Humanizing the yeast origin recognition complex

Lee, Clare S. K.; Cheung, Ming Fung; Li, Jinsen; Zhao, Yongqian; Lam, Wai Hei; Ho, Vincy; Rohs, Remo; Zhai, Yuanliang; Leung, Danny; Tye, Bik-Kwoon

doi:10.1038/s41467-020-20277-y

Download PDF

Article
Open access
Published: 04 January 2021

Humanizing the yeast origin recognition complex

Nature Communications volume 12, Article number: 33 (2021) Cite this article

5511 Accesses
20 Citations
48 Altmetric
Metrics details

Subjects

Abstract

The Origin Recognition Complex (ORC) is an evolutionarily conserved six-subunit protein complex that binds specific sites at many locations to coordinately replicate the entire eukaryote genome. Though highly conserved in structure, ORC’s selectivity for replication origins has diverged tremendously between yeasts and humans to adapt to vastly different life cycles. In this work, we demonstrate that the selectivity determinant of ORC for DNA binding lies in a 19-amino acid insertion helix in the Orc4 subunit, which is present in yeast but absent in human. Removal of this motif from Orc4 transforms the yeast ORC, which selects origins based on base-specific binding at defined locations, into one whose selectivity is dictated by chromatin landscape and afforded with plasticity, as reported for human. Notably, the altered yeast ORC has acquired an affinity for regions near transcriptional start sites (TSSs), which the human ORC also favors.

Evolution of DNA replication origin specification and gene silencing mechanisms

Article Open access 14 October 2020

Nucleosome-directed replication origin licensing independent of a consensus DNA sequence

Article Open access 23 August 2022

A predictable conserved DNA base composition signature defines human core DNA replication origins

Article Open access 21 September 2020

Introduction

The regulation of the location and timing of DNA replication initiation is critically important for the growth and development of eukaryotes. DNA replication initiation is regulated stringently, involving multiple layers of redundant mechanisms¹. During development, metazoans utilize different sets of replication origins based on accessible chromatin that is configured developmentally in stages^2,3. In contrast, the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which does not have a distinct developmental program, initiates DNA replication at a defined set of locations known as autonomously replication sequences (ARSs)⁴. How metazoan cells attain plasticity in origin selection in response to programmed development is unknown.

The origin recognition complex (ORC), which binds replication origins in eukaryotes consists of six highly conserved subunits, Orc1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (ref. ⁵). Despite their conservation in sequence and in structure^6,7,8, ORC has divergent binding specificities that vary from species to species⁹. With the exception of Schizosaccharomyces pombe, which has multiple AT-hooks in Orc4 (ref. ¹⁰), in most model yeast species, ORC binds defined and species-specific base sequences^11,12. In S. cerevisiae, ARS is characterized by a 17 bp ARS consensus sequence (ACS) embedded within ~125 bp DNA with a polar T-rich and A-rich base composition that is asymmetrically located between two well-positioned nucleosomes¹³. In metazoans, ORC binds selectively and stochastically to open chromatin regions containing active chromatin marks, but not specific nucleotide sequences^14,15,16,17. Other features that associate with ORC in human cells include CpG islands, transcription start sites (TSSs) and GC-rich DNA, all tending to be in nucleosome-depleted regions (NDRs)^3,16,18,19. In contrast, there is a paucity of ORC-binding sites in genomic regions that associate with common fragile sites and recurrent cancer deletions^16,19. In human, the bromo adjacent homology domain of Orc1 is believed to play a role in tethering ORC to H4K20me2 chromatin²⁰, but the molecular mechanism that targets ORC to specific loci is poorly understood.

Important information that could explain the disparate binding specificities between yeasts and metazoans is provided by the atomic model for the S. cerevisiae ORC bound to ARS305 that detailed the interactions between the subunits of ORC and the ACS⁸. In this model, ORC binds the ACS through multiple nonspecific and specific interactions. The multiple nonspecific interactions between Orc1-5 with the sugar phosphate backbone of the ACS provide a fairly firm grip without base specificity. The base-specific contacts are carried out by the basic patch 4 (BP4) of Orc1 and the initiator-specific motif (ISM) of Orc2 in the minor groove, and the insertion helix (IH) of Orc4 in the major groove. Importantly, these interactions with the ACS and the interactions of Orc2, Orc5, and Orc6 with the B1 element bend the ARS DNA at the ACS and B1. This DNA bending by ORC is also observed in metazoans²¹, suggesting that it may be obligatory for the loading of the MCM double hexamer. Consistent with this hypothesis, the loaded DNA in the ORC-Cdc6-Cdt1-MCM structure after capture by the MCM ring is straight²².

Comparison of sequence alignments of these DNA-contacting motifs among eukaryotes showed that only the Orc1-BP4 is conserved, while the Orc2-ISM and Orc4-IH have diverged⁸. In particular, the Orc4-IH, encoded by 19 amino acids, which interacts with methyl groups of the invariant thymines of the ACS, has diverged in sequence among yeasts and absent in S. pombe and metazoans (Fig. 1a, b). Considering that A–T base pairs in the minor groove have indistinguishable hydrogen acceptors between A–T or T–A base pairs, the only relevant motif for base recognition would be the Orc4-IH in the major groove of the ACS. Comparing the winged helix domains (WHDs) of ScOrc4, DmOrc4, and HsOrc4, we found that they are highly conserved in structure except for the extra IH in ScOrc4-WHD (Fig. 1a). Removal of the IH would likely confer metazoan/human-like binding properties to the yeast ORC.

**Fig. 1: Orc4-IH is divergent in yeasts and absent in metazoans.**

Results

Orc4-IHΔ strain is viable with activated S-phase checkpoint

To test the hypothesis that yeast ORC can be humanized by removal of the Orc4-IH, we constructed yeast strains with the endogenous ORC4 under the regulation of the GALS promoter (GALS-ORC4), and expressing the mutant Orc4-IHΔ or wild-type (WT) Orc4 ectopically under the native ORC4 promoter. The GALS-ORC4 strain with empty vector was made as a negative control (Fig. 2a). Previous study showed that point mutations in BP4 of Orc1 is lethal²³. Hence, we also constructed Orc1-BP4Δ expressing strain with endogenous ORC1 under regulation of GALS promoter as a negative control (Fig. 2b). In contrast to Orc1-BP4Δ mutant, which is inviable when GALS promoter is switched off, the Orc4-IHΔ mutant grows slower with normal S-phase progression, but a longer G2/M phase than the WT control (Fig. 2c and Supplementary Fig. 1b). To investigate if the prolonged G2/M phase phenotype is the result of intra-S-checkpoint activation, we examined the phosphorylation state of Rad53 (ref. ²⁴). At 110 min after release from G1, Rad53 is clearly phosphorylated in the mutant but not the WT control (Fig. 2d), suggesting that DNA damage accumulated at the end of S-phase activated the S-phase checkpoint, consistent with the G2/M delay in the mutant. The mutant also shows slight hydroxyurea (HU) sensitivity as might be expected with an activated S-phase checkpoint (Fig. 2e).

**Fig. 2: Yeast strain with Orc4-IHΔ has normal S-phase but prolonged G2 phase.**

ORC-IHΔ binds promiscuously with a preference for TSSs

To determine if the IH deletion could affect the ability of ORC in chromatin binding, we first examined the chromatin retention of ORC in both WT and mutant strains. The mutant ORC appears to behave similarly as its WT counterpart in DNA binding based on its retention on chromatin (Supplementary Fig. 2a). Next, we carried out chromatin immunoprecipitation-sequencing (ChIP-seq) of ORC in G2/M phase from both the WT and mutant strains to elucidate the ORC genome-wide binding profiles (Fig. 3a and Supplementary Fig. 3). In total, we defined 618 and 2219 ChIP-seq peaks in WT and mutant, respectively (Fig. 3b). Compared to previously published datasets, WT ORC ChIP-seq shows high degree of consistency and affinity toward binding to a known set of ACSs defined by stringent criteria, including T strand polarity and precise nucleosome positioning¹³ (Fig. 3a, c and Supplementary Fig. 3a–c). However, the mutant ORC-binding profile is dramatically different (Fig. 3a, b and Supplementary Fig. 3d, e), with significantly reduced enrichment at ACS sites (Fig. 3c). Furthermore, we discovered many novel ORC peaks located in broad clusters (Fig. 3a) within intergenic regions (Supplementary Fig. 4a, b). Human studies showed that ORC-binding sites are enriched near TSS^16,19, a feature not observed for S. cerevisiae¹³. However, we found that relative to WT ORC, ORC-IHΔ binds with distinct enrichment both upstream and downstream of transcripts that positively correlate with the transcriptional strength of the associated genes (Fig. 3d). In fact, 1839 out of 2219 (83%) of the mutant ORC-binding sites are located within 500 bp upstream of a TSS. The high enrichment of ORC-IHΔ upstream of TSSs is especially interesting because TSSs are also known to have a similar polar bias in T-rich and A-rich sequence, and well-positioned downstream nucleosomes as origin DNA in S. cerevisiae¹³. This result suggests that the mutant ORC has lost its sequence specificity and binds most highly to open chromatin that may harbor certain properties shared with origin DNA. The large number of highly distributed ORC-IHΔ-binding sites compared to the limited ORC molecules per cell²⁵ suggests that ORC-IHΔ binding in the mutant strain occurs promiscuously and stochastically.

**Fig. 3: Orc4-IH motif deletion alters the DNA-binding specificity of ORC.**

ORC-IHΔ has a propensity for T-rich sequences

To characterize the DNA sequences bound by the mutant ORC, we performed in depth analyses on ORC-binding sites defined in both WT and mutant. Motif enrichment analysis identifies the canonical ACS (TTTATGTTTAG) in WT ORC peaks. No known motifs are detected in the ORC-IHΔ peaks, with only a propensity for poly-T tracts and GC-rich sequences, such as (TTTTTYSS) (Fig. 4a). We identified 183 sites with ACS-like motif (TTTATGTTAGK) in WT ORC peaks and 2555 sites with the novel (TTTTTYSS) motif among the ORC-IHΔ peaks. Standardizing the motif’s strand orientation, we investigated the surrounding regions’ base composition with the position 0 denoting the first base of the motif. As previously reported²⁶, we found an A-rich region downstream of the WT motif. The same T- to A-rich bias is not as obvious in the mutant although the T-richness is as prominent if not more (Fig. 4b and Supplementary Fig. 5). Based on the ORC-DNA atomic model, the T-richness of the mutant ORC-binding motif could potentially support the interaction of the conserved and essential Orc1-BP4 (Fig. 2b) with the minor groove of origin DNA to provide a degree of stability for the mutant ORC without the 19aa IH of Orc4. To biochemically verify these predicted ORC-binding sequences, we carried out electrophoretic mobility shift assays (EMSA) with two 30 bp probes containing either the canonical ACS (TTTATATTTAG) of ARS607 or a novel sequence (TTTTTTTCCGCG) identified in the ORC and ORC-IHΔ ChIP-seq peaks, respectively (Supplementary Fig. 6). We find that the ORC-IHΔ binds to the ACS with affinity comparable to the WT (Supplementary Fig. 6a, b). However, it binds with a higher affinity to the TTTTTTTCCGCG sequence, to which the WT ORC shows reduced affinity. Therefore, while retaining the capacity to bind ACS DNA, these results suggest an acquired affinity of the mutant ORC, which may be associated with the shape rather than the nucleotide sequence of the DNA. It is important to emphasize that in vitro binding assays do not accurately measure the selectivity of ORC in vivo, given that the protein concentrations are vastly different in these two systems. Moreover, the accessibility and structures differ between naked DNA and chromatin. Nonetheless, a closer look at the shapes of the two substrates can be informative. Predictions using Monte Carlo simulations^27,28,29 show that the DNA shape preferred by ORC-IHΔ has narrower minor groove width (MGW), more negative propeller twists (ProTs) and roll angles, increased helix twist (HelT) and enhanced negative electrostatic potential, as compared to ACSs (ARS607, ARS305, and ARS416; Fig. 4c). These composite geometric and biophysical properties may potentially contribute to a distinct shape that deviates from the canonical ACS and is recognized by the ORC-IHΔ. The differential binding substrates of WT and mutant ORC are presented in a modeled illustration (Supplementary Fig. 7).

**Fig. 4: WT and mutant ORC possess differential binding affinities to distinct DNA sequences.**

ORC-IHΔ is proficient in MCM loading

A central function of ORC is to serve as a platform for the loading of the MCM double hexamer, a process known as pre-replicative complex (pre-RC) assembly. To determine if ORC-IHΔ is capable of promoting efficient MCM loading, we examined the chromatin loading in nuclear extracts and pre-RC assembly on linear DNA, using purified proteins. Similar levels of MCM complexes associating with G1 chromatin are observed in both WT and mutant strains (Supplementary Fig. 2a). Consistently, both the WT and mutant ORC exhibit comparable activities in Cdc6-dependent loading of MCM onto DNA (Supplementary Fig. 2b) and assembly of the MCM double hexamer (Supplementary Fig. 2c). These results indicate that the function of ORC in pre-RC assembly is not substantially affected by the IH deletion although the efficiency of pre-RC assembly could be quite different in vivo because of the difference in protein concentrations and template accessibility.

MCM loading and replication initiation are limited and stochastic

To achieve a genome-wide perspective of the MCM loading in the Orc4-IHΔ strain, we performed MCM ChIP-seq in both WT and mutant cells arrested in G1 phase (Fig. 5 and Supplementary Fig. 2d). Integrative analysis shows that higher ORC and MCM enrichment is found at ARS regions in WT, supporting the notion that ORC binding in G2/M promotes MCM loading in G1 (Fig. 5a). This dependence of MCM recruitment on ORC binding is best illustrated by focusing on the ORC peaks that are unique to the WT (Fig. 5bi). While concordant ORC and MCM enrichment is detected at these sites in WT, we observed little to no binding of either complex in the mutant strain (Fig. 5bi). At ORC peaks that were overlapping, but may or may not be overlapping in binding sites in WT and mutant, there is also a strong concordant ORC and MCM binding in both strains (Fig. 5bii). As expected, ORC peaks that are unique to Orc4-IHΔ show weak to no ORC and MCM signal in the WT strain. However, these sites also harbor only weak MCM enrichment in the mutant strain (Fig. 5biii), consistent with an inefficient recruitment of MCM to these sites. Taken together, our data demonstrates that the ORC-IHΔ shows low ACS binding specificity on chromatin, and the novel non-ARS binding of the ORC-IHΔ is insufficient to promote efficient MCM loading at all sites. However, its promiscuity makes up for its inefficiency to allow sufficient successful MCM loading to support a robust albeit slightly defective S-phase (Fig. 2c, d).

**Fig. 5: Genome-wide analysis of the function of ORC-IHΔ in MCM loading and replication initiation.**

To functionally test whether the ORC-binding sites in the WT and mutant are used as replication initiation sites, we conducted bromodeoxyuridine immunoprecipitation-sequencing (BrdU-IP-seq) with cells arrested at the early S-phase by HU (Fig. 5a). While BrdU incorporation peaks align well with the ORC and MCM ChIP-seq peaks at early replication origins in the WT, consistent with usage in replication initiation, no clear peaks were observed in Orc4-IHΔ (Fig. 5a, b and Supplementary Fig. 8). The diffused signal suggests that the ORC-IHΔ-binding sites were stochastically activated as origins in the cell population. This disorganized firing of origins may result in delayed replication or resolution of merging forks in parts of the genome activating the DNA replication checkpoint in late S (Fig. 2d). The efficient S-phase progression of the mutant cells (Fig. 2c) corroborates with the activation of a sizable number of the ORC-IHΔ-binding sites in the cell population to give rise to the relatively high, but flat BrdU-IP-seq signals across the genome (Supplementary Fig. 8).

ORC-IHΔ binds open chromatin sites that do not require nucleosome repositioning

Previous work has shown that ORC exclusively binds to NDRs and in turn modulates chromatin states, as measured by micrococcal nuclease digestion-sequencing (MNase-seq)³⁰. Furthermore, nucleosome positions can exert a positive or negative effect on replication initiation³¹, and ORC plays a direct role in positioning nucleosomes^32,33. Given that ORC-IHΔ has expanded binding specificity, it is important to address how it targets specific genomic loci and its potential effects on local chromatin structures. To determine whether chromatin accessibility and nucleosome positioning would play a role in influencing ORC-IHΔ binding, we conducted assay for transposase-accessible chromatin-sequencing (ATAC-seq) and MNase-seq in WT and mutant strains. Comparison of ATAC-seq peaks revealed that the overall chromatin states of WT and mutant are highly consistent (Fig. 6a, b). However, while ORC in WT has significantly higher enrichment at ARS-containing ATAC-seq peaks, ORC-IHΔ shows enrichment at open chromatin regions with no discernable preference for ARSs (Fig. 6c, Supplementary Fig. 3e and Supplementary Fig. 9).

**Fig. 6: ORC-IHΔ binds promiscuously to open chromatin and fails to facilitate nucleosome repositioning at ACSs.**

We further investigated the nucleosome positioning at annotated ARS regions (n = 249) and unique ORC-IHΔ-binding sites (n = 1,905). ORC binding at ARSs has been shown to involve chromatin remodeling that widens the nucleosome spacing upon MCM loading^13,30. When comparing the mean nucleosome positioning index of WT and mutant at ARS regions, we discovered a significant difference of 26 bp in the average inter-nucleosome distance at these loci (WT = 247 bp, ORC-IHΔ = 221 bp; Fig. 6d) consistent with a previous observation about the role of ORC in nucleosome positioning at ARS regions³⁰. In contrast, no significant difference is found at unique ORC-IHΔ-binding regions (WT = 297 bp, ORC-IHΔ = 295 bp), suggesting that no nucleosome repositioning occurs at these sites upon mutant ORC binding (Fig. 6d). Strikingly, these ORC-IHΔ-binding regions are wider than WT ORC-binding regions by ~50 bp even after the repositioning of nucleosomes by ORC. A shift in nucleosome positions can be observed in a screenshot of an ORC-binding site unique to WT, but not at sites common to both WT and mutant or unique to mutant (Fig. 6e). Given that ORC-IHΔ has little sequence specificity, its selectivity for binding appears to be dictated by a particular physical size of the NDRs in open chromatin with certain characteristics, such as those found in TSSs and TESs (Fig. 3d) distributed across the chromatin landscape.

Discussion

Until recently, studies of replication origins in human have been limited to methodologies that examine the chromatin landscapes of where replication initiation begins^19,34,35,36 rather than the precise locations of ORC-binding sites¹⁶. While genome-wide study of human ORC1 and ORC2 identified 50,000–100,000 binding sites across the human genome¹⁶, no consensus sequence for ORC binding was predicted. In this study, we made use of a yeast model to examine how ORC selects its binding sites focusing specifically on the 19aa IH of Orc4 that binds and bends the ACS⁸. Our model suggests that removal of this IH expanded ORC’s DNA-binding repertoire such that it no longer preferentially binds the ACS or other predictive base sequences (Fig. 7). Instead, it acquires the propensity to bind promiscuously to intrinsically shaped sequences in nucleosome-depleted open chromatin, such as those located near upstream and downstream of actively transcribing genes (Fig. 3d). Furthermore, it selects sites that do not require nucleosome repositioning for binding (Fig. 7). Perhaps the removal of the IH may have also abolished ORC’s ability to reposition nucleosomes^30,32, driving it to opt for preexisting NDRs that are extra wide for ORC binding and pre-RC assembly. Indeed, TSSs are known to be rich in poly-T tracts with extra wide NDRs and well-positioned downstream nucleosomes¹³. This inability of the mutant ORC to reposition nucleosomes may account for the loss of its binding to most ACSs in vivo, but unaffected in its affinity to ACSs on naked DNA in vitro.

**Fig. 7: Model for the selection of binding sites by the WT and mutant ORC.**

So, what characterizes the new preferred binding sites for the mutant ORC? It is conceivable that the preferred three-dimensional (3D) DNA shapes characterized by poly-T tracts might play the important role of precluding the binding of nucleosomes in creating extra wide nucleosome spacing³³. The narrow minor groove width, enhanced negative ProT, and increased HelT in the region of the poly-T tract compared to the adjacent GC-rich DNA sequence shown in the predicted DNA model (Supplementary Fig. 7) all contribute to the more rigid DNA shape with an intrinsic curvature that likely disfavors nucleosome assembly. Indeed, analysis of the human genome showed that GC-rich motifs, poly-T, and poly-A tracts form rigid structures that exclude nucleosomes³⁷.

The newly acquired DNA-binding properties of the yeast ORC-IHΔ are strikingly similar to many of the characteristics of the human ORC. They include the stochastic clustered associations at accessible chromatin regions³⁸, the preference for DNA shapes, such as promoters that potentially exclude nucleosomes³, and the agnosticism toward base-specific sequences¹⁶. This study provides a link between a particular structural motif in ORC and its divergent properties that have evolved to adapt to their changing demands in vastly different life cycles. Life cycles are characterized by stages of maturation defined by the expression of distinct sets of genes in an orderly timetable. The chromatin landscape changes as quiescent genes are activated and active genes become silent. The ability of ORC to find its place in response to changing chromatin landscapes at each developmental stage is crucial for the success of a life cycle. Further understanding of the preferred DNA shapes and nucleosome positioning requirements in model systems may provide new insights for the plasticity of the human ORC in selecting replication initiation sites during programmed development³⁹ and disease transformation⁴⁰.

Methods

Strain constructions

Yeast strain with the endogenous ORC4 or ORC1 under the regulation of the GALS promoter was generated in the W303-1a background, using PCR-based approach⁴¹. Plasmids for ectopic expression of orc4-IHΔ, orc1-BP4Δ, ORC4, or ORC1 under their native promoters were integrated into the corresponding GALS-ORC4 or GALS-ORC1 yeast strains. Tandem copies of MYC and FLAG tags were fused to the C terminus of ORC6 and MCM7 in the relevant GALS-ORC4 strains for genomic analysis⁴¹. Plasmid for overexpression of FLAG-tagged mutant Orc4 was integrated into the background strain ySD-ORC (a gift from John Diffley) that overexpresses WT Orc1-6 subunits⁴² for mutant ORC protein purification. For yeast strains and plasmids used in this study see Supplementary Table 1.

Growth conditions, cell-cycle synchronization, and FACS

WT and mutant Orc4-IHΔ yeast strains were cultured in YPG medium before shifting to YPD medium to deplete the endogenously expressed Orc4 proteins for at least 18 h at 30 °C until OD₆₀₀ of ~0.01 starter culture reached ~2. Strains were grown at 30 °C in YPD medium for all experiments. Cells were arrested at G1 with α factor (GenScript) at a concentration of 10 μg/ml for ~3 h and replenished every 60 min. G2/M arrests were achieved by culturing cells in medium containing 20 μg/ml benomyl (Sigma) for ~3 h. FACS analysis was performed, as previously described⁴³.

In vivo and in vitro MCM loading assays

In vivo MCM chromatin loading assay was performed, as described⁴⁴ with the following modifications. Cell samples were incubated in spheroplasting buffer containing lyticase at 37 °C for 15 min with mixing at every 3 min until OD₆₀₀ of a 1:100 dilution of cell suspension (in 0.2% Triton X-100) dropped to <10% of the starting value. Spheroplasts were pelleted at 1700 × g for 2 min at 4 °C and washed with 0.5 ml ice-cold spheroplast wash buffer (100 mM KCl, 50 mM Hepes-KOH (pH 7.5), 2.5 mM MgCl₂, and 0.6 M sorbitol) containing 1 mM PMSF and 2 μg/ml pepstatin A. The spheroplast pellets were resuspended in 400 μl of extraction buffer (EBX) and lysed by incubation on ice for 20 min with vigorous mixing every 3 min. In vitro MCM loading assay was performed as described previously⁴⁵. Purification of WT and mutant ORC and negative staining EM were performed as described⁸ with the exception that for mutant ORC, IP was performed using anti-FLAG M2 affinity gel (Sigma) followed by further purification, using ion-exchange chromatography with mono-Q column (GE Healthcare).

Rad53 phosphorylation assay and HU sensitivity test

WT and mutant cells were arrested at G1, as previously described and released into S-phase in YPD medium with or without 200 mM HU. Cells were collected at different time points post release from G1 and whole-cell protein extracts were prepared from cell pellets by trichloroacetic acid precipitation. Samples were analyzed on 6% SDS–PAGE gel. For spot analysis, ~5 ml of exponentially growing WT and mutant cells (OD₆₀₀ ~0.8) were collected, washed, and resuspended in 500 μl sterile double-distilled water. Tenfold serial dilutions of each test strain were performed and 10 μl were spotted onto YPD plates containing HU.

ORC and MCM ChIP-seq

For ORC and MCM ChIP, WT and mutant (Orc4-IHΔ) yeast strains with MYC-tagged Orc6 and FLAG-tagged Mcm7 were arrested at G2/M and G1 phase, respectively. Chromatin extracts were prepared and immunoprecipitated, as previously described⁴⁶ with minor modifications. About 2 × 10⁹ cells were crosslinked by adding formaldehyde (Millipore) to a final concentration of 1% and incubated at room temperature for 25 min with gentle shaking. Cross-linking reaction was halted by adding glycine to a final concentration of 0.125 M and incubation for an additional 10 mins at room temperature. Cells were resuspended in lysis buffer and subjected to bead-beating, using a Mini-Beadbeater (Biospec). Chromatin fraction was collected by centrifugation and sonicated to yield an average DNA size of 300 bp, using ultrasonicator (Covaris). About 400 μl of clarified sonicated chromatin was subjected to immunoprecipitation with 60 μl of protein G-Dynabeads (Invitrogen) conjugated to anti-MYC antibody (Roche, 9E10) for Orc6-MYC ChIP or anti-FLAG antibody (Sigma, M2) for Mcm7-FLAG ChIP at 4 °C overnight. Immunoprecipitated DNA was then recovered, as previously described⁴⁷. Reverse crosslinked samples were digested with RNase A (Roche) for 1 h followed by proteinase K (Roche) for 2 h at 37 °C. DNA was purified using MinElute PCR purification column according to Qiagen protocol. Validation of the ChIP was carried out by qPCR targeting positive control loci using WT DNA (see primers in Supplementary Table 2).

BrdU-IP seq

For BrdU incorporation, WT, and mutant (Orc4-IHΔ) yeast strains bearing BrdU-Inc cassette was generated, as previously described⁴⁸. Early S-phase-arrested cells with BrdU-labeled genomic DNA was extracted, fragmented, and immunoprecipitated, as described^30,49. Validation of BrdU-IP was carried out by qPCR targeting known origins, using WT DNA (see primers in Supplementary Table 2).

Micrococcal nuclease digestion for MNase-seq

Chromatin was digested by MNase to mostly mononucleosomes, as previously described³⁰ with the following modifications. Spheroplasting of yeast cells was performed with zymolyase at 25 °C for 35 min. Conditions for MNase digestion was first optimized by adjusting the amount of the MNase added to the digestion reaction. Different dilutions of 15 units/μl MNase (NEB) were prepared to determine the best digestion conditions: 1.5-ml tubes contained 0, 1, and 2 μl (1:4 dilution in water), 1 μl (1:4 dilution in water), 2 μl (1:16 dilution in water), and 1 μl (1:16 dilution in water) of MNase, to which 400 μl of the resuspended cells was added.

Sequencing library preparation

Sequencing libraries for ChIP-seq, BrdU-IP-seq, and MNase-seq were prepared using KAPA HyperPrep Kit according to manufacturer’s protocol. To account for the smaller amounts of immunoprecipitated materials in ORC and MCM ChIP, adaptor ligation was performed at 4 °C overnight. Quantification of adaptor-ligated DNA was performed using quantitative real-time PCR (KAPA Library Quantification Kit) before library amplification for determination of optimal PCR cycle number. Fragment size of amplified libraries were analyzed on fragment analyzer (Agilent) and size selected with AMPure beads if needed before library pooling and sequencing.

EMSA

Two 30 bp long dsDNA substrates, chosen from WT ORC and ORC-IHΔ ChIP-seq peaks, were annealed from single-stranded oligonucleotides with complementary sequences: ACS_Fw: 5′-GCTTTGTCTTGTTTATATTTAGTTACGTTG-3′ and ACS_Re: 5′-CAACGTAACTAAATATAAACAAGACAAAGC-3′ and Mutant_motif_Fw: 5′-AATCTTTTTTTTTTTTCCGCGCGCAAGCAC-3′ and Mutant_motif_Re: 5′-GTGCTTGCGCGCGGAAAAAAAAAAAAGATT-3′. Different protein concentrations of WT and mutant ORC proteins were incubated with substrate DNA for 20 min at 13 °C in 13 µl of binding buffer (25 mM Hepes-KOH (pH 7.5), 100 mM KGlu, 5 mM MgAc, 5 mM CaCl₂, 5% glycerol, and 1 mM ATP). DNA–protein complexes were separated by 0.5% agarose gel electrophoresis stained with Sybr Safe (Invitrogen) for image detection, using Gel Documentation System (Biorad).

ATAC-seq

ATAC-seq was carried out with 5 × 10⁶ G1 or G2M arrested cells⁵⁰. In brief, WT and mutant yeast cell pellets were incubated on ice for 3 min with 50 µl of cold ATAC-RSB (10 mM Tris HCl (pH 7.4), 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM MgCl₂, 1× ROCHE Complete Protease Inhibitor Cocktail, 0.1% IGEPAL CA-630, 0.1% Tween-20, and 0.01% digitonin). Subsequently, 1 ml of cold ATAC-RSB with 0.1% Tween-20 (10 mM Tris HCl (pH 7.4), 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM MgCl₂, 1× ROCHE Complete Protease Inhibitor Cocktail, and 0.1% Tween-20) was added to the mixture. Nuclei were recovered by centrifugation and resuspended in transposase mix for tagmentation (1× TTBL and 2.5 μl TTE Mix V50 (Vazyme TD501 TruePrep DNA Library Prep Kit V2 for Illumina®), 0.01% digitonin, 0.1% Tween-20, and PBS). The mixture was incubated at 37 °C for 15 min in a Thermomixer (1000 r.p.m.). DNA was purified using the Qiagen MinElute PCR Purification Kit. ATAC-seq libraries were amplified with the TruePrep Index Kit V2 for Illumina (Vazyme) and KAPA HiFi HotStart ReadyMix (Roche). Purified libraries were size selected with AMPure XP beads for 150–800 bp fragments, according to manufacturer’s protocol. Amplified libraries were analyzed on fragment analyzer and subsequently quantified and pooled for sequencing.

Prediction of DNA shape and reconstruction of atomic-resolution structure

DNA shape features were predicted using a high-throughput method based on a pentamer query table derived from Monte Carlo simulations^27,28,29. Shape features include MGW, Roll, HelT, and ProT. The DNAshape method predicts a set of additional helical parameters, representing rigid-body translations and rotations between or within base pairs²⁷. These helical parameters are used to place bases as building blocks into the template of a standard B-form DNA, using X3DNA⁵¹ to generate a 3D DNA structure that assumes its sequence-dependent conformation. Rebuilt DNA structures were aligned using PyMOL along their ACS binding sites to illustrate the structural differences at their flanking regions. Electrostatic potential was calculated using a high-throughput method for data mining Poisson–Boltzmann calculations at physiologic ionic strength²⁸.

Bioinformatic analysis

Details on bioinformatics analysis are included in Supplementary Information.

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

All raw and processed sequencing data were deposited to GEO under the accession number GSE149163. Previously published datasets of WT yeast RNA-seq, WT ORC ChIP-seq, and WT MCM2-7 ChIP-seq were obtained from SRR363968, GSE16926, and GSE38032, respectively. All data are available from the authors upon reasonable request. Source data are provided with this paper.

References

Diffley, J. F. X. Quality control in the initiation of eukaryotic DNA replication. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 3545–3553 (2011).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Hansen, R. S. et al. Sequencing newly replicated DNA reveals widespread plasticity in human replication timing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 139–144 (2010).
Article CAS PubMed ADS Google Scholar
Prioleau, M. N. & MacAlpine, D. M. DNA replication origins-where do we begin? Genes Dev. 30, 1683–1697 (2016).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Nieduszynski, C. A., Knox, Y. & Donaldson, A. D. Genome-wide identification of replication origins in yeast by comparative genomics. Genes Dev. 20, 1874–1879 (2006).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Bell, S. P. & Stillman, B. ATP-dependent recognition of eukaryotic origins of DNA replication by a multiprotein complex. Nature 357, 128–134 (1992).
Article CAS PubMed ADS Google Scholar
Bleichert, F., Botchan, M. R. & Berger, J. M. Crystal structure of the eukaryotic origin recognition complex. Nature 519, 321–326 (2015).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar
Tocilj, A. et al. Structure of the active form of human origin recognition complex and its ATPase motor module. Elife 6, e20818 (2017).
Li, N. et al. Structure of the origin recognition complex bound to DNA replication origin. Nature 559, 217–222 (2018).
Article CAS PubMed ADS Google Scholar
Hoggard, T. & Fox, C. A. in The Initiation of DNA Replication in Eukaryotes (ed. Daniel, L. K.) 159–188 (Springer International Publishing, 2016).
Chuang, R. Y. & Kelly, T. J. The fission yeast homologue of Orc4p binds to replication origin DNA via multiple AT-hooks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 2656–2661 (1999).
Article CAS PubMed ADS Google Scholar
Liachko, I. et al. A comprehensive genome-wide map of autonomously replicating sequences in a naive genome. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000946 (2010).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Liachko, I. et al. GC-rich DNA elements enable replication origin activity in the methylotrophic yeast Pichia pastoris. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004169 (2014).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Eaton, M. L., Galani, K., Kang, S., Bell, S. P. & MacAlpine, D. M. Conserved nucleosome positioning defines replication origins. Genes Dev. 24, 748–753 (2010).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. M. In search of the holy replicator. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 5, 848–855 (2004).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
MacAlpine, H. K., Gordan, R., Powell, S. K., Hartemink, A. J. & MacAlpine, D. M. Drosophila ORC localizes to open chromatin and marks sites of cohesin complex loading. Genome Res. 20, 201–211 (2010).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Miotto, B., Ji, Z. & Struhl, K. Selectivity of ORC binding sites and the relation to replication timing, fragile sites, and deletions in cancers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E4810–E4819 (2016).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Long, H. et al. H2A.Z facilitates licensing and activation of early replication origins. Nature 577, 576–581 (2020).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Blin, M. et al. Transcription-dependent regulation of replication dynamics modulates genome stability. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 26, 58–66 (2019).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Karnani, N., Taylor, C. M., Malhotra, A. & Dutta, A. Genomic study of replication initiation in human chromosomes reveals the influence of transcription regulation and chromatin structure on origin selection. Mol. Biol. Cell 21, 393–404 (2010).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kuo, A. J. et al. The BAH domain of ORC1 links H4K20me2 to DNA replication licensing and Meier-Gorlin syndrome. Nature 484, 115–119 (2012).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar
Bleichert, F., Leitner, A., Aebersold, R., Botchan, M. R. & Berger, J. M. Conformational control and DNA-binding mechanism of the metazoan origin recognition complex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E5906–E5915 (2018).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Yuan, Z. et al. Structural basis of Mcm2-7 replicative helicase loading by ORC-Cdc6 and Cdt1. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 316–324 (2017).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kawakami, H., Ohashi, E., Kanamoto, S., Tsurimoto, T. & Katayama, T. Specific binding of eukaryotic ORC to DNA replication origins depends on highly conserved basic residues. Sci. Rep. 5, 14929 (2015).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar
Lee, S. J., Schwartz, M. F., Duong, J. K. & Stern, D. F. Rad53 phosphorylation site clusters are important for Rad53 regulation and signaling. Mol. Cell Biol. 23, 6300–6314 (2003).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Rowley, A., Cocker, J. H., Harwood, J. & Diffley, J. F. Initiation complex assembly at budding yeast replication origins begins with the recognition of a bipartite sequence by limiting amounts of the initiator, ORC. EMBO J. 14, 2631–2641 (1995).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Breier, A. M., Chatterji, S. & Cozzarelli, N. R. Prediction of Saccharomyces cerevisiae replication origins. Genome Biol. 5, R22 (2004).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Li, J. et al. Expanding the repertoire of DNA shape features for genome-scale studies of transcription factor binding. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 12877–12887 (2017).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Chiu, T. P., Rao, S., Mann, R. S., Honig, B. & Rohs, R. Genome-wide prediction of minor-groove electrostatic potential enables biophysical modeling of protein-DNA binding. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 12565–12576 (2017).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Zhou, T. et al. DNAshape: a method for the high-throughput prediction of DNA structural features on a genomic scale. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, W56–W62 (2013).
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Belsky, J. A., MacAlpine, H. K., Lubelsky, Y., Hartemink, A. J. & MacAlpine, D. M. Genome-wide chromatin footprinting reveals changes in replication origin architecture induced by pre-RC assembly. Genes Dev. 29, 212–224 (2015).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Simpson, R. T. Nucleosome positioning can affect the function of a cis-acting DNA element in vivo. Nature 343, 387–389 (1990).
Article CAS PubMed ADS Google Scholar
Lipford, J. R. & Bell, S. P. Nucleosomes positioned by ORC facilitate the initiation of DNA replication. Mol. Cell 7, 21–30 (2001).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Berbenetz, N. M., Nislow, C. & Brown, G. W. Diversity of eukaryotic DNA replication origins revealed by genome-wide analysis of chromatin structure. PLoS Genet. 6, e1001092 (2010).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Cayrou, C. et al. Genome-scale analysis of metazoan replication origins reveals their organization in specific but flexible sites defined by conserved features. Genome Res. 21, 1438–1449 (2011).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Besnard, E. et al. Unraveling cell type-specific and reprogrammable human replication origin signatures associated with G-quadruplex consensus motifs. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 837–844 (2012).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Picard, F. et al. The spatiotemporal program of DNA replication is associated with specific combinations of chromatin marks in human cells. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004282 (2014).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Radwan, A., Younis, A., Luykx, P. & Khuri, S. Prediction and analysis of nucleosome exclusion regions in the human genome. BMC Genomics 9, 186 (2008).
Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar
Lebofsky, R., Heilig, R., Sonnleitner, M., Weissenbach, J. & Bensimon, A. DNA replication origin interference increases the spacing between initiation events in human cells. Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 5337–5345 (2006).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Wilson, K. A., Elefanty, A. G., Stanley, E. G. & Gilbert, D. M. Spatio-temporal re-organization of replication foci accompanies replication domain consolidation during human pluripotent stem cell lineage specification. Cell Cycle 15, 2464–2475 (2016).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Valenzuela, M. S., Hu, L., Lueders, J., Walker, R. & Meltzer, P. S. Broader utilization of origins of DNA replication in cancer cell lines along a 78 kb region of human chromosome 2q34. J. Cell Biochem. 113, 132–140 (2012).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Janke, C. et al. A versatile toolbox for PCR-based tagging of yeast genes: new fluorescent proteins, more markers and promoter substitution cassettes. Yeast 21, 947–962 (2004).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Frigola, J., Remus, D., Mehanna, A. & Diffley, J. F. ATPase-dependent quality control of DNA replication origin licensing. Nature 495, 339–343 (2013).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central ADS Google Scholar
Liang, C. & Stillman, B. Persistent initiation of DNA replication and chromatin-bound MCM proteins during the cell cycle in cdc6 mutants. Genes Dev. 11, 3375–3386 (1997).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Zhai, Y., Yung, P. Y., Huo, L. & Liang, C. Cdc14p resets the competency of replication licensing by dephosphorylating multiple initiation proteins during mitotic exit in budding yeast. J. Cell Sci. 123, 3933–3943 (2010).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kang, S., Warner, M. D. & Bell, S. P. Multiple functions for Mcm2-7 ATPase motifs during replication initiation. Mol. Cell 55, 655–665 (2014).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Strahl-Bolsinger, S., Hecht, A., Luo, K. & Grunstein, M. SIR2 and SIR4 interactions differ in core and extended telomeric heterochromatin in yeast. Genes Dev. 11, 83–93 (1997).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Bermejo, R., Katou, Y. M., Shirahige, K. & Foiani, M. ChIP-on-chip analysis of DNA topoisomerases. Methods Mol. Biol. 582, 103–118 (2009).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Viggiani, C. J. & Aparicio, O. M. New vectors for simplified construction of BrdU-Incorporating strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 23, 1045–1051 (2006).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Haye-Bertolozzi, J. E. & Aparicio, O. M. Quantitative bromodeoxyuridine immunoprecipitation analyzed by high-throughput sequencing (qBrdU-Seq or QBU). Methods Mol. Biol. 1672, 209–225 (2018).
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Corces, M. R. et al. An improved ATAC-seq protocol reduces background and enables interrogation of frozen tissues. Nat. Methods 14, 959–962 (2017).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Lu, X. J. & Olson, W. K. 3DNA: a software package for the analysis, rebuilding and visualization of three-dimensional nucleic acid structures. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 5108–5121 (2003).
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NSFC/RGC Joint Research Scheme (N_HKUST614/17 to B.-K.T and Y.L.Z.), the Research Grants Council (RGC) of Hong Kong (GRF16143016, GRF16104617, and GRF16103918 to Y.L.Z. and B.-K.T.; and GRF17112119 to Y.L.Z.), the Hong Kong Epigenomics Project (Lo Ka Chung Charitable Foundation to D.L.), and the National Institutes of Health (R35GM130376 to R.R.).

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Clare S. K. Lee, Ming Fung Cheung.

Authors and Affiliations

School of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam Road, Hong Kong
Clare S. K. Lee, Wai Hei Lam & Yuanliang Zhai
Center for Epigenomics Research, The Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong
Ming Fung Cheung, Vincy Ho & Danny Leung
Division of Life Science, The Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong
Ming Fung Cheung, Yongqian Zhao, Vincy Ho, Danny Leung & Bik-Kwoon Tye
Quantitative and Computational Biology, Departments of Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Physics & Astronomy, and Computer Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA
Jinsen Li & Remo Rohs
Institute for Advanced Study, The Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong
Yongqian Zhao & Bik-Kwoon Tye
Department of Molecular Biology & Genetics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA
Bik-Kwoon Tye

Authors

Clare S. K. Lee
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Ming Fung Cheung
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Jinsen Li
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Yongqian Zhao
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Wai Hei Lam
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Vincy Ho
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Remo Rohs
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Yuanliang Zhai
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Danny Leung
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Bik-Kwoon Tye
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

B.-K.T. and Y.L.Z. conceived the study; C.S.K.L. performed genetics and genomics experiments; M.F.C., D.L., and V.H. carried out bioinformatic analyses; Y.Q.Z. and C.S.K.L. purified ORC and performed biochemical assays; W.H.L. performed multiple sequence alignment and helped with EMSA; J.L. and R.R. carried out computational simulations; and C.S.K.L., M.F.C., B.K.T., D.L., and Y.L.Z. prepared the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yuanliang Zhai, Danny Leung or Bik-Kwoon Tye.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Communications thanks Anja-Katrin Bielinsky and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Peer Review File

Reporting Summary

Source data

Source Data

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, C.S.K., Cheung, M.F., Li, J. et al. Humanizing the yeast origin recognition complex. Nat Commun 12, 33 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20277-y

Download citation

Received: 01 June 2020
Accepted: 10 November 2020
Published: 04 January 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20277-y

This article is cited by

Establishment and function of chromatin organization at replication origins
- Erika Chacin
- Karl-Uwe Reusswig
- Christoph F. Kurat
Nature (2023)
Dimeric G-quadruplex motifs-induced NFRs determine strong replication origins in vertebrates
- Jérémy Poulet-Benedetti
- Caroline Tonnerre-Doncarli
- Marie-Noëlle Prioleau
Nature Communications (2023)
Int-Monitor: a model triggered hardware trojan in deep learning accelerators
- Peng Li
- Rui Hou
The Journal of Supercomputing (2023)
Nucleosome-directed replication origin licensing independent of a consensus DNA sequence
- Sai Li
- Michael R. Wasserman
- Shixin Liu
Nature Communications (2022)
Exogenous artificial DNA forms chromatin structure with active transcription in yeast
- Jianting Zhou
- Chao Zhang
- Ying-Jin Yuan
Science China Life Sciences (2022)

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.