Recombinational repair is important for genome duplication under conditions of replicative stress or DNA damage. Apart from the classical recombination proteins, additional factors that function more specifically in this process have been identified recently (
Lambert et al., 2007 
;
Branzei and Foiani, 2007 
;
Li and Heyer, 2008 
;
Budzowska and Kanaar, 2009 
;
Chang and Cimprich, 2009 
). These factors are critical for understanding the pathways coupling replication and recombinational repair. The functional relationships among a subset of these factors were analyzed in this study. Our results suggest that Mph1, the Shu complex, and Mms2, three factors involved in the formation of recombination intermediates, have nonoverlapping functions and may represent distinct pathways in replication-associated recombinational repair. This conclusion is supported by several observations. First,
mph1,
shu1, and
mms2 deletion mutations exhibited additive genetic interactions. Moreover, their double deletion mutations conferred better suppression of the MMS sensitivity of
smc6-P4 and
smc6-56 cells than the corresponding single deletions. Significantly, the same suppression patterns were observed in the levels of recombination intermediates in
smc6-P4 cells by using 2D gel analyses. The disparate effects of double versus single deletions in all situations argue against these proteins functioning in one pathway and support the idea that they promote recombination via different routes.
The presence of multiple recombinational repair processes underlines the importance and complexity of the task of rescuing impaired replication. It remains to be seen how Mph1, the Shu complex, and Mms2 differently promote recombination. One possibility is that they act on different structures generated during replication perturbation, such as collapsed forks versus single-stranded DNA gaps. Indeed, Mph1 orthologues have been proposed to catalyze replication fork regression, the Shu complex to facilitate single-strand gap repair, and the Mms2-mediated pathway to promote template switching (
Komori et al., 2004 
;
Shor et al., 2005 
;
Ulrich, 2005 
;
Martin et al., 2006 
;
Mankouri et al., 2007 
;
Branzei et al., 2008 
;
Gari et al., 2008 
;
Sun et al., 2008 
;
Unk et al., 2010 
;
Whitby, 2010 
). Based on the potential functions of these proteins, one plausible model for how they act independently in replication-associated recombinational repair is illustrated in . In this model, Mph1 catalyzes fork regression when leading strand synthesis is impeded. Subsequently, the leading strand is extended using the lagging strand as template, and the resulting product can either be regressed back (not shown) or processed by nucleases and engaged in recombination (, a). Independently, the Mms2-mediated pathway leads to template switching, for example, the blocked leading strand invades and uses the newly synthesized lagging strand as template to synthesize DNA over the lesion (, b). In addition, gaps on the leading or lagging strand can be repaired by Shu complex-mediated recombination, in which this complex may facilitate joint molecule formation in the absence of end invasion (a process proposed in
Cunningham et al., 1980 
) or contribute to recombination over damaged DNA (, c). This model provides a good explanation for the observed genetic interactions and takes into consideration the known properties of the proteins. However, other possibilities also exist; for example, these protein factors may work on similar replication intermediates but in different ways depending on their unique interactions and activities. Further study of the functions of these proteins will provide a better understanding of recombinational repair pathways. Because we found that
pol30-K164R, like
mms2Δ, reduces X-mol levels in
smc6-P4 cells and
esc2Δ cells (Supplemental Figure 1), the contribution of Mms2 to recombination intermediates probably requires PCNA polyubiquitination. Furthermore, because the DNA translocase activity of Rad5 functions differently from Mph1, the Shu complex, and Mms2, additional complementary routes exist for the rescue of stalled replication.
Another conclusion supported by our observations is that the Smc5/6 complex is required to prevent the accumulation of recombination structures generated by Mph1-, Shu-, and Mms2-dependent processes () and that this function is crucial for cell survival under replicative stress. Although Mph1 and the Shu complex are thought to function exclusively in recombination, Mms2 has additional roles. However, we favor the interpretation that the Smc5/6 complex affects its roles in recombinational repair, because the removal of Mms2 or proteins functioning with it rescues both the accumulation of X-mols and MMS sensitivity in mutants of the Smc5/6 complex (this study;
Branzei et al., 2008 
). Among the three proteins, the action of Mph1 seems to be most deleterious when the Smc5/6 complex is defective, because
mph1Δ exhibited the strongest suppression of MMS sensitivity in
smc6 mutants and is the only mutation that rescued the lethality of cells lacking the Smc5/6 complex. Considering that the Smc5/6 complex physically interacts with Mph1 (
Chen et al., 2009 
), an attractive model is that this complex directly modulates Mph1 in fork regression or other processes. The roles of the Smc5/6 complex in the other two pathways remain to be determined, but they could involve direct modulation of protein factors and/or tethering of DNA.
Our finding that the removal of Mph1, Shu1, or Mms2 (in the
RAD5 background) resulted in better growth of
esc2Δ cells under DNA damage conditions indicates that Esc2, like the Smc5/6 complex, also influences the processes involving these three proteins. These results, in conjunction with the reports by
Mankouri et al. (2009) 
, suggest a good correlation between the suppression of X-mol accumulation and MMS sensitivity in
esc2Δ cells, similar to the situation in
smc6 cells. Therefore, the accrual of X-mols is probably a major underlying defect that accounts for the poor survival of these cells under DNA damage conditions. Although the Smc5/6 complex and Esc2 exhibit similar genetic interactions with Mph1, Shu1, and Mms2, they have at least partly different functions, as suggested by the synthetic interactions of their mutants and by the lack of physical interaction between the two factors (
Sollier et al., 2009 
). It is also noteworthy that Sgs1, a Holliday junction dissolving enzyme that also prevents the accumulation of recombination intermediates, does not affect the Mph1-dependent process (
Chen et al., 2009 
;
Mankouri et al., 2009 
). The necessity of multiple regulators of the multiple replication-associated recombinational processes underlines the need to coordinate recombination steps in dealing with different types of lesions formed when replication is perturbed. Because all the proteins investigated here are conserved in humans, it is likely that similar functional circuitries also exist in higher eukaryotic cells. Molecular dissection of these processes in yeast will thus provide important clues for understanding how recombinational repair facilitates replication in human cells.