ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2026
The SOS response acts as a regulatory switch that balances helicase anti-recombination with transcription-replication conflict resolution activities in Escherichia coli.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Transcription-replication conflicts are a major source of genome instability, particularly at highly transcribed ribosomal RNA genes, where RNA polymerase stalling can trigger replication fork collapse and double-strand breaks. We investigated how the SOS DNA damage response regulates the activities of the UvrD, DinG, RecQ, and Rep helicases in Escherichia coli, focusing on their roles in resolving transcription-replication conflicts and repairing double-strand breaks at ribosomal RNA loci. We systematically assessed the contribution of each helicase to cell growth, DNA break formation, SOS induction, and survival. Our results show that SOS induction functions as a regulatory switch, modulating UvrD and DinG activities between protective transcription-replication conflict resolution and detrimental anti-recombination. RecA abundance emerges as the key determinant of this switch. While RecQ consistently promotes genome stability by facilitating timely SOS activation and recombinational repair, Rep primarily supports replisome progression, functioning independently of SOS response status. Under nalidixic acid treatment, where survival relies mainly on double-strand break repair, we observed a similar SOS-dependent modulation of helicase activity, reinforcing this regulatory model. Together, these findings uncover a dynamic regulatory mechanism that fine-tunes helicase activities to resolve transcription-replication conflicts while limiting deleterious anti-recombination, thereby preserving chromosome integrity under transcriptional or antibiotic-induced stress.
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.