4.6 Article

RING Finger and WD Repeat Domain 3 (RFWD3) Associates with Replication Protein A (RPA) and Facilitates RPA-mediated DNA Damage Response

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 286, 期 25, 页码 22314-22322

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M111.222802

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM080703]
  2. McLean Foundation at Baylor College of Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DNA damage response is crucial for maintaining genomic integrity and preventing cancer by coordinating the activation of checkpoints and the repair of damaged DNA. Central to DNA damage response are the two checkpoint kinases ATM and ATR that phosphorylate a wide range of substrates. RING finger and WD repeat domain 3 (RFWD3) was initially identified as a substrate of ATM/ATR from a proteomic screen. Subsequent studies showed that RFWD3 is an E3 ubiquitin ligase that ubiquitinates p53 in vitro and positively regulates p53 levels in response to DNA damage. We report here that RFWD3 associates with replication protein A (RPA), a single-stranded DNA-binding protein that plays essential roles in DNA replication, recombination, and repair. Binding of RPA to single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), which is generated by DNA damage and repair, is essential for the recruitment of DNA repair factors to damaged sites and the activation of checkpoint signaling. We show that RFWD3 is physically associated with RPA and rapidly localizes to sites of DNA damage in a RPA-dependent manner. In vitro experiments suggest that the C terminus of RFWD3, which encompass the coiled-coil domain and the WD40 domain, is necessary for binding to RPA. Furthermore, DNA damage-induced phosphorylation of RPA and RFWD3 is dependent upon each other. Consequently, loss of RFWD3 results in the persistent foci of DNA damage marker gamma H2AX and the repair protein Rad51 in damaged cells. These findings suggest that RFWD3 is recruited to sites of DNA damage and facilitates RPA-mediated DNA damage signaling and repair.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据