Literature DB >> 33370257

Super-resolution visualization of distinct stalled and broken replication fork structures.

Donna R Whelan1, Wei Ting C Lee2, Frances Marks2, Yu Tina Kong2, Yandong Yin2, Eli Rothenberg2.   

Abstract

Endogenous genotoxic stress occurs in healthy cells due to competition between DNA replication machinery, and transcription and topographic relaxation processes. This causes replication fork stalling and regression, which can further collapse to form single-ended double strand breaks (seDSBs). Super-resolution microscopy has made it possible to directly observe replication stress and DNA damage inside cells, however new approaches to sample preparation and analysis are required. Here we develop and apply multicolor single molecule microscopy to visualize individual replication forks under mild stress from the trapping of Topoisomerase I cleavage complexes, a damage induction which closely mimics endogenous replicative stress. We observe RAD51 and RAD52, alongside RECQ1, as the first responder proteins to stalled but unbroken forks, whereas Ku and MRE11 are initially recruited to seDSBs. By implementing novel super-resolution imaging assays, we are thus able to discern closely related replication fork stress motifs and their repair pathways.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33370257      PMCID: PMC7793303          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009256

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS Genet        ISSN: 1553-7390            Impact factor:   5.917


  83 in total

1.  Coordinated response of mammalian Rad51 and Rad52 to DNA damage.

Authors:  Y Liu; N Maizels
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  High speed of fork progression induces DNA replication stress and genomic instability.

Authors:  Apolinar Maya-Mendoza; Pavel Moudry; Joanna Maria Merchut-Maya; MyungHee Lee; Robert Strauss; Jiri Bartek
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Organization and dynamics of the nonhomologous end-joining machinery during DNA double-strand break repair.

Authors:  Dylan A Reid; Sarah Keegan; Alejandra Leo-Macias; Go Watanabe; Natasha T Strande; Howard H Chang; Betul Akgol Oksuz; David Fenyo; Michael R Lieber; Dale A Ramsden; Eli Rothenberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 4.  Replication fork reversal in eukaryotes: from dead end to dynamic response.

Authors:  Kai J Neelsen; Massimo Lopes
Journal:  Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 94.444

Review 5.  Playing the end game: DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice.

Authors:  J Ross Chapman; Martin R G Taylor; Simon J Boulton
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 17.970

Review 6.  Sources of DNA double-strand breaks and models of recombinational DNA repair.

Authors:  Anuja Mehta; James E Haber
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 10.005

Review 7.  Repair Pathway Choices and Consequences at the Double-Strand Break.

Authors:  Raphael Ceccaldi; Beatrice Rondinelli; Alan D D'Andrea
Journal:  Trends Cell Biol       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 20.808

8.  Human Ku70/80 protein blocks exonuclease 1-mediated DNA resection in the presence of human Mre11 or Mre11/Rad50 protein complex.

Authors:  Jingxin Sun; Kyung-Jong Lee; Anthony J Davis; David J Chen
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  Single-Molecule Imaging Reveals How Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 Initiates DNA Break Repair.

Authors:  Logan R Myler; Ignacio F Gallardo; Michael M Soniat; Rajashree A Deshpande; Xenia B Gonzalez; Yoori Kim; Tanya T Paull; Ilya J Finkelstein
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 17.970

10.  Replication fork reversal triggers fork degradation in BRCA2-defective cells.

Authors:  Sofija Mijic; Ralph Zellweger; Nagaraja Chappidi; Matteo Berti; Kurt Jacobs; Karun Mutreja; Sebastian Ursich; Arnab Ray Chaudhuri; Andre Nussenzweig; Pavel Janscak; Massimo Lopes
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 14.919

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Recombination and restart at blocked replication forks.

Authors:  Ralph Scully; Rajula Elango; Arvind Panday; Nicholas A Willis
Journal:  Curr Opin Genet Dev       Date:  2021-08-28       Impact factor: 5.578

Review 2.  Reconsidering pathway choice: a sequential model of mammalian DNA double-strand break pathway decisions.

Authors:  Tanya T Paull
Journal:  Curr Opin Genet Dev       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 5.578

3.  A basal-level activity of ATR links replication fork surveillance and stress response.

Authors:  Yandong Yin; Wei Ting Chelsea Lee; Dipika Gupta; Huijun Xue; Peter Tonzi; James A Borowiec; Tony T Huang; Mauro Modesti; Eli Rothenberg
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 19.328

4.  Super-resolution mapping of cellular double-strand break resection complexes during homologous recombination.

Authors:  Donna R Whelan; Eli Rothenberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 12.779

5.  Dosimetry of heavy ion exposure to human cells using nanoscopic imaging of double strand break repair protein clusters.

Authors:  Judith Reindl; P Kundrat; S Girst; M Sammer; B Schwarz; G Dollinger
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 6.  Human topoisomerases and their roles in genome stability and organization.

Authors:  Yves Pommier; André Nussenzweig; Shunichi Takeda; Caroline Austin
Journal:  Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 113.915

7.  Determinants of RPA megafoci localization to the nuclear periphery in response to replication stress.

Authors:  Seong Min Kim; Susan L Forsburg
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 3.542

8.  The KU-PARP14 axis differentially regulates DNA resection at stalled replication forks by MRE11 and EXO1.

Authors:  Ashna Dhoonmoon; Claudia M Nicolae; George-Lucian Moldovan
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-08-27       Impact factor: 17.694

9.  The chromatin-binding domain of Ki-67 together with p53 protects human chromosomes from mitotic damage.

Authors:  Osama Garwain; Xiaoming Sun; Divya Ramalingam Iyer; Rui Li; Lihua Julie Zhu; Paul D Kaufman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-08-10       Impact factor: 11.205

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.