ArticleEcoSal Plus2012
Translesion DNA Synthesis.
Article in EcoSal Plus, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Growth-dependent heterogeneity in the DNA damage response in Escherichia coli.Molecular systems biology · 2022Article
- Sending out an SOS - the bacterial DNA damage response.Genetics and molecular biology · 2022Article
- Why Do Muse Stem Cells Present an Enduring Stress Capacity? Hints from a Comparative Proteome Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Visualizing mutagenic repair: novel insights into bacterial translesion synthesis.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2020Review
- The SOS system: A complex and tightly regulated response to DNA damage.Environmental and molecular mutagenesis · 2019Review
- DNA replication studies ofThe Journal of biological chemistry · 2019Article
- In vivo detection and replication studies of α-anomeric lesions of 2'-deoxyribonucleosides.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- Mutation landscape of acquired cross-resistance to glycopeptide and β-lactam antibiotics in Enterococcus faecium.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2015Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
All living organisms are continually exposed to agents that damage their DNA, which threatens the integrity of their genome. As a consequence, cells are equipped with a plethora of DNA repair enzymes to remove the damaged DNA. Unfortunately, situations nevertheless arise where lesions persist, and these lesions block the progression of the cell's replicase. In these situations, cells are forced to choose between recombination-mediated "damage avoidance" pathways or a specialized DNA polymerase (pol) to traverse the blocking lesion. The latter process is referred to as Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS). As inferred by its name, TLS not only results in bases being (mis)incorporated opposite DNA lesions but also bases being (mis)incorporated downstream of the replicase-blocking lesion, so as to ensure continued genome duplication and cell survival. Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium possess five DNA polymerases, and while all have been shown to facilitate TLS under certain experimental conditions, it is clear that the LexA-regulated and damage-inducible pols II, IV, and V perform the vast majority of TLS under physiological conditions. Pol V can traverse a wide range of DNA lesions and performs the bulk of mutagenic TLS, whereas pol II and pol IV appear to be more specialized TLS polymerases.
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.