The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis in vitro programmed by damaged DNA. A comparison of DNA molecules containing different types of strand breaks.
Open accessAbstract
The ability of DNA is support poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis is completely dependent upon the number and type of strand breaks it contains and is independent of the sequence. Single-stranded DNA is ineffective. Covalently closed circular plasmid DNA is ineffective, but when it is enzymatically digested it activates poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in proportion to the number of strand breaks, suggesting that the polymerase recognizes DNA ends. Double-stranded restriction fragments with flush ends are approximately 3 times more effective than are fragments with unpaired nucleotides extending from the 3' termini and about 10 times more effective than are either fragments with unpaired nucleotides extending from the 5' termini or plasmids with single-strand breaks. All types of restriction fragments become more effective upon removal of terminal 5'-phosphate groups. This specificity profile may relate to the proposed role of poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis in the repair of DNA strand breaks, for those which are assumed to be more difficult to repair in vivo are the more effective stimulators. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase has no divalent cation requirement when supplied with flush-ended DNA fragments, but magnesium may enhance the effective of other types of DNA by activating magnesium-dependent nucleases. Ineffective DNAs, such as covalently closed plasmids or synthetic homopolymers that are unable to form Watson-Crick duplexes, apparently compete with effective DNA and weakly inhibit poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Cantó, C., Menzies, K. J., & Auwerx, J. (2015) · Cell Metabolism · doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2015.05.023 · Cited by 1,648
Dynamics of DNA damage response proteins at DNA breaks: a focus on protein modifications
Polo, S. E., & Jackson, S. P. (2011) · Genes & Development · doi:10.1101/gad.2021311 · Cited by 1,092
Donawho, C. K., Luo, Y., Luo, Y., Penning, T. D., Bauch, J. L., Bouska, J. J., Bontcheva-Diaz, V. D., Cox, B. F., DeWeese, T. L., Dillehay, L. E., et al. (2007) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-06-3039 · Cited by 773
PARP and PARG inhibitors in cancer treatment
Slade, D. (2020) · Genes & Development · doi:10.1101/gad.334516.119 · Cited by 667
Yamamoto, H., Uchigata, Y., & Okamoto, H. (1981) · Nature · doi:10.1038/294284a0 · Cited by 526
Metadata
- Authors
- Benjamin, R. C., & Gill, D. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Biological Chemistry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1980-11
- Volume
- 255
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 10502-10508
- ISSN
- 0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1498308778
- Cited by
- 487
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis in vitro programmed by damaged DNA. A comparison of DNA molecules containing different types of strand breaks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0021-9258(19)70491-8
- The paper
- Benjamin, R. C., & Gill, D. M. (1980). Poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis in vitro programmed by damaged DNA. A comparison of DNA molecules containing different types of strand breaks. Journal of Biological Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9258(19)70491-8
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.