SUMMARY: The budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been the principal organism used in experiments to examine genetic recombination in eukaryotes. Studies over the past decade have shown that meiotic recombination and probably most mitotic recombination arise from the repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs). There are multiple pathways by which such DSBs can be repaired, including several homologous recombination pathways and still other nonhomologous mechanisms. Our understanding has also been greatly enriched by the characterization of many proteins involved in recombination and by insights that link aspects of DNA repair to chromosome replication. New molecular models of DSB-induced gene conversion are presented. This review encompasses these different aspects of DSB-induced recombination in Saccharomyces and attempts to relate genetic, molecular biological, and biochemical studies of the processes of DNA repair and recombination.

DNA is subject to many endogenous and exogenous insults that impair DNA replication and proper chromosome segregation. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are one of the most toxic of these lesions and must be repaired to preserve chromosomal integrity. Eukaryotes are equipped with several different, but related, repair mechanisms involving homologous recombination, including single-strand annealing, gene conversion, and break-induced replication. In this review, we highlight the chief sources of DSBs and crucial requirements for each of these repair processes, as well as the methods to identify and study intermediate steps in DSB repair by homologous recombination.

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, an HO endonuclease-induced double-strand break can be repaired by at least two pathways of nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) that closely resemble events in mammalian cells. In one pathway the chromosome ends are degraded to yield deletions with different sizes whose endpoints have 1 to 6 bp of homology. Alternatively, the 4-bp overhanging 39 ends of HO-cut DNA (59-AACA-39) are not degraded but can be base paired in misalignment to produce +CA and +ACA insertions. When HO was expressed throughout the cell cycle, the efficiency of NHEJ repair was 30 times higher than when HO was expressed only in G1. The types of repair events were also very different when HO was expressed throughout the cell cycle; 78% of survivors had small insertions, while almost none had large deletions. When HO expression was confined to the G1 phase, only 21% were insertions and 38% had large deletions. These results suggest that there are distinct mechanisms of NHEJ repair producing either insertions or deletions and that these two pathways are differently affected by the time in the cell cycle when HO is expressed. The frequency of NHEJ is unaltered in strains from which RAD1, RAD2, RAD51, RAD52, RAD54, or RAD57 is deleted; however, deletions of RAD50, XRS2, or MRE11 reduced NHEJ by more than 70-fold when HO was not cell cycle regulated. Moreover, mutations in these three genes markedly reduced +CA insertions, while significantly increasing the proportion of both small (-ACA) and larger deletion events. In contrast, the rad5O mutation had little effect on the viability of G1-induced cells but significantly reduced the frequency of both +CA insertions and -ACA deletions in favor of larger deletions. Thus, RAD50 (and by extension XRS2 and MRE11) exerts a much more important role in the insertion-producing pathway of NHEJ repair found in S and/or G2 than in the less frequent deletion events that predominate when HO is expressed only in G1.