4.6 Article

Analysis of 6912 unselected somatic hypermutations in human VDJ rearrangements reveals lack of strand specificity and correlation between phase II substitution rates and distance to the nearest 3′ activation-induced cytidine deaminase target

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 178, 期 7, 页码 4322-4334

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.7.4322

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The initial event of somatic hypermutation (SHM) is the deamination of cytidine residues by activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID). Deamination is followed by the replication over uracil and/or different error-prone repair events. We sequenced 659 nonproductive human IgH rearrangements (IGHV3-23*01) from blood B lymphocytes enriched for CD27-positive memory cells. Analyses of 6,912 unique, unselected substitutions showed that in vivo hot and cold spots for the SHM of C and G residues corresponded closely to the target preferences reported for AID in vitro. A detailed analysis of all possible four-nucleotide motifs present on both strands of the V, gene showed significant correlations between the substitution frequencies in reverse complementary motifs, suggesting that the SHM machinery targets both strands equally well. An analysis of individual J(H) and D gene segments showed that the substitution frequencies in the individual motifs were comparable to the frequencies found in the V, gene. Interestingly, J(H)6-carrying sequences were less likely to undergo SHM (average 15.2 substitutions per V-H region) than sequences using J(H)4 (18.1 substitutions, p = 0.03). We also found that the substitution rates in G and T residues correlated inversely with the distance to the nearest 3' WRC AID hot spot motif on both the nontranscribed and transcribed strands. This suggests that phase II SHM takes place 5' of the initial AID deamination target and primarily targets T and G residues or, alternatively, the corresponding A and C residues on the opposite strand.

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