Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18723126›Full record

ArticleDNA repair2008

A molecular bar-coded DNA repair resource for pooled toxicogenomic screens.

John P Rooney, Ashish Patil, Maria R Zappala, Douglas S Conklin, Richard P Cunningham, Thomas J Begley

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

John P RooneyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Gen*NY*sis Center for Excellence in Cancer Genomics, University at Albany, State University of New York, Rensselaer, NY 12144, USA.
Ashish Patil
Maria R Zappala
Douglas S Conklin
Richard P Cunningham
Thomas J Begley
University at Albany, State University of New York · USAlbany State University · US

Funding

STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF METALLOENZYMES FOR DNA REPAIRR01GM046312 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIF-LAWRENC BERKELEY LAB · PI TAINER, JOHN A. · 1991 to 2012
$5.9M
The Roles of Trm9 and tRNA Methylation in the DNA Damage ResponseR01ES015037 · NIEHS · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY · PI BEGLEY, THOMAS J · 2006 to 2010
$2.4M
PROTEIN INTERACTION NETWORKS IN DNA REPAIRK22ES012251 · NIEHS · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY · PI BEGLEY, THOMAS J · 2004 to 2006
$315k
NCRR NIH HHS 1C06 RR 0154464NIEHS NIH HHS 1R01 ES 015037NIEHS NIH HHS K22 ES012251NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES015037NIGMS NIH HHS GM 46312NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM046312
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA damage from exogenous and endogenous sources can promote mutations and cell death. Fortunately, cells contain DNA repair and damage signaling pathways to reduce the mutagenic and cytotoxic effects of DNA damage. The identification of specific DNA repair proteins and the coordination of DNA repair pathways after damage has been a central theme to the field of genetic toxicology and we have developed a tool for use in this area. We have produced 99 molecular bar-coded Escherichia coli gene-deletion mutants specific to DNA repair and damage signaling pathways, and each bar-coded mutant can be tracked in pooled format using bar-code specific microarrays. Our design adapted bar-codes developed for the Saccharomyces cerevisiae gene-deletion project, which allowed us to utilize an available microarray product for pooled gene-exposure studies. Microarray-based screens were used for en masse identification of individual mutants sensitive to methyl methanesulfonate (MMS). As expected, gene-deletion mutants specific to direct, base excision, and recombinational DNA repair pathways were identified as MMS-sensitive in our pooled assay, thus validating our resource. We have demonstrated that molecular bar-codes designed for S. cerevisiae are transferable to E. coli, and that they can be used with pre-existing microarrays to perform competitive growth experiments. Further, when comparing microarray to traditional plate-based screens both overlapping and distinct results were obtained, which is a novel technical finding, with discrepancies between the two approaches explained by differences in output measurements (DNA content versus cell mass). The microarray-based classification of Deltatag and DeltadinG cells as depleted after MMS exposure, contrary to plate-based methods, led to the discovery that Deltatag and DeltadinG cells show a filamentation phenotype after MMS exposure, thus accounting for the discrepancy. A novel biological finding is the observation that while DeltadinG cells filament in response to MMS they exhibit wild-type sulA expression after exposure. This decoupling of filamentation from SulA levels suggests that DinG is associated with the SulA-independent filamentation pathway.

Indexed as

DNA RepairGenetic TechniquesMutationBase SequenceBiotechnologyEscherichia coliGene DeletionModels, BiologicalModels, GeneticMolecular Sequence DataOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSequence Homology, Nucleic AcidSignal TransductionToxicogenetics

Identifiers

PMID18723126
PMCPMC2613943
OpenAlexW2057485750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.