In this article we are going to explore in depth the topic of SOS box, which has sparked great interest and controversy in recent years. Since its emergence, SOS box has captured the attention of people from different fields, generating passionate debates and conflicting opinions. Through this analysis, we aim to examine in detail the different aspects surrounding SOS box, with the aim of shedding light on its importance, implications and possible future developments. With a multidisciplinary approach, we will address both its historical, cultural, social and scientific dimensions, as well as the diverse perspectives that exist on the matter, in an effort to provide a comprehensive and enriching vision of SOS box.
LexA binds to an SOS box in the absence of DNA damage. In the presence of DNA damage the binding of LexA is inactivated by the RecAactivator. SOS boxes differ in DNA sequences and binding affinity towards LexA from organism to organism.[2] Furthermore, SOS boxes may be present in a dual fashion, which indicates that more than one SOS box can be within the same promoter.[3]
^Henkin, Tina M.; Peters, Joseph E. (2020). Snyder and Champness molecular genetics of bacteria (Fifth ed.). Hoboken, NJ : Washington, D.C: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p. 409. ISBN9781555819750.
^Walker, Graham C. (October 1995). "SOS-regulated proteins in translesion DNA synthesis and mutagenesis". Trends in Biochemical Sciences. 20 (10): 416–20. doi:10.1016/s0968-0004(00)89091-x. PMID8533155.
^Tapias, A.; Barbé, J. (August 1999). "Regulation of divergent transcription from the uvrA-ssb promoters in Sinorhizobium meliloti". Molecular and General Genetics MGG. 262 (1): 121–130. doi:10.1007/s004380051066. PMID10503543. S2CID2373618.
^Mazón, G.; Lucena, J. M.; Campoy, S.; Fernández de Henestrosa, A. R.; Candau, P.; Barbé, J. (February 2004). "LexA-binding sequences in Gram-positive and cyanobacteria are closely related". Molecular Genetics and Genomics. 271 (1): 40–49. doi:10.1007/s00438-003-0952-x. PMID14652736. S2CID9219764.