Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38175823›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2024

Template switching between the leading and lagging strands at replication forks generates inverted copy number variants through hairpin-capped extrachromosomal DNA.

Rebecca Martin, Claudia Y Espinoza, Christopher R L Large, Joshua Rosswork, Cole Van Bruinisse, Aaron W Miller, Joseph C Sanchez, Madison Miller, Samantha Paskvan, Gina M Alvino and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. DNA Replication Errors Drive Genome-Wide Small Inverted Triplication Dynamics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  4. Telomeric amplicons ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rebecca MartinDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0498-3329
Claudia Y EspinozaDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3004-8115
Christopher R L LargeDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5732-970X
Joshua RossworkDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Cole Van BruinisseDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Aaron W MillerDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5037-9539
Joseph C SanchezDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2444-1834
Madison MillerDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Samantha PaskvanDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Gina M AlvinoDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1305-2155
Maitreya J DunhamDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9944-2666
M K RaghuramanDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2382-3707
Bonita J BrewerDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8782-0471
University of Washington · US

Funding

INTERDISCIPLINARY TRAINING IN GENOMIC SCIENCEST32HG000035 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Bruce Colston Trapnell · 1995 to 2026
$24.2M
TrainingP41GM103533 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MACCOSS, MICHAEL · 2012 to 2021
$20.7M
EUKARYOTIC CHROMOSOME STRUCTURE AND REPLICATIONR01GM018926 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BREWER, BONITA J · 1985 to 2016
$6.8M
Choreography of Eukaryotic DNA ReplicationR35GM122497 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BONITA J BREWER · 2017 to 2026
$5.7M
NHGRI NIH HHS T32 HG000035NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103533NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM018926NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM122497
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inherited and germ-line de novo copy number variants (CNVs) are increasingly found to be correlated with human developmental and cancerous phenotypes. Several models for template switching during replication have been proposed to explain the generation of these gross chromosomal rearrangements. We proposed a model of template switching (ODIRA-origin dependent inverted repeat amplification) in which simultaneous ligation of the leading and lagging strands at diverging replication forks could generate segmental inverted triplications through an extrachromosomal inverted circular intermediate. Here, we created a genetic assay using split-ura3 cassettes to trap the proposed inverted intermediate. However, instead of recovering circular inverted intermediates, we found inverted linear chromosomal fragments ending in native telomeres-suggesting that a template switch had occurred at the centromere-proximal fork of a replication bubble. As telomeric inverted hairpin fragments can also be created through double strand breaks we tested whether replication errors or repair of double stranded DNA breaks were the most likely initiating event. The results from CRISPR/Cas9 cleavage experiments and growth in the replication inhibitor hydroxyurea indicate that it is a replication error, not a double stranded break that creates the inverted junctions. Since inverted amplicons of the SUL1 gene occur during long-term growth in sulfate-limited chemostats, we sequenced evolved populations to look for evidence of linear intermediates formed by an error in replication. All of the data are compatible with a two-step version of the ODIRA model in which sequential template switching at short inverted repeats between the leading and lagging strands at a replication fork, followed by integration via homologous recombination, generates inverted interstitial triplications.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsDNA ReplicationChromosome AberrationsDNADNA Breaks, Double-StrandedHumansDNA

Identifiers

PMID38175823
PMCPMC10766183
OpenAlexW4390579106

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.