ArticleGenetics2004
Does crossover interference count in Saccharomyces cerevisiae?
Article in Genetics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
62 citing papers in PubMed, 103 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incorporating experimental mortality improves statistical inference of crossover patterning along meiotic chromosomes.Genetics · 2026Article
- An extension of thebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Multiple independent losses of crossover interference during yeast evolutionary history.PLoS genetics · 2024Article
- Recombination and sterility in inversion homo- and heterokaryotypes under a general counting model of chiasma interference.Genetics · 2023Article
- Meiotic crossover interference: Methods of analysis and mechanisms of action.Current topics in developmental biology · 2023Article
- The Msh5 complex shows homeostatic localization in response to DNA double-strand breaks in yeast meiosis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Article
- Transcriptional Divergence Underpinning Sexual Development in the Fungal Class Sordariomycetes.mBio · 2022Article
- Meiotic Crossover Patterning.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
- Regulated Proteolysis of MutSγ Controls Meiotic Crossing Over.Molecular cell · 2020Article
- Substantial Heritable Variation in Recombination Rate on Multiple Scales in Honeybees and Bumblebees.Genetics · 2019Article
- Role ofGenetics · 2018Article
- Physical basis for long-distance communication along meiotic chromosomes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Article
- Recombination rate plasticity: revealing mechanisms by design.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
- Modulating Crossover Frequency and Interference for Obligate Crossovers inG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2017Article
- The mismatch repair and meiotic recombination endonuclease Mlh1-Mlh3 is activated by polymer formation and can cleave DNA substrates in trans.PLoS biology · 2017Article
- Meiotic DSB patterning: A multifaceted process.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2016Review
- Meiotic Recombination in Neurospora crassa Proceeds by Two Pathways with Extensive Holliday Junction Migration.PloS one · 2016Article
- Reduced Crossover Interference and Increased ZMM-Independent Recombination in the Absence of Tel1/ATM.PLoS genetics · 2015Article
- Article
2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We previously proposed a "counting model" for meiotic crossover interference, in which double-strand breaks occur independently and a fixed number of noncrossovers occur between neighboring crossovers. Whereas in some organisms (group I) this simple model alone describes the crossover distribution, in other organisms (group II) an additional assumption--that some crossovers lack interference--improves the fit. Other differences exist between the groups: Group II needs double-strand breaks and some repair functions to achieve synapsis, while repair in group I generally occurs after synapsis is achieved; group II, but not group I, has recombination proteins Dmc1, Mnd1, and Hop2. Here we report experiments in msh4 mutants that are designed to test predictions of the revised model in a group II organism. Further, we interpret these experiments, the above-mentioned differences between group I and II meiosis, and other data to yield the following proposal: Group II organisms use the repair of leptotene breaks to promote synapsis by generating double-Holliday-junction intermediates that lock homologs together (pairing pathway). The possible crossover or noncrossover resolution products of these structures lack interference. In contrast, for both group I and group II, repair during pachytene (disjunction pathway) is associated with interference and generates only two resolution types, whose structures suggest that the Holliday junctions of the repair intermediates are unligated. A crossover arises when such an intermediate is stabilized by a protein that prevents its default resolution to a noncrossover. The protein-binding pattern required for interference depends on clustering of sites that have received, or are normally about to receive, meiotic double-strand breaks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.