↓ Skip to main content

Precise repair of mPing excision sites is facilitated by target site duplication derived microhomology

Overview of attention for article published in Mobile DNA, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Precise repair of mPing excision sites is facilitated by target site duplication derived microhomology
Published in
Mobile DNA, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13100-015-0046-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

David M. Gilbert, M. Catherine Bridges, Ashley E. Strother, Courtney E. Burckhalter, James M. Burnette, C. Nathan Hancock

Abstract

A key difference between the Tourist and Stowaway families of miniature inverted repeat transposable elements (MITEs) is the manner in which their excision alters the genome. Upon excision, Stowaway-like MITEs and the associated Mariner elements usually leave behind a small duplication and short sequences from the end of the element. These small insertions or deletions known as "footprints" can potentially disrupt coding or regulatory sequences. In contrast, Tourist-like MITEs and the associated PIF/Pong/Harbinger elements generally excise precisely, returning the genome to its original state. The purpose of this study was to determine the mechanisms underlying these excision differences, including the role of the host DNA repair mechanisms. The transposition of the Tourist-like element, mPing, and the Stowaway-like element, 14T32, were evaluated using yeast transposition assays. Assays performed in yeast strains lacking non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) enzymes indicated that the excision sites of both elements were primarily repaired by NHEJ. Altering the target site duplication (TSD) sequences that flank these elements reduced the transposition frequency. Using yeast strains with the ability to repair the excision site by homologous repair showed that some TSD changes disrupt excision of the element. Changing the ends of mPing to produce non-matching TSDs drastically reduced repair of the excision site and resulted in increased generation of footprints. Together these results indicate that the difference in Tourist and Stowaway excision sites results from transposition mechanism characteristics. The TSDs of both elements play a role in element excision, but only the mPing TSDs actively participate in excision site repair. Our data suggests that Tourist-like elements excise with staggered cleavage of the TSDs, which provides microhomology that facilitates precise repair. This slight modification in the transposition mechanism results in more efficient repair of the double stranded break, and thus, may be less harmful to host genomes by disrupting fewer genes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 31%
Other 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 19%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 September 2015.
All research outputs
#13,446,606
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Mobile DNA
#241
of 336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,372
of 267,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mobile DNA
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 267,706 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.