Literature DB >> 7873547

Differential dependence on chromatin structure for copper and iron ion induction of DNA double-strand breaks.

S M Chiu1, L Y Xue, L R Friedman, N L Oleinick.   

Abstract

The induction of DNA DSB (double-strand breaks) in isolated nuclear chromatin by Cu(II) or Fe(II)-EDTA in the presence of H2O2 and ascorbate has been compared to DSB induction by gamma-radiation. V79 nuclei embedded in agarose plugs were treated with each agent on ice, and the resultant DNA fragments were analyzed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. In the absence of low molecular weight radical scavengers, both irradiation and treatment with iron ion induced random DSB, as judged by the size distribution of DNA fragments, and the yield of DSB in each case was enhanced by either the expansion of chromatin (approximately 5-fold) or the removal of histones (21-25-fold) before treatment. In contrast, treatment with Cu(II) produced small DNA fragments of uniform size (approximately 100-200 kbp), independent of the yield of DSB. In addition, neither the DNA fragment size nor the yield of DSB produced by Cu(II) was affected by the prior removal of histones from chromatin. Deproteinized DNA was degraded randomly by Cu(II) but at a slower rate than observed for chromatin. In the presence of ascorbate, H2O2 was found to be essential for DSB induction by Fe(II)-EDTA but not by Cu(II), possibly because H2O2 can be produced from ascorbate and Cu(II) in the presence of oxygen. Despite the above differences between the production of DSB by the two metal ions, DSB induction in native chromatin by either metal ion was blocked by 0.1 M EDTA or 0.25 M thiourea but was resistant to the hydroxyl radical scavengers 0.25 M DMSO and 0.25 M mannitol.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7873547     DOI: 10.1021/bi00008a032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochemistry        ISSN: 0006-2960            Impact factor:   3.162


  6 in total

1.  Copper-mediated genotoxic stress is attenuated by the overexpression of the DNA repair gene MtTdp2α (tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase 2) in Medicago truncatula plants.

Authors:  Matteo Faè; Alma Balestrazzi; Massimo Confalonieri; Mattia Donà; Anca Macovei; Alberto Valassi; Giorgio Giraffa; Daniela Carbonera
Journal:  Plant Cell Rep       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 4.570

2.  Histone H1- and other protein- and amino acid-hydroperoxides can give rise to free radicals which oxidize DNA.

Authors:  C Luxford; B Morin; R T Dean; M J Davies
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1999-11-15       Impact factor: 3.857

3.  pH-dependent DNA cleavage in permeabilized human fibroblasts.

Authors:  S Czene; M Tibäck; M Harms-Ringdahl
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1997-04-15       Impact factor: 3.857

4.  The protein oxidation product 3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) mediates oxidative DNA damage.

Authors:  B Morin; M J Davies; R T Dean
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1998-03-15       Impact factor: 3.857

5.  Guanine-specific DNA damage induced by gamma-irradiated histone.

Authors:  Ayako Furukawa; Yusuke Hiraku; Shinji Oikawa; Catherine Luxford; Michael J Davies; Shosuke Kawanishi
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2005-06-15       Impact factor: 3.857

6.  DNA oxidative cleavage induced by the novel peptide derivatives of 3-(quinoxalin-6-yl)alanine in combination with Cu(II) or Fe(II) ions.

Authors:  Wojciech Szczepanik; Marzena Kucharczyk-Klamińska; Piotr Stefanowicz; Anna Staszewska; Zbigniew Szewczuk; Jacek Skała; Andrzej Mysiak; Małgorzata Jezowska-Bojczuk
Journal:  Bioinorg Chem Appl       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 7.778

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.