ArticlePloS one2010
Checkpoint-dependent and -independent roles of Swi3 in replication fork recovery and sister chromatid cohesion in fission yeast.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Separable functions of Tof1/Timeless in intra-S-checkpoint signalling, replisome stability and DNA topological stress.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Genetic investigation of formaldehyde-induced DNA damage response in Schizosaccharomyces pombe.Current genetics · 2020Article
- The NuA4 acetyltransferase and histone H4 acetylation promote replication recovery after topoisomerase I-poisoning.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2019Article
- Destabilization of the replication fork protection complex disrupts meiotic chromosome segregation.Molecular biology of the cell · 2017Article
- Genetic controls of DNA damage avoidance in response to acetaldehyde in fission yeast.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2017Article
- Timeless protection of telomeres.Current genetics · 2016Review
- Characterization of a Novel MMS-Sensitive Allele of Schizosaccharomyces pombe mcm4.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2016Article
- Swi1Timeless Prevents Repeat Instability at Fission Yeast Telomeres.PLoS genetics · 2016Article
- Tipin functions in the protection against topoisomerase I inhibitor.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2014Article
- Coordinated degradation of replisome components ensures genome stability upon replication stress in the absence of the replication fork protection complex.PLoS genetics · 2013Article
- Article
- Swi1 associates with chromatin through the DDT domain and recruits Swi3 to preserve genomic integrity.PloS one · 2012Article
- Timeless functions independently of the Tim-Tipin complex to promote sister chromatid cohesion in normal human fibroblasts.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2011Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Multiple genome maintenance processes are coordinated at the replication fork to preserve genomic integrity. How eukaryotic cells accomplish such a coordination is unknown. Swi1 and Swi3 form the replication fork protection complex and are involved in various processes including stabilization of replication forks, activation of the Cds1 checkpoint kinase and establishment of sister chromatid cohesion in fission yeast. However, the mechanisms by which the Swi1-Swi3 complex achieves and coordinates these tasks are not well understood. Here, we describe the identification of separation-of-function mutants of Swi3, aimed at dissecting the molecular pathways that require Swi1-Swi3. Unlike swi3 deletion mutants, the separation-of-function mutants were not sensitive to agents that stall replication forks. However, they were highly sensitive to camptothecin that induces replication fork breakage. In addition, these mutants were defective in replication fork regeneration and sister chromatid cohesion. Interestingly, unlike swi3-deleted cell, the separation-of-functions mutants were proficient in the activation of the replication checkpoint, but their fork regeneration defects were more severe than those of checkpoint mutants including cds1Δ, chk1Δ and rad3Δ. These results suggest that, while Swi3 mediates full activation of the replication checkpoint in response to stalled replication forks, Swi3 activates a checkpoint-independent pathway to facilitate recovery of collapsed replication forks and the establishment of sister chromatid cohesion. Thus, our separation-of-function alleles provide new insight into understanding the multiple roles of Swi1-Swi3 in fork protection during DNA replication, and into understanding how replication forks are maintained in response to different genotoxic agents.
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.