↓ Skip to main content

Impediments to replication fork movement: stabilisation, reactivation and genome instability

Overview of attention for article published in Chromosoma, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
179 Mendeley
Title
Impediments to replication fork movement: stabilisation, reactivation and genome instability
Published in
Chromosoma, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00412-013-0398-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Lambert, Antony M. Carr

Abstract

Maintaining genome stability is essential for the accurate transmission of genetic material. Genetic instability is associated with human genome disorders and is a near-universal hallmark of cancer cells. Genetic variation is also the driving force of evolution, and a genome must therefore display adequate plasticity to evolve while remaining sufficiently stable to prevent mutations and chromosome rearrangements leading to a fitness disadvantage. A primary source of genome instability are errors that occur during chromosome replication. More specifically, obstacles to the movement of replication forks are known to underlie many of the gross chromosomal rearrangements seen both in human cells and in model organisms. Obstacles to replication fork progression destabilize the replisome (replication protein complex) and impact on the integrity of forked DNA structures. Therefore, to ensure the successful progression of a replication fork along with its associated replisome, several distinct strategies have evolved. First, there are well-orchestrated mechanisms that promote continued movement of forks through potential obstacles. Second, dedicated replisome and fork DNA stabilization pathways prevent the dysfunction of the replisome if its progress is halted. Third, should stabilisation fail, there are mechanisms to ensure damaged forks are accurately fused with a converging fork or, when necessary, re-associated with the replication proteins to continue replication. Here, we review what is known about potential barriers to replication fork progression, how these are tolerated and their impact on genome instability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
France 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Bulgaria 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 172 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 31%
Researcher 31 17%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Student > Master 15 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 24 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 73 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 68 38%
Physics and Astronomy 3 2%
Unspecified 2 1%
Chemistry 2 1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 26 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 August 2014.
All research outputs
#15,265,264
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Chromosoma
#587
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,273
of 192,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chromosoma
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 756 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.