DNA damage checkpoints balance a tradeoff between diploid- and polyploid-derived arrest failures
Abstract
The DNA damage checkpoint system ensures genomic integrity by preventing the division of damaged cells. This system operates primarily through the G1/S and G2/M checkpoints, which are susceptible to failure; how these checkpoints coordinate quantitatively to ensure optimal cellular outcomes remains unclear. In this study, we exposed non-cancerous human cells to exogenous DNA damage and used single-cell imaging to monitor spontaneous arrest failure. We discovered that cells fail to arrest in two major paths, resulting in two types with distinct characteristics, including ploidy, nuclear morphology, and micronuclei composition. Computational simulations and experiments revealed strengthening one checkpoint reduced one mode of arrest failure but increased the other, leading to a critical tradeoff for optimizing total arrest failure rates. Our findings suggest optimal checkpoint strengths for minimizing total error are inherently suboptimal for any single failure type, elucidating the systemic cause of genomic instability and tetraploid-like cells in response to DNA damage HighlightsO_LIArrest-failed cells result from two routes, each leading to a distinct type C_LIO_LIThese types differ in nuclear morphology, size, ploidy and micronuclei composition C_LIO_LIStrengthening one checkpoint reduces one arrest-failure type but increases the other C_LIO_LITotal error is minimized when checkpoint strengths are suboptimal for each type C_LI eTOCSingle-cell quantitative analyses and computational simulations reveal that the DNA damage checkpoint system balances a tradeoff between reducing arrest failure from diploid cells and from damage-induced polyploid cells. The study suggests that to minimize total arrest failure, the checkpoint strengths need to be sub-optimal for each individual arrest-failure type.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 4
- FWCI
- 1.21
- Field percentile
- top 22%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Checkpoint non-fidelity induces a complex landscape of lineage fitness after DNA damage
Callum J. Campbell, Ashok R. Venkitaraman, Alessandro Esposito·bioRxiv·Oct 2, 2018
- CELL CYCLE ASYNCHRONY GENERATES DNA DAMAGE AT MITOTIC ENTRY IN POLYPLOID CELLS
- DNA Damage Checkpoint Dynamics Drive Cell Cycle Phase Transitions
Hui Xiao Chao, Cere E. Poovey, … Jeremy E. Purvis·bioRxiv·Aug 4, 2017
- Prolonged Cell Cycle Arrest in Response to DNA damage in Yeast Requires the Maintenance of DNA Damage Signaling and the Spindle Assembly Checkpoint
Felix Y. Zhou, David P. Waterman, … James E. Haber·eLifePeer-reviewed·Dec 10, 2024
- The mechanism of checkpoint-dependent DNA replication fork stabilization in human cells
Agostina P. Bertolin, Berta Canal, … John F.X. Diffley·Molecular CellPeer-reviewed·Jun 26, 2025
- Persistent DNA Repair Signaling and DNA Polymerase Theta Promote Broken Chromosome Segregation
D. E. Clay, H. S. Bretscher, … D. T. Fox·bioRxiv·Jun 18, 2021