ArticlePLoS genetics2016
Role of Double-Strand Break End-Tethering during Gene Conversion in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Replication Fork-Associated Checkpoint Mediator Mrc1/Claspin Acts in Arrest-Independent Double-Strand Break Survival.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Homologous recombination suppresses transgenerational DNA end resection and chromosomal instability in fission yeast.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Take a Break to Repair: A Dip in the World of Double-Strand Break Repair Mechanisms Pointing the Gaze on Archaea.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Antagonistic relationship of NuA4 with the non-homologous end-joining machinery at DNA damage sites.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
- Mechanisms restraining break-induced replication at two-ended DNA double-strand breaks.The EMBO journal · 2021Article
- Moving forward one step back at a time: reversibility during homologous recombination.Current genetics · 2019Review
- Causes and Effects of Loss of Classical Nonhomologous End Joining Pathway in Parasitic Eukaryotes.mBio · 2019Article
- Frequency of DNA end joiningProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Keep moving and stay in a good shape to find your homologous recombination partner.Current genetics · 2019Review
- Single-strand annealing between inverted DNA repeats: Pathway choice, participating proteins, and genome destabilizing consequences.PLoS genetics · 2018Article
- Homologous recombination-mediated repair of DNA double-strand breaks operates in mammalian mitochondria.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2018Article
- DNA Repair: The Search for Homology.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2018Review
- From dynamic chromatin architecture to DNA damage repair and back.Nucleus (Austin, Tex.) · 2018Review
- Break-induced replication promotes formation of lethal joint molecules dissolved by Srs2.Nature communications · 2017Article
- Recombination at subtelomeres is regulated by physical distance, double-strand break resection and chromatin status.The EMBO journal · 2017Article
- Break-induced replication links microsatellite expansion to complex genome rearrangements.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2017Review
- Article
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
Abstract
Correct repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) is critical for maintaining genome stability. Whereas gene conversion (GC)-mediated repair is mostly error-free, repair by break-induced replication (BIR) is associated with non-reciprocal translocations and loss of heterozygosity. We have previously shown that a Recombination Execution Checkpoint (REC) mediates this competition by preventing the BIR pathway from acting on DSBs that can be repaired by GC. Here, we asked if the REC can also determine whether the ends that are engaged in a GC-compatible configuration belong to the same break, since repair involving ends from different breaks will produce potentially deleterious translocations. We report that the kinetics of repair are markedly delayed when the two DSB ends that participate in GC belong to different DSBs (termed Trans) compared to the case when both DSB ends come from the same break (Cis). However, repair in Trans still occurs by GC rather than BIR, and the overall efficiency of repair is comparable. Hence, the REC is not sensitive to the "origin" of the DSB ends. When the homologous ends for GC are in Trans, the delay in repair appears to reflect their tethering to sequences on the other side of the DSB that themselves recombine with other genomic locations with which they share sequence homology. These data support previous observations that the two ends of a DSB are usually tethered to each other and that this tethering facilitates both ends encountering the same donor sequence. We also found that the presence of homeologous/repetitive sequences in the vicinity of a DSB can distract the DSB end from finding its bona fide homologous donor, and that inhibition of GC by such homeologous sequences is markedly increased upon deleting Sgs1 but not Msh6.
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.