Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Structure and mechanism of B-family DNA polymerase ζ specialized for translesion DNA synthesis

Abstract

DNA polymerase ζ (Polζ) belongs to the same B-family as high-fidelity replicative polymerases, yet is specialized for the extension reaction in translesion DNA synthesis (TLS). Despite its importance in TLS, the structure of Polζ is unknown. We present cryo-EM structures of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Polζ holoenzyme in the act of DNA synthesis (3.1 Å) and without DNA (4.1 Å). Polζ displays a pentameric ring-like architecture, with catalytic Rev3, accessory Pol31‚ Pol32 and two Rev7 subunits forming an uninterrupted daisy chain of protein–protein interactions. We also uncover the features that impose high fidelity during the nucleotide-incorporation step and those that accommodate mismatches and lesions during the extension reaction. Collectively, we decrypt the molecular underpinnings of Polζ’s role in TLS and provide a framework for new cancer therapeutics.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: The architecture of DNA-bound Polζ holoenzyme.
Fig. 2: Structure and cryo-EM density details of Rev3.
Fig. 3: Structural basis for fidelity and mismatch extension.
Fig. 4: The Rev7 dimer is the organizing center of Polζ holoenzyme.
Fig. 5: Rigidity of Polζ holoenzyme.
Fig. 6: Conformational changes upon DNA binding.

Data availability

Accession codes for the Polζ–DNA–dNTP model and map are Protein Data Bank (PDB) 6V93 and EMD-21115, respectively. Accession numbers of the Polζ (apo form) model and map are PDB 6V8P and EMD-21108, respectively.

References

  1. 1.

    Prakash, S., Johnson, R. E. & Prakash, L. Eukaryotic translesion synthesis DNA polymerases: specificity of structure and function. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 74, 317–353 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Jain, R., Aggarwal, A. K. & Rechkoblit, O. Eukaryotic DNA polymerases. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 53, 77–87 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Makarova, A. V. & Burgers, P. M. Eukaryotic DNA polymerase ζ. DNA Repair (Amst.). 29, 47–55 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Martin, S. K. & Wood, R. D. DNA polymerase ζ in DNA replication and repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, 8348–8361 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Johnson, R. E., Washington, M. T., Haracska, L., Prakash, S. & Prakash, L. Eukaryotic polymerases ι and ζ act sequentially to bypass DNA lesions. Nature 406, 1015–1019 (2000).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lange, S. S., Takata, K. & Wood, R. D. DNA polymerases and cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 11, 96–110 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Sharma, S., Helchowski, C. M. & Canman, C. E. The roles of DNA polymerase ζ and the Y family DNA polymerases in promoting or preventing genome instability. Mutat. Res. 743–744, 97–110 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Yamanaka, K., Chatterjee, N., Hemann, M. T. & Walker, G. C. Inhibition of mutagenic translesion synthesis: a possible strategy for improving chemotherapy? PLoS Genet. 13, e1006842 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Sharma, S., Shah, N. A., Joiner, A. M., Roberts, K. H. & Canman, C. E. DNA polymerase ζ is a major determinant of resistance to platinum-based chemotherapeutic agents. Mol. Pharmacol. 81, 778–787 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Nelson, J. R., Lawrence, C. W. & Hinkle, D. C. Thymine–thymine dimer bypass by yeast DNA polymerase ζ. Science 272, 1646–1649 (1996).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Khalaj, M. et al. A missense mutation in Rev7 disrupts formation of Polζ, impairing mouse development and repair of genotoxic agent-induced DNA lesions. J. Biol. Chem. 289, 3811–3824 (2014).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Aravind, L. & Koonin, E. V. The HORMA domain: a common structural denominator in mitotic checkpoints, chromosome synapsis and DNA repair. Trends Biochem. Sci. 23, 284–286 (1998).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Rosenberg, S. C. & Corbett, K. D. The multifaceted roles of the HORMA domain in cellular signaling. J. Cell Biol. 211, 745–755 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Baranovskiy, A. G. et al. DNA polymerase δ and ζ switch by sharing accessory subunits of DNA polymerase δ. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 17281–17287 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Johnson, R. E., Prakash, L. & Prakash, S. Pol31 and Pol32 subunits of yeast DNA polymerase δ are also essential subunits of DNA polymerase ζ. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 12455–12460 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Makarova, A. V., Stodola, J. L. & Burgers, P. M. A four-subunit DNA polymerase ζ complex containing Pol δ accessory subunits is essential for PCNA-mediated mutagenesis. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 11618–11626 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Hara, K. et al. Crystal structure of human REV7 in complex with a human REV3 fragment and structural implication of the interaction between DNA polymerase ζ and REV1. J. Biol. Chem. 285, 12299–12307 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Rizzo, A. A. et al. Rev7 dimerization is important for assembly and function of the Rev1/Polζ translesion synthesis complex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, Eb191–Eb200 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Jain, R. et al. Cryo-EM structure and dynamics of eukaryotic DNA polymerase δ holoenzyme. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 26, 955–962 (2019).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Baranovskiy, A. G. et al. X-ray structure of the complex of regulatory subunits of human DNA polymerase δ. Cell Cycle 7, 3026–3036 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Lee, Y. S., Gregory, M. T. & Yang, W. Human Pol ζ purified with accessory subunits is active in translesion DNA synthesis and complements Pol η in cisplatin bypass. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 2954–2959 (2014).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Gómez-Llorente, Y. et al. The architecture of yeast DNA polymerase ζ. Cell Rep. 5, 79–86 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Swan, M. K., Johnson, R. E., Prakash, L., Prakash, S. & Aggarwal, A. K. Structural basis of high-fidelity DNA synthesis by yeast DNA polymerase δ. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 16, 979–986 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Doublie, S. & Zahn, K. E. Structural insights into eukaryotic DNA replication. Front. Microbiol. 5, 444 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Bartels, P. L., Stodola, J. L., Burgers, P. M. J. & Barton, J. K. A redox role for the [4Fe4S] cluster of yeast DNA polymerase δ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139, 18339–18348 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Burgers, P. M. J. & Kunkel, T. A. Eukaryotic DNA replication fork. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 86, 417–438 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Hogg, M., Aller, P., Konigsberg, W., Wallace, S. S. & Doublie, S. Structural and biochemical investigation of the role in proofreading of a β hairpin loop found in the exonuclease domain of a replicative DNA polymerase of the B family. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 1432–1444 (2007).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Stocki, S. A., Nonay, R. L. & Reha-Krantz, L. J. Dynamics of bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase function: identification of amino acid residues that affect switching between polymerase and 3’ → 5’ exonuclease activities. J. Mol. Biol. 254, 15–28 (1995).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Steitz, T. A. DNA polymerases: structural diversity and common mechanisms. J. Biol. Chem. 274, 17395–17398 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Mapelli, M. & Musacchio, A. MAD contortions: conformational dimerization boosts spindle checkpoint signaling. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 17, 716–725 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Luo, X. & Yu, H. Protein metamorphosis: the two-state behavior of Mad2. Structure 16, 1616–1625 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Yang, M. et al. Insights into Mad2 regulation in the spindle checkpoint revealed by the crystal structure of the symmetric Mad2 dimer. PLoS Biol. 6, e50 (2008).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Mapelli, M., Massimiliano, L., Santaguida, S. & Musacchio, A. The Mad2 conformational dimer: structure and implications for the spindle assembly checkpoint. Cell 131, 730–743 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Baranovskiy, A. G. et al. Crystal structure of the human Polε B-subunit in complex with the C-terminal domain of the catalytic subunit. J. Biol. Chem. 292, 15717–15730 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Klinge, S., Nuñez-Ramírez, R., Llorca, O. & Pellegrini, L. 3D architecture of DNA Pol α reveals the functional core of multi-subunit replicative polymerases. EMBO J. 28, 1978–1987 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Suwa, Y. et al. Crystal structure of the human Pol α B subunit in complex with the C-terminal domain of the catalytic subunit. J. Biol. Chem. 290, 14328–14337 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Joyce, C. M. & Benkovic, S. J. DNA polymerase fidelity: kinetics, structure, and checkpoints. Biochemistry 43, 14317–14324 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Doublie, S., Sawaya, M. R. & Ellenberger, T. An open and closed case for all polymerases. Structure 7, R31–R35 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Wang, F. & Yang, W. Structural insight into translesion synthesis by DNA Pol II. Cell 139, 1279–1289 (2009).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Tomida, J. et al. REV7 is essential for DNA damage tolerance via two REV3L binding sites in mammalian DNA polymerase ζ. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 1000–1011 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Janin, J., Miller, S. & Chothia, C. Surface, subunit interfaces and interior of oligomeric proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 204, 155–164 (1988).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Hara, K. et al. Purification, crystallization and initial X-ray diffraction study of human REV7 in complex with a REV3 fragment. Acta Crystallogr. F Struct. Biol. Cryst. Commun. 65, 1302–1305 (2009).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Hanafusa, T. et al. Overlapping in short motif sequences for binding to human REV7 and MAD2 proteins. Genes Cells 15, 281–296 (2010).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Wojtaszek, J. et al. Structural basis of Rev1-mediated assembly of a quaternary vertebrate translesion polymerase complex consisting of Rev1, heterodimeric polymerase (Pol) ζ, and Pol κ. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 33836–33846 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Pustovalova, Y., Bezsonova, I. & Korzhnev, D. M. The C-terminal domain of human Rev1 contains independent binding sites for DNA polymerase η and Rev7 subunit of polymerase ζ. FEBS Lett. 586, 3051–3056 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Pozhidaeva, A. et al. NMR structure and dynamics of the C-terminal domain from human Rev1 and its complex with Rev1 interacting region of DNA polymerase η. Biochemistry 51, 5506–5520 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Ohashi, E. et al. Identification of a novel REV1-interacting motif necessary for DNA polymerase κ function. Genes Cells 14, 101–111 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Pustovalova, Y. et al. Interaction between the Rev1 C-terminal domain and the PolD3 subunit of Polζ suggests a mechanism of polymerase exchange upon Rev1/Polζ-dependent translesion synthesis. Biochemistry 55, 2043–2053 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Doles, J. et al. Suppression of Rev3, the catalytic subunit of Polζ, sensitizes drug-resistant lung tumors to chemotherapy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 20786–20791 (2010).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Xu, X. et al. Enhancing tumor cell response to chemotherapy through nanoparticle-mediated codelivery of siRNA and cisplatin prodrug. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 18638–18643 (2013).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Niimi, K. et al. Suppression of REV7 enhances cisplatin sensitivity in ovarian clear cell carcinoma cells. Cancer Sci. 105, 545–552 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Zhao, J. et al. Mitotic arrest deficient protein MAD2B is overexpressed in human glioma, with depletion enhancing sensitivity to ionizing radiation. J. Clin. Neurosci. 18, 827–833 (2011).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Wojtaszek, J. L. et al. A small molecule targeting mutagenic translesion synthesis improves chemotherapy. Cell 178, 152–159.e11 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Actis, M. L. et al. Identification of the first small-molecule inhibitor of the REV7 DNA repair protein interaction. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 24, 4339–4346 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Green, A. A. & Hughes, W. L. Protein fractionation on the basis of solubility in aqueous solutions of salts and organic solvents. Methods Enzymol. 1, 67–90 (1955).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Jain, T., Sheehan, P., Crum, J., Carragher, B. & Potter, C. S. Spotiton: a prototype for an integrated inkjet dispense and vitrification system for cryo-TEM. J. Struct. Biol. 179, 68–75 (2012).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Wei, H. et al. Optimizing “self-wicking” nanowire grids. J. Struct. Biol. 202, 170–174 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Lander, G. C. et al. Appion: an integrated, database-driven pipeline to facilitate EM image processing. J. Struct. Biol. 166, 95–102 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Suloway, C. et al. Automated molecular microscopy: the new Leginon system. J. Struct. Biol. 151, 41–60 (2005).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Zheng, S. Q. et al. MotionCor2: anisotropic correction of beam-induced motion for improved cryo-electron microscopy. Nat. Methods 14, 331–332 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Rohou, A. & Grigorieff, N. CTFFIND4: fast and accurate defocus estimation from electron micrographs. J. Struct. Biol. 192, 216–221 (2015).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Tan, Y. Z. et al. Addressing preferred specimen orientation in single-particle cryo-EM through tilting. Nat. Methods 14, 793–796 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Zhang, K. Gctf: real-time CTF determination and correction. J. Struct. Biol. 193, 1–12 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Roseman, A. M. FindEM — a fast, efficient program for automatic selection of particles from electron micrographs. J. Struct. Biol. 145, 91–99 (2004).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Punjani, A., Rubinstein, J. L., Fleet, D. J. & Brubaker, M. A. cryoSPARC: algorithms for rapid unsupervised cryo-EM structure determination. Nat. Methods 14, 290–296 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Scheres, S. H. W. RELION: implementation of a Bayesian approach to cryo-EM structure determination. J. Struct. Biol. 180, 519–530 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Zivanov, J. et al. New tools for automated high-resolution cryo-EM structure determination in RELION-3. Elife 7, e42166 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Bepler, T. et al. Positive-unlabeled convolutional neural networks for particle picking in cryo-electron micrographs. Nat. Methods 16, 1153–1160 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Scheres, S. H. W. & Chen, S. X. Prevention of overfitting in cryo-EM structure determination. Nat. Methods 9, 853–854 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Rosenthal, P. B. & Henderson, R. Optimal determination of particle orientation, absolute hand, and contrast loss in single-particle electron cryomicroscopy. J. Mol. Biol. 333, 721–745 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Pettersen, E. F. et al. UCSF chimera — a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J. Comput. Chem. 25, 1605–1612 (2004).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Klaholz, B. P. Deriving and refining atomic models in crystallography and cryo-EM: the latest Phenix tools to facilitate structure analysis. Acta Crystallogr. D Struct. Biol. 75, 878–881 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Kucukelbir, A., Sigworth, F. J. & Tagare, H. D. Quantifying the local resolution of cryo-EMEM density maps. Nat. Methods 11, 63–65 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Grant, T., Rohou, A. & Grigorieff, N. cisTEM, user friendly software for single-particle image processing. Elife 7, e35383 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

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

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Brown, A. et al. Tools for macromolecular model building and refinement into electron cryo-microscopy reconstructions. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 71, 136–153 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Chen, V. B. et al. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 66, 12–21 (2010).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Barad, B. A. et al. EMRinger: side chain directed model and map validation for 3D cryo-electron microscopy. Nat. Methods 12, 943–946 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    DeLano, W. L. & Lam, J. W. PyMOL: a communications tool for computational models. Abstr. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc. 230, U1371–U1372 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Sievers, F. et al. Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega. Mol. Syst. Biol. 7, 539 (2011).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Kelley, L. A., Mezulis, S., Yates, C. M., Wass, M. N. & Sternberg, M. J. The Phyre2 web portal for protein modeling, prediction and analysis. Nat. Protoc. 10, 845–858 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    Pei, J. & Grishin, N. V. PROMALS: towards accurate multiple sequence alignments of distantly related proteins. Bioinformatics 23, 802–808 (2007).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank B. Carragher, C. Potter and E. Eng for helpful advice and discussion throughout the project. We also thank Z. Zhang and D. Bobe for help in grid preparation, Y. Z. Tan for help in collecting tilted cryo-EM data, A. Brown and T. Terwilliger for help in implementing software and D. Nair for help in model building. This work was primarily funded by grant R01-GM124047 from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). I.U.-B. was supported by a grant PID2019-104423GB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 from the Spanish State Research Agency and by the Basque Excellence Research Centre program. Initial EM screening was performed at the Icahn School of Medicine microscope facility supported by a shared instrumentation grant from the NIH (1S10RR026473). Most of the cryo-EM work was performed at the Simons Electron Microscopy Center and National Resource for Automated Molecular Microscopy, located at the New York Structural Biology Center, supported by grants from the Simons Foundation (SF349247), NYSTAR and the NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM103310), with additional support from Agouron Institute (F00316), NIH (OD019994) and NIH (RR029300). Computing resources needed for this work were provided in part by the High Performance Computing facility of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Molecular graphics and analyses were performed with UCSF Chimera, developed by the Resource for Biocomputing, Visualization, and Informatics at the University of California, San Francisco, with support from NIH P41-GM103311.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

A.K.A. conceived the project; A.K.A., I.U.-B. and R.M. designed the experiments; R.E.J. expressed Polζ in yeast; R.M. purified Polζ and optimized sample conditions for cryo-EM studies; R.J. helped to standardize the DNA-binding conditions; R.M. and M.K. made grids of the Polζ–DNA–dNTP ternary complex (based on Spotiton); R.M. and Y.G.-L. made grids of apo Polζ; R.M. and M.K. collected and processed data on the ternary complex; R.M. and Y.G.-L. collected and processed data on the apo structure; R.M. reconstructed the 3D structures and built and refined the atomic models; R.J. assisted in partial ab initio chain tracing; A.K.A. and I.U.-B. guided the overall project; S.P. and L.P. guided the protein-expression studies; A.K.A. and R.M. prepared the manuscript with input from all the authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Iban Ubarretxena-Belandia or Aneel K. Aggarwal.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Beth Moorefield was the primary editor on this article and managed its editorial process and peer review in collaboration with the rest of the editorial team.

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

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Preferred specimen orientation.

a, Data collected at 0° stage angle resulted in disproportionally low number of classes for side-views of the ternary complex of Polζ depicted in the 2D class averages. This resulted in a ‘smeared 3D model’ as shown by the anisotropic 3DFSC plot. Scale bar = 123 Å. b, Data collected at a stage angle of 0° for the apo-state of Polζ also had preferred set of views as shown in the 2D class averages. The final construction was anisotropic as depicted by the directional FSC plot. Scale bar = 123 Å.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Cryo-EM data collection and processing of Polζ-DNA-dCTP complex.

a, Data were collected on Chameleon grids and particles from one session were picked with template based picker (FindEM) and processed in cryoSPARC to give a consensus map with a FSC0.143 of 3.57 Å. Major stages of processing are shown schematically and particles involved at each stage are highlighted in green. Scale bar = 137 Å. b, Final particles from two sessions were merged and used to train Topaz. Data processing from Topaz picked particles in cryoSPARC2 improved the sphericity. A schematic representation of the improved consensus map displaying a FSC0.143 of 3.2 Å is shown. Scale bar = 137 Å. c, Focused refinement of the final volume was done in cryoSPARC2. Masks were created (along the blue dashed line) for 3D refinement of Rev3 and accessory subunits separately to give consensus maps at 3.02 Å and 3.08 Å, respectively.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Cryo-EM data collection and processing for Polζ apo state.

a, Data were collected at a 40° tilt angle and processed in cryoSPARC to give a good distribution of particles (green) with different views depicted in the 2D class averages. The final 3D reconstruction displaying a FSC0.143 of 4.1 Å showed an isotropic map amenable for model building. Scale bar = 123 Å. b, Per- particle CTF refinement of the map improved the sphericity further as shown by the 3DFSC plot.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Comparison of the NTD of Rev3 and Pol3.

The NTD in Rev3 and Pol3, is composed of three motifs (I, II, III) but is much more elaborate and extended in Rev3. Loop 1 and Loop 2 contact all three motifs and connect the NTD to the fingers and palm domains, respectively.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Surface representation of the T1 binding site.

Residues around the T1 site are shown (sticks) for Rev3 (left) and Pol3 (right). Surface for the palm domains and DNA are shown in cyan and grey, respectively. The T1 base (red) and the key residues are highlighted in dots.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Comparison of yeast and human Rev7-RIR complexes.

a, Sequence alignment of yeast and human RBM1 and RBM2 regions of Rev3. Conserved prolines within RBM1 and RBM2 are highlighted in green. Also, highlighted are the conserved residues among the yeast and human homologs within the RIR region. b, Structural comparison of the yeast and human RBM1 and RBM2. Individual structures of human Rev7 with RBM1 peptide (hRev7:RBM1; PDB ID: 3ABD) and RBM2 peptide (hRev7:RBM2; PDB ID: 6BC8) are compared to the corresponding sub-regions (yRev7A:RBM1; yRev7B:RBM2) in the yeast Polζ holoenzyme. The protein residues involved in the interactions are highlighted in green and the RIR is shown in brown. The interactions of Rev7A and Rev7B with the RIR segment connecting RBM1 and RBM2 (yRev7A:yRev7B:RIRint) is also depicted.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Comparison between the CysBD of Polζ and Polδ.

A superimposition of the CysBD of the Polζ (left; grey in color) and Polδ (right; yellow in color; PDB ID: 6P1H) shows conservation in its overall topology. Notably, helix αXM in Polζ CysBD has been substituted by a loop in Polδ (PDB ID: 6P1H). All the four cysteines interacting with the 4Fe−4S cluster in Rev3 are also highlighted.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Comparison of Rev3 and Pol II.

Overlay of the palm domains of Rev3 and Pol II show a similar trajectory for the NTD-palm linker. In Rev3, this trajectory is coupled to interactions with the Palm-loop. The Pol II template DNA strand is shown in yellow (PDB ID: 3K5M). A close-up view of the looped-out abasic lesion and the adjoining 5′ guanine nucleotide. Notably, the guanine base clashes with the backbone carbonyl of E954 in Rev3.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Docking of Rev1 CTD on the Polζ holoenzyme.

a, Superimposition of human Rev7-RBM1-Rev1CTD (PDB ID: 4EXT) on Rev7B shows close proximity to Pol32N (shown in yellow), highlighting the importance of Pol32N in stabilizing this interaction. b, Superimposition of the human Rev7-RBM1-Rev1CTD on Rev7A shows clashes of Rev1CTD with various secondary structure elements of Rev7B (shown in yellow).

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures 1 and 2.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Malik, R., Kopylov, M., Gomez-Llorente, Y. et al. Structure and mechanism of B-family DNA polymerase ζ specialized for translesion DNA synthesis. Nat Struct Mol Biol 27, 913–924 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-020-0476-7

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing