FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1965934057> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1965934057 endingPage "12976" @default.
• W1965934057 startingPage "12972" @default.
• W1965934057 abstract "We examined repair of DNA strand breaks induced by the anti-cancer drug bleomycin in both Pol I and Pol II transcribed genes in permeabilized human fibroblasts. The majority of these breaks (>80%) are single strand breaks (SSBs) thought to be repaired by base excision repair enzymes. Repair was examined in each strand of a 7.2-kilobase fragment, completely within the Pol I transcribed region of ribosomal DNA (rDNA) and an 8.3-kilobase fragment completely within the Pol II transcribed region of the dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) gene. Bleomycin dose-response studies revealed no bias for SSBs in either strand of the rDNA fragment. Furthermore, repair of SSBs is rapid (~80% resealed in 60 min) in both the transcribed and nontranscribed strands of rDNA. Rapid repair of SSBs is also observed in both strands of the DHFR gene (~60% resealed in 60 min). In contrast, little (or no) repair of UV photodimers occurs in either strand of human rDNA, regardless of whether cells are confluent or actively growing. Thus, DNA lesions in human ribosomal genes may be more accessible to base excision repair enzymes than those involved in nucleotide excision repair. We examined repair of DNA strand breaks induced by the anti-cancer drug bleomycin in both Pol I and Pol II transcribed genes in permeabilized human fibroblasts. The majority of these breaks (>80%) are single strand breaks (SSBs) thought to be repaired by base excision repair enzymes. Repair was examined in each strand of a 7.2-kilobase fragment, completely within the Pol I transcribed region of ribosomal DNA (rDNA) and an 8.3-kilobase fragment completely within the Pol II transcribed region of the dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) gene. Bleomycin dose-response studies revealed no bias for SSBs in either strand of the rDNA fragment. Furthermore, repair of SSBs is rapid (~80% resealed in 60 min) in both the transcribed and nontranscribed strands of rDNA. Rapid repair of SSBs is also observed in both strands of the DHFR gene (~60% resealed in 60 min). In contrast, little (or no) repair of UV photodimers occurs in either strand of human rDNA, regardless of whether cells are confluent or actively growing. Thus, DNA lesions in human ribosomal genes may be more accessible to base excision repair enzymes than those involved in nucleotide excision repair. It has been known for over 2 decades that two forms of DNA excision repair synthesis exist in human cells (32Regan J.D. Setlow R.B. Cancer Res. 1974; 34: 3318-3325PubMed Google Scholar). “Long patch” repair, induced by UV photodimers and bulky chemical adducts, involves removal and insertion of 20-30 nucleotides at the damage site (Th'ng and Walker, 40Th'ng J.P.H. Walker I.G. Mutat. Res. 1985; 165: 139-150Google Scholar; 15Dresler S.L. Biochemistry. 1985; 24: 6861-6869Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar; 36Smith C.A. J. Cell Sci. Suppl. 1987; 6: 225-241Crossref PubMed Google Scholar; 13DiGiuseppe J.A. Dresler S.L. Biochemistry. 1989; 28: 9515-9520Crossref PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar; 14DiGiuseppe J.A. Hunting D.J. Dresler S.L. Carcinogenesis. 1990; 11: 1021-1026Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar; 33Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1990; 29 (a): 7501-7511Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar), and human cell extracts contain an activity that cleaves on each side of a cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer (CPD) 1The abbreviations used are: CPDcis-syn cyclobutane pyrimidine dimerbpbase pair(s)kbkilobase pair(s)LPCL-α-lysophosphatidylcholinePBSphosphate-buffered salinePIPESpiperazine-N,N′-bis(2-ethanesulfonic acidT4 endo VT4 endonuclease VPol IRNA polymerase IPol IIRNA polymerase IIDHFRdihydrofolate reductase. at positions 27-29 nucleotides apart (20Huang J.C. Svoboda D.L. Reardon J.T. Sancar A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1992; 89: 3664-3668Crossref PubMed Scopus (371) Google Scholar). In contrast, “short patch” repair, induced by nonligatable strand breaks and some alkylated bases, involves removal and insertion of only a few nucleotides per DNA lesion (32Regan J.D. Setlow R.B. Cancer Res. 1974; 34: 3318-3325PubMed Google Scholar; 13DiGiuseppe J.A. Dresler S.L. Biochemistry. 1989; 28: 9515-9520Crossref PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar; 14DiGiuseppe J.A. Hunting D.J. Dresler S.L. Carcinogenesis. 1990; 11: 1021-1026Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar; 33Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1990; 29 (a): 7501-7511Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar). cis-syn cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer base pair(s) kilobase pair(s) L-α-lysophosphatidylcholine phosphate-buffered saline piperazine-N,N′-bis(2-ethanesulfonic acid T4 endonuclease V RNA polymerase I RNA polymerase II dihydrofolate reductase. Bleomycin is a radiomimetic antitumor agent that induces (primarily) strand breaks in chromosomal DNA (reviewed by 39Stubbe J. Kozarich J.W. Chem. Rev. 1987; 87: 1107-1136Crossref Scopus (952) Google Scholar and Povirk and Finley Austen (1991); also see 4Bennett R.A.O. Swedlow P.S. Povirk L.F. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 3188-3195Crossref PubMed Scopus (58) Google Scholar). Unlike bulky DNA lesions, repair of these breaks is resistant to aphidicolin, and the average repair patch size is less than 6 nucleotides (13DiGiuseppe J.A. Dresler S.L. Biochemistry. 1989; 28: 9515-9520Crossref PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar; 14DiGiuseppe J.A. Hunting D.J. Dresler S.L. Carcinogenesis. 1990; 11: 1021-1026Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar; 33Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1990; 29 (a): 7501-7511Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar). Bleomycin is a glycopeptide that complexes with divalent cations (mainly Fe2+) and O2, and a portion of the molecule intercalates in DNA, particularly at NGC sequences (21Kuwahara J. Sugiura Y. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1988; 85: 2459-2463Crossref PubMed Scopus (105) Google Scholar). It produces strand breaks or apurinic/apyrimidinic sites by abstracting hydrogen from C-4′ of deoxyribose adjoining the guanidyl-3′-phosphate at the site of bleomycin-DNA intercalation (39Stubbe J. Kozarich J.W. Chem. Rev. 1987; 87: 1107-1136Crossref Scopus (952) Google Scholar; Povirk and Finley Austen, 1991). At this point, the resulting free radical can partition into one of two alternate damage pathways. Upon addition of O2, a peroxyl radical is formed, which decomposes to yield a strand break with 5′-phosphate and 3′-phosphoglycolate termini, with release of a base propanal. Alternatively, hydroxylation of the C-4′ radical can occur opening the sugar ring and releasing the base. This pathway yields an apurinic-apyrimidinic site with a chemically modified sugar. In chromatin, however, many of these modified apurinic-apyrimidinic sites undergo spontaneous cleavage, probably by reaction with histone amine groups (4Bennett R.A.O. Swedlow P.S. Povirk L.F. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 3188-3195Crossref PubMed Scopus (58) Google Scholar). These strand breaks cannot be ligated directly and may be repaired via removal of the modified base (and a few adjacent bases) by a 3′→ 5′ exonuclease and (short patch) repair synthesis (e.g., see 28Mosbaugh D.W. Linn S. J. Biol. Chem. 1984; 259: 10247-10251Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar). We analyzed repair of bleomycin-induced single strand breaks (SSBs) in the individual strands of Pol I-transcribed ribosomal genes (rDNA) and the Pol II-transcribed DHFR gene. Repair in the DHFR gene has been well characterized, and both preferential and strand-specific repair of UV-induced cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) occurs in this gene (reviewed in 16Friedberg E.C. Walker G.C. Siede W. DNA Repair and Mutagenesis. American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, D. C.1995Google Scholar). In contrast, repair of CPDs in either total rDNA of human and hamster cells (9Christians F.C. Hanawalt P.C. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 10512-10520Crossref PubMed Scopus (72) Google Scholar) or the transcriptionally active fraction of rDNA in mouse cells (18Fritz L.K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1995; 34: 13117-13124Crossref PubMed Scopus (38) Google Scholar) is very inefficient in both DNA strands. We report here that, in contrast to very inefficient repair of CPDs in rDNA, repair of bleomycin-induced SSBs occurs rapidly in both strands of a human 7.2-kb rDNA fragment and an 8.3-kb fragment in the DHFR gene (Fig. 1). Bleomycin (Blenoxane) was a generous gift from Bristol Myers Laboratories (Syracuse, New York). L-α-Lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC) was purchased from Sigma. Human diploid fibroblasts (strain AG 1518) were split 1:3 and grown in culture as described previously (35Smerdon M.J. Lan S.Y. Calza R.E. Reeves R. J. Biol. Chem. 1982; 257: 13441-13447Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar). Cells were prelabeled with 5 nCi/ml [14C]deoxythymidine (50 mCi/mmol; DuPont NEN) for 1 week after splitting. Prelabeling medium was replaced with fresh medium, and the cells were grown an additional 2-2.5 weeks until confluent. The medium was changed every 8 days during this period. To obtain actively growing cells used in some experiments, cells were split 1:4 and harvested 3 days after splitting. Cells were permeabilized with LPC as described previously (26Lorenz J.D. Watkins J.F. Smerdon M.J. Mutat. Res. 1988; 193: 167-179PubMed Google Scholar). Briefly, cells were washed twice with ice-cold PBS (16 mM phosphate buffer, pH 7.2, 5 mM KCl, 135 mM NaCl). An 80 µg/ml solution of LPC (dissolved in PBS and 1 mM CaCl2) was added to the cells, which were then kept on ice for 2 min. The effectiveness of cell permeabilization was determined in separate plates by the fraction of cells taking up trypan blue dye (26Lorenz J.D. Watkins J.F. Smerdon M.J. Mutat. Res. 1988; 193: 167-179PubMed Google Scholar). The LPC solution was then carefully removed and replaced with repair mixture (35 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 50 mM sucrose, 80 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 7.5 mM KH2PO4, 1 mM CaCl2, 5 mM ATP; see 33Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1990; 29 (a): 7501-7511Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar, 34Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Cancer Res. 1990; 50 (b): 1613-1619PubMed Google Scholar). Bleomycin treatment was performed according to 33Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1990; 29 (a): 7501-7511Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar, 34Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Cancer Res. 1990; 50 (b): 1613-1619PubMed Google Scholar. For repair experiments, cells were treated in three groups. Group 1 cells (no bleomycin) were made permeable by LPC treatment followed by addition of repair mixture containing 3 µM dNTPs. The cells were washed and harvested after a 30-min incubation at 37°C without bleomycin. Group 2 cells (damage, no repair) were made permeable by LPC treatment followed by addition of repair mixture with no dNTPs and various concentrations of bleomycin dissolved in 10 mM PIPES buffer. The cells were incubated for 30 min at 37°C prior to harvest. Group 3 cells (damage and repair) were made permeable with LPC, followed by repair mixture containing 3 µM dNTPs. Bleomycin dissolved in PIPES buffer was also added. Cells were incubated at 37°C for 30 min. Following this incubation, the bleomycin solution was replaced with prewarmed conditioned medium, and the cells were incubated for different repair times. DNA was prepared according to 6Bohr V.A. Okumoto D.S. Friedberg E.C. Hanawalt P.C. DNA Repair: A Laboratory Manual of Research Procedures. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York1988: 347Google Scholar. For repair studies in the DHFR gene, DNA was digested with PstI (5 units/µg of DNA). To assay repair in rDNA, samples were digested with EcoRI (5 units/µg of DNA). Following restriction enzyme digestion, the DNA was isolated on neutral CsCl density gradients (6Bohr V.A. Okumoto D.S. Friedberg E.C. Hanawalt P.C. DNA Repair: A Laboratory Manual of Research Procedures. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York1988: 347Google Scholar), and, after dialysis against TE buffer (10 mM Tris·HCl, 1 mM EDTA), the specific radioactivity was determined (from absorbance scans and liquid scintillation counting). Equal amounts of samples, determined from measured values of specific radioactivity, were electrophoresed in 0.6% or 0.8% alkaline agarose gels at 35 V for 16-17 h, according to 27Maniatis T. Fritsch E.F. Sambrook J. Molecular Cloning, a Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY1982Google Scholar. Samples were then depurinated in the gels by soaking in 0.25 M HCl for 15 min. After acid treatment, gels were neutralized and transferred to nylon membranes (Hybond N+, Amersham) using the alkaline transfer method (3Ausubel F.M. Brent R. Kingston R.E. Moore D.D. Seidman J.G. Smith J.A. Struhl K. Current Protocols in Molecular Biology. John Wiley and Sons, New York1988Google Scholar). Plasmid pZH-15 was a gift from Drs. C. Allen Smith and Phillip Hanawalt (Stanford University, Stanford, CA). It contains 788 bp of genomic DNA extending from −315 bp into intron 2 of the human DHFR gene (Fig. 1). Plasmid pSPT28S, used to probe rDNA, was a gift from Drs. Jose Sogo (ETH, Zürich, Switzerland) and Antonio Conconi (WSU, Pullman, WA) (Fig. 1). It contains a 137-bp BamHI/SstI fragment from the 28 S region of mouse rDNA (Fig. 1) that is very similar to the human rDNA sequence (17Fritz, L. K., 1994, Differential DNA Repair in Mammalian Ribosomal Genes. Ph.D. thesis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA.Google Scholar). Plasmid pZH111, also a gift from the Hanawalt laboratory and constructed by Dr. L. Lommel, contains a 600-bp insert (into pGEM-3Z) of the human DHFR cDNA from the EcoRI site in exon II to the Sau3A site in exon V. This plasmid was used to probe DHFR mRNA. Radioactively labeled riboprobes were generated according to the manufacturer's instructions in the Riboprobe Gemini II kit (Promega; see 18Fritz L.K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1995; 34: 13117-13124Crossref PubMed Scopus (38) Google Scholar). Autoradiograms were quantified using a laser scanning densitometer (LKB model 2222 or Molecular Dynamics model PDSI). The integrated intensity of bands resulting from bleomycin treatment was determined using a peak deconvolution program (Peak Fit; Jandel Scientific, Corte Madera, CA). These intensities were normalized to the integrated intensities of bands resulting from no treatment to determine the fraction of fragments free of strand breaks (P0). The average strand breaks/fragment was determined using the Poisson expression [−ln(P0)] (6Bohr V.A. Okumoto D.S. Friedberg E.C. Hanawalt P.C. DNA Repair: A Laboratory Manual of Research Procedures. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York1988: 347Google Scholar). Loading variations between lanes were corrected by normalization of band intensities to either an external plasmid band (e.g. see 29Murad A.O. de Cock J. Brown D.W. Smerdon M.J. J. Biol. Chem. 1995; 270: 3949-3957Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar) or to the total intensity measured in the lane. For many of these experiments, confluent human fibroblasts were reversibly permeabilized with LPC to improve transport of bleomycin into cells (34Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Cancer Res. 1990; 50 (b): 1613-1619PubMed Google Scholar). Using this treatment, bleomycin dose-response measurements were performed to determine the level of strand breaks produced in the 7.2-kb EcoRI rDNA fragment. Total strand breaks were assayed by alkaline agarose gel electrophoresis (Fig. 2A, inset). As shown in Fig. 2, at bleomycin doses >0.1 µg/ml, there is approximately a log-linear relationship between strand breaks in the rDNA fragment and bleomycin concentration. There is also a significant number of double strand breaks, or breaks on opposite strands in close proximity, at bleomycin doses >1 µg/ml, as measured by neutral gel electrophoresis (Fig. 2B, inset). These breaks account for <20% of the total breaks induced by bleomycin in the rDNA fragment (analysis not shown). Furthermore, there is no bias for bleomycin-induced strand breaks in either strand of this fragment (Fig. 2). A dose of 3 µg/ml was used for most repair experiments where 90-95% of the DNA fragments analyzed contain at least one single strand break. For most repair experiments, permeabilized, confluent human fibroblasts were exposed to 3 µg/ml bleomycin. At this dose, the 7.2-kb rDNA fragment (Fig. 1A) contained 1.8-2.3 strand breaks in each strand, while the 8.3-kb DHFR fragment (Fig. 1B) contained 2.4-2.6 strand breaks in each strand. This dose was chosen to illustrate the dramatic change in strand breaks after even short repair times (see below). Also, as observed for the rDNA fragment, no bias was observed for strand breaks in either strand of the DHFR fragment (not shown). Repair of bleomycin-induced strand breaks in both rDNA and DHFR displayed initial rapid kinetics (Fig. 3). This is illustrated by the rapid return of intact rDNA fragments after only 40 min of repair incubation (Fig. 3A, inset). At least 80% of the strand breaks are repaired in each strand of these genes after only 90 min (Fig. 3). This value approaches 100% after 24 h of repair incubation (data not shown). The “plateau” in repair data at about 80% for rDNA (Fig. 3A) most likely reflects a much slower repair of double strand breaks (12Coquerelle T.M. Weibezahn K.F. Lucke Huhle C. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 1987; 51: 209-218Crossref Scopus (98) Google Scholar), present at <20% the level of SSBs in rDNA (above). However, regardless of the reason for the plateau in repair kinetics, it is clear that most strand breaks are very rapidly repaired during the first hour in ribosomal genes. It is important to note that the results in Fig. 3 represent repair in total ribosomal genes, which are present in several hundred copies in human cells (25Long E.O. Dawid I.B. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1980; 49: 727-764Crossref PubMed Scopus (1057) Google Scholar). Using psoralen cross-linking to separate the transcriptionally active from the inactive fraction, we find that <30% of rRNA genes are in the active chromatin fraction in these cells (data not shown; see 18Fritz L.K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1995; 34: 13117-13124Crossref PubMed Scopus (38) Google Scholar). Therefore, the results in Fig. 3 indicate that efficient repair occurs in each strand of both the active and inactive rDNA fractions. It has been established that rDNA transcription is greatly reduced in stationary cells (37Sollner-Webb B. Tower J. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1986; 55: 801-830Crossref PubMed Google Scholar; 11Conconi A. Widmer R.M. Koller T. Sogo J.M. Cell. 1989; 57: 753-761Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (306) Google Scholar). Therefore, we irradiated both confluent and actively growing human fibroblasts with 20 J/m2 UV light (254 nm), and the newly replicated DNA in growing cells was separated from parental DNA using isopycnic centrifugation (see “Materials and Methods”). The yield of CPDs in each strand of the 7.2-kb rDNA fragment was measured using the method of 7Bohr V.A. Smith C.A. Okumoto D.S. Hanawalt P.C. Cell. 1985; 40: 359-369Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (994) Google Scholar. This assay measures the fraction of restriction fragments resistant to cutting by T4 endonuclease V (T4 endo V), which cleaves DNA strands specifically at CPD sites. As shown in Fig. 4, A and B, little change occurs in the fraction of T4 endo V-resistant rDNA fragment after 8 h of repair incubation, and there is only a small increase in this band after 24 h of repair. Indeed, quantitation of these results indicates that only 20-30% of the CPDs are removed from each strand after 24 h (Fig. 4, C and D), and repair was inefficient during each growth state. Thus, as previously found for rodent and human cells (9Christians F.C. Hanawalt P.C. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 10512-10520Crossref PubMed Scopus (72) Google Scholar; 18Fritz L.K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1995; 34: 13117-13124Crossref PubMed Scopus (38) Google Scholar), repair of CPDs is inefficient in each strand of the ribosomal genes of human fibroblasts. Our results indicate that bleomycin-induced SSBs in rDNA are repaired efficiently, but not in a strand-specific manner (Fig. 3). On the other hand, repair of UV-induced CPDs is very inefficient in each strand of rDNA in both growing and confluent human fibroblasts (Fig. 4). This latter observation agrees qualitatively with past studies on repair of total rDNA in human and hamster cells (9Christians F.C. Hanawalt P.C. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 10512-10520Crossref PubMed Scopus (72) Google Scholar, 10Christians F.C. Hanawalt P.C. Mutat. Res. 1994; 323: 179-187Crossref PubMed Scopus (40) Google Scholar). Recently, we have shown that inefficient repair of CPDs takes place even in the transcribed strand of the transcriptionally active fraction of ribosomal genes (18Fritz L.K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1995; 34: 13117-13124Crossref PubMed Scopus (38) Google Scholar). Thus, the rapid and extensive repair of bleomycin-induced SSBs is dramatically different from the repair of UV photodimers in rDNA. The differences we observe between the kinetics of repair of SSBs induced by bleomycin and CPDs induced by UV light are striking. 38Stevnsner T. May A. Petersen L.N. Larminat F. Pirsel M. Bohr V.A. Carcinogenesis. 1993; 14: 1591-1596Crossref PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar also observed differences in repair efficiency in rDNA damaged with various agents in CHO cells. These authors reported inefficient repair of CPDs, and both monoadducts and diadducts induced by nitrogen mustard. However, efficient repair of methyl methanesulfonate adducts and cisplatin interstrand cross-links was observed in rDNA (38Stevnsner T. May A. Petersen L.N. Larminat F. Pirsel M. Bohr V.A. Carcinogenesis. 1993; 14: 1591-1596Crossref PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar), although repair of individual rDNA strands was not measured in that study. This report, along with the present one, suggests that the “accessibility” of rDNA may vary between different repair pathways (see below). UV-induced CPDs and bleomycin-induced strand breaks are (presumably) repaired by different repair pathways (e.g. see 16Friedberg E.C. Walker G.C. Siede W. DNA Repair and Mutagenesis. American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, D. C.1995Google Scholar). DNA polymerase inhibitor studies strongly support the involvement of polymerase β (independent of polymerases α and δ/ε) in the repair of bleomycin-induced damage (13DiGiuseppe J.A. Dresler S.L. Biochemistry. 1989; 28: 9515-9520Crossref PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar; 14DiGiuseppe J.A. Hunting D.J. Dresler S.L. Carcinogenesis. 1990; 11: 1021-1026Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar; 33Sidik K. Smerdon M.J. Biochemistry. 1990; 29 (a): 7501-7511Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar). The nucleolus, where rDNA sequences are sequestered, could act as a barrier to the bulky enzyme complex associated with nucleotide excision repair (16Friedberg E.C. Walker G.C. Siede W. DNA Repair and Mutagenesis. American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, D. C.1995Google Scholar), but allow access to the 39-kDa polymerase β protein (1Abbotts J. SenGupta D.N. Zmudzka B. Widen S.G. Notario V. Wilson S.H. Biochemistry. 1988; 27: 901-909Crossref PubMed Scopus (119) Google Scholar; 43Wilson S.H. Abbotts J. Widen S. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1988; 949: 149-157Crossref PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar). (Obviously, polymerases α and δ/ε have access to these regions during S-phase; however, these cells represent a small fraction of the total population even in exponentially growing cultures.) Furthermore, because rDNA sequences are reiterated and quite highly conserved (19Gonzales I.L. Chambers C. Gorski J.L. Stambolian D. Schmickel R.D. Sylverster J.E. J. Mol. Biol. 1990; 212: 27-35Crossref PubMed Scopus (86) Google Scholar), one can speculate that recombinational repair (rather than nucleotide excision repair) of UV-induced CPDs (and perhaps other bulky DNA lesions) would offer a selective advantage in maintaining sequence integrity among the rDNA gene copies (see 10Christians F.C. Hanawalt P.C. Mutat. Res. 1994; 323: 179-187Crossref PubMed Scopus (40) Google Scholar), perhaps involving a different mechanism than used in nonreiterated sequences (30Ozenberger B.A. Roeder G.S. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1991; 11: 1222-1231Crossref PubMed Scopus (123) Google Scholar). As a control for our studies, we examined repair in the DHFR gene, which is transcribed by RNA Pol II. As stated earlier, transcription repair coupling appears to require an elongating Pol II complex (23Leadon S.A. Lawrence D.A. Mutat. Res. 1991; 255: 67-78Crossref PubMed Scopus (91) Google Scholar; 8Christians F.C. Hanawalt P.C. Mutat. Res. 1992; 274: 93-101Crossref PubMed Scopus (90) Google Scholar), and we were concerned that DHFR might not be actively transcribed in confluent cells. However, Northern analyses with these human fibroblasts showed that equivalent amounts of DHFR mRNA are present in actively growing cells and cells in deep confluence (17Fritz, L. K., 1994, Differential DNA Repair in Mammalian Ribosomal Genes. Ph.D. thesis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA.Google Scholar). Although these studies were not performed on permeabilized cells, the fact that these cells “recuperate” rapidly from LPC permeabilization (26Lorenz J.D. Watkins J.F. Smerdon M.J. Mutat. Res. 1988; 193: 167-179PubMed Google Scholar) and go on to divide normally indicates that the DHFR gene is indeed transcribed following permeabilization. Furthermore, 24Leys E.J. Kellems R.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1981; 1: 961-971Crossref PubMed Scopus (39) Google Scholar concluded that the relative rates of DHFR transcription in growing and resting cells is the same. (We note that these authors observed a small increase of DHFR mRNA levels in growing cells, after long times (30 h) of growth stimulation, and concluded this increase is due to increased stability of the DHFR message in growing cells (24Leys E.J. Kellems R.E. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1981; 1: 961-971Crossref PubMed Scopus (39) Google Scholar).) In addition, 41Venema J. van Hoffen A. Natarajan A.T. van Zeeland A.A. Mullenders L.H.F. Nucleic Acids Res. 1990; 18: 443-448Crossref PubMed Scopus (197) Google Scholar reported transcription-coupled repair of CPDs in the DHFR gene in confluent human fibroblasts, which (indirectly) suggests that transcription of DHFR occurs in confluent cells. Finally, a previous study reported efficient repair of bleomycin-induced strand breaks in an amplified c-myc gene in human cells (5Bianchi N.O. Bianchi M.S. Lopez-Larraza D. Alitalo D. de la Chapelle A. Cancer Res. 1990; 50: 2379-2384PubMed Google Scholar). However, as double strand probes were used in that study, it could not be determined if this gene was repaired in a strand specific manner. Furthermore, 22Leadon S.A. Cooper P.K. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1993; 90: 10499-10503Crossref PubMed Scopus (213) Google Scholar found more efficient repair of ionizing radiation-induced lesions in the transcribed strand of the active metallothionein IIA gene in both normal and xeroderma pigmentosum (complementation group A) human fibroblasts, while Cockayne's syndrome (group B) cells yielded no strand specific repair of this gene. Since bleomycin is considered a radiomimetic agent (31Povirk L.F. Finley Austin M.J. Mutat. Res. 1991; 257: 127-143Crossref PubMed Scopus (244) Google Scholar; although see 2Affentranger M.I. Burkart W. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 1995; 43: 229-235Crossref PubMed Scopus (8) Google Scholar), this report suggests that more efficient repair of bleomycin-induced strand breaks may also occur in the transcribed strand of DHFR. Although we observed only a slight difference between the repair efficiency of the transcribed and nontranscribed strands of the DHFR gene (Fig. 3), this distinction could easily be missed due to the rapid repair kinetics in each strand. We thank Sylvia Hering for assistance with cell culture, Drs. José Sogo and Antonio Conconi for providing plasmid pSPT28S, Drs. C. Allen Smith, Lori Lommel, and Phillip Hanawalt for providing plasmids pZH-15 and pZH111, and Dr. R. Stephen Lloyd for providing purified T4 endo V. We also thank Drs. Antonio Conconi, David Springer, Jose Sogo, and Fritz Thoma for their critical reading of this manuscript." @default.
• W1965934057 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1965934057 creator A5039865707 @default.
• W1965934057 creator A5067188506 @default.
• W1965934057 creator A5080261955 @default.
• W1965934057 date "1996-05-01" @default.
• W1965934057 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W1965934057 title "Strand Breaks Are Repaired Efficiently in Human Ribosomal Genes" @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1525007860 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1872414023 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1973693667 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1979077779 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1983290059 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1984353960 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W1998116669 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2002770228 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2004397268 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2009505318 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2011382632 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2020805433 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2022965263 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2025632893 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2027930950 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2028659362 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2035736012 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2037422698 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2046900004 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2048753271 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2050488431 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2051883249 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2057692066 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2061658361 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2064614221 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2068691503 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2075661561 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2097723222 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2114952115 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2125212637 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2125449392 @default.
• W1965934057 cites W2325114843 @default.
• W1965934057 doi "https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.271.22.12972" @default.
• W1965934057 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8662972" @default.
• W1965934057 hasPublicationYear "1996" @default.
• W1965934057 type Work @default.
• W1965934057 sameAs 1965934057 @default.
• W1965934057 citedByCount "25" @default.
• W1965934057 countsByYear W19659340572015 @default.
• W1965934057 countsByYear W19659340572018 @default.
• W1965934057 countsByYear W19659340572019 @default.
• W1965934057 countsByYear W19659340572021 @default.
• W1965934057 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1965934057 hasAuthorship W1965934057A5039865707 @default.
• W1965934057 hasAuthorship W1965934057A5067188506 @default.
• W1965934057 hasAuthorship W1965934057A5080261955 @default.
• W1965934057 hasBestOaLocation W19659340571 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConcept C67905577 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConcept C70721500 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConceptScore W1965934057C104317684 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConceptScore W1965934057C54355233 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConceptScore W1965934057C67905577 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConceptScore W1965934057C70721500 @default.
• W1965934057 hasConceptScore W1965934057C86803240 @default.
• W1965934057 hasIssue "22" @default.
• W1965934057 hasLocation W19659340571 @default.
• W1965934057 hasOpenAccess W1965934057 @default.
• W1965934057 hasPrimaryLocation W19659340571 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2001325448 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2002128513 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2047596856 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2059453003 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2067243745 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2088063203 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2148257505 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2206447955 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2092874662 @default.
• W1965934057 hasRelatedWork W2350201234 @default.
• W1965934057 hasVolume "271" @default.
• W1965934057 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1965934057 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1965934057 magId "1965934057" @default.
• W1965934057 workType "article" @default.