XB-ART-60566
Nucleic Acids Res
2024 Apr 12;526:3146-3163. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkae082.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
Resection of DNA double-strand breaks activates Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1- and Rad9-Hus1-Rad1-dependent mechanisms that redundantly promote ATR checkpoint activation and end processing in Xenopus egg extracts.
Tatsukawa K
,
Sakamoto R
,
Kawasoe Y
,
Kubota Y
,
Tsurimoto T
,
Takahashi TS
,
Ohashi E
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Sensing and processing of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are vital to genome stability. DSBs are primarily detected by the ATM checkpoint pathway, where the Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN) complex serves as the DSB sensor. Subsequent DSB end resection activates the ATR checkpoint pathway, where replication protein A, MRN, and the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 (9-1-1) clamp serve as the DNA structure sensors. ATR activation depends also on Topbp1, which is loaded onto DNA through multiple mechanisms. While different DNA structures elicit specific ATR-activation subpathways, the regulation and mechanisms of the ATR-activation subpathways are not fully understood. Using DNA substrates that mimic extensively resected DSBs, we show here that MRN and 9-1-1 redundantly stimulate Dna2-dependent long-range end resection and ATR activation in Xenopus egg extracts. MRN serves as the loading platform for ATM, which, in turn, stimulates Dna2- and Topbp1-loading. Nevertheless, MRN promotes Dna2-mediated end processing largely independently of ATM. 9-1-1 is dispensable for bulk Dna2 loading, and Topbp1 loading is interdependent with 9-1-1. ATR facilitates Mre11 phosphorylation and ATM dissociation. These data uncover that long-range end resection activates two redundant pathways that facilitate ATR checkpoint signaling and DNA processing in a vertebrate system.
???displayArticle.pubmedLink??? 38349040
???displayArticle.pmcLink??? PMC11014350
???displayArticle.link??? Nucleic Acids Res
???displayArticle.grants??? [+]
22H04697 JSPS, KAKENHI, Toyota Riken Scholar, Uehara Memorial Foundation, 21-07 R3 Young Researchers Support Project, Faculty of Science, Kyushu University, Nagahama Institute of Bio-Science and Technology
Species referenced: Xenopus laevis
Genes referenced: atm atr chek1 dna2 exo1 hus1 mre11 msh2 nbn nr2e1 orc2 rad1 rad50 rad9a rbbp8 rfc1 rps3a topbp1
???attribute.lit??? ???displayArticles.show???
![]() |
|
![]() |
Figure 1. Linear DNA activates ATR through a 9–1–1-independent pathway in Xenopus egg extracts. (A) 0.2 μl each of mock-treated (lane 1) and Rad9-depleted NPE (lane 2) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Rfc1 was used as a loading control. (*) Cross-reacting band. (B) Singly-primed circular ssDNA (lanes 3–12), primed linear ssDNA (lanes 13–22), or linear dsDNA (lanes 23–32) was incubated in NPE shown in (A), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting with phosphorylated-Chk1 (S344) and Chk1 antibodies. Rfc1 was used as a loading control. The top panel represents a superimposed image (magenta, pChk1; green, Chk1). (*) indicates the heavy chain of rabbit IgG leaked out from IgG beads used for immunodepletion. Note that although the pre-immune serum was used for the ‘mock’ control, the amount of IgG leakage varies between pre- and post-immune sera. (C) Relative intensities of pChk1 signals were quantified and normalized to that of the 20-min time-point of the mock-treated samples. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. (D) Immunodepletion of Topbp1 with a rescue experiment. 0.2 μl each of mock-treated (lane 1) and Topbp1-depleted NPE supplemented with either buffer (lane 2) or 150 nM of recombinant Topbp1 (lane 3) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Rfc1 was used as a loading control. (*) IgG. (E) Singly-primed circular ssDNA (lanes 4–15) or linear dsDNA (lanes 16–27) was incubated in NPE shown in (D), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting. (*) IgG. (F) Quantification of Chk1 phosphorylation for (E), normalized to the 20-min time-point of the mock-treated samples. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. |
![]() |
Figure 2. Bypass of the requirement of MRN in the initiation of DSB end resection by 3′-ssDNA overhangs. (A) Schematic diagram of the DNA substrate and the DSB end resection assay. The substrate was incubated in NPE, purified, and digested with S1 nuclease to measure the length of the dsDNA portion and with SacI to monitor end resection at two termini separately. (B) 0.2 μl each of mock-treated (lane 1) and Mre11-depleted NPE (lane 2) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Rfc1 was used as a loading control. (C) The tailless substrate (lanes 2–12) or the tailed substrate (lanes 13–23) was incubated in NPE shown in (B), processed as described in (A), and analyzed by agarose gel electrophoresis. The DNA fragment of approximately 6.4 kb corresponds to the major head-to-tail NHEJ product. (D) The tailed substrate was incubated in NPE shown in (B), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting. (*) IgG. |
![]() |
Figure 3. Redundant roles of 9–1–1 and MRN in ATR activation and DSB end resection. (A) 0.2 μl each of mock-treated (lane 1), Rad9-depleted (lane 2), Mre11-depleted (lane 3), and Rad9/Mre11-doubly-depleted NPE (lane 4) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Rfc1 was used as a loading control. (*) Cross-reacting band. (B) The tailed substrate was incubated in NPE shown in (A), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting. (*) IgG. (C) Quantification of Chk1 phosphorylation for (B), normalized to the 20-min time-point of the mock-treated sample. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. See Supplementary Figure S3A for individual experiments. (D) The tailed substrate was incubated in NPE shown in (A) and analyzed as described in Figure 2A. (E) Quantification of long-range end resection for (D). Relative intensities of the DNA signals within the 3- to 5-kb range were quantified and normalized to the intensity of the input DNA. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. (F) Relative intensities of pChk1 signals in response to tailed DNA in Mre11- and Rad9/Mre11-depleted NPE with a rescue experiment with recombinant 9–1–1, processed as described in (C). Mean ± one SD, n = 3. See Supplementary Figure S3D for a representative image and S3E for individual experiments. (G) Quantification of long-range end resection in Mre11- and Rad9/Mre11-depleted NPE with a rescue experiment with recombinant 9–1–1, processed as described in (E). Mean ± one SD, n = 3. See Supplementary Figure S3F for a representative image. (H) Relative intensities of pChk1 signals in response to tailed DNA in mock-, Rad9-, Nbs1- and Rad9/Nbs1-depleted NPE, processed as described in (C). Mean ± one SD, n = 3. See Supplementary Figure S4B for a representative image and S4C for individual experiments. (I) Quantification of long-range end resection in mock-, Rad9-, Nbs1- and Rad9/Nbs1-depleted NPE, processed as described in (E). Mean ± one SD, n = 3. See Supplementary Figure S4D for a representative image. |
![]() |
Figure 4. ATM is an essential component of the MRN-dependent ATR activation pathway. (A) 0.2 μl each of mock-treated (lane 1), Rad9-depleted (lane 2), Mre11-depleted (lane 3), ATM-depleted (lane 4), Rad9/Mre11-doubly-depleted (lane 5), Rad9/ATM-doubly-depleted (lane 6), and Mre11/ATM-doubly-depleted NPE (lane 7) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Rfc1 was used as a loading control. (B) The tailed substrate was incubated in NPE shown in (A), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting. (*) IgG. (C) Quantification of Chk1 phosphorylation for (B). Data were processed and presented as described in Figure 1C. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. See Supplementary Figure S5A for individual experiments. (D) The tailed substrate was incubated in NPE shown in (A) and analyzed as described in Figure 2A. (E) Quantification of long-range end resection for (D). Data were processed and presented as described in Figure 3E. |
![]() |
Figure 5. Recruitment of checkpoint and end-resection factors on tailed DNA. (A) A diagram of the substrate for the DNA pull-down assay. A 3-kb plasmid was linearized with BsaI, and a hairpin adaptor carrying Cy5- and biotin-modified bases was ligated to one terminus. Another terminus was cleaved with PstI to make a 4-nt 3′-overhang, and a poly-dA tail was appended to this terminus with TdT. The resulting DNA was immobilized on biotin-Sepharose through tetrameric streptavidin as a linker. (B) The substrate shown in (A) was immobilized on beads, incubated with GST-S-LacI in NPE depleted of mock, Rad9, Mre11, or both, purified, treated with the Nb.BbvCI nickase to separate two strands, and analyzed by alkaline agarose gel electrophoresis. The DNA was visualized by SYBR-Gold (middle), and the resected DNA strand was monitored by Cy5 fluorescence (bottom). The top panel represents a superimposed image (magenta, Cy5; green, SYBR-Gold). (*) indicates substrates escaped from Nb.BbvCI digestion. (C) Immunoblotting for Chk1 phosphorylation. (*) IgG. (D) The immobilized substrate was recovered and bound proteins were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. LacI was used as a loading control. (E) Relative intensities of DNA-bound Dna2 (Top), Exo1 (middle), and Topbp1 signals (bottom) were quantified and normalized to that of the 20-min time-point of the mock-treated samples. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. (F) Bar graphs representing 20-min time points in (E). Filled circles represent individual data. Statistical significance was evaluated using the one-way analysis of variance with Dunnett's test. |
![]() |
Figure 6. Requirement of the serine 1131 phosphorylation site in Topbp1 in MRN- and 9–1–1-dependent ATR activation subpathways. (A) Immunodepletion of Topbp1 with a rescue experiment. 0.2 μl each of mock-treated (lane 1) and Topbp1-depleted NPE supplemented with either buffer (lane 2) or 150 nM of recombinant Topbp1 (WT: wild-type, lane 3; SA: S1131A, lane 4) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Orc2 was used as a loading control. (B) Poly(dA)70–(dT)70 oligonucleotides, the tailless, or the tailed substrate were incubated in NPE shown in (A), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting. (*) IgG. (C) Quantification of pChk1 signals for (B), normalized to the 20-min time-point of the mock-treated samples. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. Filled circles represent individual data. Statistical significance was evaluated using paired t-test. (D) Immunodepletion of Topbp1 and Rad9 with a Topbp1 rescue experiment. 0.2 μl each of untreated (lane 1), Rad9-depleted (lane 2) and Rad9/Topbp1-doubly-depleted NPE (lanes 3–5) supplemented with either buffer (lane 3) or 150 nM of recombinant Topbp1 (WT: wild-type, lane 4; SA: S1131A, lane 5) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Msh2 was used as a loading control. (*) IgG. (E) The tailed substrate was incubated in NPE shown in (D), and Chk1 phosphorylation was analyzed by immunoblotting. (*) IgG. (F) Quantification of pChk1 signals for (E), normalized to the 20-min time-point of the Rad9-depleted sample. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. (G) Bar graphs representing 40-min time points in (F). Filled circles represent individual data. Statistical significance was evaluated using the one-way analysis of variance with Dunnett's test. |
![]() |
Figure 7. Requirement of Topbp1 and ATR in the assembly of checkpoint complexes on tailed DNA. (A) The tailed substrate shown in Figure 5A was immobilized on beads, incubated with GST-S-LacI in NPE depleted of mock (lanes 1 and 4–7) or Topbp1 (lanes 2, 3, and 8–15) supplemented with either buffer (lanes 1, 2 and 4–11) or 300 nM recombinant Topbp1 (lanes 3 and 12–15), and recovered. Input (lanes 1–3) and DNA-bound samples (lanes 4–15) were analyzed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. LacI was used as a loading control. (B) Relative intensities of DNA-bound Rad9 (top), ATM (middle), or ATR signals (bottom) were quantified and normalized to that of the 20-min (for Rad9 and ATR) or the 2-min (for ATM) time-point of the mock-treated sample. Mean ± one SD, n = 3. Bar graphs on the right represent the mean values at the indicated time points with individual data shown by filled circles and error bars representing the ± one SD range. Statistical significance was evaluated using paired t-test. (C) Percentages of phosphorylated Mre11 relative to total Mre11 were quantified as indicated in Supplementary Figure 10B and presented as described in (B). (D) DNA pull-down assay with tailed DNA from mock- (lanes 1 and 3–6) or ATR-depleted NPE (lanes 2 and 7–10). (E) Quantification of DNA-bound Rad9 (Top), ATM (middle), and Topbp1 signals (bottom) in (D), normalized to the 20-min (for Rad9 and Topbp1) or 2-min (for ATM) time-point of the mock-treated sample and presented as described in (B). n = 3. (F) Percentages of phosphorylated Mre11 relative to total Mre11 in (D), presented as described in (C). n = 3. |
![]() |
Figure 8. A model for the 9–1–1- and MRN-dependent ATR activation and DSB end resection pathways. DSBs activate the MRN-ATM-Topbp1-dependent ATR activation pathway (47,53). After the initial DSB end resection, both the MRN and 9–1–1 pathways redundantly detect the DNA structure and stimulate Dna2-mediated DSB end resection. MRN recruits and activates ATM to induce ATR signaling. ATM facilitates the loading of Topbp1 and Dna2 and activates ATR through phosphorylation on multiple substrates including S1131 on Topbp1. 9–1–1 promotes the recruitment of Topbp1, which, in turn, stabilizes 9–1–1 and ATR. Once activated, ATR facilitates the unloading of ATM and phosphorylation of Mre11, possibly turning off the ATM pathway. See text for details. |
References [+] :
Blackford,
ATM, ATR, and DNA-PK: The Trinity at the Heart of the DNA Damage Response.
2017, Pubmed
Blackford, ATM, ATR, and DNA-PK: The Trinity at the Heart of the DNA Damage Response. 2017, Pubmed
Castaneda, Mechanisms of loading and release of the 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp. 2022, Pubmed
Cejka, DNA End Resection: Mechanism and Control. 2021, Pubmed
Cejka, DNA end resection by Dna2-Sgs1-RPA and its stimulation by Top3-Rmi1 and Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2. 2010, Pubmed
Ceppi, CtIP promotes the motor activity of DNA2 to accelerate long-range DNA end resection. 2020, Pubmed
Chen, Suppression of DNA-damage checkpoint signaling by Rsk-mediated phosphorylation of Mre11. 2013, Pubmed , Xenbase
Cortez, ATR and ATRIP: partners in checkpoint signaling. 2001, Pubmed
Day, Phosphorylation-dependent assembly of DNA damage response systems and the central roles of TOPBP1. 2021, Pubmed
Day, Structure of the human RAD17-RFC clamp loader and 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp bound to a dsDNA-ssDNA junction. 2022, Pubmed
Delacroix, The Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 (9-1-1) clamp activates checkpoint signaling via TopBP1. 2007, Pubmed
Di Virgilio, PIKK-dependent phosphorylation of Mre11 induces MRN complex inactivation by disassembly from chromatin. 2009, Pubmed , Xenbase
Duursma, A role for the MRN complex in ATR activation via TOPBP1 recruitment. 2013, Pubmed , Xenbase
Ellison, Biochemical characterization of DNA damage checkpoint complexes: clamp loader and clamp complexes with specificity for 5' recessed DNA. 2003, Pubmed
Frattini, TopBP1 assembles nuclear condensates to switch on ATR signaling. 2021, Pubmed
Furuya, Chk1 activation requires Rad9 S/TQ-site phosphorylation to promote association with C-terminal BRCT domains of Rad4TOPBP1. 2004, Pubmed
Gobbini, The 9-1-1 Complex Controls Mre11 Nuclease and Checkpoint Activation during Short-Range Resection of DNA Double-Strand Breaks. 2020, Pubmed
Gravel, DNA helicases Sgs1 and BLM promote DNA double-strand break resection. 2008, Pubmed
Hashimoto, Xenopus Cut5 is essential for a CDK-dependent process in the initiation of DNA replication. 2003, Pubmed , Xenbase
Hashimoto, The phosphorylated C-terminal domain of Xenopus Cut5 directly mediates ATR-dependent activation of Chk1. 2006, Pubmed , Xenbase
Higashi, The prereplication complex recruits XEco2 to chromatin to promote cohesin acetylation in Xenopus egg extracts. 2012, Pubmed , Xenbase
Hoogenboom, Xenopus egg extract: A powerful tool to study genome maintenance mechanisms. 2017, Pubmed , Xenbase
Huynh, NBS1 binds directly to TOPBP1 via disparate interactions between the NBS1 BRCT1 domain and the TOPBP1 BRCT1 and BRCT2 domains. 2023, Pubmed
Jazayeri, ATM- and cell cycle-dependent regulation of ATR in response to DNA double-strand breaks. 2006, Pubmed
Karanja, DNA2 and EXO1 in replication-coupled, homology-directed repair and in the interplay between HDR and the FA/BRCA network. 2012, Pubmed , Xenbase
Käshammer, Mechanism of DNA End Sensing and Processing by the Mre11-Rad50 Complex. 2019, Pubmed
Kawasoe, The Atad5 RFC-like complex is the major unloader of proliferating cell nuclear antigen in Xenopus egg extracts. 2024, Pubmed
Kawasoe, MutSα maintains the mismatch repair capability by inhibiting PCNA unloading. 2016, Pubmed , Xenbase
Kijas, ATM-dependent phosphorylation of MRE11 controls extent of resection during homology directed repair by signalling through Exonuclease 1. 2015, Pubmed
Kim, Biochemical analysis of TOPBP1 oligomerization. 2020, Pubmed , Xenbase
Kumagai, TopBP1 activates the ATR-ATRIP complex. 2006, Pubmed , Xenbase
Kumar, Lagging strand maturation factor Dna2 is a component of the replication checkpoint initiation machinery. 2013, Pubmed
Lee, Cellular functions of the protein kinase ATM and their relevance to human disease. 2021, Pubmed
Lee, The Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 (MRN) complex has a specific role in the activation of Chk1 in response to stalled replication forks. 2013, Pubmed , Xenbase
Lee, The Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 checkpoint clamp regulates interaction of TopBP1 with ATR. 2007, Pubmed , Xenbase
Li, Plk1 Phosphorylation of Mre11 Antagonizes the DNA Damage Response. 2017, Pubmed , Xenbase
Liao, Analysis of MRE11's function in the 5'-->3' processing of DNA double-strand breaks. 2012, Pubmed , Xenbase
Liao, Identification of the Xenopus DNA2 protein as a major nuclease for the 5'->3' strand-specific processing of DNA ends. 2008, Pubmed , Xenbase
MacDougall, The structural determinants of checkpoint activation. 2007, Pubmed , Xenbase
Majka, Replication protein A directs loading of the DNA damage checkpoint clamp to 5'-DNA junctions. 2006, Pubmed
Mehta, Sources of DNA double-strand breaks and models of recombinational DNA repair. 2014, Pubmed
Mimitou, Sae2, Exo1 and Sgs1 collaborate in DNA double-strand break processing. 2008, Pubmed
Montales, MRN-dependent and independent pathways for recruitment of TOPBP1 to DNA double-strand breaks. 2022, Pubmed , Xenbase
Mordes, Dpb11 activates the Mec1-Ddc2 complex. 2008, Pubmed
Mordes, TopBP1 activates ATR through ATRIP and a PIKK regulatory domain. 2008, Pubmed
Myler, Single-Molecule Imaging Reveals How Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 Initiates DNA Break Repair. 2017, Pubmed
Ngo, The 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp coordinates resection at DNA double strand breaks. 2015, Pubmed
Ngo, The 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp stimulates DNA resection by Dna2-Sgs1 and Exo1. 2014, Pubmed
Nicolette, Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 and Sae2 promote 5' strand resection of DNA double-strand breaks. 2010, Pubmed
Nimonkar, BLM-DNA2-RPA-MRN and EXO1-BLM-RPA-MRN constitute two DNA end resection machineries for human DNA break repair. 2011, Pubmed
Ohashi, Interaction between Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 and TopBP1 activates ATR-ATRIP and promotes TopBP1 recruitment to sites of UV-damage. 2014, Pubmed
Olson, The Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 complex acts both upstream and downstream of ataxia telangiectasia mutated and Rad3-related protein (ATR) to regulate the S-phase checkpoint following UV treatment. 2007, Pubmed
Peritore, Strand-specific ChIP-seq at DNA breaks distinguishes ssDNA versus dsDNA binding and refutes single-stranded nucleosomes. 2021, Pubmed
Reginato, The MRE11 complex: A versatile toolkit for the repair of broken DNA. 2020, Pubmed
Roos-Mattjus, Phosphorylation of human Rad9 is required for genotoxin-activated checkpoint signaling. 2003, Pubmed
Saldivar, The essential kinase ATR: ensuring faithful duplication of a challenging genome. 2017, Pubmed
Shiotani, Two distinct modes of ATR activation orchestrated by Rad17 and Nbs1. 2013, Pubmed
Shiotani, Single-stranded DNA orchestrates an ATM-to-ATR switch at DNA breaks. 2009, Pubmed
Soniat, The MRN complex and topoisomerase IIIa-RMI1/2 synchronize DNA resection motor proteins. 2023, Pubmed
St Onge, DNA damage-dependent and -independent phosphorylation of the hRad9 checkpoint protein. 2001, Pubmed
St Onge, A role for the phosphorylation of hRad9 in checkpoint signaling. 2003, Pubmed
Sturzenegger, DNA2 cooperates with the WRN and BLM RecQ helicases to mediate long-range DNA end resection in human cells. 2014, Pubmed
Syed, The MRE11-RAD50-NBS1 Complex Conducts the Orchestration of Damage Signaling and Outcomes to Stress in DNA Replication and Repair. 2018, Pubmed
Takeishi, Casein kinase 2-dependent phosphorylation of human Rad9 mediates the interaction between human Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 complex and TopBP1. 2010, Pubmed
Terui, Nucleosomes around a mismatched base pair are excluded via an Msh2-dependent reaction with the aid of SNF2 family ATPase Smarcad1. 2018, Pubmed , Xenbase
Thangavel, DNA2 drives processing and restart of reversed replication forks in human cells. 2015, Pubmed
Tsai, The checkpoint clamp protein Rad9 facilitates DNA-end resection and prevents alternative non-homologous end joining. 2014, Pubmed
Vidal-Eychenié, DNA structure-specific priming of ATR activation by DNA-PKcs. 2013, Pubmed
Wanrooij, Probing the Mec1ATR Checkpoint Activation Mechanism with Small Peptides. 2016, Pubmed
Wardlaw, TopBP1: A BRCT-scaffold protein functioning in multiple cellular pathways. 2014, Pubmed
Waterman, Checkpoint Responses to DNA Double-Strand Breaks. 2020, Pubmed
Wawrousek, Xenopus DNA2 is a helicase/nuclease that is found in complexes with replication proteins And-1/Ctf4 and Mcm10 and DSB response proteins Nbs1 and ATM. 2010, Pubmed , Xenbase
Yan, Analysis of the Xenopus Werner syndrome protein in DNA double-strand break repair. 2005, Pubmed , Xenbase
Yoo, The Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 complex mediates activation of TopBP1 by ATM. 2009, Pubmed , Xenbase
Yoo, Ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM)-dependent activation of ATR occurs through phosphorylation of TopBP1 by ATM. 2007, Pubmed , Xenbase
Zhao, The molecular basis and disease relevance of non-homologous DNA end joining. 2020, Pubmed
Zheng, DNA is loaded through the 9-1-1 DNA checkpoint clamp in the opposite direction of the PCNA clamp. 2022, Pubmed
Zhong, Rad50 depletion impacts upon ATR-dependent DNA damage responses. 2005, Pubmed
Zhu, Sgs1 helicase and two nucleases Dna2 and Exo1 resect DNA double-strand break ends. 2008, Pubmed
Zou, Sensing DNA damage through ATRIP recognition of RPA-ssDNA complexes. 2003, Pubmed