Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18248777›Full record

ArticleDNA repair2008

Cooperative damage recognition by UvrA and UvrB: identification of UvrA residues that mediate DNA binding.

Deborah L Croteau, Matthew J DellaVecchia, Lalith Perera, Bennett Van Houten

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in DNA repair, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Persistent effects of early-life arsenic exposure inEnvironmental science. Processes & impacts · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Prokaryotic nucleotide excision repair.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2013
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Dynamics of lesion processing by bacterial nucleotide excision repair proteins.Progress in molecular biology and translational science · 2012
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. DNA wrapping is required for DNA damage recognition in the Escherichia coli DNA nucleotide excision repair pathway.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2009
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Deborah L CroteauLaboratory of Molecular Genetics, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Matthew J DellaVecchia
Lalith Perera
Bennett Van Houten
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences · USTriangle · US

Funding

Studies Of Nucleotide Excision Repair ProteinsZ01ES061060 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI VAN HOUTEN, BENNETT · 1999 to 2008
$1.9M
Macromolecular ModelingZIAES043010 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI PEDERSEN, LEE · 2009 to 2011
$1.3M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 ES061060
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is responsible for the recognition and removal of numerous structurally unrelated DNA lesions. In prokaryotes, the proteins UvrA, UvrB and UvrC orchestrate the recognition and excision of aberrant lesions from DNA. Despite the progress we have made in understanding the NER pathway, it remains unclear how the UvrA dimer interacts with DNA to facilitate DNA damage recognition. The purpose of this study was to define amino acid residues in UvrA that provide binding energy to DNA. Based on conservation among approximately 300 UvrA sequences and 3D-modeling, two positively charged residues, Lys680 and Arg691, were predicted to be important for DNA binding. Mutagenesis and biochemical analysis of Bacillus caldontenax UvrA variant proteins containing site directed mutations at these residues demonstrate that Lys680 and Arg691 make a significant contribution toward the DNA binding affinity of UvrA. Replacing these side chains with alanine or negatively charged residues decreased UvrA binding 3-37-fold. Survival studies indicated that these mutant proteins complemented a WP2 uvrA(-) strain of bacteria 10-100% of WT UvrA levels. Further analysis by DNase I footprinting of the double UvrA mutant revealed that the UvrA DNA binding defects caused a slower rate of transfer of DNA to UvrB. Consequently, the mutants initiated the oligonucleotide incision assay nearly as well as WT UvrA thus explaining the observed mild phenotype in the survival assay. Based on our findings we propose a model of how UvrA binds to DNA.

Indexed as

Adenosine TriphosphatasesAdenosine TriphosphateDNA, BacterialDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA DamageDNA FootprintingDNA HelicasesDNA RepairElectrophoretic Mobility Shift AssayEscherichia coliEscherichia coli ProteinsModels, MolecularMutagenesis, Site-DirectedProtein ConformationAdenosine TriphosphatasesAdenosine TriphosphateDNA, BacterialDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA HelicasesEscherichia coli ProteinsUvrA protein, E coliUvrB protein, E coli

Identifiers

PMID18248777
PMCPMC2396233
OpenAlexW2009091406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.