Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25753809›Full record

ReviewDNA repair2015

Redundancy in ribonucleotide excision repair: Competition, compensation, and cooperation.

Alexandra Vaisman, Roger Woodgate

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in DNA repair, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cells · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. RNA: a double-edged sword in genome maintenance.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2020
    Review
  10. UEG Week 2020 Oral Presentations.United European gastroenterology journal · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Ribonucleotide discrimination by translesion synthesis DNA polymerases.Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology · 2018
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexandra VaismanLaboratory of Genomic Integrity, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-3371, USA.
Roger WoodgateLaboratory of Genomic Integrity, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-3371, USA. Electronic address: woodgate@nih.gov.
National Institutes of Health · US

Funding

DNA Replication, Repair, and Mutagenesis In Eukaryotic And Prokaryotic CellsZIAHD001500 · NICHD · EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT · PI WOODGATE, ROGER · 2009 to 2025
$37.5M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA HD001500
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The survival of all living organisms is determined by their ability to reproduce, which in turn depends on accurate duplication of chromosomal DNA. In order to ensure the integrity of genome duplication, DNA polymerases are equipped with stringent mechanisms by which they select and insert correctly paired nucleotides with a deoxyribose sugar ring. However, this process is never 100% accurate. To fix occasional mistakes, cells have evolved highly sophisticated and often redundant mechanisms. A good example is mismatch repair (MMR), which corrects the majority of mispaired bases and which has been extensively studied for many years. On the contrary, pathways leading to the replacement of nucleotides with an incorrect sugar that is embedded in chromosomal DNA have only recently attracted significant attention. This review describes progress made during the last few years in understanding such pathways in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Genetic studies in Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae demonstrated that MMR has the capacity to replace errant ribonucleotides, but only when the base is mispaired. In contrast, the major evolutionarily conserved ribonucleotide repair pathway initiated by the ribonuclease activity of type 2 Rnase H has broad specificity. In yeast, this pathway also requires the concerted action of Fen1 and pol δ, while in bacteria it can be successfully completed by DNA polymerase I. Besides these main players, all organisms contain alternative enzymes able to accomplish the same tasks, although with differing efficiency and fidelity. Studies in bacteria have very recently demonstrated that isolated rNMPs can be removed from genomic DNA by error-free nucleotide excision repair (NER), while studies in yeast suggest the involvement of topoisomerase 1 in alternative mutagenic ribonucleotide processing. This review summarizes the most recent progress in understanding the ribonucleotide repair mechanisms in prokaryotes and eukaryotes.

Indexed as

DNA, FungalDNA RepairEscherichia coliEscherichia coli ProteinsRibonuclease HRibonucleotidesSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsDNA, FungalEscherichia coli ProteinsRibonuclease HRibonucleotidesSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsDNA polymerase IFlap endonucleaseMismatch repairNucleotide excision repairRibonuclease HRibonucleotide excision repair

Identifiers

PMID25753809
PMCPMC4426009
OpenAlexW2054377678

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.