↓ Skip to main content

Repairing a doublestrand chromosome break by homologous recombination: revisiting Robin Holliday's model

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, January 2004
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Repairing a doublestrand chromosome break by homologous recombination: revisiting Robin Holliday's model
Published in
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, January 2004
DOI 10.1098/rstb.2003.1367
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Since the pioneering model for homologous recombination proposed by Robin Holliday in 1964, there has been great progress in understanding how recombination occurs at a molecular level. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, one can follow recombination by physically monitoring DNA after the synchronous induction of a double-strand break (DSB) in both wild-type and mutant cells. A particularly well-studied system has been the switching of yeast mating-type (MAT) genes, where a DSB can be induced synchronously by expression of the site-specific HO endonuclease. Similar studies can be performed in meiotic cells, where DSBs are created by the Spo11 nuclease. There appear to be at least two competing mechanisms of homologous recombination: a synthesis-dependent strand annealing pathway leading to noncrossovers and a two-end strand invasion mechanism leading to formation and resolution of Holliday junctions (HJs), leading to crossovers. The establishment of a modified replication fork during DSB repair links gene conversion to another important repair process, break-induced replication. Despite recent revelations, almost 40 years after Holliday's model was published, the essential ideas he proposed of strand invasion and heteroduplex DNA formation, the formation and resolution of HJs, and mismatch repair, remain the basis of our thinking.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Bulgaria 1 <1%
Unknown 109 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 25%
Researcher 23 19%
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 17 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 55 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 16 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 October 2022.
All research outputs
#12,344,472
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#5,285
of 7,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,035
of 204,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 204,454 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.