Sustained active site rigidity during synthesis by human DNA polymerase μ


DNA polymerase μ (Pol μ) is the only template-dependent human DNA polymerase capable of repairing double-strand DNA breaks (DSBs) with unpaired 3′ ends in nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ). To probe this function, we structurally characterized Pol μ's catalytic cycle for single-nucleotide incorporation. These structures indicate that, unlike other template-dependent DNA polymerases, Pol μ shows no large-scale conformational changes in protein subdomains, amino acid side chains or DNA upon dNTP binding or catalysis. Instead, the only major conformational change is seen earlier in the catalytic cycle, when the flexible loop 1 region repositions upon DNA binding. Pol μ variants with changes in loop 1 have altered catalytic properties and are partially defective in NHEJ. The results indicate that specific loop 1 residues contribute to Pol μ's unique ability to catalyze template-dependent NHEJ of DSBs with unpaired 3′ ends.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Structural features of the hPol μ Δ2 binary and precatalytic ternary complexes.
Figure 2: Structural characterization of nucleotide incorporation by hPol μ Δ2.
Figure 3: Electron density for hPol μ Δ2 structures.
Figure 4: Structural characteristics of the hPol μ apoprotein.
Figure 5: Biochemical characterization of wild type and loop 1 mutants of hPol μ.
Figure 6: Comparison of structural rigidity across the family-X polymerases.

Accession codes

Primary accessions

Protein Data Bank

Referenced accessions

Protein Data Bank


  1. 1

    Moon, A.F. et al. The X family portrait: structural insights into biological functions of X family polymerases. DNA Repair (Amst.) 6, 1709–1725 (2007).

  2. 2

    Nick McElhinny, S.A. & Ramsden, D.A. Sibling rivalry: competition between Pol X family members in V(d)J recombination and general double strand break repair. Immunol. Rev. 200, 156–164 (2004).

  3. 3

    DeRose, E.F. et al. Solution structure of polymerase μ's BRCT domain reveals an element essential for its role in nonhomologous end joining. Biochemistry 46, 12100–12110 (2007).

  4. 4

    Mueller, G.A. et al. A comparison of BRCT domains involved in nonhomologous end-joining: introducing the solution structure of the BRCT domain of polymerase lambda. DNA Repair (Amst.) 7, 1340–1351 (2008).

  5. 5

    Bork, P. et al. A superfamily of conserved domains in DNA damage-responsive cell cycle checkpoint proteins. FASEB J. 11, 68–76 (1997).

  6. 6

    Nick McElhinny, S.A. & Ramsden, D.A. Polymerase mu is a DNA-directed DNA/RNA polymerase. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 2309–2315 (2003).

  7. 7

    Ruiz, J.F. et al. Lack of sugar discrimination by human Pol μ requires a single glycine residue. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 4441–4449 (2003).

  8. 8

    Roettger, M.P., Fiala, K.A., Sompalli, S., Dong, Y. & Suo, Z. Pre-steady-state kinetic studies of the fidelity of human DNA polymerase μ. Biochemistry 43, 13827–13838 (2004).

  9. 9

    Bertocci, B., De Smet, A., Berek, C., Weill, J.C. & Reynaud, C.A. Immunoglobulin κ light chain gene rearrangement is impaired in mice deficient for DNA polymerase mu. Immunity 19, 203–211 (2003).

  10. 10

    Bertocci, B., De Smet, A., Weill, J.C. & Reynaud, C.A. Nonoverlapping functions of DNA polymerases mu, lambda, and terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase during immunoglobulin V(d)J recombination in vivo. Immunity 25, 31–41 (2006).

  11. 11

    Gozalbo-López, B. et al. A role for DNA polymerase μ in the emerging DJH rearrangements of the postgastrulation mouse embryo. Mol. Cell. Biol. 29, 1266–1275 (2009).

  12. 12

    Lucas, D. et al. Altered hematopoiesis in mice lacking DNA polymerase μ is due to inefficient double-strand break repair. PLoS Genet. 5, e1000389 (2009).

  13. 13

    Chayot, R., Danckaert, A., Montagne, B. & Ricchetti, M. Lack of DNA polymerase μ affects the kinetics of DNA double-strand break repair and impacts on cellular senescence. DNA Repair (Amst.) 9, 1187–1199 (2010).

  14. 14

    Nick McElhinny, S.A. et al. A gradient of template dependence defines distinct biological roles for family X polymerases in nonhomologous end joining. Mol. Cell 19, 357–366 (2005).

  15. 15

    Andrade, P., Martin, M.J., Juarez, R., Lopez de Saro, F. & Blanco, L. Limited terminal transferase in human DNA polymerase μ defines the required balance between accuracy and efficiency in NHEJ. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 16203–16208 (2009).

  16. 16

    Domínguez, O. et al. DNA polymerase mu (Pol μ), homologous to TdT, could act as a DNA mutator in eukaryotic cells. EMBO J. 19, 1731–1742 (2000).

  17. 17

    Juárez, R., Ruiz, J.F., Nick McElhinny, S.A., Ramsden, D. & Blanco, L. A specific loop in human DNA polymerase mu allows switching between creative and DNA-instructed synthesis. Nucleic Acids Res. 34, 4572–4582 (2006).

  18. 18

    Romain, F., Barbosa, I., Gouge, J., Rougeon, F. & Delarue, M. Conferring a template-dependent polymerase activity to terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase by mutations in the Loop1 region. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, 4642–4656 (2009).

  19. 19

    Martin, M.J., Juarez, R. & Blanco, L. DNA-binding determinants promoting NHEJ by human Polμ. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 11389–11403 (2012).

  20. 20

    Moon, A.F. et al. Structural insight into the substrate specificity of DNA Polymerase μ. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 45–53 (2007).

  21. 21

    Batra, V.K. et al. Magnesium-induced assembly of a complete DNA polymerase catalytic complex. Structure 14, 757–766 (2006).

  22. 22

    Garcia-Diaz, M., Bebenek, K., Krahn, J.M., Pedersen, L.C. & Kunkel, T.A. Role of the catalytic metal during polymerization by DNA polymerase lambda. DNA Repair (Amst.) 6, 1333–1340 (2007).

  23. 23

    Batra, V.K., Beard, W.A., Shock, D.D., Pedersen, L.C. & Wilson, S.H. Structures of DNA polymerase β with active-site mismatches suggest a transient abasic site intermediate during misincorporation. Mol. Cell 30, 315–324 (2008).

  24. 24

    Bebenek, K., Pedersen, L.C. & Kunkel, T.A. Replication infidelity via a mismatch with Watson-Crick geometry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 1862–1867 (2011).

  25. 25

    Cavanaugh, N.A. et al. Molecular insights into DNA polymerase deterrents for ribonucleotide insertion. J. Biol. Chem. 286, 31650–31660 (2011).

  26. 26

    Garcia-Diaz, M., Bebenek, K., Krahn, J.M., Pedersen, L.C. & Kunkel, T.A. Structural analysis of strand misalignment during DNA synthesis by a human DNA polymerase. Cell 124, 331–342 (2006).

  27. 27

    Gosavi, R.A., Moon, A.F., Kunkel, T.A., Pedersen, L.C. & Bebenek, K. The catalytic cycle for ribonucleotide incorporation by human DNA Pol λ. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 7518–7527 (2012).

  28. 28

    Picher, A.J. et al. Promiscuous mismatch extension by human DNA polymerase lambda. Nucleic Acids Res. 34, 3259–3266 (2006).

  29. 29

    Franklin, M.C., Wang, J. & Steitz, T.A. Structure of the replicating complex of a pol α family DNA polymerase. Cell 105, 657–667 (2001).

  30. 30

    Rodriguez, A.C., Park, H.W., Mao, C. & Beese, L.S. Crystal structure of a pol α family DNA polymerase from the hyperthermophilic archaeon Thermococcus sp. 9° N-7. J. Mol. Biol. 299, 447–462 (2000).

  31. 31

    Wing, R.A., Bailey, S. & Steitz, T.A. Insights into the replisome from the structure of a ternary complex of the DNA polymerase III α-subunit. J. Mol. Biol. 382, 859–869 (2008).

  32. 32

    Wu, E.Y. & Beese, L.S. The structure of a high fidelity DNA polymerase bound to a mismatched nucleotide reveals an “ajar” intermediate conformation in the nucleotide selection mechanism. J. Biol. Chem. 286, 19758–19767 (2011).

  33. 33

    Garcia-Diaz, M., Bebenek, K., Krahn, J.M., Kunkel, T.A. & Pedersen, L.C. A closed conformation for the Pol λ catalytic cycle. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 12, 97–98 (2005).

  34. 34

    Doherty, A.J., Serpell, L.C. & Ponting, C.P. The helix-hairpin-helix DNA-binding motif: a structural basis for non-sequence-specific recognition of DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 24, 2488–2497 (1996).

  35. 35

    Davis, B.J., Havener, J.M. & Ramsden, D.A. End-bridging is required for pol μ to efficiently promote repair of noncomplementary ends by nonhomologous end joining. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, 3085–3094 (2008).

  36. 36

    Bebenek, K., Garcia-Diaz, M., Zhou, R.Z., Povirk, L.F. & Kunkel, T.A. Loop 1 modulates the fidelity of DNA polymerase λ. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, 5419–5431 (2010).

  37. 37

    Radhakrishnan, R. et al. Regulation of DNA repair fidelity by molecular checkpoints: “gates” in DNA polymerase β's substrate selection. Biochemistry 45, 15142–15156 (2006).

  38. 38

    Yang, L., Beard, W.A., Wilson, S.H., Broyde, S. & Schlick, T. Polymerase β simulations suggest that Arg258 rotation is a slow step rather than large subdomain motions per se. J. Mol. Biol. 317, 651–671 (2002).

  39. 39

    Li, Y. & Schlick, T. Modeling DNA polymerase μ motions: subtle transitions before chemistry. Biophys. J. 99, 3463–3472 (2010).

  40. 40

    Valley, C.C. et al. The methionine-aromatic motif plays a unique role in stabilizing protein structure. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 34979–34991 (2012).

  41. 41

    Delarue, M. et al. Crystal structures of a template-independent DNA polymerase: murine terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase. EMBO J. 21, 427–439 (2002).

  42. 42

    Gouge, J., Rosario, S., Romain, F., Beguin, P. & Delarue, M. Structures of intermediates along the catalytic cycle of terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase: dynamical aspects of the two-metal ion mechanism. J. Mol. Biol. 425, 4334–4352 (2013).

  43. 43

    Bollum, F.J. Thermal conversion of nonpriming deoxyribonucleic acid to primer. J. Biol. Chem. 234, 2733–2734 (1959).

  44. 44

    Kato, K.I., Goncalves, J.M., Houts, G.E. & Bollum, F.J. Deoxynucleotide-polymerizing enzymes of calf thymus gland: II. Properties of the terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase. J. Biol. Chem. 242, 2780–2789 (1967).

  45. 45

    Biertümpfel, C. et al. Structure and mechanism of human DNA polymerase η. Nature 465, 1044–1048 (2010).

  46. 46

    Ummat, A. et al. Human DNA polymerase η is pre-aligned for dNTP binding and catalysis. J. Mol. Biol. 415, 627–634 (2012).

  47. 47

    Beard, W.A., Shock, D.D., Batra, V.K., Pedersen, L.C. & Wilson, S.H. DNA polymerase β substrate specificity: side chain modulation of the “A-rule”. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 31680–31689 (2009).

  48. 48

    Moon, A.F., Mueller, G.A., Zhong, X. & Pedersen, L.C. A synergistic approach to protein crystallization: combination of a fixed-arm carrier with surface entropy reduction. Protein Sci. 19, 901–913 (2010).

  49. 49

    Chayen, N.E. Comparative studies of protein crystallization by vapour-diffusion and microbatch techniques. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 54, 8–15 (1998).

  50. 50

    Zwart, P.H. et al. Automated structure solution with the PHENIX suite. Methods Mol. Biol. 426, 419–435 (2008).

  51. 51

    Adams, P.D. et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 66, 213–221 (2010).

  52. 52

    Terwilliger, T.C. et al. Iterative model building, structure refinement and density modification with the PHENIX AutoBuild wizard. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 64, 61–69 (2008).

  53. 53

    Emsley, P. & Cowtan, K. Coot: model-building tools for molecular graphics. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 60, 2126–2132 (2004).

  54. 54

    Emsley, P., Lohkamp, B., Scott, W.G. & Cowtan, K. Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 66, 486–501 (2010).

  55. 55

    Lovell, S.C. et al. Structure validation by Cα geometry: φ, ψψψ and Cβ deviation. Proteins 50, 437–450 (2003).

  56. 56

    Nick McElhinny, S.A., Snowden, C.M., McCarville, J. & Ramsden, D.A. Ku recruits the XRCC4-ligase IV complex to DNA ends. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20, 2996–3003 (2000).

  57. 57

    Prasad, R., Kumar, A., Widen, S.G., Casas-Finet, J.R. & Wilson, S.H. Identification of residues in the single-stranded DNA-binding site of the 8-kDa domain of rat DNA polymerase β by UV cross-linking. J. Biol. Chem. 268, 22746–22755 (1993).

Download references


We thank G. Mueller and B. Beard for critical reading of the manuscript. This research was supported by the Division of Intramural Research of the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants ES102645 (L.C.P.), and ES065070 (T.A.K.) and by NIH grant CA097096 (D.A.R.). Use of the Advanced Photon Source was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences contract W-31-109-Eng-38.

Author information




A.F.M., L.C.P., K.B., D.A.R. and T.A.K. designed research; A.F.M., K.B. and J.M.P. performed research; and all authors contributed to data analysis and manuscript preparation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katarzyna Bebenek.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Comparison of wild-type full-length and catalytic-domain (Pro138–Ala494) constructs of hPol μ in single-nucleotide gap-filling.

A steady-state polymerase activity assay was performed in order to compare wildtype full-length or truncated Pol μ constructs (5nM), on a single-nucleotide gapped DNA substrate (no enzyme control, C). The percentage of primer extension was calculated for each construct, at two different time points. The two constructs behaved indistinguishably in this assay.

Supplementary Figure 2 Protein engineering of hPol μ Δ2.

(a) Comparison of the X-ray crystal structures of mouse Pol μ (PDB ID code 2IHM1, purple) and mouse TdT (PDB ID code 1JMS2, orange). The relative positions of Loop 1 (green, from mTdT) and Loop 2 (red, from mPol μ) are displayed. (b) Ribbon diagram showing the ordered and disordered regions of Loop 2 in mTdT (orange) and mPol μ (red). (c) ClustalW3 sequence alignments of Loop1 and Loop 2 in mammalian orthologs of Pol μ. Loop1 is boxed in green. Regions of decreased sequence conservation in Loop2 are boxed in red, and were subsequently deleted by site-directed mutagenesis. His363 (magenta), Met382 (green), and Phe385 (cyan) are clearly marked. (d) ClustalW sequence alignments of Loop 2 in mammalian orthologs of TdT. Loop1 is boxed in green, and regions that are structurally homologous to the deleted region of Loop 2 in hPol μ are boxed in red. Phe401 is marked in cyan. (e) Structure of mPol μ (purple), displaying the location of Loop 2 (red), distal from the active site (marked by the incoming nucleotide, cyan), and the DNA binding cleft (khaki ribbon and surface rendering). (f) Structure of engineered Loop 2 from hPol μ Δ2 binary complex (blue), compared to mPol μ (purple). Residues Pro398-Pro410 were deleted, and β-strands 4 and 5 fused by addition of a glycine residue (labeled Gly410 and marked by an asterisk). All structural figures were generated using PyMOL4.

Supplementary Figure 3 Activity assays with wild-type hPol μ and the hPol μ Δ2 variant.

(a) Comparison of wildtype and Δ2 variant hPol μ template-dependent synthesis activity on a single nucleotide gapped DNA substrate. (b) Comparison of wildtype and Δ2 hPol μ template-independent synthesis activity on a single-stranded oligo-dT DNA substrate. (c) Comparison of wildtype and hPol μ Δ2 during in vitro NHEJ assays. Top, schematic diagram illustrating the structure of the DNA substrates used in the NHEJ assay. Bottom, ligation products of NHEJ synthesized by either wildtype or hPol μ Δ2.

Supplementary Figure 4 Implications of loop 1 flexibility for substrate stabilization during DSB repair by NHEJ.

(a) Model of a noncomplementary DSB substrate (purple) bound to the protein component of the hPol μ Δ2 pre-catalytic ternary complex (orange). The primer (strand P) terminus (blue) is unpaired, opposite the discontinuity in the template strand (strand T). The incoming nucleotide (cyan) is correctly paired opposite the templating base (magenta). Location of the disordered Loop1 is marked in green. (b) Hypothetical Loop1 conformations were manually generated for the single-nucleotide gapped ternary complex (green) and for a noncomplementary DSB substrate (red).

Supplementary Figure 5 Biochemical characterization of wild-type and loop 1 mutants of hPol μ.

(a) Uncropped gel from Figure 5b. (b) Uncropped gel from Figure 5c (top panel). (c) Uncropped gel from Figure 5c (bottom panel). All wells in (b) and (c) also contain human Ku (10 nM) and XRCC4/Ligase IV complex (20 nM) in addition to the indicated Family X polymerase (0.5 nM).

Supplementary Figure 6 The multiple cloning site of the pGEXM expression vector.

The vestigial thrombin protease cleavage site from the parental pGEX-4T3 expression vector is highlighted in blue. The Tobacco Etch Virus (TEV) protease cleavage site is shown in green, with a green line clearly delineating the actual site of cleavage. The BamHI restriction site between the two regions encoding the thrombin and TEV protease sites has been deactivated by site directed mutagenesis (blue asterisk), a silent mutation which does not affect the protein sequence. The multicloning site from the pMALX expression vector is shown5, with the pertinent restriction sites marked. Three TGA stop codons (red) are situated immediately downstream of the multicloning site, one in each reading frame. Locations of sequencing primers 5'pGEX and 3'pGEX are shown with directional arrows.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figures 1–6 and Supplementary Tables 1–4 (PDF 34316 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moon, A., Pryor, J., Ramsden, D. et al. Sustained active site rigidity during synthesis by human DNA polymerase μ. Nat Struct Mol Biol 21, 253–260 (2014).

Download citation

Further reading