ReviewTrends in cell biology2013
DNA in motion during double-strand break repair.
Review in Trends in cell biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 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
41 citing papers in PubMed.
- Closing the loops: chromatin loop dynamics after DNA damage.Nucleus (Austin, Tex.) · 2025Review
- Formation of chromosomal rearrangements inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Loops and the activity of loop extrusion factors constrain chromatin dynamics.Molecular biology of the cell · 2023Article
- DNA double-strand break end synapsis by DNA loop extrusion.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Double-strand break repair and mis-repair in 3D.DNA repair · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Emerging non-canonical roles for the Rad51-Rad52 interaction in response to double-strand breaks in yeast.Current genetics · 2020Review
- Structural and Dynamical Signatures of Local DNA Damage in Live Cells.Biophysical journal · 2020Article
- Double-strand breaks in motion: implications for chromosomal rearrangement.Current genetics · 2020Review
- Article
- Complex Chromatin Motions for DNA Repair.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Review
- DNA damage triggers increased mobility of chromosomes in G1-phase cells.Molecular biology of the cell · 2019Article
- Ovarian dysfunction following prenatal exposure to an insecticide, chlordecone, associates with altered epigenetic features.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2019Article
- Frequency of DNA end joiningProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Guidelines for DNA recombination and repair studies: Cellular assays of DNA repair pathways.Microbial cell (Graz, Austria) · 2019Review
- Quantifying site-specific chromatin mechanics and DNA damage response.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Nuclear mechanosensing.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2018Article
- Increased chromosomal mobility after DNA damage is controlled by interactions between the recombination machinery and the checkpoint.Genes & development · 2018Article
- Structured illumination to spatially map chromatin motions.Journal of biomedical optics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DNA organization and dynamics profoundly affect many biological processes such as gene regulation and DNA repair. In this review, we present the latest studies on DNA mobility in the context of DNA damage. Recent studies demonstrate that DNA mobility is dramatically increased in the presence of double-strand breaks (DSBs) in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. As a consequence, chromosomes explore a larger nuclear volume, facilitating homologous pairing but also increasing the rate of ectopic recombination. Increased DNA dynamics is dependent on several homologous recombination (HR) proteins and we are just beginning to understand how chromosome dynamics is regulated after DNA damage.
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.