ruvA Mutants Research Articles

Formation of a Stable RuvA Protein Double Tetramer Is Required for Efficient Branch Migration in Vitro and for Replication Fork Reversal in Vivo

In bacteria, RuvABC is required for the resolution of Holliday junctions (HJ) made during homologous recombination. The RuvAB complex catalyzes HJ branch migration and replication fork reversal (RFR). During RFR, a stalled fork is reversed to form a HJ adjacent to a DNA double strand end, a reaction that requires RuvAB in certain Escherichia coli replication mutants. The exact structure of active RuvAB complexes remains elusive as it is still unknown whether one or two tetramers of RuvA support RuvB during branch migration and during RFR. We designed an E. coli RuvA mutant, RuvA2(KaP), specifically impaired for RuvA tetramer-tetramer interactions. As expected, the mutant protein is impaired for complex II (two tetramers) formation on HJs, although the binding efficiency of complex I (a single tetramer) is as wild type. We show that although RuvA complex II formation is required for efficient HJ branch migration in vitro, RuvA2(KaP) is fully active for homologous recombination in vivo. RuvA2(KaP) is also deficient at forming complex II on synthetic replication forks, and the binding affinity of RuvA2(KaP) for forks is decreased compared with wild type. Accordingly, RuvA2(KaP) is inefficient at processing forks in vitro and in vivo. These data indicate that RuvA2(KaP) is a separation-of-function mutant, capable of homologous recombination but impaired for RFR. RuvA2(KaP) is defective for stimulation of RuvB activity and stability of HJ·RuvA·RuvB tripartite complexes. This work demonstrates that the need for RuvA tetramer-tetramer interactions for full RuvAB activity in vitro causes specifically an RFR defect in vivo.

Central Role of the Holliday Junction Helicase RuvAB in vlsE Recombination and Infectivity of Borrelia burgdorferi

Antigenic variation plays a vital role in the pathogenesis of many infectious bacteria and protozoa including Borrelia burgdorferi, the causative agent of Lyme disease. VlsE, a 35 kDa surface-exposed lipoprotein, undergoes antigenic variation during B. burgdorferi infection of mammalian hosts, and is believed to be a critical mechanism by which the spirochetes evade immune clearance. Random, segmental recombination between the expressed vlsE gene and adjacent vls silent cassettes generates a large number of different VlsE variants within the infected host. Although the occurrence and importance of vlsE sequence variation is well established, little is known about the biological mechanism of vlsE recombination. To identify factors important in antigenic variation and vlsE recombination, we screened transposon mutants of genes known to be involved in DNA recombination and repair for their effects on infectivity and vlsE recombination. Several mutants, including those in BB0023 (ruvA), BB0022 (ruvB), BB0797 (mutS), and BB0098 (mutS-II), showed reduced infectivity in immunocompetent C3H/HeN mice. Mutants in ruvA and ruvB exhibited greatly reduced rates of vlsE recombination in C3H/HeN mice, as determined by restriction fragment polymorphism (RFLP) screening and DNA sequence analysis. In severe combined immunodeficiency (C3H/scid) mice, the ruvA mutant retained full infectivity; however, all recovered clones retained the ‘parental’ vlsE sequence, consistent with low rates of vlsE recombination. These results suggest that the reduced infectivity of ruvA and ruvB mutants is the result of ineffective vlsE recombination and underscores the important role that vlsE recombination plays in immune evasion. Based on functional studies in other organisms, the RuvAB complex of B. burgdorferi may promote branch migration of Holliday junctions during vlsE recombination. Our findings are consistent with those in the accompanying article by Dresser et al., and together these studies provide the first examples of trans-acting factors involved in vlsE recombination.

RuvA Mutants That Resolve Holliday Junctions but Do Not Reverse Replication Forks

RuvAB and RuvABC complexes catalyze branch migration and resolution of Holliday junctions (HJs) respectively. In addition to their action in the last steps of homologous recombination, they process HJs made by replication fork reversal, a reaction which occurs at inactivated replication forks by the annealing of blocked leading and lagging strand ends. RuvAB was recently proposed to bind replication forks and directly catalyze their conversion into HJs. We report here the isolation and characterization of two separation-of-function ruvA mutants that resolve HJs, based on their capacity to promote conjugational recombination and recombinational repair of UV and mitomycin C lesions, but have lost the capacity to reverse forks. In vivo and in vitro evidence indicate that the ruvA mutations affect DNA binding and the stimulation of RuvB helicase activity. This work shows that RuvA's actions at forks and at HJs can be genetically separated, and that RuvA mutants compromised for fork reversal remain fully capable of homologous recombination.

The Role of RuvA Octamerization for RuvAB Function in Vitro and in Vivo

RuvA plays an essential role in branch migration of the Holliday junction by RuvAB as part of the RuvABC pathway for processing Holliday junctions in Escherichia coli. Two types of RuvA-Holliday junction complexes have been characterized: 1) complex I containing a single RuvA tetramer and 2) complex II in which the junction is sandwiched between two RuvA tetramers. The functional differences between the two forms are still not clear. To investigate the role of RuvA octamerization, we introduced three amino acid substitutions designed to disrupt the E. coli RuvA tetramer-tetramer interface as identified by structural studies. The mutant RuvA was tetrameric and interacted with both RuvB and junction DNA but, as predicted, formed complex I only at protein concentrations up to 500 nm. We present biochemical and surface plasmon resonance evidence for functional and physical interactions of the mutant RuvA with RuvB and RuvC on synthetic junctions. The mutant RuvA with RuvB showed DNA helicase activity and could support branch migration of synthetic four-way and three-way junctions. However, junction binding and the efficiency of branch migration of four-way junctions were affected. The activity of the RuvA mutant was consistent with a RuvAB complex driven by one RuvB hexamer only and lead us to propose that one RuvA tetramer can only support the activity of one RuvB hexamer. Significantly, the mutant failed to complement the UV sensitivity of E. coli DeltaruvA cells. These results indicate strongly that RuvA octamerization is essential for the full biological activity of RuvABC.

Holliday junction binding and processing by the RuvA protein of Mycoplasma pneumoniae.

The RuvA, RuvB and RuvC proteins of Escherichia coli act together to process Holliday junctions formed during recombination and DNA repair. RuvA has a well-defined DNA binding surface that is sculptured specifically to accommodate a Holliday junction and allow subsequent loading of RuvB and RuvC. A negatively charged pin projecting from the centre limits binding of linear duplex DNA. The amino-acid sequences forming the pin are highly conserved. However, in certain Mycoplasma and Ureaplasma species the structure is extended by four amino acids and two acidic residues forming a crucial charge barrier are missing. We investigated the significance of these differences by analysing RuvA from Mycoplasma pneumoniae. Gel retardation and surface plasmon resonance assays revealed that this protein binds Holliday junctions and other branched DNA structures in a manner similar to E. coli RuvA. Significantly, it binds duplex DNA more readily. However it does not support branch migration mediated by E. coli RuvB and when bound to junction DNA is unable to provide a platform for stable binding of E. coli RuvC. It also fails to restore radiation resistance to an E. coli ruvA mutant. The data presented suggest that the modified pin region retains the ability to promote junction-specific DNA binding, but acts as a physical obstacle to linear duplex DNA rather than as a charge barrier. They also indicate that such an obstacle may interfere with the binding of a resolvase. Mycoplasma species may therefore process Holliday junctions via uncoupled branch migration and resolution reactions.