1987
DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(87)90348-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Specific strand loss in N-2-acetylaminofluorene-modified DNA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
41
0

Year Published

1988
1988
1998
1998

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
3
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(40,41). In addition, a double-stranded plasmid containing as many as 10 AAF adducts in 1 strand but none in the other strand survives about equallywell as a nondamaged molecule (36). These results indicate that SOS induction does not increase the survival of damaged doublestranded DNA molecules and that their replication proceeds efficiently provided that one strand remains undamaged.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 47%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(40,41). In addition, a double-stranded plasmid containing as many as 10 AAF adducts in 1 strand but none in the other strand survives about equallywell as a nondamaged molecule (36). These results indicate that SOS induction does not increase the survival of damaged doublestranded DNA molecules and that their replication proceeds efficiently provided that one strand remains undamaged.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 47%
“…2), raising the possibility that uncoupling of the replication of the two strands occurs during TLS with a delay in the replication across the adduct, thus leading to an underrepresentation of the progeny of the damaged strand in the colony. Evidence for uncoupling of the replication of strands in the presence of adducts has been presented (36 (37,38). We have previously shown that -1 slippage mutagenesis induced by AAF adducts within runs of guanines proceeds by a mutation pathway that exhibits the same genetic requirements as UV-induced base-substitution mutagenesis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter could reflect uncoupling of the first replication fork to encounter the adduct, such that repli- cation of the undamaged strand continues while replication of the damaged strand is completely or transiently blocked. Evidence exists that uncoupling can occur under some circumstances in E. coli (Koffel-Schwartz et al, 1987) 3 and during SV40 replication in vivo (Burhans et al, 1991). Alternatively, the first fork may not replicate either strand beyond the lesion, with preferential replication of the undamaged strand accomplished by the fork arriving from the other direction in the circular substrate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, an alternative explanation relevant to the plasmid situation that could equally account for the high proportion of 3Gϩ3 pure clones might be the preferential replication and concomitant amplification of the undamaged strand. Lesion-induced strand loss was proposed to explain the prevalence of the undamaged strand in transformants arising from the replication of vectors containing either AAF adducts (20,45) or a single cis-syn cyclobutane thymine dimer (15) in E. coli. It is not possible, with the present constructs, to distinguish between true DA events and lesioninduced strand loss.…”
Section: Tls Of the Aaf-modified Sequence (5 Gggmentioning
confidence: 99%