Cited by 149DNA Repair MechanismsNuclear Structure and FunctionDiffusion and Search Dynamics

Xeroderma pigmentosum group A protein loads as a separate factor onto DNA lesions

Open access
Rademakers, Suzanne, Volker, Marcel, Hoogstraten, Deborah, Nigg, Alex L., Moné, Martijn J., van Zeeland, Albert A., Hoeijmakers, Jan H. J., Houtsmuller, Adriaan B. +1 more·2003·Molecular and Cellular Biology

Abstract

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is the main DNA repair pathway in mammals for removal of UV-induced lesions. NER involves the concerted action of more than 25 polypeptides in a coordinated fashion. The xeroderma pigmentosum group A protein (XPA) has been suggested to function as a central organizer and damage verifier in NER. How XPA reaches DNA lesions and how the protein is distributed in time and space in living cells are unknown. Here we studied XPA in vivo by using a cell line stably expressing physiological levels of functional XPA fused to green fluorescent protein and by applying quantitative fluorescence microscopy. The majority of XPA moves rapidly through the nucleoplasm with a diffusion rate different from those of other NER factors tested, arguing against a preassembled XPA-containing NER complex. DNA damage induced a transient ( approximately 5-min) immobilization of maximally 30% of XPA. Immobilization depends on XPC, indicating that XPA is not the initial lesion recognition protein in vivo. Moreover, loading of replication protein A on NER lesions was not dependent on XPA. Thus, XPA participates in NER by incorporation of free diffusing molecules in XPC-dependent NER-DNA complexes. This study supports a model for a rapid consecutive assembly of free NER factors, and a relatively slow simultaneous disassembly, after repair.

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 · 10.1128/mcb.23.16.5755-5767.2003

Cites

65 of 65 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?

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

3 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Bootsma, D., K. H. Kraemer, J. E. Cleaver, and J. H. J. Hoeijmakers. 2001. Nucleotide excision repair syndromes: xeroderma pigmentosum, Cockayne syndrome and trichothiodystrophy, p. 677-703. In B. Vogelstein and K. W. Kinzler (ed.), The genetic basis of human cancer, 8th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
  2. Friedberg, E. C., G. C. Walker, and W. Siede. 1995. DNA repair and mu- tagenesis. ASM Press, Washington, D.C.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rademakers, S., Volker, M., Hoogstraten, D., Nigg, A. L., Moné, M. J., van Zeeland, A. A., Hoeijmakers, J. H. J., Houtsmuller, A. B., & Vermeulen, W.
Affiliations
  • Medical Genetics Center (DE)
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • MGC-Department of Radiation Genetics and Chemical Mutagenesis, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 AL Leiden
Corresponding author
Vermeulen, Wim
Venue
Molecular and Cellular Biology
Published
2003-08-01
Volume
23
Issue
16
Pages
5755-5767
ISSN
  • 0270-7306 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5549
OpenAlex
W2165125584
Cited by
149
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular and Cellular Biology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (901-01-229, 805-33-441, 903-68-370)
  • KWF Kankerbestrijding
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nuclear Structure and Function
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Diffusion and Search Dynamics
Keywords
XPA, nucleotide excision repair, XPC, replication protein A, DNA damage recognition, UV-induced DNA lesions
MeSH terms
Cell Line, Cell Nucleus, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, DNA-Binding Proteins, Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation, Fibroblasts, Humans, Light, Luminescent Proteins, Microscopy, Fluorescence, Models, Biological, Models, Genetic, Peptides, Time Factors, Transfection, Ultraviolet Rays, Immunoblotting, Protein Structure, Tertiary, DNA, Complementary, Microscopy, Confocal, Green Fluorescent Proteins, Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group A Protein

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