JCB logo
amgmicro.com
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

Published 27 October 2003. doi:10.1083/jcb1632Xiti3
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 636K)
Right arrow PPT slides of all figures
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dove, A. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dove, A. W.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

© The Rockefeller University Press, 0021-9525/2003/10/199 $8.00
The Journal of Cell Biology, Volume 163, Number 2, 199-199


In This Issue

An early warning system for DNA damage



Damaged DNA stalls new replication (right).

On page 245, Stokes and Michael show that when DNA damage is present, not only is the replication checkpoint system activated, but an additional system directly notifies replication forks of the problem. Previous work had identified two mechanisms of damage-induced replication arrest, the checkpoint system and a general slowing of fork progression, but the new work uncovers a third mechanism.

After observing that alkylation-damaged DNA induces a checkpoint-independent block to undamaged DNA replication in Xenopus laevis extracts, the authors found that the damaged DNA activates a diffusible inhibitor that stops new replication forks from progressing. To stop fork progression, the inhibitor must be present during a short window of time early in the assembly of prereplication complexes. Paradoxically, its effect is to prevent the binding of the processivity factor PCNA, a much later event in fork assembly. The inhibitor may work by blocking the binding of an unknown prereplication complex factor that is required for later PCNA binding.

Besides ensuring redundancy in the critical process of damage-induced replication arrest, the new system may also provide an earlier warning of trouble than the checkpoint, which responds to stalled replication forks in S-phase. By shutting down fork assembly even on undamaged sequences, the inhibitor would generate multiple checkpoint signals. {blacksquare}



Alan W. Dove

alanwdove{at}earthlink.net


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?

Related Article

DNA damage-induced replication arrest in Xenopus egg extracts
Matthew P. Stokes and W. Matthew Michael
J. Cell Biol. 2003 163: 245-255. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 636K)
Right arrow PPT slides of all figures
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dove, A. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dove, A. W.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?


  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents