4.6 Article

Tight Chk1 Levels Control Replication Cluster Activation in Xenopus

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 10, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129090

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fondation pour la recherche contre le Cancer [SFI20111203831]
  2. LIGUE contre le cancer [5FI10137LJMK]
  3. Paris-South University
  4. Ministery for Education, Research and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DNA replication in higher eukaryotes initiates at thousands of origins according to a spatio-temporal program. The ATR/Chk1 dependent replication checkpoint inhibits the activation of later firing origins. In the Xenopus in vitro system initiations are not sequence dependent and 2-5 origins are grouped in clusters that fire at different times despite a very short S phase. We have shown that the temporal program is stochastic at the level of single origins and replication clusters. It is unclear how the replication checkpoint inhibits late origins but permits origin activation in early clusters. Here, we analyze the role of Chk1 in the replication program in sperm nuclei replicating in Xenopus egg extracts by a combination of experimental and modelling approaches. After Chk1 inhibition or immunodepletion, we observed an increase of the replication extent and fork density in the presence or absence of external stress. However, overexpression of Chk1 in the absence of external replication stress inhibited DNA replication by decreasing fork densities due to lower Cdk2 kinase activity. Thus, Chk1 levels need to be tightly controlled in order to properly regulate the replication program even during normal S phase. DNA combing experiments showed that Chk1 inhibits origins outside, but not inside, already active clusters. Numerical simulations of initiation frequencies in the absence and presence of Chk1 activity are consistent with a global inhibition of origins by Chk1 at the level of clusters but need to be combined with a local repression of Chk1 action close to activated origins to fit our data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据