ATR protects ongoing and newly assembled DNA replication forks through distinct mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ATR kinase safeguards genomic integrity during S phase, but how ATR protects DNA replication forks remains incompletely understood. Here, we combine four distinct assays to analyze ATR functions at ongoing and newly assembled replication forks upon replication inhibition by hydroxyurea. At ongoing forks, ATR inhibitor (ATRi) increases MRE11- and EXO1-mediated nascent DNA degradation from PrimPol-generated, single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) gaps. ATRi also exposes template ssDNA through fork uncoupling and nascent DNA degradation. Electron microscopy reveals that ATRi reduces reversed forks by increasing gap-dependent nascent DNA degradation. At new forks, ATRi triggers MRE11- and CtIP-initiated template DNA degradation by EXO1, exposing nascent ssDNA. Upon PARP inhibition, ATRi preferentially exacerbates gap-dependent nascent DNA degradation at ongoing forks in BRCA1/2-deficient cells and disrupts the restored gap protection in BRCA1-deficient, PARP-inhibitor-resistant cells. Thus, ATR protects ongoing and new forks through distinct mechanisms, providing an extended view of ATR's functions in stabilizing replication forks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".