1998;
Pearson, et. al., 1998; Pearson, et. al., 1998). In this case, the loops are
likely to be stabilized by CG base pairs and some non-WC pairs such as GG.
Although there is some indirect evidence for S-DNA in vivo, especially during DNA replication (reviewed in Pearson and
Sinden, 1998), direct proof is still lacking.
The
recent availability of large genomic texts of many different organisms has
allowed their detailed computer analysis. This analysis (Trifonov, et. al.,
1985; Karlin, 1986; Morris, et. al., 1986; Manor, et. al., 1988; Smillie and
Bains, 1990; Lagercrantz, et. al., 1993; Han, et. al., 1994; Schroth and Ho,
1995; Karlin and Burge, 1996; Cox and Mirkin, 1997; Raghavan, et. al., 1997;
Saunders, et. al., 1998) as well as numerous experimental approaches, including
pattern matching (Galas, et. al., 1985), word frequency counting (Karlin and
Burge, 1995) and basic linguistic techniques (Pevzner, et. al., 1989; Pevzner,
et. al., 1989), has revealed that simple repeated sequences are remarkably
abundant in natural DNAs, particularly in eukaryotic genomes.
We have
recently carefully evaluated the representation of different repeat types in
prokaryotes, eukaryotes and bacteria, and compared those values with the
expected frequencies based on the local DNA base composition (Cox and Mirkin,
1997). This analysis led to several important conclusions. It became evident
that simple DNA repeats of substantial length (>24 bp-long) occur in genomes
with much higher frequency than it would be statistically predicted. However,
genomes belonging to different kingdoms of life (prokarya, eukarya and archaea)
are enriched in different types of repeats. Eukaryotic genomes showed the
enrichment of all three types of simple repeats. Of all repeats, mirror
repeats, and particularly H-palindromes, were the most overrepresented,
reaching 109 over the chance value. Bacterial genomes
and organelles have a substantial overrepresentation of inverted repeats and
sometimes direct tandem repeats. In contrast, in archae none of the repeats
were abundant.
The
enrichment in different repeats shows an interesting length dependence. The
chance frequency, calculated taking into account local GC-content,
exponentially decreases with the length of repeats. The actual frequency of
repeat occurrence also decreased exponentially but at a much slower rate. As a
result, the normalized frequencies of overrepresented repeats showed almost
perfect exponential increasing lengths (Fig.
7). This is particularly interesting since, as discussed above, the
structure forming ability of a repeat also increases exponentially with length.
One might speculate that the abundance of long repeats may indicate an
evolutionary advantage conferred by unusual DNA structures.
While
these questions are at the focus of numerous studies, we were specifically
interested in the mechanisms of simple repeat replication. Those studies, which
started from the effects of H DNA on DNA polymerization in vitro and expanded into the analysis of replication of different
repeats in vivo, are outlined below.
Fig. 7. Ratio of
observed to expected frequencies of H palindromes for pro- and eukaryotic
genomes. Red circles: H. sapiens genome; green
squares: E. coli genome.
II. Effects of simple DNA repeats
on DNA polymerization in vitro
It has
long been known that simple DNA repeats affect DNA polymerization in vitro, presumably via the unusual
conformation of the DNA template. Many instances of inverted repeats slowing
down different DNA polymerases, most likely due to hairpin formation, have been
described (Sherman and Gefter, 1976; Chalberg and Englund, 1979; Huang and
Hearst, 1980; Kaguni and Clayton, 1982; Weaver and DePamphilis, 1982; Bedinger,
et. al., 1989). Tetraplex-forming repeats also inhibit DNA synthesis carried
out by many different DNA polymerases (Woodford, et. al., 1994; Usdin and
Woodford, 1995; Weitzmann, et. al., 1997). The polymerization arrest was K+-dependent,
strongly indicating the role of intrastranded G-quartets. Finally, numerous
homopurine-homopyrimidine stretches are known to impede DNA polymerization,
presumably due to triplex formation (Lapidot, et. al., 1989; Baran, et. al.,
1991; Dayn, et. al., 1992; Samadashwily, et. al., 1993; Mikhailov and
Bogenhagen, 1996; Krasilnikov, et. al., 1997). However, the detailed mechanisms
of repeat-caused polymerization blockage were largely unknown until recently.
Our
interest to the effects of repeated DNA on polymerization arose from the
pioneering studies of Manor and colleagues (Lapidot, et. al., 1989; Baran, et.
al., 1991). They found that
polymerization by Klenow or Taq polymerases on single-stranded DNA templates
was partially blocked within d(GA)n or d(CT)n tracts.
Since polymerization halted in the middle of those stretches, they suggested
that when the newly synthesized DNA strand reached the center of a stretch its
remaining part folded
Fig. 8. Models of triplex-caused
polymerization arrest.
A. polymerization on single-stranded template;
B. polymerization on linear double-stranded template;
C. polymerization on supercoiled template.
Red rectangles: homopurine halves of an
H-palindrome; green rectangles:
homopyrimidine halves of an H-palindrome; purple
lines: growing DNA strands; purple
arrows: polymerization direction; black
lines: parent DNA strands; purple
stars: polymerization stop sites.
back to form a triplex (Fig. 8A). As a result, the polymerase
is trapped and is unable to continue elongation. This hypothesis was supported
by the characteristic pH dependence for d(CT)n tracts, and the
reversal of termination by substituting dGTP by deazaGTP which is incapable of
forming Hoogsteen hydrogen bonds.
We first
analyzed DNA polymerization on superhelical DNA templates containing different
isoforms of H-r DNA (Dayn, et. al., 1992). We found that DNA polymerase
terminates at specific sites on both DNA chains within supercoiled templates
containing these structures. The location of the termination sites differed for
various isoforms but always coincided with triplex boundaries as defined by
chemical probing (Fig. 8C). We
concluded, therefore, H DNA prevents DNA polymerization.
Subsequently,
we analyzed DNA polymerization through H-forming repeats in double-stranded
open circular DNAs, where the triplex structure did not exist prior to
polymerization (Samadashwily, et. al., 1993). DNA polymerization stopped almost
completely at the center of those sequences but only when the homopyrimidine
strand served as a template. Mutations that destroyed H-forming potential of a
repeat abolished polymerization blockage, while compensatory mutations
restoring H-forming potential, restored polymerization arrest as well. We
concluded that the formation of H-r DNA during DNA polymerization was
responsible for the observed polymerization arrest. During DNA synthesis on a
double-stranded template, the DNA polymerase must displace the non-template DNA
strand. When the displaced segment contains the purine-rich half of an H-motif,
it can fold back to form an intramolecular triplex downstream of the
polymerase, which, in turn, blocks polymerase progression (Fig. 8B).
The
severity of the triplex-caused polymerization blockage led us to wonder about
the mechanisms of their inhibitory effects. Several possibilities should be
considered. First, under polymerization conditions, triplexes may be so much
more stable than duplexes that the triplex blockage of polymerization is a
simple reflection of their persistence. Second, the kinetics of polymerase
passage through triplexes may be much slower than through duplexes, simulating
polymerization blockage. Finally, DNA polymerases, while capable of dismantling
duplexes, may be unable to do so with triplexes.
Our
recent study (Krasilnikov, et. al., 1997) distinguished between these
possibilities. We used single-stranded DNA templates containing intrastranded
H-r triplexes or control duplexes and studied the efficiency of Vent DNA
polymerase passage at different temperatures and time intervals. In parallel,
the stability of different triplex and duplex structures was determined in DNA
melting experiments. At physiological temperatures, we found that triplexes
completely block polymerization, but duplexes just slow it down several fold.
Melting temperature curves showed that triplexes were only slightly more stable
than the corresponding duplexes. Such small differences are unlikely to account
for the dramatic differences in temperatures (up to 40ˇC) at which the
polymerase traverses these structures. Projection of polymerase passage
temperatures onto melting curves for different structures revealed that the
polymerase passes triplex barriers at temperatures where they start to
dissociate, whereas duplexes are overcome far below their dissociation
temperatures (Fig. 9). This shows
that DNA polymerase can slowly untangle duplexes in DNA templates, but not
triplex structures.
Fig. 9. Comparison
of melting curves for a triplex and duplex with the temperatures of DNA
polymerase passage through these structures. Blue circles: triplex melting data; red circles: duplex melting data; arrows: temperatures of polymerase passage (blue: triplex template; red:
duplex template).
Based on
these results, it is plausible to speculate that the elongating DNA polymerase
is equipped to sense the structure of the DNA template ahead of it.
Single-stranded DNA is an optimal template, double-helical segments represent
an obstacle which can be slowly unwound by DNA polymerase, and unusual template
conformations, such as triplexes or quadruplexes, represent steady roadblocks.
It is
highly likely that other enzymes of DNA metabolism might experience similar
problems while tracking along DNA. One important question is whether different
RNA polymerases are similarly sensitive to the conformation of a DNA template.
This question is less studied, but there are some provocative data suggesting
that this is the case. RNA polymerase was shown to stall within or immediately
after several H-palindromes (Reaban and Griffin, 1990; Reaban, et. al., 1994;
Grabczyk and Fishman, 1995; Kiyama and Oishi, 1996). This stalling profoundly
depended on the repeat's orientation in the transcription unit. In most cases,
it occurred when the transcript carried an oligopurine stretch, though for d(A)n.d(T)n repeat, it happened for the
oligo(U) transcript (Kiyama and Oishi, 1996). It was suggested that stalling
occurs upon formation of a three-stranded complex between RNA and DNA strands
corresponding to the H-palindrome. In this complex, RNA is resistant to RNase A
but cleaved by RNase H, and DNA is unwound as evident from the release of
supercoils (Reaban, et. al., 1994; Grabczyk and Fishman, 1995).
The exact
nature of this complex remains unknown, and several possibilities are currently
considered. One idea is that RNA polymerization generates negative supercoiling
upstream of the enzyme, provoking transient H DNA formation. This structure
might become kinetically trapped if an RNA transcript binds to its
single-stranded portion (Grabczyk and Fishman, 1995). Formation of such a
trapped complex immediately upstream of the RNA polymerase might attenuate its
propagation. Another hypothesis is that transcription through a
homopurine-homopyrimidine sequence could create an unusually long and stable
R-loop (Reaban, et. al., 1994). The non-template DNA strand could collapse onto
this R-loop, forming some hydrogen bonds with either the DNA or RNA strand as
possible (collapsed R-loop) (Reaban, et. al., 1994). Future studies are needed
to understand the structure of this RNA/DNA complex and how it affects RNA
polymerization.
III. Effects of simple DNA repeats
on DNA replication in vivo.
Because
DNA polymerases cannot efficiently pass structured parts of DNA templates, one
might envision problems during DNA replication in vivo. It is well documented that a portion of the lagging strand
DNA template (of an Okazaki fragment size) must be single-stranded in order to
pursue coordinated synthesis of both DNA strands (reviewed in Kornberg and
Baker, 1992). This several hundred bp-long single stranded piece can adopt a
plethora of different conformations, potentially serving as roadblocks for DNA
polymerase, unless accessory replication proteins, including single-stranded
DNA binding proteins and DNA helicases, helped to remove them. In some cases,
however, even they may not be sufficient, as indicated by observations that the
replication fork as a whole stalls within some simple DNA repeats in vivo (Rao, et. al., 1988; Brinton,
et. al., 1991; Rao, 1994).
This
consideration encouraged us to study the mode of replication fork progression
through simple DNA repeats in vivo (Samadashwily,
et. al., 1997; Krasilnikova, et. al., 1998). As discussed above, these repeats
are widespread in natural DNAs, and can be cloned and maintained in many model
systems including bacteria and yeast. This clearly shows that they are able to
replicate in vivo. However, one might
expect that the rate of replication fork progression through the repeated DNA
is slower. Unfortunately, this is a difficult problem to study, since the
normal replication rate is very fast, ranging from 1000 bp/sec in bacteria to
several hundreds bp/sec in eukaryotes (reviewed in Kornberg and Baker, 1992).
For example, given a 100 bp-long repeat in pBR322 slows the replication fork
progres-
Fig. 10. Detection
of repeat-caused replication blocks by 2-dimensional gel-electrophoresis. A. Schematic representation of our
approach. Upper panel shows the structure of the linearized plasmid DNA. The
green triangle corresponds to the replication origin, the red box corresponds
to cloned repeated DNA. The lower left panel shows the shapes of different
replication intermediates. The red intermediate corresponds to the one which
preferentially accumulates due to repeat-caused replication blockage. The lower
right panel shows the replication arc. The red circle corresponds to the
replication stop site. B. Actual
electrophoregram of replication intermediates of a plasmid containing a d(G)32.d(C)32 repeat. The red arrow
points to the replication stop site.
sion 10-fold, the overall plasmid replication would only be slowed from 5 sec to 6 sec. Therefore, most conventional methods of DNA replication analysis are not applicable to this problem.
To solve this problem we decided to analyze the effects of different DNA
repeats on the replication of bacterial plasmids in vivo using an approach called 2-dimensional neutral/neutral
electrophoresis of replication intermediates. This technique was developed for
mapping of the replication origins (Brewer and Fangman, 1987; Huberman, et.
al., 1987) but lately has become instrumental in defining replication
termination sites as well (MacAllister, et. al., 1990; Zhu, et. al., 1992;
Little, et. al., 1993). Bacterial plasmids were chosen for two reasons: (i) they replicate unidirectionally
which unequivocally determines leading and lagging strands during DNA
replication; (ii) they replicate
very efficiently which allows an easy isolation and analysis of replication
intermediates.
The idea of electrophoretic analysis of replication intermediates
applied to unidirectional replication is presented in Fig. 10A. Intermediate
products of plasmid replication are Q-shaped.
Upon cleaving these intermediates with a restriction enzyme upstream of the
replication origin, they convert into bubble-shaped molecules, where the size
of the bubble correlates with the duration of replication. Bubble intermediates
differ in their molecular mass (ranging from 1 to 2 plasmid masses) and shape.
They are separated in two dimensions: first by mass (low percentage agarose)
and second by mass and shape (high percentage agarose with ethidium bromide).
Southern blotting hybridization with the radioactive plasmid probe reveals a
so-called bubble arc. If there are no roadblocks during DNA replication, this
arc is smooth. Stalling of the replication fork at a specific DNA repeat,
however, leads to the accumulation of an intermediate of a given size and
shape, generating a bulge on the arc. The ratio of the signal of this bulge to
the signal of the corresponding area of a smooth replication arc (relative stop strength, RSS) is
an index of replication fork retardation by the repeat.
Using this
approach we found that different simple DNA repeats, including d(CGG)n.d(CCG)n, d(CTG)n. d(CAG)n, d(G)n.d(C)n, d(G-A)n.d(T-C)n, etc., block the
replication fork progression. The typical picture of such repeat-caused
blockage is presented in Fig. 10B
for the d(G)32.d(C)32
repeat. In this case the RSS is Ĺ30, i.e. this repeat slows the replication
down 30-fold. Notably, in all cases, longer repeats caused more profound
replication stops than the shorter ones.
To prove
that replication stops coincides with those repeats, we used a modified version
of the electrophoretic analysis of replication intermediates (Friedman and
Brewer, 1995). After the first dimension of electrophoresis, replication
intermediates were digested with a restriction enzyme in the gel. The enzymes
selected for this analysis cut the plasmid either upstream or downstream of the
repeat. As a result, a fraction of bubble-shaped intermediates converted into
identical y-shaped intermediates (Fig.
11A). In the second dimension of electrophoresis, these intermediates
migrate similarly and can be detected as a horizontal line upon hybridization
with a probe adjacent to the replication
ori. As is clear from Fig. 11A,
restriction cleavage downstream of the repeat (relative to the ori) would leave the bulge on the
bubble-
Fig. 11. Mapping of
the replication stop sites. A.
Schematic representation of 2-D gel-electrophoresis upon restriction cleavage
after the first dimension. The red square shows the d(G)32.d(C)32 insert. Purple vertical
lines show HindIII and EcoRI restriction sites located upstream
and downstream from the insert, respectively. The stalled replication
intermediate is shown in red. Upon EcoRI
digestion, this stalled intermediate should remain bubble-shaped and, thus,
remain on the arc after the second dimension of electrophoresis (right panel).
In contrast, upon HindIII digestion,
this intermediate should become y-shaped and move onto the line after the
second dimension of electrophoresis (left panel). B. Actual figures of electrophoretic separation of replication
intermediates. Left panel - HindIII
digestion together with the hypothetical structure of an underreplicated
stalled intermediate, right panel - EcoR1
digestion. Red arrows point to replication stop sites.
arc, while upstream cleavage shifts the bulge from the bubble-arc onto the horizontal line.
Fig. 11B shows a characteristic example of
such mapping for the (G)32.(C)32
repeat (Krasilnikova, et. al., 1998). One can see that cleavage of the replication
intermediates downstream from the repeat leaves the bulge on the bubble arc. By
contrast, cleavage upstream of the repeat shifts the bulge away from the bubble
arc. Thus, the replication fork is indeed stalled within the (G)32.(C)32 stretch. Note, however, that
after cleavage upstream of the repeat, the bulge does not co-migrate with the
horizontal line, but migrates to a point in between the bubble-arc and the
horizontal line. Thus, the shape of this intermediate is less compact than the
y-shape but more compact than the bubble. To explain this migration pattern,
one must assume that a portion of the lagging strand around the HindIII site in stalled replication
intermediates was not yet synthesized. This will lead to an incomplete HindIII digestion and the appearance of
butterfly-like DNA molecules (shown in the diagram). If this assumption is
correct, we detect the underreplication of the lagging strand within the d(G)n.d(C)n sequences.
Different
DNA repeats mentioned above gave phenomenologically similar results in the
electrophoretic analysis of the replication intermediates: (i) they caused replication blockage; (ii) the efficiency of replication
blockage increased with repeat length; and (iii) the lagging strand at the repeated DNA segment was underreplicated.
We have found, however, that there are at least three different mechanisms
responsible for the replication fork blockage by different repeats.
The first
mechanism applies to the expandable trinucleotide repeats such as (CGG)n.(CCG)n,
(CTG)n.(CAG)n
(Samadashwily, et. al., 1997). These repeats attracted very broad attention,
since more than a dozen human neurological disorders were attributed to their
length expansion (reviewed in Ashley and Warren, 1995; McMurray, 1995; Wells,
1996). Trinucleotide repeats expand with a length-dependent probability. In
normal individuals carrying 5-to-30 repeats, expansion is highly unlikely.
Individuals with repeat numbers exceeding a threshold of nĹ30 can transmit
expanded repeats to their progeny. In the following generations, expansions
become more frequent, and each subsequent expansion has a higher probability
than the previous one. The latter phenomenon is likely to account for the
anticipation in the inheritance of these disorders (Caskey, et. al., 1992;
Bates and Lehrach, 1994)
The
length dependence of repeat expansion suggests the involvement of an unusual
DNA secondary structure(s) (Cox and Mirkin, 1997). Supporting this, it was
demonstrated that these repeats in a single-stranded state fold into imperfect
hairpins stabilized by both WC and non-WC base pairs (Chen, et. al., 1995;
Gacy, et. al., 1995; Yu, et. al., 1995; Petruska, et. al., 1996; Zheng, et.
al., 1996; Yu, et. al., 1997). Moreover, the threshold length for expansion is
similar to the threshold energy of hairpin formation (Gacy, et. al., 1995).
The
mechanisms of repeat expansion remain unknown, but most data implicate
replication in this process. Trinucleotide repeats stall in vitro DNA polymerization (Kang, et. al., 1995; Usdin and
Woodford, 1995; Ohshima and Wells, 1997). This blockage can facilitate a
misalignment between the newly synthesized and the template DNA strand (Ohshima
and Wells, 1997), potentially leading to expansion. In vivo, expansion of different trinucleotide repeats occurs
preferentially on their 3'-ends, implying that it could be due to the
miscoordination between the leading and lagging strand synthesis (Jodice, et.
al., 1994; Kunst and Warren, 1994; Snow, et. al., 1994). This hypothesis is
additionally supported by observations that in bacterial and yeast models, the
equilibrium between the repeats' expansions or contractions depends on their
positioning with regard to the replication origin (Kang, et. al., 1995; Kang,
et. al., 1996; Shimizu, et. al., 1996; Freudenreich, et. al., 1997).
To obtain
direct data on trinucleotide repeats replication in vivo, we analyzed the replication fork movement through these
repeats within bacterial plasmids
using the electrophoretic approach discussed above (Samadashwily, et. al.,
1997). We found that (CGG)n.(CCG)n and (CTG)n.(CAG)n
repeats blocked replication fork progression, and the efficiency of blockage
increased with the repeat length so that the length responsible for signifi-
Fig. 12.
Quantitative analysis of the replication stop strength (RSS). Purple squares: RSS for plasmids
carrying the d(CGG)n-insert in the lagging strand template; red squares: RSS for plasmids carrying
the d(CCG)n-insert in the lagging strand template.
Fig. 13. Model of
replication blockage caused by trinucleotide repeats. The structure prone
strand of a repeat is depicted by a red line, while its complementary strand is
shown by a green line. The purple lines show the neighboring DNA. Arrows show
the 3'-ends of the growing DNA strands. When the structure-prone DNA sequence
is in the lagging strand template, it can form a hairpin-like structure which
might prevent the lagging strand synthesis. Since synthesis of both DNA strands
is coordinated during DNA replication, this results in stalling of the whole
replication fork.
cant replication
stalling (Ĺ5-fold) was similar to the threshold length for expansion (Fig. 12). The inhibitory effect didn't
depend on whether the repeated segment was situated in the transcribed or
non-transcribed part of the
Fig. 14. Model for
replication blockage caused by transcription through d(G)n.d(C)n repeats. Stalled RNA
polymerase is shown by an orange oval. The (G)n stretches in DNA and RNA chains are depicted as red lines,
while the d(C)n stretch is depicted as green line. DNA adjacent to
the repeat is shown in purple. The RNA chain is depicted by a gray line except
for the r(G)n stretch, shown in red. Arrows show the 3'-ends of the
newly synthesized DNA and RNA chains. Transcriptional stall is believed to be
caused by the formation of a stable complex between the G-rich RNA chain and
its DNA template. The exact structure of this three-stranded complex remains to
be established. The replication fork stops upon encountering the stalled
transcription complex.
plasmid. However, it depended
on the repeat's orientation relative to the replication origin. Specifically,
when structure-prone strands of the repeated DNA, such as (CGG)n or
(CTG)n, were in the lagging strand template, the replication
blockage was the most prominent. We believe, therefore, that the unusual
structure of repeated DNA in the lagging strand template is responsible for the
replication blockage (Fig. 13).
The
second mechanisms appears to be responsible for the replication blockage caused
by the d(G)n.d(C)n
repeat (Krasilnikova, et. al., 1998). Similarly to the (CGG)n.(CCG)n repeats, d(G)n.d(C)n blocks replication in a length
dependent manner, except much stronger: for n=30 replication is slowed down
Ĺ30-fold. Unlike the trinucleotide repeats, however, replication blockage
relied exclusively on the repeats' transcription so that when the d(C)n
sequence served as the transcriptional template the replication was severely
impaired.
This led us to study
transcription through d(G)n.d(C)n
repeat in vivo. We found that when
the d(C)n sequence served as the transcriptional template,
transcription was stalled, as was detected by the accumulation of a truncated
transcript. This truncated transcript contained an oligo(G) stretch. We
conclude, therefore, that transcription is stalled within or immediately after
the d(G)n.d(C)n
repeat, and this is likely caused by the formation of a multistranded complex
between the G-rich transcript and its DNA template (Fig. 14). The replication fork, in turn, can not progress through
this stalled ternary complex of the RNA polymerase, the DNA template, and the
r(G)n transcript (Fig. 14).
The third
mechanism applies to the d(G-A)n.d(T-C)n
repeat. In this case, there is also a length-dependent replication blockage.
However, it depends neither on repeat's transcription, nor on its orientation
relative to the replication origin (Krasilnikova et al., unpublished results).
In order
to clarify this situation, we studied the replication of this repeat in
bacterial cells treated with chloramphenicol. This protein synthesis inhibitor
is necessary for bacterial chromosome replication but is dispensable for the
replication of ColE1-type plasmids. Thus, in the presence of chloramphenicol,
plasmid DNA becomes profoundly amplified, while the protein content of the cell
remains at best stagnant (Clewell, 1972). We found that replication stops in
plasmids containing d(G-A)n.d(T-C)n
inserts completely disappeared under chloramphenicol treatment (Krasilnikova et
al., unpublished results). It is plausible to speculate that the inhibitory
effect of this repeat on replication is due to a protein binding to this
repeat. The length-dependence of the d(G-A)n.d(T-C)n
-caused replication blockage could be explained by assuming cooperative protein
binding to the repeated DNA (Fig. 15).
This
situation is markedly different from the trinucleotide repeats and the d(G)n.d(C)n repeat. In the latter cases,
chloramphenicol treatment does not abolish replication blockage but rather
enhances it.
IV. Conclusions
The fact
that very different types of simple DNA repeats impede the replication fork
progression in vivo
Fig. 15. Model for
replication blockage caused by transcription through d(G-A)n.d(T-C)n repeats. DNA strands of
the repeated segment are depicted by red and green lines. Purple lines show
surrounding DNA. Gray ovals show cooperatively repeat-bound protein molecules.
The replication fork stalls upon encountering a protein/DNA complex.
might have profound biological implications. First, and most important, this may explain the remarkable length polymorphism observed for simple DNA repeats in genomic DNAs. Indeed, to bypass a roadblock involving a DNA repeat, the replication fork could either jump past it (which might cause contractions or deletions) or pull back and try again (which might case expansions). Recently, several groups have suggested models detailing the above explanation for repeat expansions and contractions (Kang, et. al., 1995; McMurray, 1995; Gordenin, et. al., 1997; Tishkoff, et. al., 1997). Note, however, that the current knowledge on the mechanisms of repeat replication is insufficient to choose between those models.
Second,
the interplay between transcription and replication blockage may play a role in
several biological processes. In notoriously long eukaryotic genes, the
collision of the replication and transcription machinery is almost inevitable.
Our proposed mechanism might prevent the replication of genes that undergo
active transcription. Another provocative opportunity is that stalling of the
replication fork caused by transcription of repeated DNA generates DNA ends
that are potentially highly recombinogenic. This may contribute to the
well-documented stimulation of genetic recombination by transcription (reviewed
in Gangloff, et. al., 1994), as well as to the recombinational hotspot activity
of some DNA repeats (Schon, et. al., 1989; Wahls, et. al., 1990; Weiller, et.
al., 1991; Sumegi, et. al., 1997; Boan, et. al., 1998)
Future
studies will undoubtedly contribute to a better understanding of both the
replication of simple DNA repeats and the consequences of their replication
peculiarities for different processes of DNA metabolism.
Acknowledgments
We thank the current and former
members of our lab Andrey
Dayn, Randal Cox, Andrey Krasilnikov and Gordana Raca for their invaluable
contribution for studying the effects of simple sequence repeats on DNA
replication and many helpful discussions, and Randal Cox for critical reading
of this manuscript. Supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health
(GM54247), the National Science Foundation (MCB-9723924) and the Council for
Tobacco Research (CTR-4468) to S.M.M. M.M.K. was in part supported by the
Office of International Affairs of the National Cancer Institute.
References
Agazie, Y. M., Burkholder, G. D., and Lee, J. S. (1996). Triplex DNA in the nucleus: direct
binding of triplex-specific antibodies and their effect on transcription,
replication and cell growth. Biochem. J.
316, 461-466.
Ahmed, S., Kintanar, A., and Henderson, E. (1994). Human telomeric C-strand
tetraplexes. Nature Struct. Biol. 1,
83-88.
Ashley, C., Jr., and Warren, S. T. (1995). Trinucleotide repeat expansion and human disease. Annu. Rev. Genet. 29, 703-728.
Baran, N., Lapidot, A., and Manor, H. (1991). Formation of DNA triplexes accounts for arrests of DNA
synthesis at d(TC)n and d(GA)n tracts. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88, 507-511.
Bates, G., and Lehrach, H. (1994). Trinucleotide repeat expansions and human genetic disease. Bioessays 16, 277-284.
Beal, P. A., and Dervan, P. B. (1991). Second structural motif for recognition of DNA by oligonucleotide-directed
triple-helix formation. Science 251,
1360-1363.
Bedinger, P., Munn, M., and Alberts, B. M. (1989). Sequence-specific pausing
during in vitro DNA replication on double stranded DNA templates. J. Biol. Chem. 264, 16880-16886.
Beltran, R., Martinez-Balbas, A., Bernues, J., Bowater, R.,
and Azorin, F. (1993).
Characterization of the zinc-induced structural transition to *H-DNA at a d(GA.CT)22 sequence. J. Mol. Biol. 230, 966-978.
Benham, C. J. (1982).
Stable cruciform formation at inverted repeat sequences in supercoiled DNA. Biopolymers 21, 679-696.
Bernues, J., Beltran, R., Casasnovas, J. M., and Azorin, F. (1990). DNA-sequence and metal-ion
specificity of the formation of *H-DNA. Nucleic
Acids Res. 18, 4067-4073.
Boan, F., Rodriguez, J. M., and Gomez-Marquez, J. (1998). A non-hypervariable human
minisatellite strongly stimulates in vitro intramolecular homologous
recombination. J. Mol. Biol. 278,
499-505.
Brewer, B. J., and Fangman, W. L. (1987). The localization of replication origins on ARS plasmids in
S. cerevisiae. Cell 51, 463-471.
Brinton, B. T., Caddle, M. S., and Heintz, N. H. (1991). Position and
orientation-dependent effects of a eukaryotic Z-triplex DNA motif on episomal
DNA replication in COS-7 cells. J. Biol.
Chem. 266, 5153-5161.
Caskey, C. T., Pizzuti, A., Fu, Y.-H., Fenwick Jr., R. G.,
and Nelson, D.L. (1992). Triplet
repeat mutations in human disease. Science
256, 784-789.
Chalberg, M. D., and Englund, P. T. (1979). The effect of template secondary structure on vaccinia DNA polymerase.
J. Biol. Chem. 254, 7820-7826.
Chen, X., Mariappan, S. V., Catasti, P., Ratliff, R.,
Moyzis, R. K., Laayoun, A., Smith, S. S., Bradbury, E. M., and Gupta, G. (1995). Hairpins are formed by the
single DNA strands of the fragile X triplet repeats: structure and biological
implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92, 5199-5203.
Chen, X., Mariappan, S. V., Moyzis, R. K., Bradbury, E. M.,
and Gupta, G. (1998). Hairpin
induced slippage and hyper-methylation of the fragile X DNA triplets. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 15, 745-756.
Clewell, D. B. (1972).
Nature of Col E1 plasmid replication in Escherichia coli in the presence of
chloramphenicol. J. Bacteriol. 110,
667-676.
Cox, R., and Mirkin, S. M. (1997). Characteristic enrichment of DNA repeats in different
genomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94, 5237-5242.
Dayn, A., Malkhosyan, S., Duzhy, D., Lyamichev, V.,
Panchenko, Y., and Mirkin, S. (1991).
Formation of (dA-dT)n cruciforms in Escherichia coli cells under different
environmental conditions. J. Bacteriol.
173, 2658-2664.
Dayn, A., Malkhosyan, S., and Mirkin, S. M. (1992). Transcriptionally driven
cruciform formation in vivo. Nucleic
Acids Res. 20, 5991-5997.
Dayn, A., Samadashwily, G. M., and Mirkin, S. M. (1992). Intramolecular DNA triplexes:
unusual sequence requirements and influence on DNA polymerization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89,
11406-11410.
Freudenreich, C. H., Stavenhagen, J. B., and Zakian, V. A. (1997). Stability of a CTG/CAG
trinucleotide repeat in yeast is dependent on its orientation in the genome. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17, 2090-2098.
Friedman, K. L., and Brewer, B. J. (1995). Analysis of replication intermediates by two-dimensional
agarose gel electrophoresis. Meth.
Enzymol. 262, 613-627.
Gacy, A. M., Goellner, G., Juranic, N., Macura, S., and McMurray,
C. T. (1995). Trinucleotide repeats
that expand in human disease form hairpin structures in vitro. Cell 81, 533-540.
Galas, D. J., Eggert, M., and Waterman, M. S. (1985). Rigorous pattern-recognition
methods for DNA sequences. Analysis of promoter sequences from Escherichia
coli. J. Mol. Biol. 186, 117-128.
Gangloff, S., Lieber, M. R., and Rothstein, R. (1994). Transcription, topoisomerases
and recombination. Experientia 50,
261-269.
Gellert, M., Lipsett, M. N., and Davies, D. R. (1962). Helix formation by guanylic
acid. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 48,
2013-2018.
Gordenin, D. A., Kunkel, T. A., and Resnick, M. A. (1997). Repeat expansion - all in a
flap? Nature Genet. 16, 116-118.
Grabczyk, E., and Fishman, M. C. (1995). A long purine-pyrimidine homopolymer acts as a
transcriptional diode. J. Biol. Chem.
270, 1791-1797.
Han, J., Hsu, C., Zhu, Z., Longshore, J. W., and Finley, W.
H. (1994). Over-representation of
the disease associated (CAG) and (CGG) repeats in the human genome. Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 1735-1740.
Haniford, D. B., and Pulleyblank, D. E. (1983). Facile transition of poly[d(TG).d(CA)]
into a left-handed helix in physiological conditions. J. Biomol. Struct. Dynam. 1, 593-609.
Hoogsteen, K. (1963).
The crystal and molecular structure of a hydrogen-bonded complex between 1
methylthymine and 9 methyladenine. Acta
Cryst. 16, 907-916.
Huang, C. C., and Hearst, J. E. (1980). Pauses at positions of secondary structure during in vitro
replication of single-stranded fd bacteriophage DNA by T4 DNA polymerase. Anal. Biochem. 103, 127-139.
Huberman, J. A., Spotila, L. D., Nawotka, K. A., El-Assouli,
S. M., and Davis, L. R. (1987). The
in vivo replication origin of the yeast 2 microns plasmid. Cell 51, 473-481.
Jaworski, A., Blaho, J. A., Larson, J. E., Shimizu, M., and
Wells, R. D. (1989). Tetracycline
promoter mutations decrease non-B DNA structural transitions, negative linking
differences and deletions in recombinant plasmids in Escherichia coli. J. Mol. Biol. 207, 513-526.
Jodice, C., Malaspina, P., Persichetti, F., Novelletto, A.,
Spadaro, M., Giunti, P., Morocutti, C., Terrenato, L., Harding, A. E., and
Frontali, M. (1994). Effect of
trinucleotide repeat length and parental sex on phenotypic variation in
spinocerebellar ataxia I. Am. J. Hum.
Genet. 54, 959-965.
Kaguni, L. S., and Clayton, D. A. (1982). Template-directed pausing in in vitro DNA synthesis by DNA
polymerase a from Drosophila melanogaster embryos. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 79, 983-987.
Kang, S., Jaworski, A., Ohshima, K., and Wells, R. D. (1995). Expansion and deletion of CTG
repeats from human disease genes are determined by the direction of replication
in E.coli. Nature Genet. 10,
213-218.
Kang, S., Ohshima, K., Jaworski, A., and Wells, R. D. (1996). CTG triplet repeats from the
myotonic dystrophy gene are expanded in Escherichia coli distal to the
replication origin as a single large event. J. Mol. Biol. 258, 543-547.
Karlin, S. (1986).
Significant potential secondary structures in the Epstein-Barr virus genome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83,
6915-6919.
Karlin, S., and Burge, C. (1995). Dinucleotide relative abundance extremes: a genomic
signature. Trends Genet. 11,
283-290.
Karlin, S., and Burge, C. (1996). Trinucleotide repeats and long homopeptides in genes and
proteins associated with nervous system disease and development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93,
1560-1565.
Kiyama, R., and Oishi, M. (1996). In vitro transcription of a poly(dA).poly(dT)-containing
sequence is inhibited by interaction between the template and its transcripts. Nucleic Acids Res. 24, 4577-4583.
Kohwi, Y. (1989).
Cationic metal-specific structures adopted by the poly(dG) region and the direct
repeats in the chicken adult bA globin gene promoter. Nucleic Acids Res. 17, 4493-4502.
Kohwi, Y., and Kohwi-Shigematsu, T. (1988). Magnesium ion-dependent triple-helix structure formed by
homopurine-homopyrimidine sequences in supercoiled plasmid DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85,
3781-3785.
Kohwi, Y., Malkhosyan, S. R., and Kohwi-Shigematsu, T. (1992). Intramolecular dG.dGdC triplex
detected in Escherichia coli cells. J.
Mol. Biol. 223, 817-822.
Kohwi, Y., and Panchenko, Y. (1993). Transcription-dependent recombination induced by
triple-helix formation. Genes Dev.
7, 1766-1778.
Kornberg, A., and Baker, T. (1992). DNA Replication - 2nd. ed. (New York: W. H. Freeman and
Co).
Krasilnikov, A. S., Panyutin, I. G., Samadashwily, G. M.,
Cox, R., Lazurkin, Y. S., and Mirkin, S. M. (1997). Mechanisms of triplex-caused polymerization arrest. Nucleic Acids Res. 25, 1339-1346.
Krasilnikova, M. M., Samadashwily, G. M., Krasilnikov, A.
S., and Mirkin, S. M. (1998).
Transcription through a simple DNA repeat blocks replication elongation. EMBO J. 17, 5095-5102.
Kunst, C. B., and Warren, S. T. (1994). Cryptic and polar variation of the fragile X repeat could
result in predisposing normal alleles. Cell
77, 853-861.
Lagercrantz, U., Ellegren, H., and Andersson, L. (1993). The abundance of various
polymorphic microsatellite motifs differs between plants and vertebrates. Nucleic Acids Res. 21, 1111-1115.
Lapidot, A., Baran, N., and Manor, H. (1989). (dT-dC)n and (dG-dA)n tracts arrest single stranded DNA
replication in vitro. Nucleic Acids Res.
17, 883-900.
Lilley, D. M. (1980).
The inverted repeat as a recognizable structural feature in supercoiled DNA
molecules. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
77, 6468-6472.
Little, R. D., Platt, T. H., and Schildkraut, C. L. (1993). Initiation and termination of
DNA replication in human rRNA. Mol.
Cell. Biol. 13, 6600-6613.
Lyamichev, V. I., Mirkin, S. M., and Frank-Kamenetskii, M.
D. (1985). A pH-dependent structural
transition in the homopurine-homopyrimidine tract in superhelical DNA. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 3, 327-338.
Lyamichev, V. I., Mirkin, S. M., and Frank-Kamenetskii, M.
D. (1986). Structures of
homopurine-homopyrimidine tract in superhelical DNA. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 3, 667-669.
MacAllister, T., Khatri, G. S., and Bastia, D. (1990). Sequence-specific and polarized
replication termination in vitro: complementation of extracts of tus-
Escherichia coli by purified Ter protein and analysis of termination
intermediates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 87, 2828-2832.
Malkov, V. A., Voloshin, O. N., Soyfer, V. N., and
Frank-Kamenetskii, M. D. (1993).
Cation and sequence effects on stability of intermolecular
pyrimidine-purine-purine triplex. Nucleic
Acids Res. 21, 585-591.
Manor, H., Sridhara-Rao, B., and Martin, R. G. (1988). Abundance and degree of
dispersion of genomic d(GA)n.d(TC)n
sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 27, 96-101.
Mariappan, S. V., Silks, L. A. 3., Chen, X., Springer, P.
A., Wu, R., Moyzis, R. K., Bradbury, E. M., Garcia, A. E., and Gupta, G. (1998). Solution structures of the
Huntington's disease DNA triplets, (CAG)n. J.
Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 15, 723-744.
Martinez-Balbas, A., and Azorin, F. (1993). The effect of zinc on the secondary structure of d(GA.TC)n DNA
sequences of different length: a model for the formation *H-DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 21, 2557-2562.
McClellan, J. A., Boublikova, P., Palecek, E., and Lilley,
D. M. J. (1990). Superhelical
torsion in cellular DNA responds directly to environmental and genetic factors.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87,
8373-8377.
McMurray, C. T. (1995).
Mechanisms of DNA expansion. Chromosoma
104, 2-13.
Mikhailov, V. S., and Bogenhagen, D. F. (1996). Termination within oligo(dT) tracts in template DNA by DNA
polymerase gamma occurs with formation of a DNA triplex structure and is
relieved by mitochondrial single-stranded DNA-binding protein. J. Biol. Chem. 271, 30774-30780.
Mirkin, S. M., and Frank-Kamenetskii, M. D. (1994). H-DNA and related structures. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 23,
541-576.
Mirkin, S. M., Lyamichev, V. I., Drushlyak, K. N., Dobrynin,
V. N., Filippov, S. A., and Frank-Kamenetskii, M. D. (1987). DNA H form requires a homopurine-homopyrimidine mirror
repeat. Nature 330, 495-497.
Mitsui, Y., Langridge, R., Grant, R. C., Kodama, M., Wells,
R. D., Shortle, B. E., and Cantor, C. R. (1970).
Physical and enzymatic studies ion poly(dI-dC)Ąpoly(dI-dC), an unusual double
helical DNA. Nature 228, 1166-1169.
Mizuuchi, K., Mizuuchi, M., and Gellert, M. (1982). Cruciform structures in
palindromic DNA are favored by DNA supercoiling. J. Mol. Biol. 156, 229-243.
Morris, J., Kushner, S. R., and Ivarie, R. (1986). The simple repeat poly(dT-dG).poly(dC-dA) common to eukaryotes is absent
from eubacteria and rare in protozoans. Mol.
Biol. Evol. 3, 343-355.
Murchie, A. I., and Lilley, D. M. (1994). Tetraplex folding of telomere sequences and the inclusion
of adenine bases. EMBO J. 13,
993-1001.
Ohshima, K., and Wells, R. D. (1997). Hairpin formation during DNA synthesis primer realignment
in vitro in triplet repeat sequences from human hereditary disease genes. J. Biol. Chem. 272, 16798-16806.
Panayotatos, N., and Wells, R. D. (1981). Cruciform structures in supercoiled DNA. Nature 289, 466-470.
Pearson, C. E., Eichler, E. E., Lorenzetti, D., Kramer, S.
F., Zoghbi, H. Y., Nelson, D. L., and Sinden, R. R. (1998). Interruptions in the triplet repeats of SCA1 and FRAXA
reduce the propensity and complexity of slipped strand DNA (S-DNA) formation. Biochemistry 37, 2701-2708.
Pearson, C. E., and Sinden, R. R. (1996). Alternative structures in duplex DNA formed within the
trinucleotide repeats of the myotonic dystrophy and fragile X loci. Biochemistry 35, 5041-5053.
Pearson, C. E., and Sinden, R. R. (1998). Trinucleotide repeat DNA structures: dynamic mutations from
dynamic DNA. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol.
8, 321-330.
Pearson, C. E., Wang, Y. H., Griffith, J. D., and Sinden, R.
R. (1998). Structural analysis of
slipped-strand DNA (S-DNA) formed in (CTG)n.(CAG)n
repeats from the myotonic dystrophy locus. Nucleic
Acids Res. 26, 816-823.
Peck, L. J., Nordheim, A., Rich, A., and Wang, J. C. (1982). Flipping of cloned
d(pC-pG)nĄd(pG-pC)n DNA sequences from right- to left handed helical structure
by salt, Co(III), or negative supercoiling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 79, 4560-4564.
Petruska, J., Arnheim, N., and Goodman, M. F. (1996). Stability of intrastrand
hairpin structures formed by the CAG/CTG class of DNA triplet repeats
associated with neurological diseases. Nucleic
Acids Res. 24, 1992-1998.
Pevzner, P. A., Borodovsky, M., and Mironov, A. A. (1989). Linguistics of nucleotide
sequences. I: The significance of deviations from mean statistical
characteristics and prediction of the frequencies of occurrence of words. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 6, 1013-1026.
Pevzner, P. A., Borodovsky, M., and Mironov, A. A. (1989). Linguistics of nucleotide
sequences. II: Stationary words in genetic texts and the zonal structure of
DNA. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 6,
1027-1038.
Pinnavaia, T. J., Marshall, C. L., Metterl, C. M., Fisk, C.
L., Miles, T., and Becker, E. D. (1978).
Alkali metal ion specificity in the solution ordering of a nucleotide,
5'-guanosine monophosphate. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 100, 3625-3627.
Pohl, F. M., and Jovin, T. M. (1972). Salt induced co-operative conformational changes of a
synthetic DNA: Equilibrium and kinetic studies with poly (dG-dC). J. Mol. Biol. 67, 375-396.
Raghavan, S., Burma, P. K., and Brahmachari, S. K. (1997). Positional preferences of
polypurine/polypyrimidine tracts in Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome:
implications for cis regulation of gene expression. J. Mol. Evol. 45, 485-498.
Rahmouni, A. R., and Wells, R. D. (1992). Direct evidence for the effect of transcription on local DNA
supercoiling in vivo. J. Mol. Biol.
223, 131-144.
Rao, B. S. (1994).
Pausing of simian virus 40 DNA replication fork movement in vivo by (dG-dA)n.(dT-dC)n tracts. Gene 140, 233-237.
Rao, S., Manor, H., and Martin, R. G. (1988). Pausing in simian virus 40 DNA replication by a sequence
containing (dG-dA)27.(dT-dC)27.
Nucleic Acids Res. 16, 8077-8094.
Reaban, M. E., and Griffin, J. A. (1990). Induction of RNA-stabilized DNA conformers by transcription
of an immunoglobulin switch region. Nature
348, 342-344.
Reaban, M. E., Lebowitz, J., and Griffin, J. A. (1994). Transcription induces the
formation of a stable RNA.DNA hybrid in the immunoglobulin a switch
region. J. Biol. Chem. 269,
21850-21857.
Rich, A., Nordheim, A., and Wang, A. H. (1984). The chemistry and biology of
left-handed Z-DNA. Annu. Rev. Biochem.
53, 791-846.
Samadashwily, G. M., Dayn, A., and Mirkin, S. M. (1993). Suicidal nucleotide sequences
for DNA polymerization. EMBO J. 12,
4975-4983.
Samadashwily, G. M., and Mirkin, S. M. (1994). Trapping DNA polymerases using triplex-forming
oligodeoxyribonucleotides. Gene 149,
127-136.
Samadashwily, G. M., Raca, G., and Mirkin, S. M. (1997). Trinucleotide repeats affect DNA
replication in vivo. Nature Genet.
17, 298-304.
Saunders, N. J., Peden, J. F., Hood, D. W., and Moxon, E. R.
(1998). Simple sequence repeats in
the Helicobacter pylori genome. Mol.
Microbiol. 27, 1091-1098.
Schon, E. A., Rizzuto, R., Moraes, C. T., Nakase, H.,
Zeviani, M., and DiMauro, S. (1989).
A direct repeat is a hotspot for large-scale deletion of human mitochondrial
DNA. Science 244, 346-349.
Schroth, G. P., and Ho, P. S. (1995). Occurrence of potential cruciform and H-DNA forming
sequences in genomic DNA. Nucleic Acids
Res. 23, 1977-1983.
Sen, D., and Gilbert, W. (1988). Formation of parallel four-stranded complexes by
guanine-rich motifs in DNA and its implications for meiosis. Nature 334, 364-366.
Sherman, L. A., and Gefter, M. L. (1976). Studies of the mechanism of enzymatic DNA elongation of by
Escherichia coli DNA polymerase II. J.
Mol. Biol. 103, 61-76.
Shimizu, M., Gellibolian, R., Oostra, B. A., and Wells, R.
D. (1996). Cloning, characterization
and properties of plasmids containing CGG triplet repeats from the FMR-1 gene. J. Mol. Biol. 258, 614-626.
Sinden, R. R. (1994). DNA structure and function. (San
Diego: Academic Press, Inc.).
Singleton, C. K., Klysik, J., Stirdivant, S. M., and Wells,
R. D. (1982). Left-handed Z DNA is
induced by supercoiling in physiological ionic conditions. Nature 299, 312-316.
Smillie, F., and Bains, W. (1990). Repetition structure of mammalian nuclear DNA. J. Theor. Biol. 142, 463-471.
Snow, K., Tester, D. J., Kruckeberg, K. E., Schaid, D. J.,
and Thibodeau, S. N. (1994).
Sequence analysis of the fragile X trinucleotide repeat: implications for the
origin of the fragile X mutation. Hum.
Mol. Genet. 3, 1543-1551.
Spiro, C., Bazett-Jones, D. P., Wu, X., and McMurray, C. T.
(1995). DNA structure determines
protein binding and transcriptional efficiency of the proenkephalin
cAMP-responsive enhancer. J. Biol. Chem.
270, 27702-27710.
Sumegi, A., Birko, Z., Szeszak, F., Vitalis, S., and Biro,
S. (1997). A short GC-rich sequence
involved in deletion formation of cloned DNA in E. coli. Acta Biol. Hung. 48, 275-279.
Sundquist, W. I., and Klug, A. (1989). Telomeric DNA dimerizes by formation of guanine tetrads
between hairpin loops. Nature 342,
825-829.
Tishkoff, D. X., Filosi, N., Gaida, G. M., and Kolodner, R.
D. (1997). A novel mutation
avoidance mechanism dependent on S. cerevisiae RAD27 is distinct from DNA
mismatch repair. Cell 88, 253-263.
Trifonov, E. N., Konopka, A. K., and Jovin, T. M. (1985). Unusual frequencies of certain
alternating purine-pyrimidine runs in natural DNA sequences: relation to Z-DNA.
FEBS Lett. 185, 197-202.
Usdin, K., and Woodford, K. J. (1995). CGG repeats associated with DNA instability and chromosome
fragility from structures that block DNA synthesis in vitro. Nucleic Acids Res. 23, 4202-4209.
Ussery, D. W., and Sinden, R. R. (1993). Environmental influences on the in vivo level of
intramolecular triplex DNA in Escherichia coli. Biochemistry 32, 6206-6213.
Vologodskii, A. (1992). Topology and physics of circular DNA.
(Boca Raton: CRC Press).
Vologodskii, A. V., and Frank-Kamenetskii, M. D. (1982). Theoretical study of cruciform
states in superhelical DNA. FEBS Lett.
143, 257-260.
Wahls, W. P., Wallace, L. J., and Moore, P. D. (1990). Hypervariable minisatellite DNA
is a hotspot for homologous recombination in human cells. Cell 60, 95-103.
Wang, A. H. J., Quigley, G. J., Kolpak, F. J., Crawford, J.
L., van Boom, J. H., Van der Marel, G., and Rich, A. (1979). Molecular structure of a left-handed double helical DNA
fragment at atomic resolution. Nature 282,
680-686.
Weaver, D. T., and DePamphilis, M. L. (1982). Specific sequences in native DNA that arrest synthesis by
DNA polymerase alpha. J. Biol. Chem.
257, 2075-2086.
Weiller, G. F., Bruckner, H., Kim, S. H., Pratje, E., and
Schweyen, R. J. (1991). A GC cluster
repeat is a hotspot for mit- macro-deletions in yeast mitochondrial DNA. Mol. Gen. Genet. 226, 233-240.
Weitzmann, M. N., Woodford, K. J., and Usdin, K. (1997). DNA secondary structures and the
evolution of hypervariable tandem arrays. J.
Biol. Chem. 272, 9517-9523.
Wells, R. D. (1996).
Molecular basis of genetic instability of triplet repeats. J. Biol. Chem. 271, 2875-2878.
Williamson, J. R., Raghuraman, M. K., and Cech, T. R. (1989). Monovalent cation-induced structure
of telomeric DNA: the G-quartet model. Cell
59, 871-880.
Wittig, B., Wolfl, S., Dobric, T., Vahrson, W., and Rich, A.
(1992). Transcription of human c-myc
in permeabilized nuclei is associated with formation of Z-DNA in three discrete
regions of the gene. EMBO J. 11,
4653-4663.
Wolfl, S., Martinez, C., Rich, A., and Majzoub, J. A. (1996). Transcription of the human
corticotrophin-releasing hormone gene in NPLC cells is correlated with Z-DNA
formation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93, 3664-3668.
Woodford, K. J., Howell, R. M., and Usdin, K. (1994). A novel K(+)-dependent DNA
synthesis arrest site in a commonly occurring sequence motif in eukaryotes. J. Biol. Chem. 269, 27029-27035.
Yu, A., Barron, M. D., Romero, R. M., Christy, M., Gold, B.,
Dai, J., Gray, D. M., Haworth, I. S., and Mitas, M. (1997). At physiological pH, d(CCG)15 forms a hairpin containing
protonated cytosines and a distorted helix. Biochemistry 36, 3687-3699.
Yu, A., Dill, J., Wirth, S. S., Huang, G., Lee, V. H.,
Haworth, I. S., and Mitas, M. (1995).
The trinucleotide repeat sequence d(GTC)15 adopts a hairpin conformation. Nucleic Acids Res. 23, 2706-2714.
Zheng, G., Kochel, T., Hoepfner, R. W., Timmons, S. E., and
Sinden, R. R. (1991). Torsionally
tuned cruciform and Z-DNA probes for measuring unrestrained supercoiling at
specific sites in DNA of living cells. J.
Mol. Biol. 221, 107-129.
Zheng, M., Huang, X., Smith, G. K., Yang, X., and Gao, X. (1996). Genetically unstable CXG repeats
are structurally dynamic and have a high propensity for folding. An NMR and UV
spectroscopic study. J. Mol. Biol.
264, 323-336.
Zhu, l. J., Newlon, C. S., and Huberman, J. A. (1992). Localization of a DNA
replication origin and termination zone on chromosome III of Saccharomyces
cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 12,
4733-4741.
Zimmerman,
S. B., Cohen, G. H., and Davies, D. R. (1975).
X-ray fiber diffraction and model-building study of polyguanylic acid and
polyinosinic acid. J. Mol. Biol. 92,
181-192.