4.8 Article

Noncovalent Binding of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons with Genetic Bases Reducing the in Vitro Lateral Transfer of Antibiotic Resistant Genes

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 49, 期 17, 页码 10340-10348

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b02293

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [41401543, 41171193]
  2. National Science Foundation for Postdoctoral Scientists of China [2014M561662]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province of China [BK20140725, BK20130030]
  4. Priority Academic Program Development Foundation of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In current studies of noncovalent interactions of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) with genetic units, the impact of such interactions On gene transfer has not been explored. In this study, we examined the association of some widely occurring PAHs (phenanthrene, pyrene, benzo[g,h,i]perylene, and other congeners) with antibiotic resistant plasmids (pUC19). Small molecular PAHs (e.g., phenanthrene) bind effectively with plasmids to form a loosely clew-like plasmid-PAH complex (16.5-49.5 nm), resulting in reduced transformation of :ampicillin resistance gene (Ampr). The in vitro transcription analysis demonstrated that reduced transformation of Ampr in plasmids results from the PAH-inhibited Ampr transcription to RNA. Fluorescence microtitration coupled with Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and theoretical interaction models showed that adenine in plasmid has a stronger capacity to sequester small Phen and Pyre molecules via a pi-pi. attraction. Changes in Gibbs free energy (Delta G) suggest that the CT-PAH model reliably depicts the plasmid-PAH interaction through a noncovalently physical sorption mechanism. Considering the wide occurrence of PAHs and antibiotic resistant genes (ARGs) in the environment, our findings suggest that small-sized PAHs can well affect the behavior of ARGs via above-described noncovalent interactions.

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

4.8
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