Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8753702›Full record

ArticleChromosoma1996

Scaffold attachment regions in centromere-associated DNA.

P L Strissel, R Espinosa, J D Rowley, H Swift

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Chromosoma, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Centromeres, kinetochores and the segregation of chromosomes. Foreword.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2004
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A model for chromosome structure during the mitotic and meiotic cell cycles.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2001
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Conserved characteristics of heterochromatin-forming DNA at the 15q11-q13 imprinting center.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1999
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P L StrisselDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
R Espinosa
J D Rowley
H Swift
University of Chicago · US

Funding

CHROMOSOME ABNORMALITIES AND HUMAN LEUKEMIA AND LYMPHOMAR35CA042557 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI ROWLEY, JANET D · 1986 to 1999
–
NCI NIH HHS CA 42557
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to indications that kinetochore proteins are an integral part of the protein scaffold component of the chromosome (Earnshaw et al. 1984), we chose to map the distribution of scaffold attachment regions (SARs) at centromeres. Using the SAR mapping assay of Mirkovitch et al., Southern blots were prepared and probed with 32P-labeled fragments from the human 1.9 kb centromeric alpha-satellite repeat unit of chromosome 1 or the 1.7 kb centromeric alpha-satellite repeat unit of chromosome 16. Our results demonstrated the presence of one SAR site per 1.9 kb repeat unit in chromosome 1, and every 1.7 kb repeat unit in chromosome 16, separated by regions of small DNA loops over the length of the alpha-satellite regions. We also identified several in vitro vertebrate topoisomerase II and cenP-B consensus sequences throughout the chromosome 1 alpha-satellite region using computer and base ratio analysis, to address the question as to why some alpha-satellite regions are SAR related and others are not. To provide in situ indications of SAR localization in the human genome, SAR DNA and non-SAR DNA were prepared following lithium 3,5-di-iodosalicylate extraction. Sequences protected from DNAse I digestion by SAR proteins, as compared with unprotected DNA that was digested by the enzyme, was labeled with biotin-UTP, hybridized to chromosomal DNA in situ, and then detected with fluorescein-avidin-DCS. Both SAR and non-SAR DNA selectively labeled virtually all centromeric regions of the human metaphase karyotype. Chromosomal arms were less strongly bound by SAR DNA, with a pattern that followed the chromosomal axis. In the more condensed chromosomes an R-banding pattern was evident. In general, labeling patterns produced by both SAR and non-SAR fractions were similar, as expected from the indications that SAR DNAs are heterogenous in sequence and do not form a specific class of sequences. We conclude that centromeric regions of several, possibly all, human metaphase chromosomes are also regions where the chromosomal axis contains loops, smaller in size than in the arms and where attachment sites are concentrated. This clustering of SARs may be responsible in part for the tight chromatin packing associated with the primary constriction of the centromeric region.

Indexed as

Blotting, SouthernCentromereChromosomal Proteins, Non-HistoneChromosomes, Human, Pair 1Chromosomes, Human, Pair 16Deoxyribonuclease IDNA, CircularDNA, SatelliteHumansIn Situ HybridizationNucleic Acid ConformationRestriction MappingTumor Cells, CulturedChromosomal Proteins, Non-HistoneDeoxyribonuclease IDNA, CircularDNA, Satellite

Identifiers

PMID8753702
OpenAlexW2038283767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.