FANCJ helicase promotes DNA end resection by facilitating CtIP recruitment to DNA double-strand breaks
Autoři:
Sarmi Nath aff001; Ganesh Nagaraju aff001
Působiště autorů:
Department of Biochemistry, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
aff001
Vyšlo v časopise:
FANCJ helicase promotes DNA end resection by facilitating CtIP recruitment to DNA double-strand breaks. PLoS Genet 16(4): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1008701
Kategorie:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1008701
Souhrn
FANCJ helicase mutations are known to cause hereditary breast and ovarian cancers as well as bone marrow failure syndrome Fanconi anemia. FANCJ plays an important role in the repair of DNA inter-strand crosslinks and DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) by homologous recombination (HR). Nonetheless, the molecular mechanism by which FANCJ controls HR mediated DSB repair is obscure. Here, we show that FANCJ promotes DNA end resection by recruiting CtIP to the sites of DSBs. This recruitment of CtIP is dependent on FANCJ K1249 acetylation. Notably, FANCJ acetylation is dependent on FANCJ S990 phosphorylation by CDK. The CDK mediated phosphorylation of FANCJ independently facilitates its interaction with BRCA1 at damaged DNA sites and promotes DNA end resection by CtIP recruitment. Strikingly, mutational studies reveal that ATP binding competent but hydrolysis deficient FANCJ partially supports end resection, indicating that in addition to the scaffolding role of FANCJ in CtIP recruitment, its helicase activity is important for promoting end resection. Together, these data unravel a novel function of FANCJ helicase in DNA end resection and provide mechanistic insights into its role in repairing DSBs by HR and in genome maintenance.
Klíčová slova:
Acetylation – Cell staining – Co-immunoprecipitation – Fluorescence imaging – Helicases – Immunoprecipitation – Phosphorylation – Polymerase chain reaction
Zdroje
1. Aguilera A, Garcia-Muse T. Causes of genome instability. Annu Rev Genet. 2013;47:1–32. doi: 10.1146/annurev-genet-111212-133232 23909437.
2. O'Driscoll M, Jeggo PA. The role of double-strand break repair—insights from human genetics. Nat Rev Genet. 2006;7(1):45–54. doi: 10.1038/nrg1746 16369571.
3. Somyajit K, Subramanya S, Nagaraju G. RAD51C: a novel cancer susceptibility gene is linked to Fanconi anemia and breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2010;31(12):2031–8. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgq210 20952512; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2994284.
4. Ciccia A, Elledge SJ. The DNA damage response: making it safe to play with knives. Mol Cell. 2010;40(2):179–204. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.09.019 20965415; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2988877.
5. Moynahan ME, Jasin M. Mitotic homologous recombination maintains genomic stability and suppresses tumorigenesis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2010;11(3):196–207. doi: 10.1038/nrm2851 20177395; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3261768.
6. Hartlerode AJ, Scully R. Mechanisms of double-strand break repair in somatic mammalian cells. Biochem J. 2009;423(2):157–68. doi: 10.1042/BJ20090942 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2983087. 19772495
7. Wright WD, Shah SS, Heyer WD. Homologous recombination and the repair of DNA double-strand breaks. J Biol Chem. 2018;293(27):10524–35. doi: 10.1074/jbc.TM118.000372 29599286; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6036207.
8. Heyer WD. Regulation of recombination and genomic maintenance. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2015;7(8):a016501. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a016501 26238353; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4526751.
9. Symington LS. End resection at double-strand breaks: mechanism and regulation. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2014;6(8). doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a016436 25085909.
10. Ranjha L, Howard SM, Cejka P. Main steps in DNA double-strand break repair: an introduction to homologous recombination and related processes. Chromosoma. 2018;127(2):187–214. doi: 10.1007/s00412-017-0658-1 29327130.
11. Cejka P. DNA End Resection: Nucleases Team Up with the Right Partners to Initiate Homologous Recombination. J Biol Chem. 2015;290(38):22931–8. doi: 10.1074/jbc.R115.675942 26231213; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4645618.
12. Daley JM, Niu H, Miller AS, Sung P. Biochemical mechanism of DSB end resection and its regulation. DNA Repair (Amst). 2015;32:66–74. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2015.04.015 25956866; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4522330.
13. San Filippo J, Sung P, Klein H. Mechanism of eukaryotic homologous recombination. Annu Rev Biochem. 2008;77:229–57. doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.77.061306.125255 18275380.
14. Zhao W, Steinfeld JB, Liang F, Chen X, Maranon DG, Jian Ma C, et al. BRCA1-BARD1 promotes RAD51-mediated homologous DNA pairing. Nature. 2017;550(7676):360–5. doi: 10.1038/nature24060 28976962; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5800781.
15. Yazinski SA, Zou L. Functions, Regulation, and Therapeutic Implications of the ATR Checkpoint Pathway. Annu Rev Genet. 2016;50:155–73. doi: 10.1146/annurev-genet-121415-121658 27617969.
16. Brosh RM Jr., Cantor SB. Molecular and cellular functions of the FANCJ DNA helicase defective in cancer and in Fanconi anemia. Front Genet. 2014;5:372. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2014.00372 25374583; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4204437.
17. Ceccaldi R, Sarangi P, D'Andrea AD. The Fanconi anaemia pathway: new players and new functions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2016;17(6):337–49. doi: 10.1038/nrm.2016.48 27145721.
18. Litman R, Peng M, Jin Z, Zhang F, Zhang J, Powell S, et al. BACH1 is critical for homologous recombination and appears to be the Fanconi anemia gene product FANCJ. Cancer Cell. 2005;8(3):255–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2005.08.004 16153896.
19. Nath S, Somyajit K, Mishra A, Scully R, Nagaraju G. FANCJ helicase controls the balance between short- and long-tract gene conversions between sister chromatids. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45(15):8886–900. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx586 28911102; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5587752.
20. Wu Y, Shin-ya K, Brosh RM Jr. FANCJ helicase defective in Fanconia anemia and breast cancer unwinds G-quadruplex DNA to defend genomic stability. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28(12):4116–28. doi: 10.1128/MCB.02210-07 18426915; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2423121.
21. Guillemette S, Branagan A, Peng M, Dhruva A, Scharer OD, Cantor SB. FANCJ localization by mismatch repair is vital to maintain genomic integrity after UV irradiation. Cancer Res. 2014;74(3):932–44. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-2474 24351291.
22. Barthelemy J, Hanenberg H, Leffak M. FANCJ is essential to maintain microsatellite structure genome-wide during replication stress. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(14):6803–16. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw433 27179029; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5001596.
23. Peng M, Cong K, Panzarino NJ, Nayak S, Calvo J, Deng B, et al. Opposing Roles of FANCJ and HLTF Protect Forks and Restrain Replication during Stress. Cell Rep. 2018;24(12):3251–61. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.08.065 30232006; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6218949.
24. Zhou Y, Caron P, Legube G, Paull TT. Quantitation of DNA double-strand break resection intermediates in human cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42(3):e19. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1309 24362840; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3919611.
25. Liu S, Opiyo SO, Manthey K, Glanzer JG, Ashley AK, Amerin C, et al. Distinct roles for DNA-PK, ATM and ATR in RPA phosphorylation and checkpoint activation in response to replication stress. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(21):10780–94. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks849 22977173; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3510507.
26. Daley JM, Jimenez-Sainz J, Wang W, Miller AS, Xue X, Nguyen KA, et al. Enhancement of BLM-DNA2-Mediated Long-Range DNA End Resection by CtIP. Cell Rep. 2017;21(2):324–32. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.09.048 29020620; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5689478.
27. Daley JM, Sung P. 53BP1, BRCA1, and the choice between recombination and end joining at DNA double-strand breaks. Mol Cell Biol. 2014;34(8):1380–8. doi: 10.1128/MCB.01639-13 24469398; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3993578.
28. Callen E, Zong D, Wu W, Wong N, Stanlie A, Ishikawa M, et al. 53BP1 Enforces Distinct Pre- and Post-resection Blocks on Homologous Recombination. Mol Cell. 2020;77(1):26–38 e7. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2019.09.024 31653568.
29. Sartori AA, Lukas C, Coates J, Mistrik M, Fu S, Bartek J, et al. Human CtIP promotes DNA end resection. Nature. 2007;450(7169):509–14. doi: 10.1038/nature06337 17965729; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2409435.
30. You Z, Shi LZ, Zhu Q, Wu P, Zhang YW, Basilio A, et al. CtIP links DNA double-strand break sensing to resection. Mol Cell. 2009;36(6):954–69. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.12.002 20064462; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2807415.
31. Gravel S, Chapman JR, Magill C, Jackson SP. DNA helicases Sgs1 and BLM promote DNA double-strand break resection. Genes Dev. 2008;22(20):2767–72. doi: 10.1101/gad.503108 18923075; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2569880.
32. Nimonkar AV, Genschel J, Kinoshita E, Polaczek P, Campbell JL, Wyman C, et al. BLM-DNA2-RPA-MRN and EXO1-BLM-RPA-MRN constitute two DNA end resection machineries for human DNA break repair. Genes Dev. 2011;25(4):350–62. doi: 10.1101/gad.2003811 21325134; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3042158.
33. Suhasini AN, Sommers JA, Muniandy PA, Coulombe Y, Cantor SB, Masson JY, et al. Fanconi anemia group J helicase and MRE11 nuclease interact to facilitate the DNA damage response. Mol Cell Biol. 2013;33(11):2212–27. doi: 10.1128/MCB.01256-12 23530059; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3648079.
34. Cantor SB, Bell DW, Ganesan S, Kass EM, Drapkin R, Grossman S, et al. BACH1, a novel helicase-like protein, interacts directly with BRCA1 and contributes to its DNA repair function. Cell. 2001;105(1):149–60. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(01)00304-x 11301010.
35. Suhasini AN, Rawtani NA, Wu Y, Sommers JA, Sharma S, Mosedale G, et al. Interaction between the helicases genetically linked to Fanconi anemia group J and Bloom's syndrome. EMBO J. 2011;30(4):692–705. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2010.362 21240188; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3041957.
36. Peng M, Litman R, Xie J, Sharma S, Brosh RM Jr, Cantor SB. The FANCJ/MutLalpha interaction is required for correction of the cross-link response in FA-J cells. EMBO J. 2007;26(13):3238–49. doi: 10.1038/sj.emboj.7601754 17581638; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1914102.
37. Moynahan ME, Chiu JW, Koller BH, Jasin M. Brca1 controls homology-directed DNA repair. Mol Cell. 1999;4(4):511–8. doi: 10.1016/s1097-2765(00)80202-6 10549283.
38. Yu X, Chini CC, He M, Mer G, Chen J. The BRCT domain is a phospho-protein binding domain. Science. 2003;302(5645):639–42. doi: 10.1126/science.1088753 14576433.
39. Xie J, Peng M, Guillemette S, Quan S, Maniatis S, Wu Y, et al. FANCJ/BACH1 acetylation at lysine 1249 regulates the DNA damage response. PLoS Genet. 2012;8(7):e1002786. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002786 22792074; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3390368.
40. Yu X, Chen J. DNA damage-induced cell cycle checkpoint control requires CtIP, a phosphorylation-dependent binding partner of BRCA1 C-terminal domains. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24(21):9478–86. doi: 10.1128/MCB.24.21.9478-9486.2004 PubMed Central PMCID: PMC522253. 15485915
41. Yu X, Wu LC, Bowcock AM, Aronheim A, Baer R. The C-terminal (BRCT) domains of BRCA1 interact in vivo with CtIP, a protein implicated in the CtBP pathway of transcriptional repression. J Biol Chem. 1998;273(39):25388–92. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.39.25388 9738006.
42. Huertas P, Jackson SP. Human CtIP mediates cell cycle control of DNA end resection and double strand break repair. J Biol Chem. 2009;284(14):9558–65. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M808906200 19202191; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2666608.
43. Wu Y, Sommers JA, Suhasini AN, Leonard T, Deakyne JS, Mazin AV, et al. Fanconi anemia group J mutation abolishes its DNA repair function by uncoupling DNA translocation from helicase activity or disruption of protein-DNA complexes. Blood. 2010;116(19):3780–91. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-11-256016 20639400; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2981534.
44. Symington LS, Gautier J. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu Rev Genet. 2011;45:247–71. doi: 10.1146/annurev-genet-110410-132435 21910633.
45. Makharashvili N, Paull TT. CtIP: A DNA damage response protein at the intersection of DNA metabolism. DNA Repair (Amst). 2015;32:75–81. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2015.04.016 25957490.
46. Andres SN, Williams RS. CtIP/Ctp1/Sae2, molecular form fit for function. DNA Repair (Amst). 2017;56:109–17. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2017.06.013 28623092; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5543718.
47. Lu H, Shamanna RA, Keijzers G, Anand R, Rasmussen LJ, Cejka P, et al. RECQL4 Promotes DNA End Resection in Repair of DNA Double-Strand Breaks. Cell Rep. 2016;16(1):161–73. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.05.079 27320928; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5576896.
48. Daddacha W, Koyen AE, Bastien AJ, Head PE, Dhere VR, Nabeta GN, et al. SAMHD1 Promotes DNA End Resection to Facilitate DNA Repair by Homologous Recombination. Cell Rep. 2017;20(8):1921–35. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.08.008 28834754; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5576576.
49. Chen Y, Liu H, Zhang H, Sun C, Hu Z, Tian Q, et al. And-1 coordinates with CtIP for efficient homologous recombination and DNA damage checkpoint maintenance. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45(5):2516–30. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw1212 27940552; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5389581.
50. Hwang SY, Kang MA, Baik CJ, Lee Y, Hang NT, Kim BG, et al. CTCF cooperates with CtIP to drive homologous recombination repair of double-strand breaks. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz639 31340001.
51. Lou J, Chen H, Han J, He H, Huen MSY, Feng XH, et al. AUNIP/C1orf135 directs DNA double-strand breaks towards the homologous recombination repair pathway. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):985. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-01151-w 29042561; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5645412.
52. Savage KI, Harkin DP. BRCA1, a 'complex' protein involved in the maintenance of genomic stability. FEBS J. 2015;282(4):630–46. doi: 10.1111/febs.13150 25400280.
53. Tomimatsu N, Mukherjee B, Catherine Hardebeck M, Ilcheva M, Vanessa Camacho C, Louise Harris J, et al. Phosphorylation of EXO1 by CDKs 1 and 2 regulates DNA end resection and repair pathway choice. Nat Commun. 2014;5:3561. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4561 24705021; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4041212.
54. Lu H, Shamanna RA, de Freitas JK, Okur M, Khadka P, Kulikowicz T, et al. Cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation regulates RECQL4 pathway choice and ubiquitination in DNA double-strand break repair. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):2039. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02146-3 29229926; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5725494.
55. Yun MH, Hiom K. CtIP-BRCA1 modulates the choice of DNA double-strand-break repair pathway throughout the cell cycle. Nature. 2009;459(7245):460–3. doi: 10.1038/nature07955 19357644; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2857324.
56. Escribano-Diaz C, Orthwein A, Fradet-Turcotte A, Xing M, Young JT, Tkac J, et al. A cell cycle-dependent regulatory circuit composed of 53BP1-RIF1 and BRCA1-CtIP controls DNA repair pathway choice. Mol Cell. 2013;49(5):872–83. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.01.001 23333306.
57. Reczek CR, Szabolcs M, Stark JM, Ludwig T, Baer R. The interaction between CtIP and BRCA1 is not essential for resection-mediated DNA repair or tumor suppression. J Cell Biol. 2013;201(5):693–707. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201302145 23712259; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3664708.
58. Polato F, Callen E, Wong N, Faryabi R, Bunting S, Chen HT, et al. CtIP-mediated resection is essential for viability and can operate independently of BRCA1. J Exp Med. 2014;211(6):1027–36. doi: 10.1084/jem.20131939 24842372; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4042650.
59. Cruz-Garcia A, Lopez-Saavedra A, Huertas P. BRCA1 accelerates CtIP-mediated DNA-end resection. Cell Rep. 2014;9(2):451–9. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.08.076 25310973.
60. Jiang Q, Greenberg RA. Deciphering the BRCA1 Tumor Suppressor Network. J Biol Chem. 2015;290(29):17724–32. doi: 10.1074/jbc.R115.667931 26048987; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4505021.
61. Nagaraju G, Scully R. Minding the gap: the underground functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 at stalled replication forks. DNA Repair (Amst). 2007;6(7):1018–31. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2007.02.020 17379580; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2989184.
62. Greenberg RA, Sobhian B, Pathania S, Cantor SB, Nakatani Y, Livingston DM. Multifactorial contributions to an acute DNA damage response by BRCA1/BARD1-containing complexes. Genes Dev. 2006;20(1):34–46. doi: 10.1101/gad.1381306 16391231; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1356099.
63. Li ML, Greenberg RA. Links between genome integrity and BRCA1 tumor suppression. Trends Biochem Sci. 2012;37(10):418–24. doi: 10.1016/j.tibs.2012.06.007 22836122; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3459146.
64. Cantor S, Drapkin R, Zhang F, Lin Y, Han J, Pamidi S, et al. The BRCA1-associated protein BACH1 is a DNA helicase targeted by clinically relevant inactivating mutations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(8):2357–62. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0308717101 14983014; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC356955.
65. Gupta R, Sharma S, Sommers JA, Jin Z, Cantor SB, Brosh RM Jr. Analysis of the DNA substrate specificity of the human BACH1 helicase associated with breast cancer. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(27):25450–60. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M501995200 15878853.
66. Sharma S, Sommers JA, Choudhary S, Faulkner JK, Cui S, Andreoli L, et al. Biochemical analysis of the DNA unwinding and strand annealing activities catalyzed by human RECQ1. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(30):28072–84. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M500264200 15899892.
67. Theissen B, Karow AR, Kohler J, Gubaev A, Klostermeier D. Cooperative binding of ATP and RNA induces a closed conformation in a DEAD box RNA helicase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(2):548–53. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0705488105 18184816; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2206573.
68. Verma P, Greenberg RA. Noncanonical views of homology-directed DNA repair. Genes Dev. 2016;30(10):1138–54. doi: 10.1101/gad.280545.116 27222516; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4888836.
69. Juhasz S, Elbakry A, Mathes A, Lobrich M. ATRX Promotes DNA Repair Synthesis and Sister Chromatid Exchange during Homologous Recombination. Mol Cell. 2018;71(1):11–24 e7. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.014 29937341.
70. Puget N, Knowlton M, Scully R. Molecular analysis of sister chromatid recombination in mammalian cells. DNA Repair (Amst). 2005;4(2):149–61. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2004.08.010 15590323; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2967438.
71. Nagaraju G, Odate S, Xie A, Scully R. Differential regulation of short- and long-tract gene conversion between sister chromatids by Rad51C. Mol Cell Biol. 2006;26(21):8075–86. doi: 10.1128/MCB.01235-06 16954385; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1636746.
72. Fattah F, Lee EH, Weisensel N, Wang Y, Lichter N, Hendrickson EA. Ku regulates the non-homologous end joining pathway choice of DNA double-strand break repair in human somatic cells. PLoS Genet. 2010;6(2):e1000855. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000855 20195511; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2829059.
73. Somyajit K, Mishra A, Jameei A, Nagaraju G. Enhanced non-homologous end joining contributes toward synthetic lethality of pathological RAD51C mutants with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase. Carcinogenesis. 2015;36(1):13–24. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgu211 25292178.
74. Saxena S, Somyajit K, Nagaraju G. XRCC2 Regulates Replication Fork Progression during dNTP Alterations. Cell Rep. 2018;25(12):3273–82 e6. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.11.085 30566856.
75. Lee KY, Im JS, Shibata E, Park J, Handa N, Kowalczykowski SC, et al. MCM8-9 complex promotes resection of double-strand break ends by MRE11-RAD50-NBS1 complex. Nat Commun. 2015;6:7744. doi: 10.1038/ncomms8744 26215093; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4525285.
76. Somyajit K, Basavaraju S, Scully R, Nagaraju G. ATM- and ATR-mediated phosphorylation of XRCC3 regulates DNA double-strand break-induced checkpoint activation and repair. Mol Cell Biol. 2013;33(9):1830–44. doi: 10.1128/MCB.01521-12 23438602; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3624173.
Článek vyšel v časopise
PLOS Genetics
2020 Číslo 4
- Případ Bulovka: Jak postupují jiné nemocnice, aby podobným tragédiím zabránily?
- Jak často se u masových střelců vyskytují duševní choroby?
- Zvoní budík? Přispěte si ještě chvilku, bude vám to myslet rychleji!
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
- Není statin jako statin aneb praktický přehled rozdílů jednotlivých molekul
Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
- Analysis of genes within the schizophrenia-linked 22q11.2 deletion identifies interaction of night owl/LZTR1 and NF1 in GABAergic sleep control
- Spastin mutations impair coordination between lipid droplet dispersion and reticulum
- High expression in maize pollen correlates with genetic contributions to pollen fitness as well as with coordinated transcription from neighboring transposable elements
- Is imprinting the result of “friendly fire” by the host defense system?