Skip to main content
PMC home page
Molecular and Cellular Biology logoLink to Molecular and Cellular Biology
. 1992 Dec;12(12):5426–5437. doi: 10.1128/mcb.12.12.5426

Effect of terminal nonhomologies on homologous recombination in Xenopus laevis oocytes.

S Jeong-Yu 1, D Carroll 1
PMCID: PMC360480  PMID: 1448075

Abstract

Homologous recombination of linear DNA molecules in Xenopus laevis oocytes is very efficient. The predictions of molecular models for this recombination process were tested with substrates with terminal nonhomologies (nonhomologous sequences). It was found that nonhomologies on one or both ends of an otherwise efficient substrate substantially reduced the yield of recombination products. In the case of a single nonhomology, inhibition was observed for all lengths of nonhomology, from 60 to 1,690 bp, being most dramatic for the longer blocks. Examination of time courses of recombination showed that the blocks were largely kinetic; that is, substrates with short nonhomologies eventually yielded substantial levels of completed products. Intermediates that accumulated after the injection of end-blocked substrates were characterized by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and hybridization with strand-specific oligonucleotide probes. These blocked intermediates were shown to have base-paired junctions, but resolution was prevented by the failure to remove the 3'-ending strand of the original nonhomology. Continuing exonuclease action created a single-strand gap adjacent to the position of the persistent nonhomology. In contrast, the strand that included the unblocked side of the junction could be sealed. These results are consistent with a nonconservative, resection-annealing mechanism of homologous recombination in the oocytes and suggest the absence of any activity that can efficiently remove 3' tails.

Full text

PDF
5426

Images in this article

5428Image
on p.5428
5429Image
on p.5429
5430Image
on p.5430
5431Image
on p.5431
5432Image
on p.5432
5432Image
on p.5432
5433Image
on p.5433
5434Image
on p.5434

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Anderson R. A., Eliason S. L. Recombination of homologous DNA fragments transfected into mammalian cells occurs predominantly by terminal pairing. Mol Cell Biol. 1986 Sep;6(9):3246–3252. doi: 10.1128/mcb.6.9.3246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carroll D. Genetic recombination of bacteriophage lambda DNAs in Xenopus oocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983 Nov;80(22):6902–6906. doi: 10.1073/pnas.80.22.6902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Carroll D., Wright S. H., Wolff R. K., Grzesiuk E., Maryon E. B. Efficient homologous recombination of linear DNA substrates after injection into Xenopus laevis oocytes. Mol Cell Biol. 1986 Jun;6(6):2053–2061. doi: 10.1128/mcb.6.6.2053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cassuto E., Radding C. M. Mechanism for the action of lambda exonuclease in genetic recombination. Nat New Biol. 1971 Jan 6;229(1):13–16. doi: 10.1038/newbio229013a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cortese R., Harland R., Melton D. Transcription of tRNA genes in vivo: single-stranded compared to double-stranded templates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1980 Jul;77(7):4147–4151. doi: 10.1073/pnas.77.7.4147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Craigie R., Mizuuchi K. Mechanism of transposition of bacteriophage Mu: structure of a transposition intermediate. Cell. 1985 Jul;41(3):867–876. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(85)80067-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Doherty M. J., Morrison P. T., Kolodner R. Genetic recombination of bacterial plasmid DNA. Physical and genetic analysis of the products of plasmid recombination in Escherichia coli. J Mol Biol. 1983 Jul 5;167(3):539–560. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(83)80097-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Feinberg A. P., Vogelstein B. A technique for radiolabeling DNA restriction endonuclease fragments to high specific activity. Anal Biochem. 1983 Jul 1;132(1):6–13. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(83)90418-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fishman-Lobell J., Rudin N., Haber J. E. Two alternative pathways of double-strand break repair that are kinetically separable and independently modulated. Mol Cell Biol. 1992 Mar;12(3):1292–1303. doi: 10.1128/mcb.12.3.1292. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Grzesiuk E., Carroll D. Recombination of DNAs in Xenopus oocytes based on short homologous overlaps. Nucleic Acids Res. 1987 Feb 11;15(3):971–985. doi: 10.1093/nar/15.3.971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Gurdon J. B., Wickens M. P. The use of Xenopus oocytes for the expression of cloned genes. Methods Enzymol. 1983;101:370–386. doi: 10.1016/0076-6879(83)01028-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hanahan D. Studies on transformation of Escherichia coli with plasmids. J Mol Biol. 1983 Jun 5;166(4):557–580. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(83)80284-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jeong-Yu S. J., Carroll D. Test of the double-strand-break repair model of recombination in Xenopus laevis oocytes. Mol Cell Biol. 1992 Jan;12(1):112–119. doi: 10.1128/mcb.12.1.112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lin F. L., Sperle K., Sternberg N. Intermolecular recombination between DNAs introduced into mouse L cells is mediated by a nonconservative pathway that leads to crossover products. Mol Cell Biol. 1990 Jan;10(1):103–112. doi: 10.1128/mcb.10.1.103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lin F. L., Sperle K., Sternberg N. Model for homologous recombination during transfer of DNA into mouse L cells: role for DNA ends in the recombination process. Mol Cell Biol. 1984 Jun;4(6):1020–1034. doi: 10.1128/mcb.4.6.1020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Maryon E., Carroll D. Characterization of recombination intermediates from DNA injected into Xenopus laevis oocytes: evidence for a nonconservative mechanism of homologous recombination. Mol Cell Biol. 1991 Jun;11(6):3278–3287. doi: 10.1128/mcb.11.6.3278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Maryon E., Carroll D. Degradation of linear DNA by a strand-specific exonuclease activity in Xenopus laevis oocytes. Mol Cell Biol. 1989 Nov;9(11):4862–4871. doi: 10.1128/mcb.9.11.4862. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Maryon E., Carroll D. Involvement of single-stranded tails in homologous recombination of DNA injected into Xenopus laevis oocyte nuclei. Mol Cell Biol. 1991 Jun;11(6):3268–3277. doi: 10.1128/mcb.11.6.3268. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Orr-Weaver T. L., Szostak J. W. Fungal recombination. Microbiol Rev. 1985 Mar;49(1):33–58. doi: 10.1128/mr.49.1.33-58.1985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Ozenberger B. A., Roeder G. S. A unique pathway of double-strand break repair operates in tandemly repeated genes. Mol Cell Biol. 1991 Mar;11(3):1222–1231. doi: 10.1128/mcb.11.3.1222. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Rudin N., Haber J. E. Efficient repair of HO-induced chromosomal breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by recombination between flanking homologous sequences. Mol Cell Biol. 1988 Sep;8(9):3918–3928. doi: 10.1128/mcb.8.9.3918. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Rudin N., Sugarman E., Haber J. E. Genetic and physical analysis of double-strand break repair and recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics. 1989 Jul;122(3):519–534. doi: 10.1093/genetics/122.3.519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Seifert H. S., Chen E. Y., So M., Heffron F. Shuttle mutagenesis: a method of transposon mutagenesis for Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986 Feb;83(3):735–739. doi: 10.1073/pnas.83.3.735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Smith G. R. Homologous recombination in procaryotes. Microbiol Rev. 1988 Mar;52(1):1–28. doi: 10.1128/mr.52.1.1-28.1988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Struhl K. Effect of deletion and insertion on double-strand-break repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol. 1987 Mar;7(3):1300–1303. doi: 10.1128/mcb.7.3.1300. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Symington L. S., Morrison P., Kolodner R. Intramolecular recombination of linear DNA catalyzed by the Escherichia coli RecE recombination system. J Mol Biol. 1985 Dec 5;186(3):515–525. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(85)90126-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Szostak J. W., Orr-Weaver T. L., Rothstein R. J., Stahl F. W. The double-strand-break repair model for recombination. Cell. 1983 May;33(1):25–35. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(83)90331-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. West S. C. Processing of recombination intermediates in vitro. Bioessays. 1990 Apr;12(4):151–154. doi: 10.1002/bies.950120402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. White C. I., Haber J. E. Intermediates of recombination during mating type switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO J. 1990 Mar;9(3):663–673. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1990.tb08158.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Wyllie A. H., Laskey R. A., Finch J., Gurdon J. B. Selective DNA conservation and chromatin assembly after injection of SV40 DNA into Xenopus oocytes. Dev Biol. 1978 May;64(1):178–188. doi: 10.1016/0012-1606(78)90069-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Molecular and Cellular Biology are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES