Cited by 48DNA Repair MechanismsGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFungal and yeast genetics research

Ctf18-RFC and DNA Pol ϵ form a stable leading strand polymerase/clamp loader complex required for normal and perturbed DNA replication

Open access
Stokes, Katy, Winczura, Alicja, Song, Boyuan, De Piccoli, Giacomo, Grabarczyk, Daniel B·2020·Nucleic Acids Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The eukaryotic replisome must faithfully replicate DNA and cope with replication fork blocks and stalling, while simultaneously promoting sister chromatid cohesion. Ctf18-RFC is an alternative PCNA loader that links all these processes together by an unknown mechanism. Here, we use integrative structural biology combined with yeast genetics and biochemistry to highlight the specific functions that Ctf18-RFC plays within the leading strand machinery via an interaction with the catalytic domain of DNA Pol ϵ. We show that a large and unusually flexible interface enables this interaction to occur constitutively throughout the cell cycle and regardless of whether forks are replicating or stalled. We reveal that, by being anchored to the leading strand polymerase, Ctf18-RFC can rapidly signal fork stalling to activate the S phase checkpoint. Moreover, we demonstrate that, independently of checkpoint signaling or chromosome cohesion, Ctf18-RFC functions in parallel to Chl1 and Mrc1 to protect replication forks and cell viability.

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 · 10.1093/nar/gkaa541

Cites

85 of 85 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 budding yeast, previous experiments mapped the POLD3-POLA1 interaction to the location in both proteins predicted by AF-M.

    “in budding yeast, previous experiments mapped this interaction to the location in both proteins predicted by AF-M69,70.”

    From Predictomes, a classifier-curated database of AlphaFold-modeled protein-protein interactions (2025) · cites this paper as [70]

    The Results sections on complex architecture and recruitment to replication forks map an interaction between Pol2 (DNA polymerase ε) and Ctf18-RFC, not between POLD3 and POLA1. Searches for POLD3–POLA1 and the proposed yeast interaction found no passage in our copy addressing that interaction or its agreement with an AF-M prediction. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [37]Kabsch W. XDS. Acta Crystallogr. D. Biol. Crystallogr. 2010; 66: 125– 132. 20124692 PMC2815665
  2. [39]McCoy A.J., Grosse-Kunstleve R.W., Adams P.D., Winn M.D., Storoni L.C., Read R.J. Phaser crystallographic software. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2007; 40: 658– 674. 19461840 PMC2483472
  3. [53]Knop M., Siegers K., Pereira G., Zachariae W., Winsor B., Nasmyth K., Schiebel E. Epitope tagging of yeast genes using a PCR-based strategy: more tags and improved practical routines. Yeast. 1999; 15: 963– 972. 10407276

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stokes, K., Winczura, A., Song, B., De Piccoli, G., & Grabarczyk, D. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Warwick (GB)
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • University of Warwick, Warwick Medical School, Coventry, UK
Corresponding author
Grabarczyk, Daniel B
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Published
2020-06-25
Volume
48
Issue
14
Pages
8128-8145
ISSN
  • 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-4962
OpenAlex
W3037282523
Cited by
48
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3
FWCI
2.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nucleic Acids Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
  • Desy Publications Database (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Cancer Research UK (C44595/A16326)
  • DFG (GR 5152/3-1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
DNA polymerase epsilon, clamp loader, replisome, replication fork stalling, replication fork protection, S-phase checkpoint, sister chromatid cohesion, CHL1, CD206, DNA replication
MeSH terms
Replisomes, Binding Sites, DNA-Directed DNA Polymerase, DNA Replication, Multienzyme Complexes, Protein Binding, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Cell Cycle Proteins, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins

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