4.7 Article

DNA double-strand breaks induce deletion of CTG•CAG repeats in an orientation-dependent manner in Escherichia coli

Journal

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 336, Issue 3, Pages 655-672

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2003.12.038

Keywords

triplet repeat; double-strand break; Escherichia coli; recombination; repair

Funding

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [ES11347] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [NS37554] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The influences of double-strand breaks (DSBs) within a triplet repeat sequence on its genetic instabilities (expansions and deletions) related to hereditary neurological diseases was investigated. Plasmids containing 43 or 70 CTG(.)CAG repeats or 43 CGG(.)CCG repeats were linearized in vitro near the center of the repeats and were transformed into parental, RecA-dependent homologous recombination-deficient, or RecBC exonuclease-deficient Escherichia coli. The resulting repair process considerably increased deletion of the repeating sequence compared to the circular DNA controls. Unexpectedly, the orientation of the insert relative to the unidirectional ColE1 origin of replication affected the amount of instability generated during the repair of the DSB. When the CTG strand was the template for lagging-strand synthesis, instability was increased, most markedly in the recA(-) strain. Results indicated that RecA and/or RecBC might play a role in DSB repair within the triplet repeat. Altering the length, orientation, and sequence composition of the triplet repeat suggested an important role of DNA secondary structures during repair intermediates. Hence, we hypothesize that ColE1 origin-dependent replication was involved during the repair of the DSB. A model is presented to explain the mechanisms of the observed genetic instabilities. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available