Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24876253›Full record

ArticleThe Plant cell2014

Repair of Site-Specific DNA Double-Strand Breaks in Barley Occurs via Diverse Pathways Primarily Involving the Sister Chromatid.

Giang T H Vu, Hieu X Cao, Koichi Watanabe, Goetz Hensel, Frank R Blattner, Jochen Kumlehn, Ingo Schubert

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Plant cell, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Frontiers in genome editing · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Can Designer Indels Be Tailored by Gene Editing?: Can Indels Be Customized?BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2019
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Giang T H VuLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
Hieu X CaoLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
Koichi WatanabeLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
Goetz HenselLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
Frank R BlattnerLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
Jochen KumlehnLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7080-7983
Ingo SchubertLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany Faculty of Science and Central European Institute of Technology, Masaryk University, CZ-61137 Brno, Czech Republic schubert@ipk-gatersleben.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6300-2068
Leibniz-Institut für Pflanzengenetik und Kulturpflanzenforschung (IPK) · DECentral European Institute of Technology · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair mechanisms differ in their requirements for a homologous repair template and in the accuracy of the result. We aimed to quantify the outcome of repair of a single targeted DSB in somatic cells of young barley (Hordeum vulgare) plants. Amplicon sequencing of three reporter constructs revealed 47 to 58% of reads as repaired via nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) with deletions and/or small (1 to 3 bp) insertions. Alternative NHEJ revealed 2 to 5 bp microhomology (15.7% of cases) or new replication-mediated short duplications at sealed breaks. Although deletions outweigh insertions in barley, this bias was less pronounced and deleted sequences were shorter than in Arabidopsis thaliana. Between 17 and 33% of reads likely represent restoration of the original sequence. Depending on the construct, 20 to 33% of reads arose via gene conversion (homologous recombination). Remarkably, <1 to >8% of reads apparently display synthesis-dependent strand annealing linked with NHEJ, inserting 4 to 61 bp, mostly originating from the surrounding of breakpoints. Positional coincidence of >81% of sister chromatid exchanges with target loci is unprecedented for higher eukaryotes and indicates that most repair events for staggered DSBs, at least in barley, involve the sister chromatid and occur during S or G2 phase of the cell cycle.

Identifiers

PMID24876253
PMCPMC4079375
OpenAlexW2096428430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.