ArticleThe Journal of biological chemistry2014
Excision of uracil from transcribed DNA negatively affects gene expression.
Article in The Journal of biological chemistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcription-Coupled Nucleotide Excision Repair: A Faster Solution or the Only Option?Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Cytotoxic mechanisms of pemetrexed and HDAC inhibition in non-small cell lung cancer cells involving ribonucleotides in DNA.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Back-Up Base Excision DNA Repair in Human Cells Deficient in the Major AP Endonuclease, APE1.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Requirement of transcription-coupled nucleotide excision repair for the removal of a specific type of oxidatively induced DNA damage.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Direct and Base Excision Repair-Mediated Regulation of a GC-RichInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- EGFP Reporters for Direct and Sensitive Detection of Mutagenic Bypass of DNA Lesions.Biomolecules · 2020Article
- Alkyladenine DNA glycosylase associates with transcription elongation to coordinate DNA repair with gene expression.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Deoxyuracil in DNA and disease: Genomic signal or managed situation?DNA repair · 2019Review
- Metabolic profiling of umbilical cord blood in macrosomia.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2018Article
- Functional impacts of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine, 5-formylcytosine, and 5-carboxycytosine at a single hemi-modified CpG dinucleotide in a gene promoter.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- Article
- Widespread transcriptional gene inactivation initiated by a repair intermediate of 8-oxoguanine.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uracil is an unavoidable aberrant base in DNA, the repair of which takes place by a highly efficient base excision repair mechanism. The removal of uracil from the genome requires a succession of intermediate products, including an abasic site and a single strand break, before the original DNA structure can be reconstituted. These repair intermediates are harmful for DNA replication and also interfere with transcription under cell-free conditions. However, their relevance for cellular transcription has not been proved. Here we investigated the influence of uracil incorporated into a reporter vector on gene expression in human cells. The expression constructs contained a single uracil opposite an adenine (to mimic dUTP misincorporation during DNA synthesis) or a guanine (imitating a product of spontaneous cytosine deamination). We found no evidence for a direct transcription arrest by uracil in either of the two settings because the vectors containing the base modification exhibited unaltered levels of enhanced GFP reporter gene expression at early times after delivery to cells. However, the gene expression showed a progressive decline during subsequent hours. In the case of U:A pairs, this effect was retarded significantly by knockdown of UNG1/2 but not by knockdown of SMUG1 or thymine-DNA glycosylase uracil-DNA glycosylases, proving that it is base excision by UNG1/2 that perturbs transcription of the affected gene. By contrast, the decline of expression of the U:G constructs was not influenced by either UNG1/2, SMUG1, or thymine-DNA glycosylase knockdown, strongly suggesting that there are substantial mechanistic or kinetic differences between the processing of U:A and U:G lesions in cells.
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.