4.5 Article

Limited concentration of RecA delays DNA double-strand break repair in Deinococcus radiodurans R1

Journal

MOLECULAR MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 1, Pages 338-349

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2005.04946.x

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To evaluate the importance of RecA in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair, we examined the effect of low and high RecA concentrations such as 2500 and 100 000 molecules per cell expressed from the inducible Pspac promoter in Deinococcus radiodurans in absence or in presence of IPTG respectively. We showed that at low concentration, RecA has a negligible effect on cell survival after gamma-irradiation when bacteria were immediately plated on TGY agar whereas it significantly decreased the survival to gamma-irradiation of Delta ddrA cells while overexpression of RecA can partially compensate the loss of DdrA protein. In contrast, when cells expressing limited concentration of RecA were allowed to recover in TGY2X liquid medium, they showed a delay in mending DSB, failed to reinitiate DNA replication and were committed to die during incubation. A deletion of irrE resulted in sensitivity to gamma-irradiation and mitomycin C treatment. Interestingly, constitutive high expression of RecA compensates partially the Delta irrE sensitization to mitomycin C. The cells with low RecA content also failed to cleave LexA after DNA damage. However, neither a deletion of the lexA gene nor the expression of a non-cleavable LexA(Ind(-)) mutant protein had an effect on survival or kinetics of DNA DSB repair compared with their lexA(+) counterparts in recA(+) as well as in bacteria expressing limiting concentration of RecA, suggesting an absence of relationship between the absence of LexA cleavage and the loss of viability or the delay in the kinetics of DSB repair. Thus, LexA protein seems to play no major role in the recovery processes after gamma-irradiation in D. radiodurans.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available