Skip to content

Now that I've gathered all the necessary information, let me provide a comprehensive review of the GO-CAM model with ID 613aae0000001005.

Review of GO-CAM Model 613aae0000001005 ("SP-ANN-RECQL5")

Overview

This GO-CAM model (available at https://bioregistry.io/go.model:613aae0000001005) focuses on the role of RECQL5 helicase in DNA replication and repair, with a focus on interactions with DNA recombination proteins like RAD51 and the endonuclease MUS81, regulated by CDK1 kinase activity.

Summary of Key Components

  1. RECQL5 helicase activity (GO:0004386) enabled by UniProtKB:O94762 (RECQL5)
  2. Single-stranded DNA binding (GO:0003697) enabled by UniProtKB:Q06609 (RAD51)
  3. Endonuclease activity (GO:0004519) enabled by UniProtKB:Q96NY9 (MUS81)
  4. Kinase activity (GO:0016301) enabled by UniProtKB:P06493 (CDK1)

Biological Context

The model represents a pathway where RECQL5 helicase directly negatively regulates RAD51 DNA binding activity, while directly positively regulating MUS81 endonuclease activity. CDK1 is shown to directly positively regulate RECQL5 helicase activity. The model is focused on processes occurring at the replication fork (GO:0005657) during mitotic DNA replication (GO:1990506).

Detailed Analysis

1. RECQL5 Helicase Activity

  • Correctly modeled: RECQL5 is accurately depicted as having helicase activity (GO:0004386)
  • Location is appropriate: The activity occurs at the replication fork (GO:0005657)
  • Biochemistry is accurate: The model correctly shows ATP and water as inputs, with ADP and phosphate as outputs
  • Process association is correct: The activity is part of mitotic DNA-templated DNA replication (GO:1990506)

2. RAD51 Activity

  • Correctly modeled: RAD51 is annotated with single-stranded DNA binding activity (GO:0003697)
  • Location issue: The activity is shown to occur in "presynaptic intermediate filament cytoskeleton" (GO:0099182), which appears to be a questionable annotation. Based on literature, RAD51 activity during DNA repair typically occurs at replication forks or DNA double-strand breaks.

3. MUS81 Activity

  • Correctly modeled: MUS81 is shown with endonuclease activity (GO:0004519)
  • Location is appropriate: The activity occurs at the replication fork (GO:0005657)

4. CDK1 Activity

  • Correctly modeled: CDK1 is annotated with kinase activity (GO:0016301)
  • Evidence supported: The positive regulation of RECQL5 by CDK1 is supported by literature evidence (PMID:28575661)

5. Causal Relationships

  • RECQL5 and RAD51: The direct negative regulation (RO:0002630) of RAD51 by RECQL5 is well-supported by the literature (PMID:18003859), which shows that RECQL5 can disrupt RAD51 presynaptic filaments
  • RECQL5 and MUS81: The direct positive regulation (RO:0002629) of MUS81 by RECQL5 is supported by literature (PMID:28575661)
  • CDK1 and RECQL5: The direct positive regulation (RO:0002629) of RECQL5 by CDK1 is supported by literature (PMID:28575661)

Issues Identified

  1. Location annotation for RAD51: The subcellular location for RAD51 activity is annotated as "presynaptic intermediate filament cytoskeleton" (GO:0099182), which seems inappropriate for the DNA repair context. This term is usually used in neuronal contexts, not DNA repair. The more appropriate location would be "replication fork" (GO:0005657) or "site of DNA damage" (GO:0035861).

  2. Incomplete representation of process context: While RECQL5 activity is correctly shown as part of mitotic DNA replication (GO:1990506), there could be more specific process context for the regulations of RAD51 and MUS81. For example, this could be occurring during "DNA damage response" (GO:0006974) or more specifically "replication fork processing" (GO:0031297).

  3. Complex annotation: According to the GO-CAM guidelines for annotating complexes, when specific subunits carrying molecular activities are known (as in this case), they should be displayed individually in the model. However, it may be worth noting that MUS81 often functions as part of the MUS81-EME1 complex, which is not reflected in this model.

  4. Missing components: The literature suggests that RPA (Replication Protein A) plays an important role in RECQL5's ability to displace RAD51 from ssDNA. This component is missing from the model.

Recommendations

  1. Correct the location annotation for RAD51 from "presynaptic intermediate filament cytoskeleton" (GO:0099182) to a more appropriate term such as "replication fork" (GO:0005657).

  2. Add more specific process context for the regulations, particularly for the RAD51 and MUS81 activities.

  3. Consider adding RPA as it plays an important role in RECQL5's ability to displace RAD51 from ssDNA according to the literature.

  4. Consider adding EME1 as a partner of MUS81, as they typically function together as a complex in DNA repair processes.

  5. Add more specific biological context: The model could benefit from additional information about when this pathway is active, such as during replication stress or at common fragile sites during mitosis, as suggested by the literature.

Conclusion

Overall, the GO-CAM model 613aae0000001005 provides a good representation of the role of RECQL5 in regulating homologous recombination through its interactions with RAD51 and MUS81, under the regulation of CDK1. The causal relationships are well-supported by the literature, and the evidence is properly cited. With the suggested improvements, particularly correcting the location annotation for RAD51 and adding more complete biological context, this could become an even more valuable representation of this important DNA repair mechanism.