4.6 Article

Quantitative analysis of translesion DNA synthesis across a benzo[a] pyrene-guanine adduct in mammalian cells -: The role of DNA polymerase κ

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 279, 期 51, 页码 53298-53305

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M409155200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA099194] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Replication across unrepaired DNA lesions in mammalian cells is effected primarily by specialized, low fidelity DNA polymerases. We studied translesion DNA synthesis (TLS) across a benzo[ a] pyrene-guanine (BP-G) adduct, a major mutagenic DNA lesion generated by tobacco smoke. This was done using a quantitative assay that measures TLS indirectly, by measuring the recovery of gapped plasmids transfected into cultured mammalian cells. Analysis of PolK(+/+) mouse embryo fibroblasts (MEFs) showed that TLS across the BP-G adduct occurred with an efficiency of 48 +/- 4%, which is an order of magnitude higher than in Escherichia coli. In PolK(-/-) MEFs, bypass was 16 +/- 1%, suggesting that at least two-thirds of the BP-G adducts in MEFs were bypassed exclusively by polymerase kappa (polkappa). In contrast, poleta was not required for bypass across BP-G in a human XP-V cell line. Analysis of misinsertion specificity across BP-G revealed that bypass was more error-prone in MEFs lacking polkappa. Expression of polkappa from a plasmid introduced into PolK(-/-) MEFs restored both the extent and fidelity of bypass across BP-G. Polkappa was not required for bypass of a synthetic abasic site. In vitro analysis demonstrated efficient bypass across BP-G by both polkappa and poleta, suggesting that the biological role of polkappa in TLS across BP-G is due to regulation of TLS and not due to an exclusive ability to bypass this lesion. These results indicate that BP-G is bypassed in mammalian cells with relatively high efficiency and that polkappa bypasses BP-G in vivo with higher efficiency and higher accuracy than other DNA polymerases.

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