ArticleDNA repair2014
Sgs1 and Exo1 suppress targeted chromosome duplication during ends-in and ends-out gene targeting.
Article in DNA repair, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gene duplication and deletion caused by over-replication at a fork barrier.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Insertion orientation within the cassette affects gene-targeting success during ends-out recombination in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.Current genetics · 2022Article
- Repair of mismatched templates during Rad51-dependent Break-Induced Replication.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- Novel Approach in the Construction of Bioethanol-ProducingFood technology and biotechnology · 2019Article
- Telomere Dysfunction Triggers Palindrome Formation Independently of Double-Strand Break Repair Mechanisms.Genetics · 2016Article
- Article
- Noncanonical views of homology-directed DNA repair.Genes & development · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Gene targeting is extremely efficient in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. It is performed by transformation with a linear, non-replicative DNA fragment carrying a selectable marker and containing ends homologous to the particular locus in a genome. However, even in S. cerevisiae, transformation can result in unwanted (aberrant) integration events, the frequency and spectra of which are quite different for ends-out and ends-in transformation assays. It has been observed that gene replacement (ends-out gene targeting) can result in illegitimate integration, integration of the transforming DNA fragment next to the target sequence and duplication of a targeted chromosome. By contrast, plasmid integration (ends-in gene targeting) is often associated with multiple targeted integration events but illegitimate integration is extremely rare and a targeted chromosome duplication has not been reported. Here we systematically investigated the influence of design of the ends-out assay on the success of targeted genetic modification. We have determined transformation efficiency, fidelity of gene targeting and spectra of all aberrant events in several ends-out gene targeting assays designed to insert, delete or replace a particular sequence in the targeted region of the yeast genome. Furthermore, we have demonstrated for the first time that targeted chromosome duplications occur even during ends-in gene targeting. Most importantly, the whole chromosome duplication is POL32 dependent pointing to break-induced replication (BIR) as the underlying mechanism. Moreover, the occurrence of duplication of the targeted chromosome was strikingly increased in the exo1Δ sgs1Δ double mutant but not in the respective single mutants demonstrating that the Exo1 and Sgs1 proteins independently suppress whole chromosome duplication during gene targeting.
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.