Literature DB >> 15989976

Checkpoint responses to replication fork barriers.

Sarah Lambert1, Antony M Carr.   

Abstract

The fidelity of DNA replication is of paramount importance to the maintenance of genome integrity. When an active replication fork is perturbed, multiple cellular pathways are recruited to stabilize the replication apparatus and to help to bypass or correct the causative problem. However, if the problem is not corrected, the fork may collapse, exposing free DNA ends to potentially inappropriate processing. In prokaryotes, replication fork collapse promotes the activity of recombination proteins to restore a replication fork. Recent work has demonstrated that recombination is also intimately linked to replication in eukaryotic cells, and that recombination proteins are recruited to collapsed, but not stalled, replication forks. In this review we discuss the different types of potential replication fork barriers (RFB) and how these distinct RFBs can result in different DNA structures at the stalled replication fork. The DNA structure checkpoints which act within S phase respond to different RFBs in different ways and we thus discuss the processes that are controlled by the DNA replication checkpoints, paying particular attention to the function of the intra-S phase checkpoint that stabilises the stalled fork.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15989976     DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2004.10.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochimie        ISSN: 0300-9084            Impact factor:   4.079


  67 in total

1.  Replication stress checkpoint signaling controls tRNA gene transcription.

Authors:  Vesna C Nguyen; Brett W Clelland; Darren J Hockman; Sonya L Kujat-Choy; Holly E Mewhort; Michael C Schultz
Journal:  Nat Struct Mol Biol       Date:  2010-07-18       Impact factor: 15.369

2.  Hsk1 kinase and Cdc45 regulate replication stress-induced checkpoint responses in fission yeast.

Authors:  Seiji Matsumoto; Michie Shimmoto; Naoko Kakusho; Mika Yokoyama; Yutaka Kanoh; Motoshi Hayano; Paul Russell; Hisao Masai
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 4.534

3.  Proteomic analysis of the Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus terminal repeat element binding proteins.

Authors:  Huaxin Si; Subhash C Verma; Erle S Robertson
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.103

4.  How to exchange your partner. Workshop on recombination mechanisms and the maintenance of genomic stability.

Authors:  Andrés Aguilera; Simon J Boulton
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2006-12-15       Impact factor: 8.807

5.  Replication fork progression is impaired by transcription in hyperrecombinant yeast cells lacking a functional THO complex.

Authors:  Ralf E Wellinger; Félix Prado; Andrés Aguilera
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.272

6.  Molecular architecture of a eukaryotic DNA replication terminus-terminator protein complex.

Authors:  Gregor Krings; Deepak Bastia
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2006-08-28       Impact factor: 4.272

Review 7.  Replication fork stalling at natural impediments.

Authors:  Ekaterina V Mirkin; Sergei M Mirkin
Journal:  Microbiol Mol Biol Rev       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 11.056

8.  Identification of pathways controlling DNA damage induced mutation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Ewa T Lis; Bryan M O'Neill; Cristina Gil-Lamaignere; Jodie K Chin; Floyd E Romesberg
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2008-04-08

9.  Nearby inverted repeats fuse to generate acentric and dicentric palindromic chromosomes by a replication template exchange mechanism.

Authors:  Ken'Ichi Mizuno; Sarah Lambert; Giuseppe Baldacci; Johanne M Murray; Antony M Carr
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 11.361

10.  HARPing on about the DNA damage response during replication.

Authors:  Robert Driscoll; Karlene A Cimprich
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 11.361

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.