Cargando…
The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2)
DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) activate the DNA damage checkpoint machinery to pause or halt the cell cycle. Telomeres, the specific DNA-protein complexes at linear eukaryotic chromosome ends, are capped DSBs that do not activate DNA damage checkpoints. This “checkpoint privileged” status of telo...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6240467/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30498568 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15166.2 |
_version_ | 1783371633949409280 |
---|---|
author | Audry, Julien Wang, Jinyu Eisenstatt, Jessica R. Berkner, Kathleen L. Runge, Kurt W. |
author_facet | Audry, Julien Wang, Jinyu Eisenstatt, Jessica R. Berkner, Kathleen L. Runge, Kurt W. |
author_sort | Audry, Julien |
collection | PubMed |
description | DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) activate the DNA damage checkpoint machinery to pause or halt the cell cycle. Telomeres, the specific DNA-protein complexes at linear eukaryotic chromosome ends, are capped DSBs that do not activate DNA damage checkpoints. This “checkpoint privileged” status of telomeres was previously investigated in the yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombelacking the major double-stranded telomere DNA binding protein Taz1. Telomeric DNA repeats in cells lacking Taz1 are 10 times longer than normal and contain single-stranded DNA regions. DNA damage checkpoint proteins associate with these damaged telomeres, but the DNA damage checkpoint is not activated. This severing of the DNA damage checkpoint signaling pathway was reported to stem from exclusion of histone H4 lysine 20 dimethylation (H4K20me2) from telomeric nucleosomes in both wild type cells and cells lacking Taz1. However, experiments to identify the mechanism of this exclusion failed, prompting our re-evaluation of H4K20me2 levels at telomeric chromatin. In this short report, we used an extensive series of controls to identify an antibody specific for the H4K20me2 modification and show that the level of this modification is the same at telomeres and internal loci in both wild type cells and those lacking Taz1. Consequently, telomeres must block activation of the DNA Damage Response by another mechanism that remains to be determined. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6240467 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | F1000 Research Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62404672018-11-28 The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) Audry, Julien Wang, Jinyu Eisenstatt, Jessica R. Berkner, Kathleen L. Runge, Kurt W. F1000Res Research Note DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) activate the DNA damage checkpoint machinery to pause or halt the cell cycle. Telomeres, the specific DNA-protein complexes at linear eukaryotic chromosome ends, are capped DSBs that do not activate DNA damage checkpoints. This “checkpoint privileged” status of telomeres was previously investigated in the yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombelacking the major double-stranded telomere DNA binding protein Taz1. Telomeric DNA repeats in cells lacking Taz1 are 10 times longer than normal and contain single-stranded DNA regions. DNA damage checkpoint proteins associate with these damaged telomeres, but the DNA damage checkpoint is not activated. This severing of the DNA damage checkpoint signaling pathway was reported to stem from exclusion of histone H4 lysine 20 dimethylation (H4K20me2) from telomeric nucleosomes in both wild type cells and cells lacking Taz1. However, experiments to identify the mechanism of this exclusion failed, prompting our re-evaluation of H4K20me2 levels at telomeric chromatin. In this short report, we used an extensive series of controls to identify an antibody specific for the H4K20me2 modification and show that the level of this modification is the same at telomeres and internal loci in both wild type cells and those lacking Taz1. Consequently, telomeres must block activation of the DNA Damage Response by another mechanism that remains to be determined. F1000 Research Limited 2018-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6240467/ /pubmed/30498568 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15166.2 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Audry J et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Note Audry, Julien Wang, Jinyu Eisenstatt, Jessica R. Berkner, Kathleen L. Runge, Kurt W. The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) |
title | The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) |
title_full | The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) |
title_fullStr | The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) |
title_full_unstemmed | The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) |
title_short | The inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone H4 lysine 20 (H4K20me2) |
title_sort | inhibition of checkpoint activation by telomeres does not involve exclusion of dimethylation of histone h4 lysine 20 (h4k20me2) |
topic | Research Note |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6240467/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30498568 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15166.2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT audryjulien theinhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT wangjinyu theinhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT eisenstattjessicar theinhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT berknerkathleenl theinhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT rungekurtw theinhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT audryjulien inhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT wangjinyu inhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT eisenstattjessicar inhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT berknerkathleenl inhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 AT rungekurtw inhibitionofcheckpointactivationbytelomeresdoesnotinvolveexclusionofdimethylationofhistoneh4lysine20h4k20me2 |