4.6 Article

Dual Nuclease and Helicase Activities of Helicobacter pylori AddAB Are Required for DNA Repair, Recombination, and Mouse Infectivity

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 284, 期 25, 页码 16759-16766

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M109.005587

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM031693, AI054423]
  2. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Synergy Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Helicobacter pylori infection of the human stomach is associated with disease-causing inflammation that elicits DNA damage in both bacterial and host cells. Bacteria must repair their DNA to persist. The H. pylori AddAB helicase-exonuclease is required for DNA repair and efficient stomach colonization. To dissect the role of each activity in DNA repair and infectivity, we altered the AddA and AddB nuclease (NUC) domains and the AddA helicase (HEL) domain by site-directed mutagenesis. Extracts of Escherichia coli expressing H. pylori addA(NUC)B or addAB(NUC) mutants unwound DNA but had approximately half of the exonuclease activity of wild-type AddAB; the addA(NUC)B(NUC) double mutant lacked detectable nuclease activity but retained helicase activity. Extracts with AddA(HEL)B lacked detectable helicase and nuclease activity. H. pylori with the single nuclease domain mutations were somewhat less sensitive to the DNA-damaging agent ciprofloxacin than the corresponding deletion mutant, suggesting that residual nuclease activity promotes limited DNA repair. The addA(NUC) and addA(HEL) mutants colonized the stomach less efficiently than the wild type; addB(NUC) showed partial attenuation. E. coli Delta recBCD expressing H. pylori addAB was recombination-deficient unless H. pylori recA was also expressed, suggesting a species-specific interaction between AddAB and RecA and also that H. pylori AddAB participates in both DNA repair and recombination. These results support a role for both the AddAB nuclease and helicase in DNA repair and promoting infectivity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据