Cited by 152DNA Repair MechanismsPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology

Molecular response to climate change: temperature dependence of UV‐induced DNA damage and repair in the freshwater crustacean Daphnia pulicaria

MacFadyen, Emily J., Williamson, Craig E., Grad, Gabriella, Lowery, Megan, Jeffrey, Wade H., Mitchell, David L.·2004·Global Change Biology

Abstract

In temperate lakes, asynchronous cycles in surface water temperatures and incident ultraviolet (UV) radiation expose aquatic organisms to damaging UV radiation at different temperatures. The enzyme systems that repair UV‐induced DNA damage are temperature dependent, and thus potentially less effective at repairing DNA damage at lower temperatures. This hypothesis was tested by examining the levels of UV‐induced DNA damage in the freshwater crustacean Daphnia pulicaria in the presence and absence of longer‐wavelength photoreactivating radiation (PRR) that induces photoenzymatic repair (PER) of DNA damage. By exposing both live and dead (freeze‐killed) Daphnia as well as raw DNA to UV‐B in the presence and absence of PRR, we were able to estimate the relative importance and temperature dependence of PER (light repair), nucleotide excision repair (NER, dark repair), and photoprotection (PP). Total DNA damage increased with increasing temperature. However, the even greater increase in DNA repair rates at higher temperatures led net DNA damage (total DNA damage minus repair) to be greater at lower temperatures. Photoprotection accounted for a much greater proportion of the reduction in DNA damage than did repair. Experiments that looked at survival rates following UV exposure demonstrated that PER increased survival rates. The important implication is that aquatic organisms that depend heavily on DNA repair processes may be less able to survive high UV exposure in low temperature environments. Photoprotection may be more effective under the low temperature, high UV conditions such as are found in early spring or at high elevations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00750.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacFadyen, E. J., Williamson, C. E., Grad, G., Lowery, M., Jeffrey, W. H., & Mitchell, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Lehigh University (US)
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • University of West Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Williamson, Craig E.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-02-19
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
408-416
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2160644803
Cited by
152
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Global Change Biology (publishedVersion)
Funders
Division of Environmental Biology
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Keywords
UV-B radiation, DNA damage, DNA repair, temperature dependence, Daphnia pulicaria, nucleotide excision repair, photoprotection, climate change, freshwater crustaceans

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