↓ Skip to main content

A genetic screen for replication initiation defective (rid) mutants in Schizosaccharomyces pombe

Overview of attention for article published in Cell Division, August 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#21 of 179)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
A genetic screen for replication initiation defective (rid) mutants in Schizosaccharomyces pombe
Published in
Cell Division, August 2010
DOI 10.1186/1747-1028-5-20
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In fission yeast the intra-S phase and DNA damage checkpoints are activated in response to inhibition of DNA replication or DNA damage, respectively. The intra-S phase checkpoint responds to stalled replication forks leading to the activation of the Cds1 kinase that both delays cell cycle progression and stabilizes DNA replication forks. The DNA damage checkpoint, that operates during the G2 phase of the cell cycle delays mitotic progression through activation of the checkpoint kinase, Chk1. Delay of the cell cycle is believed to be essential to allow time for either replication restart (in S phase) or DNA damage repair (in G2). Previously, our laboratory showed that fission yeast cells deleted for the N-terminal half of DNA polymerase ε (Cdc20) are delayed in S phase, but surprisingly require Chk1 rather than Cds1 to maintain cell viability. Several additional DNA replication mutants were then tested for their dependency on Chk1 or Cds1 when grown under semi-permissive temperatures. We discovered that mutants defective in DNA replication initiation are sensitive only to loss of Chk1, whilst mutations that inhibit DNA replication elongation are sensitive to loss of both Cds1 and Chk1. To confirm that the Chk1-sensitive, Cds1-insensitive phenotype (rid phenotype) is specific to mutants defective in DNA replication initiation, we completed a genetic screen for cell cycle mutants that require Chk1, but not Cds1 to maintain cell viability when grown at semi-permissive temperatures. Our screen identified two mutants, rid1-1 and rid2-1, that are defective in Orc1 and Mcm4, respectively. Both mutants show defects in DNA replication initiation consistent with our hypothesis that the rid phenotype is replication initiation specific. In the case of Mcm4, the mutation has been mapped to a highly conserved region of the protein that appears to be required for DNA replication initiation, but not elongation. Therefore, we conclude that the cellular response to inhibition of DNA replication initiation is distinct from blocking DNA replication elongation, and this difference can be exploited to identify mutants specifically defective in DNA replication initiation.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 6%
Canada 1 6%
Unknown 16 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 44%
Psychology 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 November 2010.
All research outputs
#7,605,073
of 28,841,988 outputs
Outputs from Cell Division
#21
of 179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,947
of 115,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Division
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,841,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 179 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 115,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them