, Volume 119, Issue 5, pp 505–518

MRE11 and COM1/SAE2 are required for double-strand break repair and efficient chromosome pairing during meiosis of the protist Tetrahymena

  • Agnieszka Lukaszewicz
  • Rachel A. Howard-Till
  • Maria Novatchkova
  • Kazufumi Mochizuki
  • Josef Loidl

DOI: 10.1007/s00412-010-0274-9

Cite this article as:
Lukaszewicz, A., Howard-Till, R.A., Novatchkova, M. et al. Chromosoma (2010) 119: 505. doi:10.1007/s00412-010-0274-9


Programmed DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are generated during meiosis to initiate homologous recombination. Various aspects of DSB formation, signaling, and repair are accomplished or governed by Mre11, a component of the MRN/MRX complex, partially in cooperation with Com1/Sae2/CtIP. We used Tetrahymena to study evolutionarily conserved and changed functions of Mre11 and Com1. There is a difference between organisms with respect to the dependency of meiotic DSB formation on Mre11. By cytology and an electrophoresis-based assay for DSBs, we found that in Tetrahymena Mre11p is not required for the formation and ATR-dependent signaling of DSBs. Its dispensability is also reflected by wild-type-like DSB-dependent reorganization of the meiotic nucleus and by the phosphorylation of H2A.X in mre11∆ mutant. However, mre11∆ and com1∆ mutants are unable to repair DSBs, and chromosome pairing is reduced. It is concluded that, while MRE11 has no universal role in DNA damage signaling, its requirement for DSB repair is conserved between evolutionarily distant organisms. Moreover, reduced chromosome pairing in repair-deficient mutants reveals the existence of two complementing pairing processes, one by the rough parallel arrangement of chromosomes imposed by the tubular shape of the meiotic nucleus and the other by repair-dependent precise sequence matching.

Supplementary material

412_2010_274_Fig8_ESM.gif (106 kb)
Fig. S1

(GIF 105 kb)

412_2010_274_Fig1_ESM.eps (2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 2080 kb)
412_2010_274_Fig9_ESM.gif (154 kb)
Fig. S2

(GIF 154 kb)

412_2010_274_Fig2_ESM.eps (3.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 3234 kb)
412_2010_274_Fig10_ESM.gif (207 kb)
Fig. S4

(GIF 206 kb)

412_2010_274_Fig3_ESM.tif (3.7 mb)
High resolution image file (TIFF 3796 kb)
412_2010_274_Fig11_ESM.gif (406 kb)
Fig. S5

(GIF 406 kb)

412_2010_274_Fig4_ESM.tif (2 mb)
High resolution image file (TIFF 2095 kb)
412_2010_274_Fig12_ESM.gif (331 kb)
Fig. S6

(GIF 330 kb)

412_2010_274_Fig5_ESM.tif (855 kb)
High resolution image file (TIFF 855 kb)
412_2010_274_Fig13_ESM.gif (423 kb)
Fig. S7

(GIF 422 kb)

412_2010_274_Fig6_ESM.tif (8.4 mb)
High resolution image file (TIFF 8566 kb)
412_2010_274_MOESM7_ESM.doc (31 kb)
Table S3(DOC 31 kb)
412_2010_274_MOESM8_ESM.doc (50 kb)
Supplementary figure legends and references(DOC 49 kb)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Agnieszka Lukaszewicz
    • 1
  • Rachel A. Howard-Till
    • 1
  • Maria Novatchkova
    • 2
  • Kazufumi Mochizuki
    • 3
  • Josef Loidl
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chromosome Biology and Max F. Perutz Laboratories, Center for Molecular BiologyUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria
  2. 2.Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP)ViennaAustria
  3. 3.Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (IMBA)ViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations