Back

Biochemical, structural, and single-molecule characterization of LIG1 active site mutants demonstrate role of F635 and F872 residues for faithful ligation

Kalaycioglu, M.; Gilkis, M.; Lee, K. M.; Chatterjee, S.; Balu, K.; Ratcliffe, J. E.; Castro, E.; Almahdor, D.; Caglayan, M.

2024-11-08 biochemistry
10.1101/2024.11.07.622578 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Human DNA ligase 1 (LIG1) finalizes DNA repair pathways by an ultimate ligation step and discriminates against nicks containing unusual ends, yet the contribution of the conserved active site residues for faithful end joining remains unknown. Here, using biochemistry, X-ray crystallography, and single-molecule approaches, we comprehensively characterized LIG1 mutants carrying Ala(A) and Leu(L) substitutions at the active site residues Phe(F)635 and Phe(F)872. Our results showed an abolished ligation of nick DNA substrates with all 12 non-canonical mismatches, while the mutagenic nick sealing of oxidatively damaged ends by wild-type enzyme is significantly reduced by F635A/L and F872A/L substitutions. Furthermore, sugar discrimination against a single ribonucleotide at 3- or 5-end of nick DNA is distinctly affected depending on architecture of 3-terminus:template base pairing. Finally, our LIG1 structures demonstrated the importance of DNA end alignment governed by the distance to nick site through F635 and F872 residues, and single-molecule measurements showed similar nick DNA binding modes for LIG1 wild-type and active site mutants in real-time. Overall, our study provides a mechanistic insight into the mechanism by which conserved F635 and F872 residues contribute to ligation efficiency of nick repair intermediates that mimic DNA polymerase-mediated mismatch, damaged, or ribonucleotide insertion products and how LIG1 ensures faithful end joining at the final step of DNA repair to maintain genome integrity.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.