ArticlePloS one2025
Evolutionary history of the DNA repair protein, Ku, in eukaryotes and prokaryotes.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ku is essential in non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) across prokaryotes and eukaryotes, primarily in double-stranded breaks (DSBs) repair. It often presents as a multi-domain protein in eukaryotes, unlike their prokaryotic single-domain homologs. We systematically searched for Ku proteins across different domains of life. To elucidate the evolutionary history of the Ku protein, we constructed a maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree using Ku protein sequences from 100 representative eukaryotic, prokaryotic, and viral species. The resulting tree revealed a common node for eukaryotic Ku proteins, while viral and prokaryotic species clustered into a distinct clade. Our phylogenetic analysis reveals that the common ancestry of Ku70 and Ku80 likely resulted from a gene duplication event in the ancestral eukaryote. This inference is supported by BLASTp results, which indicate a close resemblance between archaeal Ku and eukaryotic Ku, particularly Ku70. The presence of both Ku protein paralogs in the Discoba group further supports the hypothesis that the gene duplication occurred early in eukaryotic evolution. It is plausible that archaea, which may have acted as intermediaries for Ku transfer, subsequently lost the Ku protein. Nonetheless, the extensive horizontal transfer of Ku among prokaryotes and its relatively higher prevalence in bacteria complicates our understanding of how Ku protein was inherited by early-branching eukaryotes.
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.