1887

Chapter 10 : Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes

Authors: C. Friedberg Errol1, C. Walker Graham2, Siede Wolfram3, D. Wood Richard4, A. Schultz Roger5, Ellenberger Tom6
VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
Affiliations: 1: Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; 2: Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts; 3: Department of Cell Biology and Genetics, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, Texas; 4: Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; 5: Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; 6: Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
Content Type: Reference
Publication Year: 2006

Category: Microbial Genetics and Molecular Biology

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Preview this chapter:
Preview Magnify
Zoom in
Zoomout

Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, Page 1 of 2

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555816704/9781555813192_Chap10-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555816704/9781555813192_Chap10-2.gif

Abstract:

A definitive understanding of nucleotide excision repair (NER) in eukaryotes must ultimately embrace the process as it transpires in living cells and must accommodate many cellular biological observations. Some aspects of chromatin structure are considered in the context of the influence of such structure on the accessibility of sites in DNA to NER. The influence of transcription on NER efficiency is then discussed by two different mechanisms. First, chromatin structure is remodeled in a transcribed gene during transcription and in some regions of active genes. NER proteins can gain better access to damage as a consequence of this remodeling. Second, NER preferentially occurs on the transcribed strand of active genes in a transcription-coupled NER (TC-NER) process that is a specific response to blockage of RNAPII at a damaged site. The molecular details of the coupling of transcription blockage to TC-NER remain to be elaborated in detail. Genetic studies suggest several mechanisms that result in preferential NER of transcribed strands of active genes. As more is learned about the protein and nucleic acid participants of this process, rapid progress in our understanding of TC-NER is anticipated.

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10

Key Concept Ranking

DNA Synthesis
0.59477353
RNA Polymerase II
0.5509868
Nucleotide Excision Repair
0.52455723
Transcription Start Site
0.5228227
Base Excision Repair
0.47869492
0.59477353
Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

Figures

Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes
Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig01
Figure 10–1
(A) The nucleosome core particle (left) consists of 1.5 turns of DNA wrapped around a histone octamer comprising two molecules each of the core histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4. Also shown (right) is a representation of the nucleosome, consisting of the core particle plus the linker DNA between two core particles and bound histone H1 (shown in grey). (B) Representation of the position of the contacts made between core histones (indicated by their numbers) and DNA as it wraps around the histone octamer. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0352-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0352-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–1
Figure 10–1

(A) The nucleosome core particle (left) consists of 1.5 turns of DNA wrapped around a histone octamer comprising two molecules each of the core histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4. Also shown (right) is a representation of the nucleosome, consisting of the core particle plus the linker DNA between two core particles and bound histone H1 (shown in grey). (B) Representation of the position of the contacts made between core histones (indicated by their numbers) and DNA as it wraps around the histone octamer. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig02
Figure 10–2
The crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle provides a molecular-scale roadmap of the histone octamer (two copies each of histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4) and its interactions with 146 bp of DNA wrapped around the protein complex. One striking feature is the nonuniform shape of the DNA and the regular variation in double-helix geometry that suggests why nucleosomes reside in defined positions on DNA and require active remodeling to change chromatin structure. The N-terminal histone tails, which are subject to extensive post-translational modifications ( Fig. 10–4 ), protrude from the cracks between gyres of the DNA. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0352-02_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0352-02.gif
Image of Figure 10–2
Figure 10–2

The crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle provides a molecular-scale roadmap of the histone octamer (two copies each of histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4) and its interactions with 146 bp of DNA wrapped around the protein complex. One striking feature is the nonuniform shape of the DNA and the regular variation in double-helix geometry that suggests why nucleosomes reside in defined positions on DNA and require active remodeling to change chromatin structure. The N-terminal histone tails, which are subject to extensive post-translational modifications ( Fig. 10–4 ), protrude from the cracks between gyres of the DNA. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig03
Figure 10–3
Levels of folding of DNA and nucleosomes that give rise to highly condensed chromatin.
10.1128/9781555816704/f0353-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0353-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–3
Figure 10–3

Levels of folding of DNA and nucleosomes that give rise to highly condensed chromatin.

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig04
Figure 10–4
Twin supercoil domain model. (A) A transcription complex together with a nascent mRNA molecule is shown moving ca.10 bp along the DNA duplex. This movement creates a single positive supercoil in front of the polymerase and a negative supercoil behind it. (B) Histones are shown transferring (as intact octamers or partial assemblies). This transfer is facilitated by the fact that negatively supercoiled DNA preferentially binds histone octamers compared with positively supercoiled DNA. An additional two nucleosome cores are shown more remote from the polymerase, each storing one negative supercoil associated with the organization of two turns of DNA. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0353-02_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0353-02.gif
Image of Figure 10–4
Figure 10–4

Twin supercoil domain model. (A) A transcription complex together with a nascent mRNA molecule is shown moving ca.10 bp along the DNA duplex. This movement creates a single positive supercoil in front of the polymerase and a negative supercoil behind it. (B) Histones are shown transferring (as intact octamers or partial assemblies). This transfer is facilitated by the fact that negatively supercoiled DNA preferentially binds histone octamers compared with positively supercoiled DNA. An additional two nucleosome cores are shown more remote from the polymerase, each storing one negative supercoil associated with the organization of two turns of DNA. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig05
Figure 10–5
Histone modifications on the nucleosome core particle. The nucleosome core particle showing six of the eight core histone N-terminal tail domains and two C-terminal tails is illustrated. Sites of post-translational modification are indicated by colored symbols that are defined in the key (lower left); acK, acetyl lysine; meR, methylarginine; meK, methyllysine; PS, phosphorylserine; uK, ubiquitinated lysine. Residue numbers are shown for each modification. Note that H3 lysine 9 can be either acetylated or methylated. The C-terminal (C-term) tail domains of one H2A molecule and one H2B molecule are shown (dashed lines), with sites of ubiquitination at H2A lysine 119 (most common in mammals) and H2B lysine 123 (most common in yeast). Modifications are shown on only one of the two copies of histones H3 and H4, and only one tail is shown for H2A and H2B. Sites marked by arrows are susceptible to cutting by trypsin in intact nucleosomes. The diagram is a compendium of data from various organisms, some of which may lack particular modifications (e.g., there is no H3meK9 in (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0355-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0355-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–5
Figure 10–5

Histone modifications on the nucleosome core particle. The nucleosome core particle showing six of the eight core histone N-terminal tail domains and two C-terminal tails is illustrated. Sites of post-translational modification are indicated by colored symbols that are defined in the key (lower left); acK, acetyl lysine; meR, methylarginine; meK, methyllysine; PS, phosphorylserine; uK, ubiquitinated lysine. Residue numbers are shown for each modification. Note that H3 lysine 9 can be either acetylated or methylated. The C-terminal (C-term) tail domains of one H2A molecule and one H2B molecule are shown (dashed lines), with sites of ubiquitination at H2A lysine 119 (most common in mammals) and H2B lysine 123 (most common in yeast). Modifications are shown on only one of the two copies of histones H3 and H4, and only one tail is shown for H2A and H2B. Sites marked by arrows are susceptible to cutting by trypsin in intact nucleosomes. The diagram is a compendium of data from various organisms, some of which may lack particular modifications (e.g., there is no H3meK9 in (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig06
Figure 10–6
Ratio of the amount of repair synthesis per unit DNA in MNase-sensitive and -resistant regions as a function of repair time after UV irradiation of cells. Note that very soon after UV irradiation, the repair synthesis label is distributed largely in MNase-sensitive regions of the genome. However, at later times the label is distributed more uniformly between MNase-sensitive and -resistant regions ( ).
10.1128/9781555816704/f0356-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0356-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–6
Figure 10–6

Ratio of the amount of repair synthesis per unit DNA in MNase-sensitive and -resistant regions as a function of repair time after UV irradiation of cells. Note that very soon after UV irradiation, the repair synthesis label is distributed largely in MNase-sensitive regions of the genome. However, at later times the label is distributed more uniformly between MNase-sensitive and -resistant regions ( ).

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig07
Figure 10–7
Transitions in chromatin structure that take place during NER of transcriptionally silent DNA. (A) UV radiation-induced lesions are formed throughout chromatin, with a slight modulation depending on local chromatin structure. (B) The XPC-RAD23B and/or DDB complex recognizes a DNA distortion. (C) Chromatin-remodeling complexes are directed to the site and change chromatin structure to allow sufficient binding of other NER factors in an ATP-dependent manner. (D) An open preincision complex is formed on ATP hydrolysis after recruitment of TFIIH, XPG, XPA, and RPA. (E) The endonucleases XPG and ERCC1-XPF incise the damaged strand 3’ and 5’ to the lesion, respectively. (F) A DNA polymerase holoenzyme fills in the gap by repair synthesis. (G) Redistribution of nucleosomes occurs, or reassembly of nucleosomes, which might be mediated by CAF1 and/or chromatin-remodeling complexes. DNA ligase I seals the nicks, perhaps in DNA already assembled into nucleosomes. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0357-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0357-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–7
Figure 10–7

Transitions in chromatin structure that take place during NER of transcriptionally silent DNA. (A) UV radiation-induced lesions are formed throughout chromatin, with a slight modulation depending on local chromatin structure. (B) The XPC-RAD23B and/or DDB complex recognizes a DNA distortion. (C) Chromatin-remodeling complexes are directed to the site and change chromatin structure to allow sufficient binding of other NER factors in an ATP-dependent manner. (D) An open preincision complex is formed on ATP hydrolysis after recruitment of TFIIH, XPG, XPA, and RPA. (E) The endonucleases XPG and ERCC1-XPF incise the damaged strand 3’ and 5’ to the lesion, respectively. (F) A DNA polymerase holoenzyme fills in the gap by repair synthesis. (G) Redistribution of nucleosomes occurs, or reassembly of nucleosomes, which might be mediated by CAF1 and/or chromatin-remodeling complexes. DNA ligase I seals the nicks, perhaps in DNA already assembled into nucleosomes. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig08
Figure 10–8
Both the monofunctional psoralen 4’-(hydroxy-methyl)-4,5’,8-trimethylpsoralen (HMT) (A) and AAF (B) adducts are removed more slowly from α-DNA sequences of African green monkey cells than from bulk DNA. (Adapted from references [panel A] and [panel B].)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0358-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0358-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–8
Figure 10–8

Both the monofunctional psoralen 4’-(hydroxy-methyl)-4,5’,8-trimethylpsoralen (HMT) (A) and AAF (B) adducts are removed more slowly from α-DNA sequences of African green monkey cells than from bulk DNA. (Adapted from references [panel A] and [panel B].)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig09
Figure 10–9
The methylation of DNA following NER of UV damage in confluent and in logarithmic-phase human fibroblasts is slower and less complete than in undamaged cells undergoing normal semiconservative DNA replication ( ).
10.1128/9781555816704/f0359-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0359-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–9
Figure 10–9

The methylation of DNA following NER of UV damage in confluent and in logarithmic-phase human fibroblasts is slower and less complete than in undamaged cells undergoing normal semiconservative DNA replication ( ).

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig10
Figure 10–10
Effect of NER on the methylation of DNA. Repair of damage immediately in advance of a replication fork is shown on the left. If excision is initiated close to a methylated controlling sequence (A), a methylated base may be removed (B) and replaced (by repair synthesis) with a nonmethylated base (C). Replication of this region before remethylation can occur gives rise to a nonmethylated DNA duplex, which is not a substrate for the maintenance methylase. The other hemimethylated DNA duplex is normally methylated (D). Repair of damage close to a site of methylation immediately after replication is shown on the right. Excision of damage before the daughter strands have been methylated (A’ and B’) gives rise to a nonmethylated DNA molecule (C ‘), which is not a substrate for the maintenance methylase.
10.1128/9781555816704/f0359-02_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0359-02.gif
Image of Figure 10–10
Figure 10–10

Effect of NER on the methylation of DNA. Repair of damage immediately in advance of a replication fork is shown on the left. If excision is initiated close to a methylated controlling sequence (A), a methylated base may be removed (B) and replaced (by repair synthesis) with a nonmethylated base (C). Replication of this region before remethylation can occur gives rise to a nonmethylated DNA duplex, which is not a substrate for the maintenance methylase. The other hemimethylated DNA duplex is normally methylated (D). Repair of damage close to a site of methylation immediately after replication is shown on the right. Excision of damage before the daughter strands have been methylated (A’ and B’) gives rise to a nonmethylated DNA molecule (C ‘), which is not a substrate for the maintenance methylase.

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig11
Figure 10–11
Detection of NER in specific gene sequences. (A) Cells are exposed to a DNA-damaging agent, which produces base adducts for which a specific detection method is available that can convert the damage to DNA strand breaks. In the example shown, DNA is damaged by UV radiation, thereby generating CPD that can be cleaved with a PD-DNA glycosylase/AP lyase such as T4 denV. Some of the cells are lysed immediately, while others are allowed to carry out NER in the presence of the nucleoside analog bromodeoxyuridine. DNA is extracted, purified, and treated with a restriction enzyme to generate fragments. (B) The restricted DNA is subjected to equilibrium density centrifugation in CsCl gradients to separate replicated (HL) DNA fragments from unreplicated (LL) DNA. (C) The unreplicated (LL) DNA is then treated with T4 denV or left untreated, forming strand breaks at the sites of CPD. (D) The DNA fragments are resolved by gel electrophoresis, transferred to a membrane, and probed with a P-labeled fragment derived from a gene of interest. Following autoradiography, DNA fragments not exposed to enzyme (—) yield an autoradiographic signal. In contrast, DNA isolated from cells immediately after exposure to UV radiation is degraded by the T4 denV (+) and yields little or no autoradiographic signal. The intensity of the autoradiographic signal after incubation (24 h) shows the extent to which CPD were removed by repair. The ratio of the intensity of the signal in the treated and untreated samples for a given time point indicates the fraction of DNA molecules that were free of damage (P). The average number of damaged sites per fragment, can be derived using the Poisson equation (S = — ln P). (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0361-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0361-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–11
Figure 10–11

Detection of NER in specific gene sequences. (A) Cells are exposed to a DNA-damaging agent, which produces base adducts for which a specific detection method is available that can convert the damage to DNA strand breaks. In the example shown, DNA is damaged by UV radiation, thereby generating CPD that can be cleaved with a PD-DNA glycosylase/AP lyase such as T4 denV. Some of the cells are lysed immediately, while others are allowed to carry out NER in the presence of the nucleoside analog bromodeoxyuridine. DNA is extracted, purified, and treated with a restriction enzyme to generate fragments. (B) The restricted DNA is subjected to equilibrium density centrifugation in CsCl gradients to separate replicated (HL) DNA fragments from unreplicated (LL) DNA. (C) The unreplicated (LL) DNA is then treated with T4 denV or left untreated, forming strand breaks at the sites of CPD. (D) The DNA fragments are resolved by gel electrophoresis, transferred to a membrane, and probed with a P-labeled fragment derived from a gene of interest. Following autoradiography, DNA fragments not exposed to enzyme (—) yield an autoradiographic signal. In contrast, DNA isolated from cells immediately after exposure to UV radiation is degraded by the T4 denV (+) and yields little or no autoradiographic signal. The intensity of the autoradiographic signal after incubation (24 h) shows the extent to which CPD were removed by repair. The ratio of the intensity of the signal in the treated and untreated samples for a given time point indicates the fraction of DNA molecules that were free of damage (P). The average number of damaged sites per fragment, can be derived using the Poisson equation (S = — ln P). (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig12
Figure 10–12
Measurement of NER in individual DNA strands. After irradiation of growing cells at time zero, steps A, B, and C as shown in Fig. 10–11 are followed. DNA is then subjected to electrophoresis in denaturing gels to separate the two strands of the fragment. Repair in the transcribed strand is visualized by probing a membrane with a radioactively labeled single-stranded DNA probe, so that the number of remaining lesions can be calculated. After stripping the signal, the same membrane is probed with labeled DNA from the complementary, nontranscribed strand and a similar calculation is made. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0362-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0362-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–12
Figure 10–12

Measurement of NER in individual DNA strands. After irradiation of growing cells at time zero, steps A, B, and C as shown in Fig. 10–11 are followed. DNA is then subjected to electrophoresis in denaturing gels to separate the two strands of the fragment. Repair in the transcribed strand is visualized by probing a membrane with a radioactively labeled single-stranded DNA probe, so that the number of remaining lesions can be calculated. After stripping the signal, the same membrane is probed with labeled DNA from the complementary, nontranscribed strand and a similar calculation is made. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig13
Figure 10–13
The transcribed strand (TS) of the gene of is repaired faster than the nontranscribed strand (NTS) during incubation of cells for the times indicated after their exposure to UV radiation. When the same experiment was carried out with a strain with a temperature-sensitive (ts) allele incubated at the restrictive temperature, the preferential repair of the transcribed strand was abolished. Removal of CPD lesions was measured as in the experiment in Fig. 10–12 . (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0363-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0363-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–13
Figure 10–13

The transcribed strand (TS) of the gene of is repaired faster than the nontranscribed strand (NTS) during incubation of cells for the times indicated after their exposure to UV radiation. When the same experiment was carried out with a strain with a temperature-sensitive (ts) allele incubated at the restrictive temperature, the preferential repair of the transcribed strand was abolished. Removal of CPD lesions was measured as in the experiment in Fig. 10–12 . (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig14
Figure 10–14
Relative speed of repair in active genes. Repair is faster on the transcribed strand (TS) than on the nontranscribed strand (NTS), but variations in the rate of repair are evident between regions of both strands. (A) In the transcribed strand, repair is very fast close to the site of transcription initiation. (B) In the nontranscribed strand, but not in the transcribed strand, repair is markedly affected by the presence of nucleosomes. The color code in panel B reflects this finer detail. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0364-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0364-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–14
Figure 10–14

Relative speed of repair in active genes. Repair is faster on the transcribed strand (TS) than on the nontranscribed strand (NTS), but variations in the rate of repair are evident between regions of both strands. (A) In the transcribed strand, repair is very fast close to the site of transcription initiation. (B) In the nontranscribed strand, but not in the transcribed strand, repair is markedly affected by the presence of nucleosomes. The color code in panel B reflects this finer detail. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig15
Figure 10–15
Different fates of RNAPII at a damaged site in DNA as mediated by CSB and other factors. The gold circle indicates the active site of RNAPII and the gold triangles denote a DNA lesion on the transcribed strand. (A) RNAPII dissociation from a site of damage. Such dissociation could be achieved by employing a transcription release factor or the Swi/Snf-like activities of CSB. (B) RNAPII is moved away from the damaged site. Such displacement could conceivably be achieved by Swi/Snf-like activities of CSB or by the use of other activities such as that of SII. (C) Remodeling of the damaged DNA-RNAPII interface by CSB. (D) At certain lesions, bypass might be promoted by accessory factors, of which CSB is a candidate activity. (E) Damage-binding factors arriving prior to RNAPII might facilitate repair by keeping the polymerase at a distance. (F) Degradation of RNAPII stalled at a lesion could occur. One or more of these fates of RNAPII appears to facilitate recruitment of the NER apparatus to the lesion. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0365-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0365-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–15
Figure 10–15

Different fates of RNAPII at a damaged site in DNA as mediated by CSB and other factors. The gold circle indicates the active site of RNAPII and the gold triangles denote a DNA lesion on the transcribed strand. (A) RNAPII dissociation from a site of damage. Such dissociation could be achieved by employing a transcription release factor or the Swi/Snf-like activities of CSB. (B) RNAPII is moved away from the damaged site. Such displacement could conceivably be achieved by Swi/Snf-like activities of CSB or by the use of other activities such as that of SII. (C) Remodeling of the damaged DNA-RNAPII interface by CSB. (D) At certain lesions, bypass might be promoted by accessory factors, of which CSB is a candidate activity. (E) Damage-binding factors arriving prior to RNAPII might facilitate repair by keeping the polymerase at a distance. (F) Degradation of RNAPII stalled at a lesion could occur. One or more of these fates of RNAPII appears to facilitate recruitment of the NER apparatus to the lesion. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig16
Figure 10–16
Def1 confers UV sensitivity independently of NER in yeast. A deletion strain of completely defective in NER, is further sensitized by a deletion of the gene. This additional sensitivity may arise because the degradation of stalled RNAPII is impaired by the mutation. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0367-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0367-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–16
Figure 10–16

Def1 confers UV sensitivity independently of NER in yeast. A deletion strain of completely defective in NER, is further sensitized by a deletion of the gene. This additional sensitivity may arise because the degradation of stalled RNAPII is impaired by the mutation. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig17
Figure 10–17
Possible stepwise mechanism to resolve arrested RNAPII elongation. Two examples of arrested RNAPII complexes and ways in which they might be resolved are shown. On the right is an elongation complex arrested at a DNA lesion, and on the left is a complex arrested for other reasons (such as a spontaneous stall at sequence forming a secondary structure). General elongation factors such as SII (TFIIS) play an important role in resolution of the latter situation but have little effect on RNAPII stalled at DNA damage. By contrast, human CSB or yeast Rad26 can affect the resolution of both types of complexes. If such resolution fails, ubiquitin-related mechanisms come into play. These do not always involve RNAPII proteolysis, which might be a solution of last resort. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0369-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0369-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–17
Figure 10–17

Possible stepwise mechanism to resolve arrested RNAPII elongation. Two examples of arrested RNAPII complexes and ways in which they might be resolved are shown. On the right is an elongation complex arrested at a DNA lesion, and on the left is a complex arrested for other reasons (such as a spontaneous stall at sequence forming a secondary structure). General elongation factors such as SII (TFIIS) play an important role in resolution of the latter situation but have little effect on RNAPII stalled at DNA damage. By contrast, human CSB or yeast Rad26 can affect the resolution of both types of complexes. If such resolution fails, ubiquitin-related mechanisms come into play. These do not always involve RNAPII proteolysis, which might be a solution of last resort. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10fig18
Figure 10–18
Rad26-independent TC-NER in the galactoseinduced gene. Repair of CPD in the transcribed strand of is shown. Specific DNA restriction fragments were incised with T4 denV enzyme at sites of CPD and end labeled with P by a procedure similar to that shown in Fig. 8–5. Lanes in the autoradiograph of the gel are DNA samples from unirradiated (U) and irradiated cells following incubation for 0, 1, 2, and 4 h. Ovals on the left represent nucleosome positions (darkest, least variable; lightest, most variable). Roman numerals denote the positions of the four Gal4-binding sites in the upstream activating sequence. The gold vertical arrow and bars on the right indicate the major transcriptional start site and TATA box of the gene, respectively. The black arrow on the right indicates the sites where TC-NER initiates in this gene. No removal of CPD from the nontranscribed strand occurs in mutant cells in similar experiments. nt, nucleotides. (Adapted from reference .)
10.1128/9781555816704/f0370-01_thmb.gif
10.1128/9781555816704/f0370-01.gif
Image of Figure 10–18
Figure 10–18

Rad26-independent TC-NER in the galactoseinduced gene. Repair of CPD in the transcribed strand of is shown. Specific DNA restriction fragments were incised with T4 denV enzyme at sites of CPD and end labeled with P by a procedure similar to that shown in Fig. 8–5. Lanes in the autoradiograph of the gel are DNA samples from unirradiated (U) and irradiated cells following incubation for 0, 1, 2, and 4 h. Ovals on the left represent nucleosome positions (darkest, least variable; lightest, most variable). Roman numerals denote the positions of the four Gal4-binding sites in the upstream activating sequence. The gold vertical arrow and bars on the right indicate the major transcriptional start site and TATA box of the gene, respectively. The black arrow on the right indicates the sites where TC-NER initiates in this gene. No removal of CPD from the nontranscribed strand occurs in mutant cells in similar experiments. nt, nucleotides. (Adapted from reference .)

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint

References

/content/book/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
1. Adolphs, K. W.,, S. M. Cheng,, J. R. Paulson, and, U. K. Laemmli. 1977. Isolation of a protein scaffold from mitotic HeLa cell chromosomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 74 :4937– 4941.
2. Ausio, J., and, D. W. Abbot. 2004. The role of histone variability in chromatin stability and folding, p. 241– 290. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
3. Awrey, D. E.,, R. G. Weilbaecher,, S. A. Hemming,, S. M. Orlicky,, C. M. Kane, and, A. M. Edwards. 1997. Transcription elongation through DNA arrest sites. A multistep process involving both RNA polymerase II subunit RPB9 and TFIIS. J. Biol. Chem. 272 :14747– 14754.
4. Balajee, A. S.,, A. May,, G. L. Dianov,, E. C. Friedberg, and, V. A. Bohr. 1997. Reduced RNA-polymerase II transcription in intact and per-meabilized Cockayne syndrome group B cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94 :4306– 4311.
5. Baxter, B. K., and, M. J. Smerdon. 1998. Nucleosome unfolding during DNA repair in normal and xeroderma pigmentosum (group C) human cells. J. Biol. Chem. 273 :17517– 17524.
6. Bazett-Jones, D. P., and, C. H. Eskiw. 2004. Chromatin structure and function: lessons from imaging techniques, p. 343– 368. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
7. Beaudenon, S. L.,, M. R. Huacani,, G. Wang,, D. P. McDonnell, and, J. M. Huibregtse. 1999. Rsp5 ubiquitin-protein ligase mediates DNA damage-induced degradation of the large subunit of RNA polymerase II in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19 :6972– 6979.
8. Benyajati, C., and, A. Worcel. 1976. Isolation, characterization, and structure of the folded interphase genome of Drosophila melanogaster. Cell 9 :393– 407.
9. Bhatia, P. K.,, R. A. Verhage,, J. Brouwer, and, E. C. Friedberg. 1996. Molecular cloning and characterization of Saccharomyces cerevisiae RAD28, the yeast homolog of the human Cockayne syndrome A (CSA) gene. J. Bacteriol. 178 :5977– 5988.
10. Bill, C. A.,, B. M. Grochan,, R. E. Meyn,, V. A. Bohr, and, P. J. Tofilon. 1991. Loss of intragenomic DNA repair heterogeneity with cellular differentiation J. Biol. Chem. 266 :21821– 21826.
11. Bird, A., 2002. DNA methylation patterns and epigenetic memory. Genes Dev. 16 :6– 21.
12. Bodell, W. J., 1977. Nonuniform distribution of DNA repair in chromatin after treatment with methyl methanesulfonate. Nucleic Acids Res. 4 :2619– 2628.
13. Bodell, W. J., and, J. E. Cleaver. 1981. Transient conformation changes in chromatin during excision repair of ultraviolet damage to DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 9 :203– 213.
14. Bohr, V. A., 1988. DNA repair and transcriptional activity in genes. J. Cell Sci. 91 :175– 178.
15. Bohr, V. A., 1991. Gene specific DNA repair. Carcinogenesis 12 :1983– 1992.
16. Bohr, V. A.,, D. H. Phillips, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1987. Heterogeneous DNA damage and repair in the mammalian genome. Cancer Res. 47 :6426– 6436.
17. Bohr, V. A.,, C. A. Smith,, D. S. Okumoto, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1985. DNA repair in an active gene: removal of pyrimidine dimers from the DHFR gene of CHO cells is much more efficient than in the genome overall. Cell 40 :359– 369.
18. Bootsma, D., and, J. H. J. Hoeijmakers. 1993. DNA repair: engagement with transcription. Nature 363 :114– 115.
19. Bowman, K. K.,, C. A. Smith, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1997. Excision repair patch lengths are similar for transcription-coupled repair and global genome repair in UV-irradiated human-cells. Mutat. Res. 385 :95– 105.
20. Bradbury, E. M., and, K. E. van Holde. 2004. Chromatin structure and dynamics: a historical perspective, p. 1– 11. In J. Zlatanova, and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
21. Bregman, D. B.,, R. Halaban,, A. J. van Gool,, K. A. Henning,, E. C. Friedberg, and, S. L. Warren. 1996. UV-induced ubiquitination of RNA polymerase II: a novel modification deficient in Cockayne syndrome cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93 :11586– 11590.
22. Bucheli, M.,, L. Lommel, and, K. Sweder. 2001. The defect in transcription-coupled repair displayed by a Saccharomyces cerevisiae rad26 mutant is dependent on carbon source and is not associated with a lack of transcription. Genetics 158 :989– 997.
23. Carothers, A. M.,, W. Zhen,, J. Mucha,, Y. J. Zhang,, R. M. Santella,, D. Grunberger, and, V. A. Bohr. 1992. DNA strand-specific repair of (+ –)-3 alpha,4 beta-dihydroxy-1 alpha,2 alpha-epoxy-1,2,3,4-tetrahydrobenzo [c]phenanthrene adducts in the hamster dihydrofolate reductase gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89 :11925– 11929.
24. Chafin, D. R.,, J. M. Vitolo,, L. A. Henricksen,, R. A. Bambara, and, J. J. Hayes. 2000. Human DNA ligase I efficiently seals nicks in nucleosomes. EMBO J. 19 :5492– 5501.
25. Chen, R. H.,, V. M. Maher,, J. Brouwer,, P. van de Putte, and, J. J. McCormick. 1992. Preferential repair and strand-specific repair of benzo [a]pyrene diol epoxide adducts in the HPRT gene of diploid human fibroblasts. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89 :5413– 5417.
26. Chen, Y. H., and, D. F. Bogenhagen. 1993. Effects of DNA lesions on transcription elongation by T7 RNA polymerase. J. Biol. Chem. 268 :5849– 5855.
27. Christians, F. C., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1992. Inhibition of transcription and strand-specific DNA repair by alpha-amanitin in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Mutat. Res. 274 :93– 101.
28. Christians, F. C., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1993. Lack of transcription-coupled repair in mammalian ribosomal RNA genes. Biochemistry 32 :10512– 10518.
29. Citterio, E.,, V. van den Boom,, G. Schnitzler,, R. Kanaar,, E. Bonte,, R. E. Kingston,, J. H. J. Hoeijmakers, and, W. Vermeulen. 2000. ATP dependent chromatin remodeling by the Cockayne syndrome B DNA repair-transcription-coupling factor. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20 :7643– 7653.
30. Clark, D. J., and, G. Felsenfeld. 1991. Formation of nucleosomes on positively supercoiled DNA. EMBO J. 10 :387– 395.
31. Cleaver, J. E., 1977. Nucleosome structure controls rates of excision repair in DNA of human cells. Nature 270 :451– 453.
32. Conaway, J. W.,, A. Shilatifard,, A. Dvir, and, R. C. Conaway. 2000. Control of elongation by RNA polymerase II. Trends Biochem. Sci. 25 :375– 380.
33. Conconi, A.,, V. A. Bespalov, and, M. J. Smerdon. 2002. Transcription-coupled repair in RNA polymerase I-transcribed genes of yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 :649– 654.
34. Cook, P. R., 1999. The organization of replication and transcription. Science 284 :1790– 1795.
35. Cook, P. R., and, I. A. Brazell. 1975. Supercoils in human DNA. J. Cell Sci. 19 :261– 279.
36. Cramer, P.,, D. A. Bushnell, and, R. D. Kornberg. 2001. Structural basis of transcription: RNA polymerase II at 2.8 Ångstrom resolution. Science 292 :1863– 1876.
37. Dammann, R., and, G. P. Pfeifer. 1997. Lack of gene-specific and strand-specific DNA repair in RNA polymerase III-transcribed human transfer RNA genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17 :219– 229.
38. Davie, J. R., 2004. Histone modifications, p. 205– 240. In J. Zla-tanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
39. Doetsch, P. W., 2002. Translesion synthesis by RNA polymerases: occurrence and biological implications for transcriptional mutagenesis. Mutat. Res. 510 :131– 140.
40. Donahue, B. A.,, R. P. Fuchs,, D. Reines, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1996. Effects of aminofluorene and acetylaminofluorene DNA adducts on transcriptional elongation by RNA polymerase II. J. Biol. Chem. 271 :10588– 10594.
41. Donahue, B. A.,, S. Yin,, J. S. Taylor,, D. Reines, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1994. Transcript cleavage by RNA polymerase II arrested by a cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer in the DNA template. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91 :8502– 8506.
42. Dorigo, B.,, T. Schalch,, A. Kulangara,, S. Duda,, R. R. Schroeder, and, T. J. Richmond. 2004. Nucleosome arrays reveal the two-start organization of the chromatin fiber. Science 306 :1571– 1573.
43. Dvir, A.,, J. W. Conaway, and, R. C. Conaway. 2001. Mechanism of transcription initiation and promoter escape by RNA polymerase II. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11 :209– 214.
44. Eisen, J. A., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1999. A phylogenomic study of DNA repair genes, proteins, and processes. Mutat. Res. DNA Repair 435 :171– 213.
45. Evans, E.,, J. Fellows,, A. Coffer, and, R. D. Wood. 1997. Open complex formation around a lesion during nucleotide excision repair provides a structure for cleavage by human XPG protein. EMBO J. 16 :625– 638.
46. Felsenfeld, G.,, D. Clark, and, V. Studitsky. 2000. Transcription through nucleosomes. Biophys. Chem. 86 :231– 237.
47. Feng, Z.,, W. Hu,, E. Komissarova,, A. Pao,, M. C. Hung,, G. M. Adair, and, M. S. Tang. 2002. Transcription-coupled DNA repair is genomic context-dependent. J. Biol. Chem. 277 :12777– 12783.
48. Ferdous, A.,, F. Gonzalez,, L. Sun,, T. Kodadek, and, S. A. Johnston. 2001. The 19S regulatory particle of the proteasome is required for efficient transcription elongation by RNA polymerase II. Mol. Cell 7 :981– 991.
49. Friedberg, E. C.,, G. C. Walker, and, W. Siede. 1995. DNA Repair and Mutagenesis. ASM Press, Washington, D.C.
50. Frit, P.,, K. Kwon,, F. Coin,, J. Auriol,, S. Dubaele,, B. Salles, and, J. M. Egly. 2002. Transcriptional activators stimulate DNA repair. Mol. Cell 10 :1391– 1401.
51. Gaillard, P.-H. L.,, J. G. Moggs,, D. M. J. Roche,, J.-P. Quivy,, P. B. Becker,, R. D. Wood, and, G. Almouzni. 1997. Initiation and bidirectional propagation of chromatin assembly from a target site for nucleotide excision repair. EMBO J. 16 :6282– 6289.
52. Gaillard, P. H. L.,, E. M. D. Martini,, P. D. Kaufman,, B. Stillman,, E. Moustacchi, and, G. Almouzni. 1996. Chromatin assembly coupled to DNA repair: a new role for chromatin assembly factor I. Cell 86 :887– 896.
53. Gale, J. M.,, K. A. Nissen, and, M. J. Smerdon. 1987. UV-induced formation of pyrimidine dimers in nucleosome core DNA is strongly modulated with a period of 10.3 bases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84 :6644– 6648.
54. Gillette, T. G.,, W. Huang,, S. J. Russell,, S. H. Reed,, S. A. Johnston, and, E. C. Friedberg. 2001. The 19S complex of the proteasome regulates nucleotide excision repair in yeast. Genes Dev. 15 :1528– 1539.
55. Gnatt, A. L.,, P. Cramer,, J. Fu,, D. A. Bushnell, and, R. D. Kornberg. 2001. Structural basis of transcription: an RNA polymerase II elongation complex at 3.3 A resolution. Science 292 :1876– 1882.
56. Green, C. M., and, G. Almouzni. 2002. When repair meets chromatin. First in series on chromatin dynamics. EMBO Rep. 3 :28– 33.
57. Green, C. M., and, G. Almouzni. 2003. Local action of the chromatin assembly factor CAF-1 at sites of nucleotide excision repair in vivo. EMBO J. 22 :5163– 5174.
58. Gregory, S. M., and, K. S. Sweder. 2001. Deletion of the CSB ho- molog, RAD26, yields Spt(–) strains with proficient transcription-coupled repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 29 :3080– 3086.
59. Hanawalt, P. C., 1994. Transcription-coupled repair and human disease. Science 266 :1957– 1958.
60. Hanawalt, P. C., and, G. Spivak. 1999. Transcription-coupled DNA repair: which lesions? Which diseases? p. 169– 179. In M. Dizdaroglu and, A. Karakaya (ed.), Advances in DNA Damage and Repair. Plenum Publishing Corp., New York, N.Y.
61. Hara, R., and, A. Sancar. 2002. The SWI/SNF chromatin-remodeling factor stimulates repair by human excision nuclease in the mononucleosome core particle. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22 :6779– 6787.
62. Hara, R.,, C. P. Selby,, M. Y. Liu,, D. H. Price, and, A. Sancar. 1999. Human transcription release factor 2 dissociates RNA polymerases I and II stalled at a cyclobutane thymine dimer. J. Biol. Chem. 274 :24779– 24786.
63. Harp, J. M.,, B. L. Hanson, and, G. J. Bunick. 2004. The core particle of the nucleosome, p. 13– 44. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
64. Hemming, S. A.,, D. B. Jansma,, P. F. Macgregor,, A. Goryachev,, J. D. Friesen, and, A. M. Edwards. 2000. RNA polymerase II subunit Rpb9 regulates transcription elongation in vivo. J. Biol. Chem. 275 :35506– 35511.
65. Ho, L., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1991. Gene-specific DNA repair in terminally differentiating rat myoblasts. Mutat. Res. 255 :123– 141.
66. Hoek, M., and, B. Stillman. 2003. Chromatin assembly factor 1 is essential and couples chromatin assembly to DNA replication in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100 :12183– 12188.
67. Huang, J. C., and, A. Sancar. 1994. Determination of minimum substrate size for human excinuclease. J. Biol. Chem. 269 :19034– 19040.
68. Hunting, D. J.,, S. L. Dresler, and, M. W. Lieberman. 1985. Multiple conformational states of repair in chromatin during DNA excision repair. Biochemistry 24 :3219– 3225.
69. Ishii, K., and, U. K. Laemmli. 2003. Structural and dynamic functions establish chromatin domains. Mol. Cell 11 :237– 248.
70. Jackson, D. A.,, A. S. Balajee,, L. Mullenders, and, P. R. Cook. 1994. Sites in human nuclei where DNA damaged by ultraviolet-light is repaired: visualization and localization relative to the nucleoskeleton. J. Cell Sci. 107 :1745– 1752.
71. Jackson, D. A.,, A. B. Hassan,, R. J. Errington, and, P. R. Cook. 1994. Sites in human nuclei where damage induced by ultraviolet light is repaired: localization relative to transcription sites and concentrations of proliferating cell nuclear antigen and the tumor-suppressor protein, p53. J. Cell Sci. 107 :1753– 1760.
72. Jackson, V., 2004. What happens to nucleosomes during transcription? p. 467– 491. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.) Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
73. Jansen, L. E. T.,, H. den Dulk,, R. M. Brouns,, M. de Ruijter,, J. A. Brandsma, and, J. Brouwer. 2000. Spt4 modulates Rad26 requirement in transcription-coupled nucleotide excision repair. EMBO J. 19 :6498– 6507.
74. Jenuwein, T., and, C. D. Allis. 2001. Translating the histone code. Science 293 :1074– 1080.
75. Jerzmanowski, A., 2004. The linker histones, p. 75– 102. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
76. Kamakaka, R. T.,, M. Bulger,, P. D. Kaufman,, B. Stillman, and, J. T. Kadonaga. 1996. Postreplicative chromatin assembly by Drosophila and human chromatin assembly factor 1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16 :810– 817.
77. Kastan, M. B.,, B. J. Gowans, and, M. W. Lieberman. 1982. Methylation of deoxycytidine incorporated by excision repair synthesis of DNA. Cell 30 :509– 516.
78. Kathe, S. D.,, G. P. Shen, and, S. S. Wallace. 2004. Single-stranded breaks in DNA but not oxidative DNA base damages block transcriptional elongation by RNA polymerase II in HeLa cell nuclear extracts. J. Biol. Chem. 279 :18511– 18520.
79. Kaufman, P. D.,, R. Kobayashi, and, B. Stillman. 1997. Ultraviolet radiation sensitivity and reduction of telomeric silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells lacking chromatin assembly factor 1. Genes Dev. 11 :345– 357.
80. Kimura, H.,, Y. Tao,, R. G. Roeder, and, P. R. Cook. 1999. Quantitation of RNA polymerase II and its transcription factors in a HeLa cell: little soluble holoenzyme but significant amounts of polymerases attached to the nuclear substructure. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19 :5383– 5392.
81. Kornberg, R. D., 1974. Chromatin structure: a repeating unit of his- tones and DNA. Science 184 :868– 871.
82. Kornberg, R. D., and, Y. Lorch. 1992. Chromatin structure and transcription. Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 8 :563– 587.
83. Kornberg, R. D., and, J. O. Thomas. 1974. Chromatin structure; oligomers of the histones. Science 184 :865– 868.
84. Kosmoski, J. V.,, E. J. Ackerman, and, M. J. Smerdon. 2001. DNA repair of a single UV photoproduct in a designed nucleosome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98 :10113– 10118.
85. Kuraoka, I.,, M. Endou,, Y. Yamaguchi,, T. Wada,, H. Handa, and, K. Tanaka. 2003. Effects of endogenous DNA base lesions on transcription elongation by mammalian RNA polymerase II. Implications for transcription-coupled DNA repair and transcriptional mutagenesis. J. Biol. Chem. 278 :7294– 7299.
86. Lander, E. S.,, L. M. Linton,, B. Birren,, C. Nusbaum,, M. C. Zody,, J. Baldwin,, K. Devon,, K. Dewar,, M. Doyle,, W. FitzHugh,, R. Funke,, D. Gage,, K. Harris,, A. Heaford,, J. Howland,, L. Kann,, J. Lehoczky,, R. LeVine,, P. McEwan,, K. McKernan, et al., 2001. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 409 :860– 921.
87. Langowski, J., and, H. Schiessel. 2004. Theory and computational modeling of the 30 nm chromatin fiber, p. 397– 420. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
88. Leadon, S. A., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1984. Ultraviolet irradiation of monkey cells enhances the repair of DNA adducts in alpha DNA. Carcinogenesis 5 :1505– 1510.
89. Leadon, S. A.,, M. E. Zolan, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1983. Restricted repair of aflatoxin B1 induced damage in alpha DNA of monkey cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 11 :5675– 5689.
90. Lee, K. B.,, D. Wang,, S. J. Lippard, and, P. A. Sharp. 2002. Transcription-coupled and DNA damage-dependent ubiquitination of RNA polymerase II in vitro. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 :4239– 4244.
91. Lee, S. K.,, S. L. Yu,, L. Prakash, and, S. Prakash. 2001. Requirement for yeast RAD26, a homolog of the human CSB gene, in elongation by RNA polymerase II. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21 :8651– 8656.
92. Lee, S. K.,, S. L. Yu,, L. Prakash, and, S. Prakash. 2002. Requirement of yeast RAD2, a homolog of human XPG gene, for efficient RNA polymerase II transcription. Implications for Cockayne syndrome. Cell 109 :823– 834.
93. Lee, S. K.,, S. L. Yu,, L. Prakash, and, S. Prakash. 2002. Yeast RAD26, a homolog of the human CSB gene, functions independently of nucleotide excision repair and base excision repair in promoting transcription through damaged bases. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22 :4383– 4389.
94. Le Page, F.,, E. E. Kwoh,, A. Avrutskaya,, A. Gentil,, S. A. Leadon,, A. Sarasin, and, P. K. Cooper. 2000. Transcription-coupled repair of 8-oxoguanine: requirement for XPG, TFIIH, and CSB and implications for Cockayne syndrome. Cell 101 :159– 171.
95. Li, S., and, M. J. Smerdon. 2002. Rpb4 and Rpb9 mediate subpathways of transcription-coupled DNA repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO J. 21 :5921– 5929.
96. Li, S., and, M. J. Smerdon. 2004. Dissecting transcription-coupled and global genomic repair in the chromatin of yeast GAL1–10 genes. J. Biol. Chem. 279 :14418– 14426.
97. Li, S. S.,, M. Livingstone-Zatchej,, R. Gupta,, M. Meijer,, F. Thoma, and, M. J. Smerdon. 1999. Nucleotide excision repair in a constitutive and inducible gene of a yeast minichromosome in intact cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 27 :3610– 3620.
98. Link, C. J.,, D. L. Mitchell,, R. S. Nairn, and, V. A. Bohr. 1992. Preferential and strand-specific DNA-repair of (6–4) photoproducts detected by a photochemical method in the hamster DHFR gene. Carcinogenesis 13 :1975– 1980.
99. Liu, L. F., and, J. C. Wang. 1987. Supercoiling of the DNA template during transcription. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84 :7024– 7027.
100. Ljungman, M., and, D. P. Lane. 2004. Transcription–Guarding the genome by sensing DNA damage. Nat. Rev. Cancer 4 :727– 737.
101. Ljungman, M., and, F. Zhang. 1996. Blockage of RNA polymerase as a possible trigger for UV light-induced apoptosis. Oncogene 13 :823– 831.
102. Lommel, L.,, M. E. Bucheli, and, K. S. Sweder. 2000. Transcription-coupled repair in yeast is independent from ubiquitylation of RNA pol II: implications for Cockayne’s syndrome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97 :9088– 9092.
103. Lommel, L.,, C. Carswell-Crumpton, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1995. Preferential repair of the transcribed DNA strand in the dihydrofolate reductase gene throughout the cell cycle in UV-irradiated human cells. Mutat. Res. DNA Repair 336 :181– 192.
104. Lommel, L., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1991. The genetic defect in the Chinese hamster ovary cell mutant UV61 permits moderate selective repair of cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers in an expressed gene. Mutat. Res. 255 :183– 191.
105. Luger, K.,, A. W. Mader,, R. K. Richmond,, D. F. Sargent, and, T. J. Richmond. 1997. Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 Å resolution. Nature 389 :251– 260.
106. Luger, K., and, T. J. Richmond. 1998. DNA binding within the nucleosome core. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 8 :33– 40.
107. Luo, Z.,, J. Zheng,, Y. Lu, and, D. B. Bregman. 2001. Ultraviolet radiation alters the phosphorylation of RNA polymerase II large subunit and accelerates its proteasome-dependent degradation. Mutat. Res. 486 :259– 274.
108. Madhani, D. H.,, V. A. Bohr, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1986. Differential DNA repair in transcriptionally active and inactive proto-oncogenes: c -abl and c-mos. Cell 45 :417– 423.
109. Mansbridge, J., and, P. Hanawalt. 1983. Domain-limited repair of DNA in ultraviolet irradiated fibroblasts from xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group C, p. 195– 207. In E. Friedberg and, B. Bridges (ed.), Cellular Responses to DNA Damage. Alan R. Liss, New York, N.Y.
110. Martini, E.,, D. M. J. Roche,, K. Marheineke,, A. Verreault, and, G. Almouzni. 1998. Recruitment of phosphorylated chromatin assembly factor 1 to chromatin after UV irradiation of human-cells. J. Cell Biol. 143 :563– 575.
111. Mauldin, S. K.,, T. M. Freeland, and, R. A. Deering. 1994. Differential repair of UV damage in a developmentally-regulated gene of Dictyostelium discoideum. Mutat. Res. 314 :187– 198.
112. May, A.,, R. S. Nairn,, D. S. Okumoto,, K. Wassermann,, T. Stevnsner,, J. C. Jones, and, V. A. Bohr. 1993. Repair of individual DNA strands in the hamster dihydrofolate reductase gene after treatment with ultraviolet light, alkylating agents, and cisplatin J. Biol. Chem. 268 :1650– 1657.
113. McKay, B. C.,, F. Chen,, S. T. Clarke,, H. E. Wiggin,, L. M. Harley, and, M. Ljungman., 2001. UV light-induced degradation of RNA polymerase II is dependent on the Cockayne’s syndrome A and B proteins but not p53 or MLH1. Mutat. Res. DNA Repair 485 :93– 105.
114. Mellon, I.,, V. A. Bohr,, A. C. Smith, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1986. Preferential DNA repair of an active gene in human cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83 :8878– 8882.
115. Mellon, I., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1989. Induction of the Escherichia coli lactose operon selectively increases repair of its transcribed DNA strand. Nature 342 :95– 98.
116. Mellon, I.,, G. Spivak, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1987. Selective removal of transcription-blocking DNA damage from the transcribed strand of the mammalian DHFR gene. Cell 51 :241– 249.
117. Moggs, J. G., and, G. Almouzni. 1999. Assays for chromatin remodeling during DNA repair. Methods Enzymol. 304 :333– 351.
118. Moggs, J. G., and, G. Almouzni. 1999. Chromatin rearrangements during nucleotide excision repair. Biochimie 81 :45– 52.
119. Moggs, J. G.,, P. Grandi,, J. P. Quivy,, Z. O. Jonsson,, U. Hubscher,, P. B. Becker, and, G. Almouzni. 2000. A CAF-1-PCNA-mediated chromatin assembly pathway triggered by sensing DNA damage. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20 :1206– 1218.
120. Mondal, N.,, Y. Zhang,, Z. Jonsson,, S. K. Dhar,, M. Kannapiran, and, J. D. Parvin. 2003. Elongation by RNA polymerase II on chromatin templates requires topoisomerase activity. Nucleic Acids Res. 31 :5016– 5024.
121. Murai, M.,, Y. Enokido,, N. Inamura,, M. Yoshino,, Y. Nakatsu,, G. T. van der Horst,, J. H. Hoeijmakers,, K. Tanaka, and, H. Hatanaka. 2001. Early postnatal ataxia and abnormal cerebellar development in mice lacking xeroderma pigmentosum group A and Cockayne syndrome group B DNA repair genes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98 :13379– 13384.
122. Nakanishi, T.,, M. Shimoaraiso,, T. Kubo, and, S. Natori. 1995. Structure-function relationship of yeast S-II in terms of stimulation of RNA polymerase II, arrest relief, and suppression of 6-azauracil sensitivity. J. Biol. Chem. 270 :8991– 8995.
123. Nouspikel, T., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 2000. Terminally differentiated human neurons repair transcribed genes but display attenuated global DNA repair and modulation of repair gene expression. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20 :1562– 1570.
124. Nouspikel, T., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 2002. DNA repair in terminally differentiated cells. DNA Repair 1 :59– 75.
125. Okumoto, D. S., and, V. A. Bohr. 1987. DNA repair in the metallothionein gene increases with transcriptional activation. Nucleic Acids Res. 15 :10021– 10030.
126. Oleson, F. B.,, B. L. Mitchell,, A. Dipple, and, M. W. Lieberman. 1979. Distribution of DNA damage in chromatin and its relation to repair in human cells treated with 7-bromomethylbenz (a) anthracene. Nucleic Acids Res. 7 :1343– 1361.
127. Park, J. S.,, M. T. Marr, and, J. W. Roberts. 2002. E. coli transcription repair coupling factor (Mfd protein) rescues arrested complexes by promoting forward translocation. Cell 109 :757– 767.
128. Paulson, J. R., and, U. K. Laemmli. 1977. The structure of histonedepleted metaphase chromosomes. Cell 12 :817– 828.
129. Pfaffle, P., and, V. Jackson. 1990. Studies on rates of nucleosome formation with DNA under stress. J. Biol. Chem. 265 :16821– 16829.
130. Ramanathan, B., and, M. J. Smerdon. 1989. Enhanced DNA repair synthesis in hyperacetylated nucleosomes. J. Biol. Chem. 264 :11026– 11034.
131. Ratner, J. N.,, B. Balasubramanian,, J. Corden,, S. L. Warren, and, D. B. Bregman. 1998. Ultraviolet radiation-induced ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of the large subunit of RNA polymerase II: implications for transcription-coupled DNA repair. J. Biol. Chem. 273 :5184– 5189.
132. Reagan, M. S., and, E. C. Friedberg. 1997. Recovery of RNA polymerase II synthesis following DNA damage in mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae defective in nucleotide excision repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 25 :4257– 4263.
133. Reid, J., and, J. Q. Svejstrup. 2004. DNA damage-induced Def1-RNA polymerase II interaction and Def1 requirement for polymerase ubiquitylation in vitro. J. Biol. Chem. 279 :29875– 29878.
134. Russell, S. J.,, S. H. Reed,, W. Huang,, E. C. Friedberg, and, S. A. Johnston. 1999. The 19S regulatory complex of the proteasome functions independently of proteolysis in nucleotide excision repair. Mol. Cell 3 :687– 695.
135. Saha, A.,, J. Wittmeyer, and, B. R. Cairns. 2002. Chromatin remodeling by RSC involves ATP-dependent DNA translocation. Genes Dev. 16 :2120– 2134.
136. Scicchitano, D. A., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1989. Repair of Nmethylpurines in specific DNA sequences in Chinese hamster ovary cells: absence of strand specificity in the dihydrofolate reductase gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86 :3050– 3054.
137. Scicchitano, D. A.,, E. C. Olesnicky, and, A. Dmitri. 2004. Transcription and DNA adducts: what happens when the message gets cut off? DNA Repair 3 :1537– 1548.
138. Scott, A. D., and, R. Waters. 1997. Inducible nucleotide excision-repair (NER) of UV-induced cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers in the cell cycle of the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae: evidence that inducible NER is confined to the G1 phase of the mitotic cell cycle. Mol. Gen. Genet. 254 :43– 53.
139. Selby, C. P.,, R. Drapkin,, D. Reinberg, and, A. Sancar. 1997. RNA polymerase II stalled at a thymine dimer: footprint and effect on excision repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 25 :787– 793.
140. Selby, C. P., and, A. Sancar. 1997. Cockayne syndrome group B protein enhances elongation by RNA polymerase II. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94 :11205– 11209.
141. Selby, C. P., and, A. Sancar. 1997. Human transcription-repair coupling factor CSB/ERCC6 is a DNA-stimulated ATPase but is not a helicase and does not disrupt the ternary transcription complex of stalled RNApolymerase II. J. Biol. Chem. 272 :1885– 1890.
142. Singer, M. F., 1982. Highly repeated sequences in mammalian genomes. Int. Rev. Cytol. 76 :67– 112.
143. Sitaram, A.,, G. Plitas,, W. Wang, and, D. A. Scicchitano. 1997. Functional nucleotide excision repair is required for the preferential removal of N-ethylpurines from the transcribed strand of the dihydrofolate reductase gene of Chinese hamster ovary cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17 :564– 570.
144. Smerdon, M. J., 1986. Completion of excision repair in human cells. Relationship between ligation and nucleosome formation. J. Biol. Chem. 261 :244– 252.
145. Smerdon, M. J., 1991. DNA repair and the role of chromatin structure. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 3 :422– 428.
146. Smerdon, M. J.,, M. B. Kastan, and, M. W. Lieberman. 1979. Distribution of repair-incorporated nucleotides and nucleosome rearrangement in the chromatin of normal and xeroderma pigmentosum human fibroblasts. Biochemistry 18 :3732– 3739.
147. Smerdon, M. J., and, M. W. Lieberman. 1978. Nucleosome rearrangement in human chromatin during UV-induced DNA repair synthesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 75 :4238– 4241.
148. Smerdon, M. J.,, T. D. Tlsty, and, M. W. Lieberman. 1978. Distribution of ultraviolet-induced DNA repair synthesis in nuclease sensitive and resistant regions of human chromatin. Biochemistry 17 :2377– 2386.
149. Smerdon, M. J.,, J. F. Watkins, and, M. W. Lieberman. 1982. Effect of histone H1 removal on the distribution of ultraviolet-induced deoxyribonucleic acid repair synthesis within chromatin. Biochemistry 21 :3879– 3885.
150. Smith, P. J., 1986. n-Butyrate alters chromatin accessibility to DNA repair enzymes. Carcinogenesis 7 :423– 429.
151. Smith, S., and, B. Stillman. 1989. Purification and characterization of CAF-I, a human cell factor required for chromatin assembly during DNA replication in vitro. Cell 58 :15– 25.
152. Spivak, G., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1992. Translesion DNA-synthesis in the dihydrofolate-reductase domain of UV-irradiated CHO cells. Biochemistry 31 :6794– 6800.
153. Strahl, B. D., and, C. D. Allis. 2000. The language of covalent histone modifications. Nature 403 :41– 45.
154. Svejstrup, J. Q., 2001. Transcription-coupled DNA repair without the transcription-coupling repair factor. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26 :151.
155. Svejstrup, J. Q., 2002. Chromatin elongation factors. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 12 :156– 161.
156. Svejstrup, J. Q., 2002. Mechanisms of transcription-coupled DNA repair. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 3 :21– 40.
157. Svejstrup, J. Q., 2003. Rescue of arrested RNA polymerase II complexes. J. Cell Sci. 116 :447– 451.
158. Svetlova, M. P.,, L. V. Solovjeva,, N. A. Pleskach, and, N. V. Tomilin. 1999. Focal sites of DNA repair synthesis in human chromosomes. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 257 :378– 383.
159. Sweder, K. S., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1992. Preferential repair of cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers in the transcribed strand of a gene in yeast chromosomes and plasmids is dependent on transcription. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89 :10696– 10700.
160. Tang, J. Y.,, B. J. Hwang,, J. M. Ford,, P. C. Hanawalt, and, G. Chu. 2000. Xeroderma pigmentosum p48 gene enhances global genomic repair and suppresses UV-induced mutagenesis. Mol. Cell 5 :737– 744.
161. Tang, M. S.,, V. A. Bohr,, X. S. Zhang,, J. Pierce, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1989. Quantification of aminofluorene adduct formation and repair in defined DNA sequences in mammalian cells using the UvrABC nuclease. J. Biol. Chem. 264 :4455– 4462.
162. Tantin, D., 1998. RNA polymerase II elongation complexes containing the Cockayne syndrome group B protein interact with a molecular complex containing the transcription factor IIH components xeroderma pigmentosum B and p62. J. Biol. Chem. 273 :27794– 27799.
163. Tantin, D.,, A. Kansal, and, M. Carey. 1997. Recruitment of the putative transcription repair coupling factor CSB/ERCC6 to RNA polymerase II elongation complexes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17 :6803– 6814.
164. Teng, Y., and, R. Waters. 2000. Excision repair at the level of the nucleotide in the upstream control region, the coding sequence and in the region where transcription terminates of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae MFA2 gene and the role of RAD26. Nucleic Acids Res. 28 :1114– 1119.
165. Terleth, C.,, P. van de Putte, and, J. Brouwer. 1991. New insights in DNA repair: preferential repair of transcriptionally active DNA. Mutagenesis 6 :103– 111.
166. Thoma, F., 1991. Structural changes in nucleosomes during transcription: strip, split or flip? Trends Genet. 7 :175– 177.
167. Thoma, F., 1999. Light and dark in chromatin repair: repair of UVinduced DNA lesions by photolyase and nucleotide excision repair. EMBO J. 18 :6585– 6598.
168. Thomas, D. C.,, D. S. Okumoto,, A. Sancar, and, V. A. Bohr. 1989. Preferential DNA repair of (6–4) photoproducts in the dihydrofolate reductase gene of Chinese hamster ovary cells. J. Biol. Chem. 264 :8005– 8010.
169. Tijsterman, M., and, J. Brouwer. 1999. Rad26, the yeast homolog of the Cockayne syndrome B gene product, counteracts inhibition of DNA repair due to RNA polymerase II transcription. J. Biol. Chem. 274 :1199– 1202.
170. Tijsterman, M.,, R. de Pril,, J. G. Tasseron-de Jong, and, J. Brouwer. 1999. RNA polymerase II transcription suppresses nucleosomal modulation of UV-induced (6–4) photoproduct and cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer repair in yeast. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19 :934– 940.
171. Tijsterman, M.,, J. G. Tasseron-de Jong,, P. van de Putte, and, J. Brouwer. 1996. Transcription-coupled and global genome repair in the Saccharomyces cerevisiae RPB2 gene at nucleotide resolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 24 :3499– 3506.
172. Tijsterman, M.,, R. A. Verhage,, P. van de Putte,, J. G. Tasseronde Jong, and, J. Brouwer. 1997. Transitions in the coupling of transcription and nucleotide excision-repair within RNA polymerase II-transcribed genes of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94 :8027– 8032.
173. Tlsty, T. D., and, M. W. Lieberman. 1978. The distribution of DNA repair synthesis in chromatin and its rearrangement following damage with N-acetoxy-2-acetylaminofluorene. Nucleic Acids Res. 5 :3261– 3273.
174. Tornaletti, S., and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1999. Effect of DNA lesions on transcription elongation. Biochimie 81 :139– 146.
175. Tornaletti, S.,, L. S. Maeda,, R. D. Kolodner, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 2004. Effect of 8-oxoguanine on transcription elongation by T7 RNA polymerase and mammalian RNA polymerase II. DNA Repair 3 :483– 494.
176. Tornaletti, S.,, L. S. Maeda,, D. R. Lloyd,, D. Reines, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 2001. Effect of thymine glycol on transcription elongation by T7 RNA polymerase and mammalian RNA polymerase II. J. Biol. Chem. 276 :45367– 45371.
177. Travers, A. A., and, T. Owen-Hughes. 2004. Nucleosome remodeling, p. 421– 465. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
178. Tremeau-Bravard, A.,, T. Riedl,, J. M. Egly, and, M. E. Dahmus. 2004. Fate of RNA polymerase II stalled at a cisplatin lesion. J. Biol. Chem. 279 :7751– 7759.
179. Troelstra, C.,, A. van Gool,, J. De Wit,, W. Vermeulen,, D. Bootsma, and, J. H. J. Hoeijmakers. 1992. ERCC6, a member of a subfamily of putative helicases, is involved in Cockayne’s syndrome and preferential repair of active genes. Cell 71 :939– 953.
180. Tu, Y.,, S. Bates, and, G. P. Pfeifer. 1998. The transcription repair coupling factor CSA is required for efficient repair only during the elongation stages of RNA polymerase II transcription. Mutat. Res. 400 :143– 151.
181. Tu, Y. Q.,, S. Bates, and, G. P. Pfeifer. 1997. Sequence-specific and domain specific DNA repair in xeroderma pigmentosum and Cockayne syndrome cells. J. Biol. Chem. 272 :20747– 20755.
182. Tu, Y. Q.,, S. Tornaletti, and, G. P. Pfeifer. 1996. DNA repair domains within a human gene: selective repair of sequences near the transcription initiation site. EMBO J. 15 :675– 683.
183. Turner, B. M., 2002. Cellular memory and the histone code. Cell 111 :285– 291.
184. Turner, B. M., 2004. Nucleosome modifications and their interactions: searching for a histone code, p. 291– 308. In J. Zlatanova and, S. H. Leuba (ed.), Chromatin Structure and Dynamics: State of the Art. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
185. Tyler, J. K.,, C. R. Adams,, S. R. Chen,, R. Kobayashi,, R. T. Kamakaka, and, J. T. Kadonaga. 1999. The RCAF complex mediates chromatin assembly during DNA replication and repair. Nature 402 :555– 560.
186. Tyler, J. K.,, K. A. Collins,, J. Prasad-Sinha,, E. Amiott,, M. Bulger,, P. J. Harte,, R. Kobayashi, and, J. T. Kadonaga. 2001. Interaction between the Drosophila CAF-1 and ASF1 chromatin assembly factors. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21 :6574– 6584.
187. Ura, K.,, M. Araki,, H. Saeki,, C. Masutani,, T. Ito,, S. Iwai,, T. Mizukoshi,, Y. Kaneda, and, F. Hanaoka. 2001. ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling facilitates nucleotide excision repair of UV-induced DNA lesions in synthetic dinucleosomes. EMBO J. 20 :2004– 2014.
188. Ura, K., and, J. J. Hayes. 2002. Nucleotide excision repair and chromatin remodeling. Eur. J. Biochem. 269 :2288– 2293.
189. van den Boom, V.,, N. G. Jaspers, and, W. Vermeulen. 2002. When machines get stuck: obstructed RNA polymerase II: displacement, degradation or suicide. Bioessays 24 :780– 784.
190. van Gool, A. J.,, E. Citterio,, S. Rademakers,, R. Vanos,, W. Vermeulen,, A. Constantinou,, J. M. Egly,, D. Bootsma, and, J. H. J. Hoeijmakers. 1997. The Cockayne syndrome B protein, involved in transcription-coupled DNA repair, resides in an RNA polymerase II-containing complex. EMBO J. 16 :5955– 5965.
191. van Gool, A. J.,, R. Verhage,, S. M. A. Swagemakers,, P. van de Putte,, J. Brouwer,, C. Troelstra,, D. Bootsma, and, J. H. J. Hoeijmakers. 1994. Rad26, the functional Saccharomyces cerevisiae homolog of the Cockayne syndrome B gene ERCC6. EMBO J. 13 :5361– 5369.
192. van Hoffen, A.,, A. T. Natarajan,, L. V. Mayne,, A. A. van Zeeland,, L. H. F. Mullenders, and, J. Venema. 1993. Deficient repair of the transcribed strand of active genes in Cockayne’s syndrome cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 21 :5890– 5895.
193. van Hoffen, A.,, J. Venema,, R. Meschini,, A. A. van Zeeland, and, L. H. F. Mullenders. 1995. Transcription-coupled repair removes both cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers and 6–4 photoproducts with equal efficiency and in a sequential way from transcribed DNA in xeroderma pigmentosum group C fibroblasts. EMBO J. 14 :360– 367.
194. van Holde, K. E., 1988. Chromatin. Springer-Verlag, New York, N.Y.
195. van Holde, K. E.,, D. E. Lohr, and, C. Robert. 1992. What happens to nucleosomes during transcription? J. Biol. Chem. 267 :2837– 2840.
196. van Oosterwijk, M. F.,, R. Filon,, A. J. L. de Groot,, A. A. van Zee-land, and, L. H. F. Mullenders. 1998. Lack of transcription-coupled repair of acetylaminofluorene DNA-adducts in human fibroblasts contrasts their efficient inhibition of transcription. J. Biol. Chem. 273 :13599– 13604.
197. van Oosterwijk, M. F.,, R. Filon,, W. H. Kalle,, L. H. Mullenders, and, A. A. van Zeeland. 1996. The sensitivity of human fibroblasts to N-acetoxy-2-acetylaminofluorene is determined by the extent of transcription-coupled repair, and/or their capability to counteract RNA synthesis inhibition. Nucleic Acids Res. 24 :4653– 4659.
198. Vaquero, A.,, A. Loyola, and, D. Reinberg. 2003. The constantly changing face of chromatin. Sci. Aging Knowledge Environ. 2003 :RE4.
199. Venema, J.,, L. H. F. Mullenders,, A. T. Natarajan,, A. A. Van Zeeland, and, L. V. Mayne. 1990. The genetic defect in Cockayne syndrome is associated with a defect in repair of UV-induced DNA damage in transcriptionally active DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87 :4707– 4711.
200. Venema, J.,, A. van Hoffen,, V. Karcagi,, A. T. Natarajan,, A. A. van Zeeland, and, L. H. F. Mullenders. 1991. Xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group C cells remove pyrimidine dimers selectively from the transcribed strand of active genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 11 :4128– 4134.
201. Venema, J.,, A. van Hoffen,, A. T. Natarajan,, A. A. Van Zeeland, and, L. H. F. Mullenders. 1990. The residual repair capacity of xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group C fibroblasts is highly specific for transcriptionally active DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 18 :443– 448.
202. Venter, J. C.,, M. D. Adams,, E. W. Myers,, P. W. Li,, R. J. Mural,, G. G. Sutton,, H. O. Smith,, M. Yandell,, C. A. Evans,, R. A. Holt,, J. D. Go-cayne,, P. Amanatides,, R. M. Ballew,, D. H. Huson,, J. R. Wortman,, Q. Zhang,, C. D. Kodira,, X. H. Zheng,, L. Chen,, M. Skupski, et al., 2001. The sequence of the human genome. Science 291 :1304– 1351.
203. Verhage, R.,, A. Zeeman,, N. de Groot,, F. Gleig,, D. Bang,, P. van de Putte, and, J. Brouwer. 1994. The RAD7 and RAD16 genes, which are essential for pyrimidine dimer removal from the silent mating-type loci, are also required for repair of the nontranscribed strand of an active gene in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14 :6135– 6142.
204. Verhage, R. A.,, P. van de Putte, and, J. Brouwer. 1996. Repair of rDNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: RAD4-independent strand-specific nucleotide excision repair of RNA polymerase I transcribed genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 24 :1020– 1025.
205. Vidali, G.,, L. C. Boffa,, E. M. Bradbury, and, V. G. Allfrey. 1978. Butyrate suppression of histone deacetylation leads to accumulation of multiacetylated forms of histones H3 and H4 and increased DNase I sensitivity of the associated DNA sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 75 :2239– 2243.
206. Vignali, M.,, A. H. Hassan,, K. E. Neely, and, J. L. Workman. 2000. ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling complexes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20 :1899– 1910.
207. Viswanathan, A., and, P. W. Doetsch. 1998. Effects of nonbulky DNA base damages on Escherichia coli RNA polymerase-mediated elongation and promoter clearance. J. Biol. Chem. 273 :21276– 21281.
208. Vos, J. M. H., and, E. L. Wauthier. 1991. Differential introduction of DNA damage and repair in mammalian genes transcribed by RNA polymerase I and polymerase II. Mol. Cell. Biol. 11 :2245– 2252.
209. Wang, W.,, A. Sitaram, and, D. A. Scicchitano. 1995. 3- Methyladenine and 7-methylguanine exhibit no preferential removal from the transcribed strand of the dihydrofolate reductase gene in Chinese hamster ovary B11 cells. Biochemistry 34 :1798– 1804.
210. Wang, Z.,, X. Wu, and, E. C. Friedberg. 1991. Nucleotide excision repair of DNA by human cell extracts is suppressed in reconstituted nu- cleosomes. J. Biol. Chem. 266 :22472– 22478.
211. Wellinger, R. E., and, F. Thoma. 1997. Nucleosome structure and positioning modulate nucleotide excision repair in the nontranscribed strand of an active gene. EMBO J. 16 :5046– 5056.
212. Williams, J. I., and, E. C. Friedberg. 1979. Deoxyribonucleic acid excision repair in chromatin after ultraviolet irradiation of human fibro-blasts in culture. Biochemistry 18 :3965– 3972.
213. Williams, J. I., and, E. C. Friedberg. 1982. Increased levels of unscheduled DNA synthesis in UV-irradiated human fibroblasts pretreated with sodium butyrate. Photochem. Photobiol. 36 :423– 427.
214. Wilson, V. L., and, P. A. Jones. 1983. Inhibition of DNA methylation by chemical carcinogens in vitro. Cell 32 :239– 246.
215. Wittschieben, B. ∅.,, G. Otero,, T. de Bizemont,, J. Fellows,, H. Erdjument-Bromage,, R. Ohba,, Y. Li,, C. D. Allis,, P. Tempst, and, J. Q. Svejstrup. 1999. A novel histone acetyltransferase is an integral subunit of elongating RNA polymerase II holoenzyme. Mol. Cell 4 :123– 128.
216. Wolffe, A. P., 1998. Chromatin: Structure and Function, 3rd ed. Academic Press, Inc. San Diego, Calif.
217. Woudstra, E. C.,, C. Gilbert,, J. Fellows,, L. Jansen,, J. Brouwer,, H. Erdjument-Bromage,, P. Tempst, and, J. Q. Svejstrup. 2002. A Rad26-Def1 complex coordinates repair and RNA pol II proteolysis in response to DNA damage. Nature 415 :929– 933.
218. Yamaizumi, M., and, T. Sugano. 1994. UV-induced nuclear accumulation of p53 is evoked through DNA damage of actively transcribed genes independent of the cell cycle. Oncogene 9 :2775– 2784.
219. Yasuhira, S.,, M. Morimyo, and, A. Yasui. 1999. Transcription dependence and the roles of two excision repair pathways for UV damage in fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. J. Biol. Chem. 274 :26822– 26827.
220. Yu, A.,, H. Y. Fan,, D. Liao,, A. D. Bailey, and, A. M. Weiner. 2000. Activation of p53 or loss of the Cockayne syndrome group B repair protein causes metaphase fragility of human U1, U2, and 5S genes. Mol. Cell 5 :801– 810.
221. Zawel, L.,, K. P. Kumar, and, D. Reinberg. 1995. Recycling of general transcription factors during RNA polymerase II transcription. Genes Dev. 9 :1479– 1490.
222. Zheng, Y.,, A. Pao,, G. M. Adair, and, M. Tang. 2001. Cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers and bulky chemical DNA adducts are efficiently repaired in both strands of either a transcriptionally active or promoter- deleted APRT gene. J. Biol. Chem. 276 :16786– 16796.
223. Zlatanova, J.,, S. H. Leuba, and, K. van Holde. 1999. Chromatin structure revisited. Crit. Rev. Eukaryot. Gene Expression 9 :245– 255.
224. Zolan, M. E.,, G. A. Cortopassi,, C. A. Smith, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1982. Deficient repair of chemical adducts in alpha DNA of monkey cells. Cell 28 :613– 619.
225. Zolan, M. E.,, C. A. Smith,, N. M. Calvin, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1982. Rearrangement of mammalian chromatin structure following excision repair. Nature 299 :462– 464.
226. Zolan, M. E.,, C. A. Smith, and, P. C. Hanawalt. 1984. Formation and repair of furocoumarin adducts in alpha deoxyribonucleic and bulk deoxyribonucleic acid of monkey cells. Biochemistry 23 :63– 68.

Tables

Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes
Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10tab01
Table 10–1
Preferential removal of CPD from active genes in mammalian cells
Generic image for table
Table 10–1

Preferential removal of CPD from active genes in mammalian cells

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10
/content/10.1128/9781555816704.ch10.ch10tab02
Table 10–2
TC-NER of UV radiation-induced CPD from the gene of CHO cells
Generic image for table
Table 10–2

TC-NER of UV radiation-induced CPD from the gene of CHO cells

Citation: Errol C, Graham C, Wolfram S, Richard D, Roger A, Tom E. 2006. Heterogeneity of Nucleotide Excision Repair in Eukaryotic Genomes, p 351-377. In DNA Repair and Mutagenesis, Second Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555816704.ch10

Back to top
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error