Pathways of mammalian replication fork restart
Abstract
Single-molecule analyses of DNA replication have greatly advanced our understanding of mammalian replication restart. Several proteins that are not part of the core replication machinery promote the efficient restart of replication forks that have been stalled by replication inhibitors, suggesting that bona fide fork restart pathways exist in mammalian cells. Different models of replication fork restart can be envisaged, based on the involvement of DNA helicases, nucleases, homologous recombination factors and the importance of DNA double-strand break formation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Spontaneous HR is promoted by collapsed replication forks caused by endogenous DNA single-strand breaks.
“It has been established that spontaneous HR is promoted by collapsed replication forks that are caused by endogenous DNA SSB [24, 28].”
From NER initiation factors, DDB2 and XPC, regulate UV radiation response by recruiting ATR and ATM kinases to DNA damage sites (2013) · cites this paper as [24]
Unrepaired fork gaps can become frank double-strand breaks.
“Unrepaired fork gaps can become frank DSB [24, 61, 62].”
From NER initiation factors, DDB2 and XPC, regulate UV radiation response by recruiting ATR and ATM kinases to DNA damage sites (2013) · cites this paper as [24]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 340
- Authors
- Petermann, E., & Helleday, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- Stockholm University (SE)
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology
- Published
- 2010-09-15
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 683-687
- ISSN
- 1471-0072 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-0080
- OpenAlex
- W2007889926
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 30
- FWCI
- 3.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Pain Relief Foundation
- Cancerfonden
- Vetenskapsrådet
- Medical Research Council
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
- Keywords
- replication fork restart, replication fork stalling, DNA replication, DNA helicase, nucleases, homologous recombination, DNA double-strand breaks, replication inhibitors, mammalian cells
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Bloom Syndrome, DNA, DNA Damage, DNA Replication, DNA Helicases, Humans, Mammals, Models, Genetic, DNA, Cruciform
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
