IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v412y2001i6846d10.1038_35087613.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The DNA replication checkpoint response stabilizes stalled replication forks

Author

Listed:
  • Massimo Lopes

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

  • Cecilia Cotta-Ramusino

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

  • Achille Pellicioli

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

  • Giordano Liberi

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

  • Paolo Plevani

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

  • Marco Muzi-Falconi

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

  • Carol S. Newlon

    (UMDNJ—New Jersey Medical School)

  • Marco Foiani

    (Istituto F.I.R.C. di Oncologia Molecolare
    Università degli Studi di Milano)

Abstract

In response to DNA damage and blocks to replication, eukaryotes activate the checkpoint pathways that prevent genomic instability and cancer by coordinating cell cycle progression with DNA repair1,2,3,4,5. In budding yeast, the checkpoint response requires the Mec1-dependent activation of the Rad53 protein kinase3,4,6. Active Rad53 slows DNA synthesis when DNA is damaged7 and prevents firing of late origins of replication8,9. Further, rad53 mutants are unable to recover from a replication block10. Mec1 and Rad53 also modulate the phosphorylation state of different DNA replication and repair enzymes6,11,12,13. Little is known of the mechanisms by which checkpoint pathways interact with the replication apparatus when DNA is damaged or replication blocked. We used the two-dimensional gel technique14 to examine replication intermediates in response to hydroxyurea-induced replication blocks. Here we show that hydroxyurea-treated rad53 mutants accumulate unusual DNA structures at replication forks. The persistence of these abnormal molecules during recovery from the hydroxyurea block correlates with the inability to dephosphorylate Rad53. Further, Rad53 is required to properly maintain stable replication forks during the block. We propose that Rad53 prevents collapse of the fork when replication pauses.

Suggested Citation

  • Massimo Lopes & Cecilia Cotta-Ramusino & Achille Pellicioli & Giordano Liberi & Paolo Plevani & Marco Muzi-Falconi & Carol S. Newlon & Marco Foiani, 2001. "The DNA replication checkpoint response stabilizes stalled replication forks," Nature, Nature, vol. 412(6846), pages 557-561, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:412:y:2001:i:6846:d:10.1038_35087613
    DOI: 10.1038/35087613
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/35087613
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/35087613?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicholas A Willis & Arvind Panday & Erin E Duffey & Ralph Scully, 2018. "Rad51 recruitment and exclusion of non-homologous end joining during homologous recombination at a Tus/Ter mammalian replication fork barrier," PLOS Genetics, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-28, July.
    2. Demis Menolfi & Brian J. Lee & Hanwen Zhang & Wenxia Jiang & Nicole E. Bowen & Yunyue Wang & Junfei Zhao & Antony Holmes & Steven Gershik & Raul Rabadan & Baek Kim & Shan Zha, 2023. "ATR kinase supports normal proliferation in the early S phase by preventing replication resource exhaustion," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:412:y:2001:i:6846:d:10.1038_35087613. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.