Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20429771›Full record

ReviewCritical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology2010

RecQ4: the second replicative helicase?

Christopher Capp, Jianhong Wu, Tao-Shih Hsieh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology, 2010. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Telomere-associated aging disorders.Ageing research reviews · 2017
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Archaeology of eukaryotic DNA replication.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2013
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

3 authors.

Christopher CappDepartment of Biochemistry, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Jianhong Wu
Tao-Shih Hsieh

Funding

FUNCTION AND MECHANISM OF DNA TOPOISOMERASER01GM029006 · NIGMS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI HSIEH, TAO-SHIH · 1985 to 2010
$5.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM29006NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM029006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent work has greatly contributed to the understanding of the biology and biochemistry of RecQ4. It plays an essential non-enzymatic role in the formation of the CMG complex, and thus replication initiation, by means of its Sld2 homologous domain. The helicase domain of RecQ4 has now been demonstrated to possess 3'-5' DNA helicase activity, like the other members of the RecQ family. The biological purpose of this activity is still unclear, but helicase-dead mutants are unable to restore viability in the absence of wildtype RecQ4. This indicates that RecQ4 performs a second role, which requires helicase activity and is implicated in replication and DNA repair. Thus, it is clear that two helicases, RecQ4 and Mcm2-7, are integral to replication. The nature of the simultaneous involvement of these two helicases remains to be determined, and possible models will be proposed.

Indexed as

DNA ReplicationAnimalsDNA RepairHumansRecQ HelicasesSequence AlignmentRecQ HelicasesRECQL4 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID20429771
PMCPMC2874125

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.