Small looped mispairs are efficiently corrected by mismatch repair. The situation with larger loops is less clear. Repair activity on large loops has been reported as anywhere from very low to quite efficient. There is also uncertainty about how many loop repair activities exist and whether any are conserved. To help address these issues, we studied large loop repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using in vivo and in vitro assays. Transformation of heteroduplexes containing 1, 16 or 38 nt loops led to >90% repair for all three substrates. Repair of the 38 base loop occurred independently of mutations in key genes for mismatch repair (MR) and nucleotide excision repair (NER), unlike other reported loop repair functions in yeast. Correction of the 16 base loop was mostly independent of MR, indicating that large loop repair predominates for this size heterology. Similarities between mammalian and yeast large loop repair were suggested by the inhibitory effects of loop secondary structure and by the role of defined nicks on the relative proportions of loop removal and loop retention products. These observations indicate a robust large loop repair pathway in yeast, distinct from MR and NER, and conserved in mammals.

A quantitative genetic assay was developed to monitor alterations in tract lengths of trinucleotide repeat sequences in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Insertion of (CAG)50 or (CTG)50 repeats into a promoter that drives expression of the reporter gene ADE8 results in loss of expression and white colony color. Contractions within the trinucleotide sequences to repeat lengths of 8 to 38 restore functional expression of the reporter, leading to red colony color. Reporter constructs including (CAG)50 or (CTG)50 repeat sequences were integrated into the yeast genome, and the rate of red colony formation was measured. Both orientations yielded high rates of instability (4 x 10(-4) to 18 x 10(-4) per cell generation). Instability depended on repeat sequences, as a control harboring a randomized (C,A,G)50 sequence was at least 100-fold more stable. PCR analysis of the trinucleotide repeat region indicated an excellent correlation between change in color phenotype and reduction in length of the repeat tracts. No preferential product sizes were observed. Strains containing disruptions of the mismatch repair gene MSH2, MSH3, or PMS1 or the recombination gene RAD52 showed little or no difference in rates of instability or distributions of products, suggesting that neither mismatch repair nor recombination plays an important role in large contractions of trinucleotide repeats in yeast.

An activity in nuclear extracts of S.cerevisiae binds specifically to heteroduplexes containing four to nine extra bases in one strand. The specificity of this activity (IMR, for insertion mismatch recognition) in band shift assays was confirmed by competition experiments. IMR is biochemically and genetically distinct from the MSH2 dependent, single base mismatch binding activity. The two activities migrate differently during electrophoresis, they are differentially competable and their spectra of mispair binding are distinct. Furthermore, IMR activity is observed in extracts from an msh2- msh3- msh4- strain. IMR exhibits specificity for insertion mispairs in two different sequence contexts. Binding is influenced by the structure of the mismatch since an insertion with a hairpin configuration is not recognized by this activity. IMR does not result from single-strand binding because single-stranded probes to not yield IMR complex and single-stranded competitors are unable to displace insertion heteroduplexes from the complex. Similar results with intrinsically bent duplexes make it unlikely that recognition is conferred by a bend alone. Heteroduplexes bound by IMR do not contain any obvious damage. These findings are consistent with the idea that yeast contains a distinct recognition factor, IMR that is specific for insertion/deletion mismatches.

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Golgi lumenal guanosine diphosphatase is hypothesized to generate GMP which in turn allows entry of GDP-mannose into the lumen to serve as substrate for mannosylation of proteins and lipids. We have recently shown in studies in vivo that this GDPase is required for protein and sphingolipid mannosylation in the Golgi lumen of S. cerevisiae. We have now isolated Golgi-vesicles from wild type and gda1 null mutants (GDPase defective) and have found that the initial rate of GDP-mannose entry into mutant vesicles was 5-fold lower than into those of wild type. Because the concentration of GDP within vesicles is insufficient to inhibit Golgi lumenal mannosyltransferases and the null mutant vesicles are impaired in synthesis of Golgi mannoproteins, the above results demonstrate that the reduced availability of GDP-mannose in the null mutants is the cause for altered Golgi mannosylation of macromolecules.

An activity present in nuclear extracts of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae binds specifically to oligonucleotides containing DNA mismatches, as judged by a band shift assay. The specificity of this activity for mismatched DNA was confirmed by competition experiments; binding to radiolabeled heteroduplexes was abolished in the presence of excess unlabeled heteroduplex but not when excess unlabeled homoduplex was added. Both T/G and T/- (single base deletion) mispairs were recognized in each of two sequence contexts. Binding was also observed with G/G, G/A, A/C, and T/C mismatches, but recognition of a C/C mispair was very weak. Competition studies with the various mismatches were consistent with the idea that a single activity recognizes all mispairs tested. Extracts from strains mutant in either or both of two putative mismatch recognition functions, MSH2 and MSH3, were also tested. Mismatch-binding activity was present in extracts of msh3- strains but completely absent in msh2- strains. The molecular weight of the major binding protein was estimated by UV cross-linking experiments to be approximately 110 kDa, in good agreement with the size predicted for Msh2 protein (Reenan, R. A. and Kolodner, R. D. (1992) Genetics 132, 963-973).