Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30352618›Full record

ArticleEpigenetics & chromatin2018

DNA replication and repair kinetics of Alu, LINE-1 and satellite III genomic repetitive elements.

Francesco Natale, Annina Scholl, Alexander Rapp, Wei Yu, Cathia Rausch, M Cristina Cardoso

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epigenetics & chromatin, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Repetitive Sequence Stability in Embryonic Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Epigenetics, DNA damage, and aging.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Francesco NataleDepartment of Biology, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany.
Annina SchollDepartment of Biology, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany.
Alexander RappDepartment of Biology, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany.
Wei YuDepartment of Biology, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany.
Cathia RauschDepartment of Biology, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany.
M Cristina CardosoDepartment of Biology, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany. cardoso@bio.tu-darmstadt.de.ORCID 0000-0001-8427-8859

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung BMBF 02NUK036DDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG CA198/8-2Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft GRK1657/TP1BDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DE) DFG CA198/8-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreservation of genome integrity by complete, error-free DNA duplication prior to cell division and by correct DNA damage repair is paramount for the development and maintenance of an organism. This holds true not only for protein-encoding genes, but also it applies to repetitive DNA elements, which make up more than half of the human genome. Here, we focused on the replication and repair kinetics of interspersed and tandem repetitive DNA elements.

resultsWe integrated genomic population level data with a single cell immunofluorescence in situ hybridization approach to simultaneously label replication/repair and repetitive DNA elements. We found that: (1) the euchromatic Alu element was replicated during early S-phase; (2) LINE-1, which is associated with AT-rich genomic regions, was replicated throughout S-phase, with the majority being replicated according to their particular histone marks; (3) satellite III, which constitutes pericentromeric heterochromatin, was replicated exclusively during the mid-to-late S-phase. As for the DNA double-strand break repair process, we observed that Alu elements followed the global genome repair kinetics, while LINE-1 elements repaired at a slower rate. Finally, satellite III repeats were repaired at later time points.

conclusionsWe conclude that the histone modifications in the specific repeat element predominantly determine its replication and repair timing. Thus, Alu elements, which are characterized by euchromatic chromatin features, are repaired and replicated the earliest, followed by LINE-1 elements, including more variegated eu/heterochromatic features and, lastly, satellite tandem repeats, which are homogeneously characterized by heterochromatic features and extend over megabase-long genomic regions. Altogether, this work reemphasizes the need for complementary approaches to achieve an integrated and comprehensive investigation of genomic processes.

Indexed as

Alu ElementsDNA RepairDNA ReplicationLong Interspersed Nucleotide ElementsAnimalsCell LineDNA, SatelliteHeLa CellsHistone CodeHumansMiceDNA, SatelliteAluChIP-SeqDNA repairDNA repetitive elementsDNA replicationGenome-wide analysisImmuno-FISHLINEPhosphorylated H2AXSatellites

Identifiers

PMID30352618
PMCPMC6198450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.