ArticlePLoS genetics2018
Rad51 recruitment and exclusion of non-homologous end joining during homologous recombination at a Tus/Ter mammalian replication fork barrier.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- The BRCA1 coiled-coil domain is dispensable for suppression of tandem duplications and tolerance of FANCM loss.The EMBO journal · 2026Article
- Review
- Two-ended recombination at a Flp-nickase-broken replication fork.Molecular cell · 2025Article
- One-ended and two-ended breaks at nickase-broken replication forks.DNA repair · 2024Review
- Review
- The Altered Functions of Shelterin Components in ALT Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- An AlphaFold2 map of the 53BP1 pathway identifies a direct SHLD3-RIF1 interaction critical for shieldin activity.EMBO reports · 2023Article
- Characterization of Unidirectional Replication Forks in the Mouse Genome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- A modified CUT&RUN-seq technique for qPCR analysis of chromatin-protein interactions.STAR protocols · 2022Article
- The structure-specific endonuclease complex SLX4-XPF regulates Tus-Ter-induced homologous recombination.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2022Article
- Review
- REV7 directs DNA repair pathway choice.Trends in cell biology · 2021Review
- DNA End Joining: G0-ing to the Core.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- FANCM regulates repair pathway choice at stalled replication forks.Molecular cell · 2021Article
- SLX4-XPF mediates DNA damage responses to replication stress induced by DNA-protein interactions.The Journal of cell biology · 2021Article
- Mechanisms of direct replication restart at stressed replisomes.DNA repair · 2020Review
- DNA double-strand break repair-pathway choice in somatic mammalian cells.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2019Review
- Replication-Coupled DNA Repair.Molecular cell · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Classical non-homologous end joining (C-NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) compete to repair mammalian chromosomal double strand breaks (DSBs). However, C-NHEJ has no impact on HR induced by DNA nicking enzymes. In this case, the replication fork is thought to convert the DNA nick into a one-ended DSB, which lacks a readily available partner for C-NHEJ. Whether C-NHEJ competes with HR at a non-enzymatic mammalian replication fork barrier (RFB) remains unknown. We previously showed that conservative "short tract" gene conversion (STGC) induced by a chromosomal Tus/Ter RFB is a product of bidirectional replication fork stalling. This finding raises the possibility that Tus/Ter-induced STGC proceeds via a two-ended DSB intermediate. If so, Tus/Ter-induced STGC might be subject to competition by C-NHEJ. However, in contrast to the DSB response, where genetic ablation of C-NHEJ stimulates HR, we report here that Tus/Ter-induced HR is unaffected by deletion of either of two C-NHEJ genes, Xrcc4 or Ku70. These results show that Tus/Ter-induced HR does not entail the formation of a two-ended DSB to which C-NHEJ has competitive access. We found no evidence that the alternative end-joining factor, DNA polymerase θ, competes with Tus/Ter-induced HR. We used chromatin-immunoprecipitation to compare Rad51 recruitment to a Tus/Ter RFB and to a neighboring site-specific DSB. Rad51 accumulation at Tus/Ter was more intense and more sustained than at a DSB. In contrast to the DSB response, Rad51 accumulation at Tus/Ter was restricted to within a few hundred base pairs of the RFB. Taken together, these findings suggest that the major DNA structures that bind Rad51 at a Tus/Ter RFB are not conventional DSBs. We propose that Rad51 acts as an "early responder" at stalled forks, binding single stranded daughter strand gaps on the arrested lagging strand, and that Rad51-mediated fork remodeling generates HR intermediates that are incapable of Ku binding and therefore invisible to the C-NHEJ machinery.
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.