Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33784377›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2021

RPA2 winged-helix domain facilitates UNG-mediated removal of uracil from ssDNA; implications for repair of mutagenic uracil at the replication fork.

Bodil Kavli, Tobias S Iveland, Edith Buchinger, Lars Hagen, Nina B Liabakk, Per A Aas, Tobias S Obermann, Finn L Aachmann, Geir Slupphaug

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Re-establishment of TAD boundary organization during DNA replication.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bodil KavliDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Tobias S IvelandDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Edith BuchingerNOBIPOL, Department of Biotechnology and Food Science, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7034 Trondheim, Norway.
Lars HagenDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Nina B LiabakkDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Per A AasDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Tobias S ObermannDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Finn L AachmannNOBIPOL, Department of Biotechnology and Food Science, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7034 Trondheim, Norway.
Geir SlupphaugDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uracil occurs at replication forks via misincorporation of deoxyuridine monophosphate (dUMP) or via deamination of existing cytosines, which occurs 2-3 orders of magnitude faster in ssDNA than in dsDNA and is 100% miscoding. Tethering of UNG2 to proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) allows rapid post-replicative removal of misincorporated uracil, but potential 'pre-replicative' removal of deaminated cytosines in ssDNA has been questioned since this could mediate mutagenic translesion synthesis and induction of double-strand breaks. Here, we demonstrate that uracil-DNA glycosylase (UNG), but not SMUG1 efficiently excises uracil from replication protein A (RPA)-coated ssDNA and that this depends on functional interaction between the flexible winged-helix (WH) domain of RPA2 and the N-terminal RPA-binding helix in UNG. This functional interaction is promoted by mono-ubiquitination and diminished by cell-cycle regulated phosphorylations on UNG. Six other human proteins bind the RPA2-WH domain, all of which are involved in DNA repair and replication fork remodelling. Based on this and the recent discovery of the AP site crosslinking protein HMCES, we propose an integrated model in which templated repair of uracil and potentially other mutagenic base lesions in ssDNA at the replication fork, is orchestrated by RPA. The UNG:RPA2-WH interaction may also play a role in adaptive immunity by promoting efficient excision of AID-induced uracils in transcribed immunoglobulin loci.

Indexed as

DNA ReplicationBinding SitesDNA GlycosylasesDNA, Single-StrandedHumansProtein BindingRecombinant ProteinsReplication Protein AUracilCCNO protein, humanDNA GlycosylasesDNA, Single-StrandedRecombinant ProteinsReplication Protein ARPA1 protein, humanRPA2 protein, humanUracil

Identifiers

PMID33784377
PMCPMC8053108
OpenAlexW3143058942

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.