CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 62

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Age- and Temperature-Dependent Somatic Mutation Accumulation in Drosophila melanogaster

Garcia, Ana Maria, Calder, R. Brent, Dollé, Martijn E. T., Lundell, Martha, Kapahi, Pankaj, Vijg, Jan·2010·PLoS Genetics
DOI 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000950PMC PMC2869313
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000950

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Comparative analysis of somatic mutations in mice and flies. (A) Schematic depiction of the LacZ-plasmid model in Mus musculus and D. melanogaster. Note that the mouse line 60 contains about 10 head-to-tail organized plasmid copies per integration site, but only two plasmid copies are depicted. For the transgenic flies, each line harbors only 1 copy of the pUR288 plasmid. Individual plasmids can be rescued by excision of genomic DNA with Hind III (H) or Pst I (P). After purification from the mouse or fly genomic DNA, self-ligation and transformation into Escherichia coli C (ΔlacZ, galE -) host cells, individual plasmids are recovered in the form of ampicillin-resistant colonies. A small amount of transformants is plated on medium containing X-gal, to determine the total number of plasmids rescued (titer plate). The remainder is plated on media supplemented with the lactose-analogue p-gal, to select only the cells harboring a mutant lacZ (selective plate). The mutant frequency is the ratio of the colonies on the selective plate versus colonies on the titer plate (times the dilution factor). Location and direction of the integration site of the pP[CaSper]vector is shown for line 11. For the mouse, the location and direction of the integrated pUR288 concatamers is shown for line 60. LacZ = lacZ reporter gene; P5′ = 5′ end of (pP[CaSper]); P3′ = 3′ end of (pP[CaSper]); white = the white selection marker. (B) Direct comparison of spontaneous somatic mutation frequency in mice (3-month old; liver) and flies (1–2-days old; whole body). White bars represent the frequency of point mutations and black bars the frequency of DNA rearrangements. The frequency of all mutations in the fly is greater than that of mouse liver (one-tailed Welch Two Sample t-test, p = 9.04e−05). Error bars are Standard Deviations.
Figure 1 Comparative analysis of somatic mutations in mice and flies. (A) Schematic depiction of the LacZ-plasmid model in Mus musculus and D. melanogaster. Note that the mouse line 60 contains about 10 head-to-tail organized plasmid copies per integration site, but only two plasmid copies are depicted. For the transgenic flies, each line harbors only 1 copy of the pUR288 plasmid. Individual plasmids can be rescued by excision of genomic DNA with Hind III (H) or Pst I (P). After purification from the mouse or fly genomic DNA, self-ligation and transformation into Escherichia coli C (ΔlacZ, galE -) host cells, individual plasmids are recovered in the form of ampicillin-resistant colonies. A small amount of transformants is plated on medium containing X-gal, to determine the total number of plasmids rescued (titer plate). The remainder is plated on media supplemented with the lactose-analogue p-gal, to select only the cells harboring a mutant lacZ (selective plate). The mutant frequency is the ratio of the colonies on the selective plate versus colonies on the titer plate (times the dilution factor). Location and direction of the integration site of the pP[CaSper]vector is shown for line 11. For the mouse, the location and direction of the integrated pUR288 concatamers is shown for line 60. LacZ = lacZ reporter gene; P5′ = 5′ end of (pP[CaSper]); P3′ = 3′ end of (pP[CaSper]); white = the white selection marker. (B) Direct comparison of spontaneous somatic mutation frequency in mice (3-month old; liver) and flies (1–2-days old; whole body). White bars represent the frequency of point mutations and black bars the frequency of DNA rearrangements. The frequency of all mutations in the fly is greater than that of mouse liver (one-tailed Welch Two Sample t-test, p = 9.04e−05). Error bars are Standard Deviations.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Somatic mutations as a function of life span at different temperatures. (A) Survivalship of female flies grown at 18, 25 and 29°C (p<0.0001 for all comparisons by log-rank test). (B) The same for male flies (p<0.0001 for all comparisons by log-rank test). (C) Mutation frequency in flies maintained at different temperatures with age. Through linear regression analysis, the slopes of all mutation frequencies with chronological time are significant at the p<.01 level except for female flies at 18°C (see Figure S2). The slopes of the different temperatures are significant for females (p = 3.33e−05) and males (p = 4.89e−05). (D) Mutation accumulation at 18 and 29°C in male flies (data are independent of Figure 2C). (E) Mutation frequency of flies as a function of remaining survival time at a given temperature (data are from Figure 2A–2C). Black = 18°C, green = 25°C, red = 29°C, circle = female, triangle = male. Error bars are standard deviations.
Figure 2 Somatic mutations as a function of life span at different temperatures. (A) Survivalship of female flies grown at 18, 25 and 29°C (p<0.0001 for all comparisons by log-rank test). (B) The same for male flies (p<0.0001 for all comparisons by log-rank test). (C) Mutation frequency in flies maintained at different temperatures with age. Through linear regression analysis, the slopes of all mutation frequencies with chronological time are significant at the p<.01 level except for female flies at 18°C (see Figure S2). The slopes of the different temperatures are significant for females (p = 3.33e−05) and males (p = 4.89e−05). (D) Mutation accumulation at 18 and 29°C in male flies (data are independent of Figure 2C). (E) Mutation frequency of flies as a function of remaining survival time at a given temperature (data are from Figure 2A–2C). Black = 18°C, green = 25°C, red = 29°C, circle = female, triangle = male. Error bars are standard deviations.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 LacZ mutation spectra in D. melanogaster at different temperatures. (A) Frequencies of point mutations (white) and DNA rearrangements (black). Each determination point is based on 60 mutants, taken from the plates used to generate the data in Figure 2C. The accumulation of genome rearrangements was statistically significant (p = 0.0043 in males and p = 0.0260 in females). No significant accumulation of point mutations was detected. (B) Physical maps of the second breakpoint for the genome rearrangements in the fly at 18 and 29°C.
Figure 3 LacZ mutation spectra in D. melanogaster at different temperatures. (A) Frequencies of point mutations (white) and DNA rearrangements (black). Each determination point is based on 60 mutants, taken from the plates used to generate the data in Figure 2C. The accumulation of genome rearrangements was statistically significant (p = 0.0043 in males and p = 0.0260 in females). No significant accumulation of point mutations was detected. (B) Physical maps of the second breakpoint for the genome rearrangements in the fly at 18 and 29°C.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Mutation frequency in DNA from the head, thorax, and abdomen. Of young and old, female (A) and male (B) flies maintained at 29°C. *p<0.05; **p<0.01, ***p<1e−5 (t-test of old vs. young). Mutation frequency of old male thorax was significantly different from old male abdomen (p = 9.13e−05) and old male head (p = 0.01092). Mutation frequency of old female thorax was different only from old head p = 0.03318. Error bars are Standard Deviations.
Figure 4 Mutation frequency in DNA from the head, thorax, and abdomen. Of young and old, female (A) and male (B) flies maintained at 29°C. *p<0.05; **p<0.01, ***p<1e−5 (t-test of old vs. young). Mutation frequency of old male thorax was significantly different from old male abdomen (p = 9.13e−05) and old male head (p = 0.01092). Mutation frequency of old female thorax was different only from old head p = 0.03318. Error bars are Standard Deviations.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. G Failla, 1958, The aging process and carcinogenesis., Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 71, 1124, 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1958.tb46828.x · DOI
  2. LB Russell, 1981, Use of the mouse spot test in chemical mutagenesis: interpretation of past data and recommendations for future work., Mutat Res, 86, 355, 10.1016/0165-1110(81)90011-7 · DOI
  3. B Kaya, 2004, Evaluation of the genotoxicity of four herbicides in the wing spot test of Drosophila melanogaster using two different strains., Mutat Res, 557, 53, 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2003.09.010 · DOI
  4. ME Boerrigter, 1995, Plasmid-based transgenic mouse model for studying in vivo mutations., Nature, 377, 657, 10.1038/377657a0 · DOI
  5. J Vijg, 2002, Large genome rearrangements as a primary cause of aging., Mech Ageing Dev, 123, 907, 10.1016/S0047-6374(02)00028-3 · DOI
  6. RJ Britten, 1986, Rates of DNA sequence evolution differ between taxonomic groups., Science, 231, 1393, 10.1126/science.3082006 · DOI · Paper page
  7. CF Baer, 2007, Mutation rate variation in multicellular eukaryotes: causes and consequences., Nat Rev Genet, 8, 619, 10.1038/nrg2158 · DOI
  8. AM Garcia, 2007, A model system for analyzing somatic mutations in Drosophila melanogaster., Nat Methods, 4, 401, 10.1038/nmeth1027 · DOI
  9. JA Gossen, 1991, High somatic mutation frequencies in a LacZ transgene integrated on the mouse X-chromosome., Mutat Res, 250, 423, 10.1016/0027-5107(91)90198-W · DOI
  10. ME Dollé, 2000, Distinct spectra of somatic mutations accumulated with age in mouse heart and small intestine., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 97, 8403, 10.1073/pnas.97.15.8403 · DOI
  11. ME Dollé, 2002, Genome dynamics in aging mice., Genome Res, 12, 1732, 10.1101/gr.125502 · DOI · Paper page
  12. SF Elena, 1997, Test of synergistic interactions among deleterious mutations in bacteria., Nature, 390, 395, 10.1038/37108 · DOI
  13. ME Dolle, 1999, Characterization of color mutants in lacZ plasmid-based transgenic mice, as detected by positive selection., Mutagenesis, 14, 287, 10.1093/mutage/14.3.287 · DOI
  14. PD Keightley, 2009, Analysis of the genome sequences of three Drosophila melanogaster spontaneous mutation accumulation lines., Genome Res, 19, 1195, 10.1101/gr.091231.109 · DOI
  15. JF Crow, 1997, The high spontaneous mutation rate: is it a health risk?, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 94, 8380, 10.1073/pnas.94.16.8380 · DOI
  16. AM Garcia, 2008, Effect of Ames dwarfism and caloric restriction on spontaneous DNA mutation frequency in different mouse tissues., Mech Ageing Dev, 129, 528, 10.1016/j.mad.2008.04.013 · DOI
  17. EJ Masoro, 2005, Overview of caloric restriction and ageing., Mech Ageing Dev, 126, 913, 10.1016/j.mad.2005.03.012 · DOI · Paper page
  18. U Edman, 2009, Lifespan extension by dietary restriction is not linked to protection against somatic DNA damage in Drosophila melanogaster., Aging Cell, 8, 331, 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2009.00480.x · DOI
  19. W Mair, 2003, Demography of dietary restriction and death in Drosophila., Science, 301, 1731, 10.1126/science.1086016 · DOI
  20. MD Piper, 2007, Dietary restriction in Drosophila: delayed aging or experimental artefact?, PLoS Genet, 3, e57, 10.1371/journal.pgen.0030057 · DOI
  21. D Abele, 2002, Temperature-dependence of mitochondrial function and production of reactive oxygen species in the intertidal mud clam Mya arenaria., J Exp Biol, 205, 1831, 10.1242/jeb.205.13.1831 · DOI · Paper page
  22. J Gruber, 2008, The mitochondrial free radical theory of ageing–where do we stand?, Front Biosci, 13, 6554, 10.2741/3174 · DOI
  23. JJ Gille, 1994, Mutagenicity of metabolic oxygen radicals in mammalian cell cultures., Carcinogenesis, 15, 2695, 10.1093/carcin/15.12.2695 · DOI
  24. M Kappeler, 2008, Drosophila bloom helicase maintains genome integrity by inhibiting recombination between divergent DNA sequences., Nucleic Acids Res, 36, 6907, 10.1093/nar/gkn793 · DOI
  25. M McVey, 2004, Formation of deletions during double-strand break repair in Drosophila DmBlm mutants occurs after strand invasion., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101, 15694, 10.1073/pnas.0406157101 · DOI
  26. RA Busuttil, 2007, Intra-organ variation in age-related mutation accumulation in the mouse., PLoS ONE, 2, e876, 10.1371/journal.pone.0000876 · DOI
  27. M Levine, 2005, Gene regulatory networks for development., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 102, 4936, 10.1073/pnas.0408031102 · DOI · Paper page
  28. AM Garcia, 2007, Detection and analysis of somatic mutations at a lacZ reporter locus in higher organisms: application to Mus musculus and Drosophila melanogaster., Methods Mol Biol, 371, 267, 10.1007/978-1-59745-361-5_20 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 62

Metadata

Authors
Garcia, A. M., Calder, R. B., Dollé, M. E. T., Lundell, M., Kapahi, P., & Vijg, J.
Venue
PLoS Genetics
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2010-05-13
Volume
6
Issue
5
Pages
e1000950
ISSN
1553-7404
DOI
10.1371/journal.pgen.1000950
PMC
PMC2869313
Cited by
62
References
2
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (unspecified)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Age- and Temperature-Dependent Somatic Mutation Accumulation in Drosophila melanogaster. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000950
The paper
Garcia, A. M., Calder, R. B., Dollé, M. E. T., Lundell, M., Kapahi, P., & Vijg, J. (2010). Age- and Temperature-Dependent Somatic Mutation Accumulation in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000950