Cited by 87DNA Repair MechanismsGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology

Archaeology of Eukaryotic DNA Replication

Open access
Makarova, K. S., Koonin, E. V.·2013·Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology

Abstract

Recent advances in the characterization of the archaeal DNA replication system together with comparative genomic analysis have led to the identification of several previously uncharacterized archaeal proteins involved in replication and currently reveal a nearly complete correspondence between the components of the archaeal and eukaryotic replication machineries. It can be inferred that the archaeal ancestor of eukaryotes and even the last common ancestor of all extant archaea possessed replication machineries that were comparable in complexity to the eukaryotic replication system. The eukaryotic replication system encompasses multiple paralogs of ancestral components such that heteromeric complexes in eukaryotes replace archaeal homomeric complexes, apparently along with subfunctionalization of the eukaryotic complex subunits. In the archaea, parallel, lineage-specific duplications of many genes encoding replication machinery components are detectable as well; most of these archaeal paralogs remain to be functionally characterized. The archaeal replication system shows remarkable plasticity whereby even some essential components such as DNA polymerase and single-stranded DNA-binding protein are displaced by unrelated proteins with analogous activities in some lineages.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/cshperspect.a012963

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • DNA as the primary information storage molecule evolved independently in bacteria and archaea.

    “The fact that the mechanisms of DNA replication in bacteria and archaea are different [133] suggests the possibility that DNA, as the primary information storage molecule, evolved independently in each of these lineages [133,134,135].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Makarova, K. S., & Koonin, E. V.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology
Published
2013-07-23
Volume
5
Issue
11
Pages
a012963-a012963
ISSN
1943-0264 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2143135304
Cited by
87
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • National Institutes of Health
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine
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 › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Keywords
archaeal DNA replication, eukaryotic DNA replication, archaea, last common ancestor, gene duplication, paralogs, heteromeric complexes, subfunctionalization, DNA polymerase, single-stranded DNA binding protein, replisome
MeSH terms
Animals, Archaea, DNA-Directed DNA Polymerase, DNA Replication, DNA-Binding Proteins, Eukaryotic Cells, Humans, Phylogeny, Methanococcus, Cell Lineage, Evolution, Molecular, Genome, Archaeal, Origin Recognition Complex

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