Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17266985›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular biology2007

Restriction endonucleases that bridge and excise two recognition sites from DNA.

Jacqueline J T Marshall, Darren M Gowers, Stephen E Halford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jacqueline J T MarshallThe DNA-Protein Interactions Unit, Department of Biochemistry, School of Medical Sciences, University of Bristol, University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TD, UK.
Darren M Gowers
Stephen E Halford

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/C513077/1Wellcome Trust 063111/Z/00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most restriction endonucleases bridge two target sites before cleaving DNA: examples include all of the translocating Type I and Type III systems, and many Type II nucleases acting at their sites. A subset of Type II enzymes, the IIB systems, recognise bipartite sequences, like Type I sites, but cut specified phosphodiester bonds near their sites, like Type IIS enzymes. However, they make two double-strand breaks, one either side of the site, to release the recognition sequence on a short DNA fragment; 34 bp long in the case of the archetype, BcgI. It has been suggested that BcgI needs to interact with two recognition sites to cleave DNA but whether this is a general requirement for Type IIB enzymes had yet to be established. Ten Type IIB nucleases were tested against DNA substrates with one or two copies of the requisite sequences. With one exception, they all bridged two sites before cutting the DNA, usually in concerted reactions at both sites. The sites were ideally positioned in cis rather than in trans and were bridged through 3-D space, like Type II enzymes, rather than along the 1-D contour of the DNA, as seen with Type I enzymes. The standard mode of action for the restriction enzymes that excise their recognition sites from DNA thus involves concurrent action at two DNA sites.

Indexed as

DNA CleavageBinding SitesDeoxyribonucleases, Type II Site-SpecificDNANucleic Acid ConformationPlasmidsSubstrate SpecificityDeoxyribonucleases, Type II Site-SpecificDNAendodeoxyribonuclease BcgI

Identifiers

PMID17266985
PMCPMC1892151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.