ArticlePloS one2016
UmuDAb: An Error-Prone Polymerase Accessory Homolog Whose N-Terminal Domain Is Required for Repression of DNA Damage Inducible Gene Expression in Acinetobacter baylyi.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Should I stay or should I go? DNA damage thresholds drive stay-or-go decisions inJournal of bacteriology · 2026Review
- Acinetobacter baumannii encodes multiple mutagenically and biochemically active DNA polymerase V variants.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Identification of EppR, a Second Repressor of Error-Prone DNA Polymerase Genes in Acinetobacter baumannii.Molecular microbiology · 2025Article
- Repression ofJournal of bacteriology · 2024Article
- Locking down SOS Mutagenesis Repression in a Dynamic Pathogen.Journal of bacteriology · 2022Article
- The DdrR Coregulator of the Acinetobacter baumannii Mutagenic DNA Damage Response Potentiates UmuDAb Repression of Error-Prone Polymerases.Journal of bacteriology · 2022Article
- The Small DdrR Protein Directly Interacts with the UmuDAb Regulator of the Mutagenic DNA Damage Response in Acinetobacter baumannii.Journal of bacteriology · 2022Article
- Homodimerization and heterodimerization requirements ofCanadian journal of microbiology · 2021Article
- A corepressor participates in LexA-independent regulation of error-prone polymerases inMicrobiology (Reading, England) · 2020Article
- Betulinic Acid Prevents the Acquisition of Ciprofloxacin-Mediated Mutagenesis inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Mechanisms of Bacterial Tolerance and Persistence in the Gastrointestinal and Respiratory Environments.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2018Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In many bacteria, the DNA damage response induces genes (SOS genes) that were repressed by LexA. LexA represses transcription by binding to SOS promoters via a helix-turn-helix motif in its N-terminal domain (NTD). Upon DNA damage, LexA cleaves itself and allows induction of transcription. In Acinetobacter baumannii and Acinetobacter baylyi, multiple genes are induced by DNA damage, and although the Acinetobacter genus lacks LexA, a homolog of the error-prone polymerase subunit UmuD, called UmuDAb, regulates some DNA damage-induced genes. The mechanism of UmuDAb regulation has not been determined. We constructed UmuDAb mutant strains of A. baylyi to test whether UmuDAb mediates gene regulation through LexA-like repressor actions consisting of relief of repression through self-cleavage after DNA damage. Real-time quantitative PCR experiments in both a null umuDAb mutant and an NTD mutant showed that the DNA damage-inducible, UmuDAb-regulated gene ddrR was highly expressed even in the absence of DNA damage. Protein modeling identified a potential LexA-like helix-turn-helix structure in the UmuDAb NTD, which when disrupted, also relieved ddrR and umuDAb repression under non-inducing conditions. Mutations in a putative SOS box in the shared umuDAb-ddrR promoter region similarly relieved these genes' repression under non-inducing conditions. Conversely, cells possessing a cleavage-deficient UmuDAb were unable to induce gene expression after MMC-mediated DNA damage. This evidence of a UmuDAb repressor mechanism was contrasted with the failure of umuDAb to complement an Escherichia coli umuD mutant for UmuD error-prone DNA replication activity. Similarly, A. baumannii null umuDAb mutant cells did not have a reduced UmuD'2UmuC-mediated mutation rate after DNA damage, suggesting that although this UmuDAb protein may have evolved from a umuDC operon in this genus, it now performs a LexA-like repressor function for a sub-set of DNA damage-induced genes.
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.