Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24717437›Full record

ArticleNature2014

Homologue engagement controls meiotic DNA break number and distribution.

Drew Thacker, Neeman Mohibullah, Xuan Zhu, Scott Keeney

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 143 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
143citing papers in PubMed
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

143 citing papers in PubMed, 221 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Structure and function of the synaptonemal complex.The Journal of cell biology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Improved synapsis dynamics accompany meiotic stability inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

83 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Drew Thacker1] Molecular Biology Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA [2] Weill Graduate School of Medical Sciences of Cornell University, New York, New York 10065, USA.
Neeman Mohibullah1] Molecular Biology Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA [2] Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA.
Xuan Zhu1] Molecular Biology Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA [2] Weill Graduate School of Medical Sciences of Cornell University, New York, New York 10065, USA.
Scott Keeney1] Molecular Biology Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA [2] Weill Graduate School of Medical Sciences of Cornell University, New York, New York 10065, USA [3] Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USCornell University · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Mechanism of meiotic recombination in yeastR01GM058673 · NIGMS · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI KEENEY, SCOTT · 1999 to 2015
$6.0M
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM058673NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM058673
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meiotic recombination promotes genetic diversification as well as pairing and segregation of homologous chromosomes, but the double-strand breaks (DSBs) that initiate recombination are dangerous lesions that can cause mutation or meiotic failure. How cells control DSBs to balance between beneficial and deleterious outcomes is not well understood. Here we test the hypothesis that DSB control involves a network of intersecting negative regulatory circuits. Using multiple complementary methods, we show that DSBs form in greater numbers in Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells lacking ZMM proteins, a suite of recombination-promoting factors traditionally regarded as acting strictly downstream of DSB formation. ZMM-dependent DSB control is genetically distinct from a pathway tying break formation to meiotic progression through the Ndt80 transcription factor. These counterintuitive findings suggest that homologous chromosomes that have successfully engaged one another stop making breaks. Genome-wide DSB maps uncover distinct responses by different subchromosomal domains to the ZMM mutation zip3 (also known as cst9), and show that Zip3 is required for the previously unexplained tendency of DSB density to vary with chromosome size. Thus, feedback tied to ZMM function contributes in unexpected ways to spatial patterning of recombination.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedChromosome PairingChromosomes, FungalCrossing Over, GeneticDNA-Binding ProteinsEpistasis, GeneticGenome, FungalHomologous RecombinationMeiosisMutationPhenotypeSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsTranscription FactorsUbiquitin-Protein LigasesDNA-Binding ProteinsNDT80 protein, S cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsTranscription FactorsUbiquitin-Protein LigasesZip3 protein, S cerevisiae

Identifiers

PMID24717437
PMCPMC4057310
OpenAlexW2032852397

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.