ArticleGenes & development2010
Leaping forks at inverted repeats.
Article in Genes & development, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of chromatin on double-strand break repair: Imaging tools and discoveries.DNA repair · 2024Article
- The Prevalence and Evolutionary Conservation of Inverted Repeats in Proteobacteria.Genome biology and evolution · 2018Article
- Short inverted repeats contribute to localized mutability in human somatic cells.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- Replication fork stability is essential for the maintenance of centromere integrity in the absence of heterochromatin.Cell reports · 2013Article
- Telomere dysfunction and chromosome instability.Mutation research · 2012Review
- Chromosome catastrophes involve replication mechanisms generating complex genomic rearrangements.Cell · 2011Article
- Non-B DNA Secondary Structures and Their Resolution by RecQ Helicases.Journal of nucleic acids · 2011Article
- All y'all need to know 'bout retroelements in cancer.Seminars in cancer biology · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genome rearrangements are often associated with genome instability observed in cancer and other pathological disorders. Different types of repeat elements are common in genomes and are prone to instability. S-phase checkpoints, recombination, and telomere maintenance pathways have been implicated in suppressing chromosome rearrangements, but little is known about the molecular mechanisms and the chromosome intermediates generating such genome-wide instability. In the December 15, 2009, issue of Genes & Development, two studies by Paek and colleagues (2861-2875) and Mizuno and colleagues (pp. 2876-2886), demonstrate that nearby inverted repeats in budding and fission yeasts recombine spontaneously and frequently to form dicentric and acentric chromosomes. The recombination mechanism underlying this phenomenon does not appear to require double-strand break formation, and is likely caused by a replication mechanism involving template switching.
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.