Cited by 20DNA Repair MechanismsDNA and Nucleic Acid ChemistryCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment

DNA sequence dependence of closely opposed cyclobutyl pyrimidine dimers induced by UV radiation

Lam, Lun H., Reynolds, Richard J.·1987·Mutation Research

Abstract

Treatment of UV-irradiated DNAs with Micrococcus luteus pyrimidine dimer-DNA glycosylase results in the formation of double-strand breaks due to cleavage at closely opposed pyrimidine dimers. To determine if the induction of closely opposed dimers is significantly affected by DNA nucleotide sequence, end-labeled DNA fragments of known nucleotide sequence were UV irradiated, incubated with pyrimidine dimer-DNA glycosylase, and analyzed by electrophoresis through nondenaturing polyacrylamide gels. Distinct bands of increased electrophoretic mobility were observed, indicating that bifilar cleavage had occurred with greater probability at specific sites in each DNA sequence. In vitro enzymatic photoreactivation of dimers prior to treatment with pyrimidine dimer-DNA glycosylase prevented the appearance of bands. DNA sequence analysis revealed the presence of closely opposed runs of pyrimidines at sites of more frequent bifilar cleavage. Our results indicate that the induction of closely opposed dimers occurs with greater probability at specific sites in DNA sequences and that such sites are characterized by the presence of closely opposed pyrimidine runs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0027-5107(87)90266-1

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Approximately 1% of all UV-induced lesions are configured as closely opposing lesions.

    “actual measurements on irradiated DNA proved that approximately 1% of all UV-induced lesions are configured as closely opposing lesions [76–78].”

    From Mind the gap: keeping UV lesions in check (2011) · cites this paper as [78]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lam, L. H., & Reynolds, R. J.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
Mutation Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1987-06
Volume
178
Issue
2
Pages
167-176
ISSN
0027-5107 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2087078419
Cited by
20
References
34
Citations by year
2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Mutation research. Fundamental and molecular mechanisms of mutagenesis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Keywords
cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers, UV-induced DNA damage, DNA sequence dependence, DNA double-strand breaks, photoreactivation, Micrococcus luteus
MeSH terms
Bacterial Proteins, Base Sequence, DNA Damage, DNA, Bacterial, DNA, Viral, N-Glycosyl Hydrolases, Pyrimidine Dimers, Ultraviolet Rays, DNA Glycosylases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review