Cited by 102DNA Repair MechanismsMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFungal and yeast genetics research

Recovery from DNA damage checkpoint arrest by PP1-mediated inhibition of Chk1

Open access
den Elzen, Nicole R, O'Connell, Matthew J·2004·The EMBO Journal

Abstract

The G2 DNA damage checkpoint delays mitotic entry via the upregulation of Wee1 kinase and the downregulation of Cdc25 phosphatase by Chk1 kinase, and resultant inhibitory phosphorylation of Cdc2. While checkpoint activation is well understood, little is known about how the checkpoint is switched off to allow cell cycle re-entry. To identify proteins required for checkpoint release, we screened for genes in Schizosaccharomyces pombe that, when overexpressed, result in precocious mitotic entry in the presence of DNA damage. We show that overexpression of the type I protein phosphatase Dis2 sensitises S. pombe cells to DNA damage, causing aberrant mitoses. Dis2 abrogates Chk1 phosphorylation and activation in vivo, and dephosphorylates Chk1 and a phospho-S345 Chk1 peptide in vitro. dis2Delta cells have a prolonged chk1-dependent arrest and a compromised ability to downregulate Chk1 activity for checkpoint release. These effects are specific for the DNA damage checkpoint, because Dis2 has no effect on the chk1-independent response to stalled replication forks. We propose that inactivation of Chk1 by Dis2 allows mitotic entry following repair of DNA damage in the G2-phase.

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 · 10.1038/sj.emboj.7600105

Cites

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 102

Authors
den Elzen, N. R., & O'Connell, M. J.
Venue
The EMBO Journal
Published
2004-02-05
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
908-918
ISSN
  • 0261-4189 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2075
OpenAlex
W2165529795
Cited by
102
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The EMBO Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Cancer Institute (CA 100076-01, R01CA100076, R56CA100076)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Microtubule and mitosis dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
DNA damage checkpoint, Chk1, protein phosphatase 1, G2/M cell cycle arrest, WEE1, Cdc25 phosphatase, Cdc2 phosphorylation, Schizosaccharomyces pombe, mitotic entry, DNA damage sensitivity, aberrant mitosis, stalled replication forks
MeSH terms
Checkpoint Kinase 1, DNA Damage, DNA Replication, Mitosis, Mutation, Phosphoprotein Phosphatases, Phosphorylation, Protein Kinases, Schizosaccharomyces, Down-Regulation, Cell Cycle Proteins, Gene Expression Profiling, Schizosaccharomyces pombe Proteins, Checkpoint Kinase 2

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