ReviewMethods (San Diego, Calif.)2010
Reconstitution of eukaryotic lagging strand DNA replication.
Review in Methods (San Diego, Calif.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- How DNA secondary structures drive replication fork instability.DNA repair · 2025Review
- The flap endonuclease-1 promotes cellular tolerance to a chain-terminating nucleoside analog, alovudine, by counteracting the toxic effect of 53BP1.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Article
- DNA2-An Important Player in DNA Damage Response or Just Another DNA Maintenance Protein?International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
- The GAN Exonuclease or the Flap Endonuclease Fen1 and RNase HII Are Necessary for Viability of Thermococcus kodakarensis.Journal of bacteriology · 2017Article
- Adapting capillary gel electrophoresis as a sensitive, high-throughput method to accelerate characterization of nucleic acid metabolic enzymes.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
- The roles of family B and D DNA polymerases in Thermococcus species 9°N Okazaki fragment maturation.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2015Article
- Targeting human papillomavirus genome replication for antiviral drug discovery.Antiviral therapy · 2013Review
- Msh2-Msh3 interferes with Okazaki fragment processing to promote trinucleotide repeat expansions.Cell reports · 2012Article
- Functional regulation of FEN1 nuclease and its link to cancer.Nucleic acids research · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Eukaryotic DNA replication is a complex process requiring the proper functioning of a multitude of proteins to create error-free daughter DNA strands and maintain genome integrity. Even though synthesis and joining of Okazaki fragments on the lagging strand involves only half the DNA in the nucleus, the complexity associated with processing these fragments is about twice that needed for leading strand synthesis. Flap endonuclease 1 (FEN1) is the central component of the Okazaki fragment maturation pathway. FEN1 cleaves flaps that are displaced by DNA polymerase delta (pol delta), to create a nick that is effectively joined by DNA ligase I. The Pif1 helicase and Dna2 helicase/nuclease contribute to the maturation process by elongating the flap displaced by pol delta. Though the reason for generating long flaps is still a matter of debate, genetic studies have shown that Dna2 and Pif1 are both important components of DNA replication. Our current knowledge of the exact enzymatic steps that govern Okazaki fragment maturation has heavily derived from reconstitution reactions in vitro, which have augmented genetic information, to yield current mechanistic models. In this review, we describe both the design of specific DNA substrates that simulate intermediates of fragment maturation and protocols for reconstituting partial and complete lagging strand replication.
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.