Mari Fujita, Hiroyuki Sasanuma, Kimiyo N. Yamamoto, Hiroshi Harada, Aya Kurosawa, Noritaka Adachi, Masato Omura, Masahiro Hiraoka, Shunichi Takeda, Kouji Hirota
Abstract
Morphological analysis of mitotic chromosomes is used to detect mutagenic chemical compounds and to estimate the dose of ionizing radiation to be administered. It has long been believed that chromosomal breaks are always associated with double-strand breaks (DSBs). We here provide compelling evidence against this canonical theory. We employed a genetic approach using two cell lines, chicken DT40 and human Nalm-6. We measured the number of chromosomal breaks induced by three replication-blocking agents (aphidicolin, 5-fluorouracil, and hydroxyurea) in DSB-repair-proficient wild-type cells and cells deficient in both homologous recombination and nonhomologous end-joining (the two major DSB-repair pathways). Exposure of cells to the three replication-blocking agents for at least two cell cycles resulted in comparable numbers of chromosomal breaks for RAD54(-/-/)KU70(-/-) DT40 clones and wild-type cells. Likewise, the numbers of chromosomal breaks induced in RAD54(-/-/)LIG4(-/-) Nalm-6 clones and wild-type cells were also comparable. These data indicate that the replication-blocking agents can cause chromosomal breaks unassociated with DSBs. In contrast with DSB-repair-deficient cells, chicken DT40 cells deficient in PIF1 or ATRIP, which molecules contribute to the completion of DNA replication, displayed higher numbers of mitotic chromosomal breaks induced by aphidicolin than did wild-type cells, suggesting that single-strand gaps left unreplicated may result in mitotic chromosomal breaks.
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 11 April 2013.
All research outputs
#13,306,540
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#106,030
of 193,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,259
of 199,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,636
of 5,292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 199,817 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,292 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
