Development and Reproduction (한국발생생물학회지:발생과생식)

The Korean Society of Developmental Biology (한국발생생물학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Rad51 Regulates Reprogramming Efficiency through DNA Repair Pathway

  • Lee, Jae-Young (Dept. of Biomedical Science, College of Life Science, CHA University) ;
  • Kim, Dae-Kwan (Dept. of Biomedical Science, College of Life Science, CHA University) ;
  • Ko, Jeong-Jae (Dept. of Biomedical Science, College of Life Science, CHA University) ;
  • Kim, Keun Pil (Dept. of Life Science, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Park, Kyung-Soon (Dept. of Biomedical Science, College of Life Science, CHA University)
  • Received : 2016.05.18
  • Accepted : 2016.06.09
  • Published : 2016.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Rad51 is a key component of homologous recombination (HR) to repair DNA double-strand breaks and it forms Rad51 recombinase filaments of broken single-stranded DNA to promote HR. In addition to its role in DNA repair and cell cycle progression, Rad51 contributes to the reprogramming process during the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. In light of this, we performed reprogramming experiments to examine the effect of co-expression of Rad51 and four reprogramming factors, Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc, on the reprogramming efficiency. Co-expression of Rad51 significantly increased the numbers of alkaline phosphatase-positive colonies and embryonic stem cell-like colonies during the process of reprogramming. Co-expression ofRad51 significantly increased the expression of epithelial markers at an early stage of reprogramming compared with control cells. Phosphorylated histone H2AX (${\gamma}H2AX$), which initiates the DNA double-strand break repair system, was highly accumulated in reprogramming intermediates upon co-expression of Rad51. This study identified a novel role of Rad51 in enhancing the reprogramming efficiency, possibly by facilitating mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition and by regulating a DNA damage repair pathway during the early phase of the reprogramming process.

Keywords

References

  1. Banito A, Rashid ST, Acosta JC, Li S, Pereira CF, Geti I, Pinho S, Silva JC, Azuara V, Walsh M, Vallier L, Gil J (2009) Senescence impairs successful reprogramming to pluripotent stem cells. Genes & Development 23:2134-2139. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1811609
  2. Chi HJ, Gao S, Yang XC, Cai J, Zhao WS, Sun H, Geng YJ (2015) Clinical application of induced pluripotent stem cells in cardiovascular medicine. Cardiology 131:236-244. https://doi.org/10.1159/000381280
  3. Chlon TM, Ruiz-Torres S, Maag L, Mayhew CN, Wiken heiser-Brokamp KA, Davies SM, Mehta P, Myers KC, Wells JM, Wells SI (2016) Overcoming pluripotent stem cell dependence on the repair of endogenous DNA damage. Stem Cell Reports 6:44-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2015.12.001
  4. Ebrahimi B (2015) Reprogramming barriers and enhancers: strategies to enhance the efficiency and kinetics of induced pluripotency. Cell Regeneration 4:10.
  5. Felgentreff K, Du L, Weinacht KG, Dobbs K, Bartish M, Giliani S, Schlaeger T, DeVine A, Schambach A, Woodbine LJ, Davies G, Baxi SN, van der Burg M, Bleesing J, Gennery A, Manis J, Pan-Hammarstrom Q, Notarangelo LD (2014) Differential role of nonhomologous end joining factors in the generation, DNA damage response, and myeloid differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111:8889-8894.
  6. Gonzalez F, Georgieva D, Vanoli F, Shi ZD, Stadtfeld M, Ludwig T, Jasin M, Huangfu D (2013) Homologous recombination DNA repair genes play a critical role in reprogramming to a pluripotent state. Cell Reports 3:651-660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2013.02.005
  7. Gore A, Li Z, Fung HL, Young JE, Agarwal S, Anto siewicz-Bourget J, Canto I, Giorgetti A, Israel MA, Kiskinis E, Lee JH, Loh YH, Manos PD, Montserrat N, Panopoulos AD, Ruiz S, Wilbert ML, Yu J, Kirkness EF, Izpisua Belmonte JC, Rossi DJ, Thomson JA, Eggan K, Daley GQ, Goldstein LS, Zhang K (2011) Somatic coding mutations in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 471:63-67. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09805
  8. Hussein SM, Batada NN, Vuoristo S, Ching RW, Autio R, Narva E, Ng S, Sourour M, Hamalainen R, Olsson C, Lundin K, Mikkola M, Trokovic R, Peitz M, Brustle O, Bazett-Jones DP, Alitalo K, Lahesmaa R, Nagy A, Otonkoski T (2011) Copy number variation and selection during reprogramming to pluripotency. Nature 471:58-62. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09871
  9. Jirmanova L, Afanassieff M, Gobert-Gosse S, Markossian S, Savatier P (2002) Differential contributions of ERK and PI3-kinase to the regulation of cyclin D1 expression and to the control of the G1/S transition in mouse embryonic stem cells. Oncogene 21:5515-5528. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1205728
  10. Kawamura T, Suzuki J, Wang YV, Menendez S, Morera LB, Raya A, Wahl GM, Izpisua Belmonte JC (2009) Linking the p53 tumour suppressor pathway to somatic cell reprogramming. Nature 460:1140-1144. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08311
  11. Kinner A, Wu W, Staudt C, Iliakis G (2008) Gamma-H2AX in recognition and signaling of DNA double-strand breaks in the context of chromatin. Nucleic Acids Research 36:5678-5694. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkn550
  12. Laurent LC, Ulitsky I, Slavin I, Tran H, Schork A, Morey R, Lynch C, Harness JV, Lee S, Barrero MJ, Ku S, Martynova M, Semechkin R, Galat V, Gottesfeld J, Izpisua Belmonte JC, Murry C, Keirstead HS, Park HS, Schmidt U, Laslett AL, Muller FJ, Nievergelt CM, Shamir R, Loring JF (2011) Dynamic changes in the copy number of pluripotency and cell proliferation genes in human ESCs and iPSCs during reprogramming and time in culture. Cell Stem Cell 8:106-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2010.12.003
  13. Li Z, Rana TM (2012) A kinase inhibitor screen identifies small-molecule enhancers of reprogramming and iPS cell generation. Nature communications 3:1085. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2059
  14. Luni C, Giulitti S, Serena E, Ferrari L, Zambon A, Gagliano O, Giobbe GG, Michielin F, Knobel S, Bosio A, Elvassore N (2016) High-efficiency cellular reprogramming with microfluidics. Nature methods.
  15. Onder TT, Kara N, Cherry A, Sinha AU, Zhu N, Bernt KM, Cahan P, Marcarci BO, Unternaehrer J, Gupta PB, Lander ES, Armstrong SA, Daley GQ (2012) Chromatin-modifying enzymes as modulators of reprogramming. Nature 483:598-602. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10953
  16. Samavarchi-Tehrani P, Golipour A, David L, Sung HK, Beyer TA, Datti A, Woltjen K, Nagy A, Wrana JL, (2010) Functional genomics reveals a BMP-driven mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition in the initiation of somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 7:64-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2010.04.015
  17. Singh AM, Dalton S (2009) The cell cycle and Myc intersect with mechanisms that regulate pluripotency and reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 5:141-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2009.07.003
  18. Somyajit K, Saxena S, Babu S, Mishra A, Nagaraju G (2015) Mammalian RAD51 paralogs protect nascent DNA at stalled forks and mediate replication restart. Nucleic Acids Research 43:9835-9855.
  19. Sonoda E, Sasaki MS, Buerstedde JM, Bezzubova O, Shinohara A, Ogawa H, Takata M, Yamaguchi-Iwai Y, Takeda S (1998) Rad51-deficient vertebrate cells accumulate chromosomal breaks prior to cell death. The EMBO Journal 17:598-608. https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/17.2.598
  20. Sugawara N, Wang X, Haber JE (2003) In vivo roles of Rad52, Rad54, and Rad55 proteins in Rad51-mediated recombination. Molecular Cell 12:209-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(03)00269-7
  21. Tidball AM, Parent JM (2016) Concise review: Exciting cells: Modeling genetic epilepsies with patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cells 34:27-33. https://doi.org/10.1002/stem.2203
  22. Tsuzuki T, Fujii Y, Sakumi K, Tominaga Y, Nakao K, Sekiguchi M, Matsushiro A, Yoshimura Y, Morita T (1996) Targeted disruption of the Rad51 gene leads to lethality in embryonic mice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 93:6236-6240.
  23. Unternaehrer JJ, Zhao R, Kim K, Cesana M, Powers JT, Ratanasirintrawoot S, Onder T, Shibue T, Weinberg RA, Daley GQ (2014) The epithelial-mesenchymal transition factor SNAIL paradoxically enhances reprogramming. Stem Cell Reports 3:691-698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2014.09.008
  24. White CI, Haber JE (1990) Intermediates of recombination during mating type switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The EMBO Journal 9:663-673.
  25. Yamashita T, Abe K (2016) Recent progress in cell reprogramming technology for cell transplantation therapy. Neurologia Medico-Chirurgica 56:97-101. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.ra.2015-0309
  26. Yoon SW, Kim DK, Kim KP, Park KS (2014) Rad51 regulates cell cycle progression by preserving G2/M transition in mouse embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells and Development 23:2700-2711. https://doi.org/10.1089/scd.2014.0129