Cited by 359Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsRNA Research and SplicingNuclear Structure and Function

Distinction and Relationship between Elongation Rate and Processivity of RNA Polymerase II In Vivo

Open access
Mason, Paul B., Struhl, Kevin·2005·Molecular Cell

Abstract

A number of proteins and drugs have been implicated in the process of transcriptional elongation by RNA polymerase (Pol) II, but the factors that govern the elongation rate (nucleotide additions per min) and processivity (nucleotide additions per initiation event) in vivo are poorly understood. Here, we show that a mutation in the Rpb2 subunit of Pol II reduces both the elongation rate and processivity in vivo. In contrast, none of the putative elongation factors tested affect the elongation rate, although mutations in the THO complex and in Spt4 significantly reduce processivity. The drugs 6-azauracil and mycophenolic acid reduce both the elongation rate and processivity, and this processivity defect is aggravated by mutations in Spt4, TFIIS, and CTDK-1. Our results suggest that, in vivo, a reduced rate of Pol II elongation leads to premature dissociation along the chromatin template and that Pol II processivity can be uncoupled from elongation rate.

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.molcel.2005.02.017

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • In yeast, genes are quite short (around 1.5-2 kb long on average), although the gene YLR454W used for most experiments measuring RNA Pol II speed in budding yeast is exceptionally large with a size of around 8 kb.

    “In yeast, genes are quite short (around 1.5–2 kb long on average, although the gene YLR454W, used for most of the experiments measuring RNA Pol II speed in budding yeast, is exceptionally large with a size of around 8 kb (Table 2) (Mason & Struhl, 2005; Quan & Hartzog, 2010; Kruk et al, 2011; García et al, 2012)).”

    From RNA polymerase II speed: a key player in controlling and adapting transcriptome composition (2021) · cites this paper as Mason & Struhl, 2005

    The paper’s discussion of biological significance says YLR454w is 8 kb, versus a typical yeast gene of 1–2 kb. Its description of the GAL1-YLR454 experiments confirms that it used this gene to measure Pol II elongation rate. It does not establish that YLR454w was used for most such experiments across budding-yeast research, or give an average of 1.5–2 kb. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Deletion of TFIIS has no effect on RNA Pol II velocity in budding yeast.

    “Accordingly, TFIIS increases RNA Pol II speed in human cells (Sheridan et al, 2019; Zatreanu et al, 2019), while its deletion had no effect on RNA Pol II velocity in budding yeast (Mason & Struhl, 2005).”
  • Loss of Paf1C has no measurable effect on RNA Pol II velocity in budding yeast.

    “Paf1C specifically increases RNA Pol II velocity within the first part of gene bodies in mice (Hou et al, 2019), although no effect of the loss of this factor could be measured in budding yeast (Mason & Struhl, 2005).”

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
Mason, P. B., & Struhl, K.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Struhl, Kevin
Venue
Molecular Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-03
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
831-840
ISSN
1097-2765 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079493448
Cited by
359
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 26
FWCI
10.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (GM30186)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM30186)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nuclear Structure and Function
Keywords
RNA polymerase II, transcription elongation, elongation rate, processivity, THO complex, Spt4, TFIIS, 6-azauracil, mycophenolic acid, elongation factors, chromatin templates
MeSH terms
Antibiotics, Antineoplastic, Antimetabolites, Chromatin, Mutation, Mycophenolic Acid, Nuclear Proteins, Peptide Chain Elongation, Translational, Protein Kinases, RNA Polymerase II, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Transcription, Genetic, Uracil, Gene Expression Regulation, Fungal, Protein Subunits, Transcription Initiation Site, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, Transcriptional Elongation Factors

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