ArticleNature2010
Identification of sister chromatids by DNA template strand sequences.
Article in Nature, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strand-seq and the future of personalized genomics.Nature genetics · 2026Review
- Genomic and epigenomic maps of mouse centromeres and pericentromeres.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Nanoscale 3D DNA tracing in non-denatured cells resolves the Cohesin-dependent loop architecture of the genome in situ.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Oligopaint FISH in Drosophila Testes.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- ERCC6L2 mitigates replication stress and promotes centromere stability.Cell reports · 2023Article
- The Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Prospects of Alternative Lengthening of Telomeres (ALT).Cancers · 2023Review
- Sister chromatid-sensitive Hi-C to map the conformation of replicated genomes.Nature protocols · 2022Review
- Mitotic drive in asymmetric epigenetic inheritance.Biochemical Society transactions · 2022Article
- A probabilistic framework for cellular lineage reconstruction using integrated single-cell 5-hydroxymethylcytosine and genomic DNA sequencing.Cell reports methods · 2021Article
- Cosegregation of asymmetric features during cell division.Open biology · 2021Article
- Construction of Whole Genomes from Scaffolds Using Single Cell Strand-Seq Data.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- MIWI prevents aneuploidy during meiosis by cleaving excess satellite RNA.The EMBO journal · 2020Article
- Review
- A bright FIT-PNA hybridization probe for the hybridization state specific analysis of a C → U RNA editChemical science · 2018Article
- Variation of mutational burden in healthy human tissues suggests non-random strand segregation and allows measuring somatic mutation rates.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
- Centromere Chromosome Orientation FluorescentBio-protocol · 2018Article
- Epigenetic characteristics of the mitotic chromosome in 1D and 3D.Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology · 2017Review
- Symmetry from Asymmetry or Asymmetry from Symmetry?Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology · 2017Article
- Mouse Label-Retaining Cells Are Molecularly and Functionally Distinct From Reserve Intestinal Stem Cells.Gastroenterology · 2016Article
- When stem cells grow old: phenotypes and mechanisms of stem cell aging.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
It is generally assumed that sister chromatids are genetically and functionally identical and that segregation to daughter cells is a random process. However, functional differences between sister chromatids regulate daughter cell fate in yeast and sister chromatid segregation is not random in Escherichia coli. Differentiated sister chromatids, coupled with non-random segregation, have been proposed to regulate cell fate during the development of multicellular organisms. This hypothesis has not been tested because molecular features to reliably distinguish between sister chromatids are not obvious. Here we show that parental 'Watson' and 'Crick' DNA template strands can be identified in sister chromatids of murine metaphase chromosomes using CO-FISH (chromosome orientation fluorescence in situ hybridization) with unidirectional probes specific for centromeric and telomeric repeats. All chromosomes were found to have a uniform orientation with the 5' end of the short arm on the same strand as T-rich major satellite repeats. The invariable orientation of repetitive DNA was used to differentially label sister chromatids and directly study mitotic segregation patterns in different cell types. Whereas sister chromatids appeared to be randomly distributed between daughter cells in cultured lung fibroblasts and embryonic stem cells, significant non-random sister chromatid segregation was observed in a subset of colon crypt epithelial cells, including cells outside positions reported for colon stem cells. Our results establish that DNA template sequences can be used to distinguish sister chromatids and follow their mitotic segregation in vivo.
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.