Cited by 280DNA Repair MechanismsGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics

Long Neural Genes Harbor Recurrent DNA Break Clusters in Neural Stem/Progenitor Cells

Open access
Wei, Pei-Chi, Chang, Amelia N., Kao, Jennifer, Du, Zhou, Meyers, Robin M., Alt, Frederick W., Schwer, Bjoern·2016·Cell

Abstract

Repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) by non-homologous end joining is critical for neural development, and brain cells frequently contain somatic genomic variations that might involve DSB intermediates. We now use an unbiased, high-throughput approach to identify genomic regions harboring recurrent DSBs in primary neural stem/progenitor cells (NSPCs). We identify 27 recurrent DSB clusters (RDCs), and remarkably, all occur within gene bodies. Most of these NSPC RDCs were detected only upon mild, aphidicolin-induced replication stress, providing a nucleotide-resolution view of replication-associated genomic fragile sites. The vast majority of RDCs occur in long, transcribed, and late-replicating genes. Moreover, almost 90% of identified RDC-containing genes are involved in synapse function and/or neural cell adhesion, with a substantial fraction also implicated in tumor suppression and/or mental disorders. Our characterization of NSPC RDCs reveals a basis of gene fragility and suggests potential impacts of DNA breaks on neurodevelopment and neural functions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.039

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wei, P.-C., Chang, A. N., Kao, J., Du, Z., Meyers, R. M., Alt, F. W., & Schwer, B.
Affiliations
Boston Children's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
  • Alt, Frederick W.
  • Schwer, Bjoern
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-02
Volume
164
Issue
4
Pages
644-655
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2268858163
Cited by
280
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 25
FWCI
21.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Institute on Aging (K01AG043630)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Keywords
neural stem/progenitor cells, DNA double-strand breaks, non-homologous end joining, replication stress, synaptic function, neuronal adhesion, tumor suppression genes, mental illness, brain development
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Cell Adhesion, DNA Repair, Humans, Nerve Tissue Proteins, Synapses, Transcription Factors, Translocation, Genetic, Cell Adhesion Molecules, Neuronal, Aphidicolin, Genome, Mice, Basic Helix-Loop-Helix Proteins, DNA Breaks, GPI-Linked Proteins, Neural Stem Cells, DNA End-Joining Repair

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review