4.6 Article

1UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA 2Department of Pharmacology and Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA 3

期刊

LIFE SCIENCE ALLIANCE
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

LIFE SCIENCE ALLIANCE LLC
DOI: 10.26508/lsa.202201807

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Centromere identity is defined and maintained by CENP-A, but how its positioning and maintenance during DNA replication are accomplished remains unclear. The newly released T2T genome assembly provides a valuable tool for studying CENP-A positioning. Mapping CENP-A position to the T2T assembly revealed consistent localization after cell divisions, while variations in CENP-A expression were observed across different human cell lines. Despite CENP-A dilution during DNA replication, it is reliably reloaded onto the same sequences in daughter centromeres, preserving centromere identity in human cells.
Centromere identity is defined and maintained epigenetically by the presence of the histone variant CENP-A. How centromeric CENP-A position is specified and precisely maintained through DNA replication is not fully understood. The recently released Telomere-to-Telomere (T2T) genome assembly containing the first complete human centromere sequences provides a new resource for examining CENP-A position. Mapping CENP-A posi-tion in clones of the same cell line to the T2T assembly identified highly similar CENP-A position after multiple cell divisions. In contrast, centromeric CENP-A epialleles were evident at several centromeres of different human cell lines, demonstrating the location of CENP-A enrichment and the site of kinetochore re-cruitment vary among human cells. Across the cell cycle, CENP-A molecules deposited in G1 phase are maintained in their precise position through DNA replication. Thus, despite CENP-A dilution during DNA replication, CENP-A is precisely reloaded onto the same sequences within the daughter centromeres, maintaining unique centromere identity among human cells.

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