Literature DB >> 15242410

V(D)J recombination: how to tame a transposase.

Vicky L Brandt1, David B Roth.   

Abstract

Since the discovery that the recombination-activating gene (RAG) proteins were capable of transposition in vitro, investigators have been trying to uncover instances of transposition in vivo and understand how this transposase has been harnessed to do useful work while being inhibited from causing deleterious chromosome rearrangements. How to preserve the capacity of the recombinase to promote a certain class of rearrangements while curtailing its ability to catalyze others is an interesting problem. In this review, we examine the progress that has been made toward understanding the regulatory mechanisms that prohibit transposition in order to formulate a model that takes into account the diverse observations that have been made over the last 15 years. First, we touch on the striking mechanistic similarities between transposition and V(D)J recombination and review evidence suggesting that the RAG proteins may be members of the retroviral integrase superfamily. We then dispense with an old theory that certain standard products of V(D)J recombination called signal joints protect against deleterious transposition events. Finally, we discuss the evidence that target capture could serve a regulatory role and close with an analysis of hairpins as preferred targets for RAG-mediated transposition. These novel strategies for harnessing the RAG transposase not only shed light on V(D)J recombination but also may provide insight into the regulation of other transposases.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15242410     DOI: 10.1111/j.0105-2896.2004.00161.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Immunol Rev        ISSN: 0105-2896            Impact factor:   12.988


  8 in total

1.  Unique contacts direct high-priority recognition of the tetrameric Mu transposase-DNA complex by the AAA+ unfoldase ClpX.

Authors:  Aliaa H Abdelhakim; Elizabeth C Oakes; Robert T Sauer; Tania A Baker
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 17.970

Review 2.  Brain cell somatic gene recombination and its phylogenetic foundations.

Authors:  Gwendolyn Kaeser; Jerold Chun
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 3.  V(D)J recombination: Born to be wild.

Authors:  Dale A Ramsden; Brett D Weed; Yeturu V R Reddy
Journal:  Semin Cancer Biol       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 15.707

4.  A non-sequence-specific DNA binding mode of RAG1 is inhibited by RAG2.

Authors:  Shuying Zhao; Lori M Gwyn; Pallabi De; Karla K Rodgers
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 5.469

5.  Target DNA structure plays a critical role in RAG transposition.

Authors:  Jennifer E Posey; Malgorzata J Pytlos; Richard R Sinden; David B Roth
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 8.029

6.  Site- and allele-specific polycomb dysregulation in T-cell leukaemia.

Authors:  Jean-Marc Navarro; Aurore Touzart; Lydie C Pradel; Marie Loosveld; Myriam Koubi; Romain Fenouil; Sandrine Le Noir; Muhammad Ahmad Maqbool; Ester Morgado; Claude Gregoire; Sebastien Jaeger; Emilie Mamessier; Charles Pignon; Salima Hacein-Bey-Abina; Bernard Malissen; Marta Gut; Ivo G Gut; Hervé Dombret; Elizabeth A Macintyre; Steven J Howe; H Bobby Gaspar; Adrian J Thrasher; Norbert Ifrah; Dominique Payet-Bornet; Estelle Duprez; Jean-Christophe Andrau; Vahid Asnafi; Bertrand Nadel
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2015-01-23       Impact factor: 14.919

7.  How mouse RAG recombinase avoids DNA transposition.

Authors:  Xuemin Chen; Yanxiang Cui; Huaibin Wang; Z Hong Zhou; Martin Gellert; Wei Yang
Journal:  Nat Struct Mol Biol       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 15.369

8.  A bifunctional DNA binding region in Tn5 transposase.

Authors:  Richard J Gradman; Jerod L Ptacin; Archna Bhasin; William S Reznikoff; Igor Y Goryshin
Journal:  Mol Microbiol       Date:  2007-12-14       Impact factor: 3.501

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.