Abstract
Background: DNA replication fork rescue requires the action of DNA helicases to regress the fork. Results: RecG is more active than RuvAB on substrates that mimic nascent stalled forks, whereas RuvAB is active on Holliday junctions. Conclusion: RecG in concert with SSB regresses stalledDNAreplication forks, producingDNAsubstrates to which RuvAB can bind. Significance: RecG, not RuvAB, regresses stalled DNA replication forks.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 26397-26409 |
Number of pages | 13 |
Journal | Journal of Biological Chemistry |
Volume | 288 |
Issue number | 37 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Sep 13 2013 |
Externally published | Yes |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Biochemistry
- Molecular Biology
- Cell Biology