Characterization of G1 checkpoint control in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae following exposure to DNA-damaging agents.

doi:10.1093/genetics/138.2.271

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Back to search

Article

Characterization of G1 checkpoint control in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae following exposure to DNA-damaging agents.

Genetics - 1 Oct 1994

Siede W, Friedberg A S, Dianova I, Friedberg E C

Abstract excerpt

The delay of S-phase following treatment of yeast cells with DNA-damaging agents is an actively regulated response that requires functional RAD9 and RAD24 genes. An analysis of cell cycle arrest indicates the existence of (at least) two checkpoints for damaged DNA prior to S-phase; one at START (a G1 checkpoint characterized by pheromone sensitivity of arrested cells) and one between the CDC4- and CDC7-mediated...

Topics

Cell Cycle
Cell Cycle Proteins
DNA Damage
DNA-Binding Proteins
Endodeoxyribonucleases
Flow Cytometry
Fungal Proteins
G1 Phase
Gene Deletion
Genes, Fungal
Genotype

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Intracellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins

Mating Factor

Peptide Biosynthesis

Peptides

Pheromones

Restriction Mapping

Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 7828811
DOI: 10.1093/genetics/138.2.271
PMCID: PMC1206146

Genes

CDC7

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 29 Aug 2026. Prepared record publication-7828811-2026-08-29.1. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-08-29.1.

Source receipt: PubMed via Helena Literature Corpus, retrieved 29 Aug 2026.

Community interpretation

Discuss the evidence

Ask a question, add context or challenge an interpretation. Community activity is separate from scientific evidence strength.

discussions

replies

Citations encouraged

Claims remain attributable.

No discussion yet

Be the first to add a careful, cited interpretation.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Characterization of G1 checkpoint control in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae following exposure to DNA-damaging agents.PMID 7828811Read ↗

Checkpoint controls in Schizosaccharomyces pombe: rad1.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Cisplatin DNA cross-links do not inhibit S-phase and cause only a G2/M arrest in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.Semantic proximity Read ↗

DNA repair mutants defining G2 checkpoint pathways in Schizosaccharomyces pombe.Semantic proximity Read ↗

S-phase-specific activation of Cds1 kinase defines a subpathway of the checkpoint response in Schizosaccharomyces pombe.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The Schizosaccharomyces pombe S-phase checkpoint differentiates between different types of DNA damage.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Induction of a G1-S checkpoint in fission yeast.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Characterization of RAD9 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and evidence that its function acts posttranslationally in cell cycle arrest after DNA damage.Semantic proximity Read ↗

S-phase checkpoint activity and function throughout the cell cycleSemantic proximity Read ↗

Mitotic checkpoint genes in budding yeast and the dependence of mitosis on DNA replication and repair.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Radiation checkpoints in model systems.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Cloning and characterization of RAD17, a gene controlling cell cycle responses to DNA damage in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Cell cycle arrest of cdc mutants and specificity of the RAD9 checkpoint.Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.