![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 35, 25144-25150, August 27, 1999
From the 5-Formyluracil (fU), a major methyl oxidation
product of thymine, forms correct (fU:A) and incorrect (fU:G) base
pairs during DNA replication. In the accompanying paper (Masaoka, A.,
Terato, H., Kobayashi, M., Honsho, A., Ohyama, Y., and Ide, H. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 25136-25143), it has been shown
that fU correctly paired with A is recognized by AlkA protein
(Escherichia coli 3-methyladenine DNA glycosylase II). In
the present work, mispairing frequency of fU with G and cellular repair
protein that specifically recognized fU:G mispairs were studied using
defined oligonucleotide substrates. Mispairing frequency of fU was
determined by incorporation of 2'-deoxyribonucleoside 5'-triphosphate
of fU opposite template G using DNA polymerase I Klenow fragment
deficient in 3'-5' exonuclease. Mispairing frequency of fU was
dependent on the nearest neighbor base pair in the primer terminus and
2-12 times higher than that of thymine at pH 7.8 and 2.6-6.7 times
higher at pH 9.0 with an exception of the nearest neighbor
T(template):A(primer). AlkA catalyzed the excision of fU placed
opposite G, as well as A, and the excision efficiencies of fU for fU:G
and fU:A pairs were comparable. In addition, MutS protein involved in
methyl-directed mismatch repair also recognized fU:G mispairs and bound
them with an efficiency comparable to T:G mispairs, but it did not
recognize fU:A pairs. Prior complex formation between MutS and a
heteroduplex containing an fU:G mispair inhibited the activity of AlkA
to fU. These results suggest that fU present in DNA can be restored by two independent repair pathways, i.e. the base excision
repair pathway initiated by AlkA and the methyl-directed mismatch
repair pathway initiated by MutS. Biological relevance of the present results is discussed in light of DNA replication and repair in cells.
Damage to DNA base moieties alters the base pairing properties,
hence generating mutation after DNA replication. Deamination of
cytosine and adenine, for example, results in uracil and hypoxanthine, respectively, and changes their coding properties in an explicit manner
because the deamination products can fully (uracil) or partly
(hypoxanthine) adopt hydrogen bonding schemes of thymine and guanine,
respectively. Abasic sites also result in mutation by an explicit
mechanism due to the total loss of base pairing information at the
sites. In contrast, some of DNA base lesions that seemingly retain
intact coding regions have mutagenic potential. 7,8-Dihydro-8-oxoguanine is one of the best studied examples for this
type of lesions. In this lesion, the functional groups in the
pyrimidine unit responsible for canonical hydrogen bond formation remain intact, but oxidation of the imidazole unit (C-8) tends to shift
the anti-syn equilibrium of the base conformation so that
7,8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine in syn conformation forms a mispair with adenine during DNA replication (1-3). Similarly, we have previously shown that 5-formyluracil
(fU)1 retaining an apparently
intact coding region forms a mispair with guanine, as well as a correct
pair with adenine (4). The mispairing frequency of fU with guanine is
significantly higher than that of parent thymine, and the decreased
pKa of fU relative to thymine is responsible for the
mispairing. Thus, alterations of a part of a base structure that is not
directly involved in base pairing can affect anti-syn (ex.
7, 8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine) or acid-base (fU) equilibria, thereby
leading to mutation in an implicit manner.
In the accompanying paper (5), we have shown that fU paired with
adenine is recognized by Escherichia coli 3-methyladenine glycosylase II (AlkA) and excised from DNA. In the present work, we
quantitatively evaluated the mispairing frequency of fU based on the
misincorporation of the deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate of fU (fdUTP)
and then searched for cellular repair systems that recognize an fU:G
mispair site-specifically introduced into oligonucleotide substrates.
We report here that the mispairing frequency of fU with G is nearest
neighbor base-dependent and that fU:G mispairs are
specifically recognized by two repair proteins, i.e. AlkA (3-methyladenine glycosylase II) and MutS, which are involved in the
base excision and methyl-directed mismatch repair pathways, respectively.
Chemicals--
Ultra-pure dNTPs were purchased from Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech. 5-Formyl-2'-deoxyuridine (fdU) and
5-formyl-2'-deoxyuridine 5'-triphosphate (fdUTP) were synthesized and
purified as described (4).
Enzymes--
T4 polynucleotide kinase and E. coli DNA
polymerase I Klenow fragment deficient in 3'-5' exo nuclease (Pol I Kf
(exo Oligonucleotides--
Templates and primers for DNA polymerase
reactions (Table I) were synthesized by the standard phosphoramidite
method and purified by reversed phase HPLC. 25T and 25FU containing
thymine and fU at the same position, respectively, were prepared by DNA polymerase reactions using template/primer 30A/P1 as described in the
accompanying paper (5) and separated from the complementary strand 30A
by preparative 16% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis under denaturing
conditions. 25T and 25FU were extracted from the gel and purified by a
Sep-Pak cartridge (6). The amounts of the recovered oligonucleotides
were calculated from the specific radioactivity of the primer P1 used
in the polymerase reaction.
Enzymatic Parameters of Nucleotide Incorporation--
Primers
(13A, 13G, 13C, and 13T, Table I) were 5'-end labeled with
[ AlkA Reaction--
Duplex oligonucleotide substrates 25FU/30A
and 25FU/30G (Table I) were incubated with AlkA protein in Buffer B
(typically 25 µl) at 37 °C for 30 min. Buffer B for AlkA reactions
consisted of 70 mM Hepes-KOH (pH 7.8), 1 mM
EDTA, 5 mM 2-mercaptoethanol. The substrate concentration
and the amount of AlkA used in the reaction are indicated in the figure
legends. After incubation, DNA was purified by phenol extraction and
ethanol precipitation. The purified DNA was incubated with endonuclease
IV (4 ng) at 37 °C for 30 min in Buffer C (10 µl), mixed with gel
loading buffer, and finally subjected to gel electrophoresis. Buffer C
was composed of 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 50 mM
NaCl, and 1 mM EDTA.
25FU/30A and 25FU/30G were also treated with AlkA in the presence of
MutS protein to elucidate the effect of competitive action of these
proteins on the substrates. The substrates (2 nM) were preincubated with MutS protein (0.049-0.39 µg, approximately 0.5-4 pmol) in Buffer B (9 µl) at 0 °C for 10 min, and then AlkA (10 ng)
diluted in Buffer B (1 µl) was added to the reaction mixture. The
reaction mixture was incubated at 37 °C for 10 min. Product analysis
was performed as described above.
MutS Binding Assay--
The binding of MutS protein to
oligonucleotide duplexes was analyzed by the gel electrophoretic
mobility shift assay as described by Jiricny et al. (8).
Binding reactions were performed by mixing 3 µl of 5'-labeled
oligonucleotide duplexes (25FU/30A, 25FU/30G, 25T/30A, and 25T/30G, 0.1 pmol, Table I) in Buffer D with 2 µl of MutS protein (0.2-0.82 µg,
approximately 2.1-8.4 pmol) appropriately diluted in Buffer E. The
composition of Buffer D was 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.6), 0.1 mM dithiothreitol, and that of Buffer E was 50 mM Hepes-KOH (pH 7.2), 100 mM KCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 50%
glycerol. The reaction mixture was incubated on ice for 30 min
and then supplemented with 2 µl 50% sucrose. Samples (2 µl)
were loaded onto a 6% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel and
electrophoresed in TBE buffer at 4 °C. Gels were dried and
autoradiographed at Attempt to Detect fdUTP in E. coli Cells Exposed to Hydrogen
Peroxide--
E. coli AB1157 cells were grown at 37 °C
in M9 medium supplemented with 0.4% glucose, 0.5% casamino acids
(Difco), 2 mM MgSO4, 0.1 mM
CaCl2. At an absorbance of 0.6, cells were harvested by centrifugation and resuspended in phosphate-buffered saline
( Base Pairing Properties of fU--
In our previous study, it was
shown that fdUTP efficiently substitutes for dTTP and to the less
extent for dCTP, indicating that fU forms a mispair with guanine as
well as a correct pair with adenine (4). To clarify more quantitative
aspects of correct and incorrect base pairing capabilities of fU,
steady state kinetic parameters for incorporation of fdUTP were
determined using a set of defined template and primer. For correct
incorporation, template/primer 27TA/13A (Table
I) was incubated with Pol I Kf (exo
Mispairing capabilities of fU were studied based on the incorporation
of fdUTP opposite template guanine. A set of template and primer
containing all four possible nearest neighbor base pairs at the primer
terminus (27TG/13A, 27AG/13T, 27CG/13G, and 27GG/13C, Table I) was used
to elucidate their effects on the mispairing frequency. The parameters
are summarized in Table III along with
those for dTTP and dCTP. The mispairing frequencies (f) of
fU were lower than the correct paring frequency of C by factors of
104-105 at pH 7.8 and
103-104 at pH 9.0. The major discrimination
factor was the large increase in Km
(102-104-fold), and the contribution of the
reduction of Vmax was relatively minor (at most
by a factor of 10). To compare mispairing frequencies of fdUTP and dTTP
more clearly, f values in Table III were plotted against the
nearest neighbor pairs in Fig. 1.
Mispairing frequencies were clearly nearest
neighbor-dependent and pH-dependent for both fdUTP and dTTP, and they were consistently higher for fdUTP than dTTP
except the T(template):A(primer) pair (see also Fig.
2). The mispairing frequency increased
with the pH shift from 7.8 to 9.0 for both fdUTP and dTTP. In this pH
range, the dominant form of the base unit of fdUTP changes from the
keto to enolate (ionized) form due to the acid-base equilibrium of the
fU moiety (pKa = 8.6). The enolate form of fU forms
a base pair with guanine possibly through two hydrogen bonds (4).
Likewise, partial ionization of the thymine moiety in dTTP
(pKa = 10) at pH 9.0 resulted in the increased
mispairing frequencies in comparison with those at pH 7.8. Relative
mispairing frequencies of fdUTP versus dTTP
(f(fdUTP)/f(dTTP)) are shown in Fig. 2. With an exception for the
T(template):A(primer) pair, the mispairing frequencies of fdUTP was
2-12-fold higher than those of dTTP at pH 7.8 and 2.6-6.7-fold higher
at pH 9.0. These results suggest that the mutagenic effect associated
with fU is sequence context-dependent.
Activity of AlkA for fU Paired with A and G--
fU can form fU:G
mispairs as well as correct fU:A pairs during DNA replication (Ref. 4
and this work), although the frequency of the fU:G formation was much
low compared with that of fU:A formation. Because oxidation of thymine
to fU in intracellular dTTP or DNA can lead to increased mutation via
the fU:G intermediate, this mispair needs to be corrected before the
progression to the subsequent round of DNA replication. Thus, the
substrate containing an fU:G mispair was tested for E. coli
3-methyladenine glycosylase II (AlkA) that was shown to recognize
correct fU:A pairs and remove fU from DNA in the accompanying paper
(5). Substrates containing an fU:G mispair (25FU/30G, Table I) and an
fU:A pair (25FU/30A) were incubated with AlkA, followed by endonuclease
IV to cleave abasic sites generated by the N-glycosylase
activity of AlkA. Products were analyzed by polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis. Fig. 3A shows
typical results of the product analysis. AlkA recognized fU placed
opposite G (lane 6) as well as A (lane 3), so
that products incised at the lesion were observed for both substrates
containing fU:G and fU:A pairs. To compare the activity of AlkA for
fU:A and fU:G pairs quantitatively, similar reactions were performed with different concentrations of the substrates or different amounts of
AlkA. 25FU/30A and 25FU/30G were equally incised at the 0.2 and 10 nM substrate concentrations (Fig. 3B). In
addition, the yields of nicked products for fU:A and fU:G pairs were
essentially similar with varying amounts of AlkA and increased in
parallel with the amount of AlkA (Fig.
4). These results clearly indicate that
fU:G and fU:A pairs are recognized by AlkA with comparable efficiencies.
Recognition of fU:G Mispair by MutS Protein--
Base
mispairs generated by DNA replication are primarily restored by the
methyl-directed (MutHLS) system in E. coli, and similar mechanisms are present in eukaryotic cells (reviewed in Refs. 11 and
12). These postreplication mismatch repair pathways are initiated by
binding of MutS or its homologues to mispaired bases. Thus, binding of
MutS protein to an fU:G mispair was examined using a gel
electrophoretic mobility shift assay. Fig.
5 shows the result when homoduplexes
(25FU/30A, 25T/30A) and heteroduplexes (25FU/30G, 25T/30G) were
incubated with MutS. Shifted bands were observed for 25FU/30G
(lane 4) and 25T/30G (lane 8), containing fU:G
and T:G mispairs, respectively, but not for 25FU/30A (lane 2) and 25T/30A (lane 6), containing correct fU:A and
T:A pairs, respectively. To compare the binding affinities of MutS to
the mispaired substrates, the concentration of MutS protein was varied in the assay and the fraction of the bound substrates was determined by
quantitating free and bound DNA species (Fig.
6). The amounts of MutS required for 50%
binding for T:G and fU:G mispairs were virtually similar (5.1 and 5.7 pmol, respectively) These values are also translated into approximately
1 µM as a MutS concentration. Accordingly, despite the
difference in the C5 substituents of the bases, MutS binds to fU:G and
T:G mispairs with comparable affinities.
Effects of MutS Protein on the Repair of fU by AlkA--
The
specificity of the two E. coli repair proteins AlkA and MutS
shown in the above experiments suggested that fU:A pairs were
preferentially repaired by AlkA, whereas fU:G mispairs were recognized
by both AlkA and MutS. Possible consequences of the coexistence of the
two proteins in the repair of fU were investigated. 25FU/30G and
25FU/30A were preincubated with varying amounts of MutS, then treated
with AlkA. The repair efficiency of AlkA to homoduplex 25FU/30A was
slightly enhanced by the addition of MutS (Fig.
7). The enhancement was dependent on the
amount of MutS and reached a plateau with an approximately 1.8-fold
increase in the repair efficiency. A similar enhancement was observed
by the addition of bovine serum albumin in place for MutS protein (data
not shown), implying that general (or nonspecific) protein-protein interactions resulted in stabilization of the AlkA activity during the
assay. In contrast to the homoduplex, the repair activity of AlkA for
the heteroduplex (25FU/30G) was notably inhibited by the presence of
MutS. The repair activity of AlkA was inhibited by 50% with
approximately 2 pmol of MutS (or 0.2 µM as a MutS protein
concentration) and further decreased by the addition of more MutS. The
concentration of MutS required for 50% inhibition of the AlkA activity
to 25FU/30G (approximately 0.2 µM) was considerably lower
than that for 50% binding to the same substrate in the gel mobility
shift assay described above (approximately 1 µM),
probably reflecting the latent differences in the two assays. Such
discrepancies were also observed when the binding affinity of MutS to
heteroduplexes was measured by gel mobility shift and DNase I
protection assays (8, 13).
Attempted Detection of fdUTP in E. coli Cells--
Because a part
of the present study concerning genotoxic effects of fU is based on
incorporation of fdUTP potentially formed in the intracellular
nucleotide pool, we attempted to measure the level of fdUTP in E. coli cells after oxidative stress as described under
"Experimental Procedures." E. coli AB1157 cells were
treated with 20 and 40 mM hydrogen peroxide at 37 °C for 1 h and lysed by repeated freeze-thaw cycles. The nucleotides released from cells were converted to the corresponding nucleosides by
alkali phosphatase treatment and quantified by HPLC. The standard sample containing authentic fdUTP and dTTP gave reasonable results with
respect to the chromatographic separation and their recovery after the
extraction procedure used. The retention times of fdU and
2'-deoxythymidine were 14.9 and 18.9 min, respectively. The recovery of
fdU derived from fdUTP was approximately 40%, and that of
2'-deoxythymidine from dTTP was approximately 80%. However, the
putative fdU peak was obscured by a large unknown co-migrating peak
when the extracted sample was directly analyzed. We have previously
shown that fdU can be quantitatively converted to a thiazolidine
derivative by incubation with cysteamine (10). This modification
results in a large shift of the retention time. Thus, the sample after
the alkali phosphatase treatment was incubated with cysteamine and
analyzed by HPLC. However, the peak corresponding the thiazolidine
derivative of fdU (retention time, 26.0 min) was not detected over the
background noise. This result suggests that the level of fdUTP in the
hydrogen peroxide-treated cells was below the detection limit. Because
the concentration of nucleotides from the intracellular pool was
diluted by roughly 10-fold in the present extraction procedure, we
estimated that the lowest detection limit of the fdUTP concentration in
the pool was approximately 4 µM with a signal to noise
ratio (S:N) of 3 under the present conditions. This limit corresponds
to 5% of the pool concentration of dTTP (approximately 77 µM) in prokaryotic cells (14). According to this
estimation, it is very likely that fdUTP can not be detected unless a
significant portion of intracellular dTTP (at least 5%) is oxidized to
fdUTP by the oxidative stress. We suspect that such a level of dTTP
oxidation to fdUTP will hardly occur in cells in the present hydrogen
peroxide treatment. Thus, we concluded that it was virtually impossible
to detect fdUTP formed in the intracellular nucleotide pool using HPLC
coupled with UV detection. Much more sensitive and selective methods
need to be devised for the detection.
In the present and accompanying (5) papers, it has been shown that
fU, a major methyl oxidation product of thymine, is recognized by two
repair proteins, i.e. AlkA and MutS. fU correctly paired
with adenine is excised from DNA by AlkA, an enzyme responsible for
base excision repair of alkylated bases such as 3-methyladenine and
7-methylguanine (15, 16). AlkA also recognized fU mispaired with
guanine, and the repair efficiencies for fU:A and fU:G pairs were
comparable (Figs. 3 and 4). Interestingly, an fU:G but not fU:A pair
was also recognized by MutS, which initiates methyl-directed DNA
mismatch repair by binding to base mispairs and small
insertion/deletions (11, 12). The binding efficiency of MutS to an fU:G
pair was comparable to that to a T:G pair, which is most tightly bound by MutS in vitro and most efficiently corrected by the
methyl-directed mismatch repair system in vivo (13, 17).
These results suggest that fU present in DNA may be subjected to two
independent repair pathways, i.e. base excision repair
initiated by AlkA (fU:A and fU:G pairs) and methyl-directed mismatch
repair initiated by MutS (fU:G), although subsequent repair reactions
involving MutL and MutH proteins were not demonstrated in this work.
AlkA has a broad substrate specificity, particularly base lesions with
the labile N-glycosidic bond (18-20), and is suggested to
use a base flipping mechanism for excision of damaged bases (21, 22).
Granted this mechanism, fU, whether placed opposite adenine or guanine,
may flip out the DNA duplex into the hydrophobic cleft of the AlkA
active site and is removed with comparable efficiencies as judged from
the present results (Fig. 4). The methyl-directed mismatch repair
initiated by MutS recognizes and corrects all single-base mismatches
(except for C:C) and small insertion/deletion mispairs (11, 12).
Moreover, it has recently been shown that MutS also binds to genetic
lesions such as O6-methylguanine:T and
1,N6-ethenoadenine:T (23, 24). In addition,
hMutS fU is formed in DNA by oxidation of DNA base thymine (Fig.
8, path I) or incorporation of
fdUTP generated in the nucleotide pool (paths III and
IV). According to the present results, fU in fU:A pairs is
removed by AlkA via paths a and e, whereas fU in
fU:G pairs formed by incorporation of dGTP (Fig. 8, path II) or fdUTP (path IV) is removed by AlkA or corrected by
methyl-directed mismatch repair (paths b and d).
These repair pathways, except path c, can operate
independently or cooperatively to avoid the genotoxic effects of fU.
Conversely, repair of an fU:G mispair formed by miscoding of template
fU (path II) by AlkA results in preferential removal of fU
(path c), thereby fixing mutation after repair synthesis.
Although biological relevance of the two competing repair pathways
(b and c) is not known, it is rather puzzling that such a mutagenic repair path c is potentially present
in cells. In this regard, we have shown in this study that the activity of AlkA to fU:G mispairs is preferentially inhibited by the prior complex formation between MutS and the heteroduplex substrate containing fU:G (Fig. 7). Accordingly, it is tempting to speculate that
preferential binding of MutS to fU:G mispairs may have dual roles in
cells, i.e. recruitment of MutL and MutH to the genetic lesion for methyl-directed repair and prevention of mutagenic repair of
fU by AlkA (Fig. 8, path c). The MutS protein binds to
heteroduplexes as a dimer (17, 32). The number of MutS molecules in an
exponentially growing E. coli cell has been estimated to be
186 as a dimer, which is translated into 260 nM as the MutS dimer concentration (34). Although the number of AlkA molecules in an
E. coli cell is not known, this enzyme accounts for roughly Mutagenic repair similar to path c has been suggested in the repair of
8oxoG:A mispairs that is formed by misincorporation of 8oxoG opposite
template A (36). In this case, excision of correct A by MutY DNA
glycosylase results in A:T to G:C transitions. In light of the possible
dual roles of MutS in the repair of damage-containing mispaired bases
(discussed above for fU:G mispairs), we measured the binding affinity
of MutS to a duplex containing 8oxoG:A by gel electrophoretic mobility
shift assay. However, the affinity of MutS to the 8oxoG:A pair was low
(data not shown), thereby ruling out the involvement of MutS in the
processing of the 8oxoG:A lesion.
The present work has shown that fU forms mispairs with template guanine
in a sequence context-dependent manner when fdUTP is
incorporated by DNA polymerase, although the detailed mechanism of the
nearest neighbor effect is unknown. Recently, in vivo
mutagenicity of fdUTP involving the fU:G intermediate has been also
confirmed using E. coli cells (37). Assuming the base
pairing symmetry of DNA, it is likely that fU present in the template
strand also directs similar misincorporation (for a contradictory
report, see Ref. 38). The underlying mechanism of the fU:G mispair
formation during DNA replication is ionization of the fU moiety
markedly promoted by the electron-withdrawing formyl group. A similar
mechanism is involved in the mutagenesis arising from mispairing of
bromouracil (BrU) with guanine (39), where BrU has the
electron-withdrawing bromine group at the pyrimidine C5 position. Thus,
mutations arising from fU and BrU are attributable to the common
mechanism. E. coli strains defective in methyl-directed
repair are hypersensitive to base substitution mutagenesis by BrU (40,
41), indicating methyl-directed repair of BrU:G mispairs in pathways
like b and d in Fig. 8. Therefore, it is very
likely that fU:G mispairs recognized by MutS is also subjected to the
same methyl-directed repair pathway.
The alkA mutant of E. coli is not sensitive to
ionizing radiation that produces many types of oxidative thymine damage
including fU (42). Unlike other thymine damage, such as thymine glycol and urea analogues (43-45), fU in a DNA template or nascent primer strand does not exert cytotoxic effects by inhibiting DNA synthesis (4,
38), although it is potentially mutagenic. Thus, the lethal effect of
fU may not show up even if this lesion is present in DNA.
Alternatively, there might be an additional enzyme that recognizes fU.
In the case of E. coli endonuclease III (Nth) and VIII (Nei)
having overlapping substrate specificity, only the double mutant
(nth nei) exhibits sensitivities to ionizing radiation and
hydrogen peroxide (33, 46). In addition, it is important to address the
physiological relevance of multiple pathways for the potential repair
of fU lesions suggested in this study. This can be performed in future
studies by constructing a vector containing fU at a defined site and
analyzing fU-induced mutations in E. coli strains defective
in alkA and mutS.
We thank Kenjiro Asagoshi for technical
assistance in HPLC measurements.
*
This work was supported by grants-in-aid from the Ministry
of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan (to H. I.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel. & Fax:
81-824-24-7457; E-mail: ideh@ipc.hiroshima-u.ac.jp.
The abbreviations used are:
fU, 5-formyluracil;
fdU, 5-formyl-2'-deoxyuridine;
fdUTP, 5-formyl-2'-deoxyuridine
5'-triphosphate;
Pol I Kf, E. coli DNA polymerase I Klenow
fragment deficient in 3'-5' exonuclease;
AlkA, E. coli
3-methyladenine DNA glycosylase II;
8oxoG, 7,8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine;
BrU, 5-bromouracil;
HPLC, high pressure liquid chromatography.
Enzymatic Repair of 5-Formyluracil
II. MISMATCH FORMATION BETWEEN 5-FORMYLURACIL AND GUANINE DURING
DNA REPLICATION AND ITS RECOGNITION BY TWO PROTEINS INVOLVED IN
BASE EXCISION REPAIR (AlkA) AND MISMATCH REPAIR (MutS)*
,
,
,
,
,
¶
Graduate Department of Gene Science,
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
)) were obtained from Toyobo and New England Biolabs,
respectively. Alkali phosphatase and cloned MutS protein was purchased
from Roche Molecular Biochemicals and Amersham Pharmacia Biotech,
respectively. Cloned AlkA and endonuclease IV were prepared as
described in the accompanying paper (5).
-32P]ATP (110 TBq/mmol, Amersham Pharmacia Biotech)
and T4 polynucleotide kinase, and purified as described (6). The
primers were annealed to appropriate templates, and template/primer
(0.3 pmol) was incubated with Pol I Kf (exo
) (0.012 unit)
and dNTP (fdUTP, dTTP or dCTP) in Buffer A (6 µl) at 25 °C. Buffer
A consisted of 66 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.8 or 9.0), 1.5 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, 0.5 mg/ml bovine serum albumin, and 6.6 mM MgCl2. Appropriate ranges of dNTP
concentration and incubation time were determined in preliminary
experiments, then the parameters were measured using these ranges (see
below). The percentage of the extended primer was generally less than
30% under these conditions. For the correct incorporation
(i.e. fdUTP and dTTP opposite template A, dCTP opposite
template G), the dNTP concentration range was typically 0.025-2
µM, and incubation time was 3 min. For the incorrect incorporation (i.e. fdUTP and dTTP opposite template G),
they were typically 10-1000 µM and 10-30 min under
these conditions. After incubation, the reaction was terminated by the
addition of gel loading buffer consisted of 0.05% xylene cyanol,
0.05% bromphenol blue, 20 mM EDTA, and 98% formamide. The
sample was separated by 16% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis under
denaturing conditions. In the gel electrophoresis, TPE (90 mM Tris-phosphate and 2 mM EDTA, pH 6.6) buffer
was used in stead of TBE (90 mM Tris borate and 1 mM EDTA, pH 8.2) because electrophoresis of the reaction
products containing 3'-terminal fU in TBE resulted in smearing of the
band (data not shown), probably due to the acid-base equilibrium of the
fU moiety (pKa = 8.6) (4, 7). The smearing of the
band could be minimized by electrophoresis in TPE buffer. After
electrophoresis, the radioactivity of the extended and unextended
primer was quantitated by Fuji BAS 2000. Kinetic parameters for
incorporation of dNTP were calculated from Lineweaver-Burk plots.
80 °C. Free and bound DNA species were quantitated by Fuji BAS 2000.
volume of the original culture). Hydrogen peroxide was
added to the cell suspension (final concentrations, 20 and 40 mM), and the suspension was kept at 37 °C for 1 h.
Cells were collected by centrifugation at 4 °C, and washed by cold
phosphate-buffered saline twice, and resuspended in lysis buffer (3 volumes of the cell pellet) containing 150 mM Tris-HCl (pH
8.0), 5 mM EDTA, and lysozyme (final concentration, 1 mg/ml). Cells were lysed by repeated freeze-thaw cycles. The lysis
solution was mixed with 3 volumes of cold 5% trichloroacetic acid,
mixed vigorously, and clarified by centrifugation. The supernatant was
taken and extracted by 2 volumes of trioctylamine/1,1,1-trichloroethane
(1:4 v/v) to remove trichloroacetic acid (9). The water phase (400 µl) was passed through a C18 Sep-Pak cartridge light (Waters). An
aliquot of the flow-through fraction (100 µl) containing nucleotides
was mixed with 5 µl of 500 mM Tris-HCl (pH 9.0), 80 mM MgCl2, and alkali phosphatase (6 units) and
incubated at 37 °C for 2 h. The sample was filtered with an
ultrafiltration filter (molecular weight cut, approximately 10,000) and
the filtrate was subjected to HPLC analysis. Alternatively, the
filtered sample (100 µl) was mixed with 100 mM cysteamine
(5 µl) for derivatization to a thiazolidine derivative (10), left at
room temperature for 8 h, and analyzed by HPLC. The HPLC system
consisted of Jasco Model PU-980 pumps, a Hitachi Model
L-4200H UV-VIS detector, a Hitachi model D-2500 integrator,
and a column oven (40 °C). The nucleosides resulting from alkali
phosphatase digestion were separated on a C18 WS-DNA column (0.46 × 15 cm, Wako) using a linear methanol gradient in 10 mM
phosphate buffer (pH 7.4): 0% methanol (0-5 min), 0-20% (5-35
min). The flow rate was 0.8 ml/min. The monitoring wavelength was 280 nm (
max of 5-formyl-2'-deoxyuridine (fdU)) and 265 nm
(
max of the thiazolidine derivative) for the samples without and with the derivatization, respectively. To determine the
recovery efficiency, the extraction procedure was performed on a
standard sample containing authentic fdUTP and dTTP.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
) in the presence of varying concentrations of fdUTP
or dTTP, and initial velocities of their incorporation opposite
template A were measured by gel electrophoresis. Parameters
(Vmax and Km) were determined
at pH 7.8 and 9.0 to elucidate the effects of the acid-base equilibrium
of the base unit of fdUTP. The pKa values of the
base units of fdUTP and dTTP are 8.6 and 10.0, respectively (4, 7). The
ratio of the correct incorporation efficiencies (f = Vmax/Km) for fdUTP and dTTP
were approximately 1/2 (0.52/1) at pH 7.8 and 1/4 (0.06/0.23) at pH 9.0 (Table II),
indicating that fU retained the base pairing capability similar to
parent thymine but with somewhat reduced efficiencies. At pH 9.0, ionization of the base unit of fdUTP (pKa = 8.6) led
to a notable increase in Km (= 1.64 µM) relative to that at pH 7.8 (Km = 0.12). Consequently, the incorporation efficiency was reduced
significantly (f = 0.06), although the deviation from the optimum
pH for the DNA polymerase appeared to be an additional factor as judged
from the moderate decrease in the f value for dTTP: f = 1 (pH 7.8)
and 0.23 (pH 9.0).
List of oligonucleotides used in this study
Kinetic parameters (Vmax and Km) and frequencies (f) of
correct incorporation of fdUTP and dTTP opposite template adenine
Kinetic parameters (Vmax and Km) and frequencies (f) of
incorrect incorporation of fdUTP and dTTP opposite template guanine

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Nearest neighbor and pH effects on the
mispairing of fU and T. The mispairing (fU:G and T:G) and
correctly pairing (C:G) frequencies were determined by Pol I Kf
(exo
)-catalyzed incorporation of fdUTP, dTTP, and dCTP
opposite template G at pH 7.8 and 9.0. The mispairing frequency
(f, relative to the correct C:G pair) shown in Table III was
plotted against the nearest neighbor base pairs in the primer
terminus.

View larger version (30K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Comparison of the mispairing frequencies of
fU and T in dNTP forms. The ratio of the mispairing
frequencies of fdUTP and dTTP (f(fdUTP)/f(dTTP)) for the same
template/primer was calculated from the data in Table III and was
plotted against the nearest neighbor base pairs in the primer terminus
for pH 7.8 and 9.0.

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Recognition of fU paired with A and G
by AlkA. A, polyacrylamide gel analysis of the repair
activity of AlkA to fU:A and fU:G pairs. 25FU/30A and 25FU/30G (0.2 nM) containing fU:A and fU:G pairs, respectively, were
incubated with AlkA (10 ng) in Buffer B (25 µl) at 37 °C for 30 min. After incubation, DNA was purified by phenol extraction and
ethanol precipitation. Purified DNA was treated with endonuclase IV (4 ng) at 37 °C for 30 min in Buffer C (10 µl), mixed with gel
loading buffer, and electrophoresed on a 16% denaturing polyacrylamide
gel. Lane 1, P1 (marker, Table I); lane 2, untreated 25FU/30A; lane 3, 25FU/30A treated with AlkA
followed by endonuclease IV; lane 4, 25FU/30A treated with
endonuclease IV alone; lane 5, untreated 25FU/30G;
lane 6, 25FU/30G treated with AlkA followed by endonuclease
IV; lane 7, 25FU/30G treated with endonuclease IV alone.
B, activity of AlkA to fU:A and fU:G pairs with different
substrate concentrations. Substrates (0.2 or 10 nM) were
treated with AlkA and endonuclease IV as described above. Products were
quantitated by Fuji BAS 2000.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Correlation between the amounts of AlkA and
reaction products for fU:A and fU:G pairs. A, product
analysis by gel electrophoresis. 25FU/30A (lanes 1-5) and
25FU/30G (lanes 6-10) all in 20 nM were treated
with varying amounts of AlkA and products were separated as described
in Fig. 3A. The amount of AlkA was 1.55 ng (lanes
1 and 6), 3.1 ng (lanes 2 and 7),
6.2 ng (lanes 3 and 8), 9.3 ng (lanes
4 and 9), and 15.5 ng (lanes 5 and
10). B, plots of the yield of nicked products
(%) versus the amount of AlkA protein. After gel
electrophoresis, products were quantitated by Fuji BAS 2000. Data
points were average values from two independent experiments. Open
circles, 25FU/30A (fU:A); closed circles, 25FU/30G
(fU:G).

View larger version (42K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Gel electrophoretic mobility shift assay for
MutS binding to duplexes containing fU:A and fU:G pairs. 25FU/30A
(containing an fU:A pair), 25FU/30G (fU:G), 25T/30A (T:A), and 25T/30G
(T:G) were incubated with MutS as described under "Experimental
Procedures," and free and bound complexes were analyzed by 6%
nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Target base pairs in
the duplexes and the absence and presence of MutS (indicated by
and + signs, respectively) are shown on the top of the gel.

View larger version (17K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Binding efficiency of MutS to fU:G and T:G
mispairs. Gel electrophoretic mobility shift assay was performed
as described in Fig. 4 using the heteroduplexes 25FU/30G (fU:G) and
25T/30G (T:G) and varying amounts of MutS protein. Fraction (%) of the
bound DNA species was determined by Fuji BAS 2000. Averaged data from
three independent experiments with standard deviations were plotted
against the amount of MutS. Open circles, T:G pair;
closed circles, fU:G pair.

View larger version (17K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Differential effects of MutS protein on the
repair efficiency of AlkA to fU:A and fU:G pairs. 25FU/30A and
25FU/30G (2 nM) were preincubated with the indicated
amounts of MutS protein at 0 °C for 10 min. Then AlkA (10 ng) were
added to the reaction mixture, and incubation was continued at 37 °C
for 10 min. Products were separated and quantitated as described in
Fig. 3. Open circles, 25FU/30A (fU:A); closed
circles, 25FU/30G (fU:G).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
, an eukaryotic functional homologue of MutS and a heterodimer
of hMSH2 and hMSH6 (GTBP), binds to base pairs containing damage, such
as cisplatin-1,2-d(GpG) cross-links,
O6-methylguanine:T,
O6-methylguanine:C,
O4-methylthymine:A, and 2-aminofluorene and
N-acetyl-2-aminofluorene adducts of guanine (25-28). To our
knowledge, the present paper is the first report on the binding of MutS
proteins to oxidative DNA lesions, in this case fU. The underlying
mechanism of the recognition of an fU:G mispair by MutS is likely an
overall structural similarity between fU:G and T:G mispairs. The
mispair initially formed during DNA replication contains an
fU(enolate):G pair because the enolate (ionized) form of fU is
responsible for the mispairing with G (4). After incorporation, the
enolate turns into the keto form, a dominant form under physiological
pH, due to the equilibrium. According to the pKa
value for the acid-base equilibrium of fU, the equilibrium ratio of the
keto versus enolate form in fU:G mispairs is expected as
96:4 at pH 7.2 (4). Thus, MutS is likely to bind to fU(keto):G
mispairs, which closely resemble the mispaired T:G structure.
Footprinting and photo-cross-linking studies on Thermus
aquaticus (Taq) MutS protein and GTBP have suggested
that a highly conserved N-terminal region of MutS proteins at least
interacts with the major groove of mispaired or unpaired sites
(29-31). Therefore, the comparable affinities of MutS to fU:G and T:G
mispairs indicate that substitution of the thymine methyl group
protruding in the major groove by the formyl group (fU) does not alter
the binding affinity.
of the 3-methyladenine glycosylase activity in uninduced
cells. The remainder is due to Tag protein, the number of which in a
cell has been also estimated around 200 molecules/cell, or 280 nM (35). Granting a simple enzyme distribution proportional to the repair activity to 3-methyladenine, cellular concentration of
AlkA will be roughly 20 molecules/cell, or 28 nM. Because
the present experiment, shown in Fig. 7, employed 25-200
nM MutS dimers (0.5-4 pmol/10 µl) and approximately 30 nM AlkA (10 ng/10 µl) for the competitive reaction, we
feel that the putative second role of MutS (prevention of mutagenic
repair of fU:G pairs) has a certain rational basis. According to the
DNase I footprinting study (32), MutS asymmetrically protects about 22 nucleotides on each strand around the G:T mismatch. Thus, MutS bound to
the fU:G mismatch can inhibit the access of AlkA protein to the
lesioned site.

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Possible scheme of fU repair, involving AlkA
(base excision repair pathway) and MutS (methyl-directed mismatch
repair pathway).
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

![]()
FOOTNOTES
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Kouchhakdjian, M.,
Bodepuri, V.,
Shibutani, S.,
Eisenberg, M.,
Johnson, F.,
Grollman, A. P.,
and Patel, D. J.
(1991)
Biochemistry
30,
1403-1412[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
2.
Shibutani, S.,
Takeshita, M.,
and Grollman, A. P.
(1991)
Nature
349,
431-434[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
3.
Maki, M.,
and Sekiguchi, M.
(1992)
Nature
355,
273-275[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Yoshida, M.,
Makino, K.,
Morita, H.,
Terato, H.,
Ohyama, Y.,
and Ide, H.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
1570-1577 5.
Masaoka, A.,
Terato, H.,
Kobayashi, M.,
Honsho, A.,
Ohyama, Y.,
and Ide, H.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
25136-25143 6.
Ide, H.,
Okagami, M.,
Murayama, H.,
Kimura, Y.,
and Makino, K.
(1993)
Biochem. Mol. Biol. Int.
31,
485-491[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
7.
Privat, E. J.,
and Sowers, L. C.
(1996)
Mutat. Res.
354,
151-156[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
8.
Jiricny, J.,
Su, S. -S.,
Wood, S. G.,
and Modrich, P.
(1988)
Nucleic Acids Res.
16,
7843-7853 9.
Hartwick, R. A.,
and Brown, P. R.
(1977)
J. Chromatogr.
143,
383-389[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
10.
Terato, H.,
Morita, H.,
Ohyama, Y.,
and Ide, H.
(1998)
Nucleosides Nucleotides
17,
131-141[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
11.
Modrich, P.
(1991)
Annu. Rev. Genet.
25,
229-253[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
12.
Modrich, P.,
and Lahue, R. S.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65,
101-133[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
13.
Su, S. -S.,
Lahue, R. S.,
Au, K. G.,
and Modrich, P.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
6829-6835 14.
Neuhard, J.,
and Nygaad, P.
(1987)
in
Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium, Cellular and Molecular Biology
(Neidhardt, F. C., ed), Vol. 1
, pp. 445-473, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D. C.
15.
Karran, P.,
Hjelmgren, T.,
and Lindahl, T.
(1982)
Nature
296,
770-773[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
16.
MaCarthy, T. V.,
Karran, P.,
and Lindahl, T.
(1984)
EMBO J.
3,
545-550[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
17.
Parker, B. O.,
and Marinus, M. G.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
1730-1734 18.
Lindahl, T.
(1982)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
51,
61-87[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
19.
Seeberg, E.,
Eide, L.,
and Bjoras, M.
(1995)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
20,
391-397[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
20.
Singer, B.,
and Hang, B.
(1997)
Chem. Res. Toxicol.
10,
713-732[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Yamagata, Y.,
Kato, M.,
Odawara, K.,
Tokuno, Y.,
Nakashima, Y.,
Tatsushima, N.,
Yasumura, K.,
Tomita, K.,
Ihara, K.,
Fujii, Y.,
Nakabeppu, Y.,
Sekiguchi, M.,
and Fujii, S.
(1996)
Cell
86,
311-319[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
22.
Labahn, J.,
Scharer, O. D.,
Long, A.,
Ezaz-Nikpay, K.,
Verdine, G. L.,
and Ellenberger, T. E.
(1996)
Cell
86,
321-329[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
23.
Rasmussen, L. J.,
and Samson, L.
(1996)
Carcinogenesis
17,
2085-2088 24.
Babic, I.,
Andrew, S. E.,
and Jirik, F. R.
(1996)
Mutat. Res.
372,
87-96[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
25.
Duckett, D. R.,
Drummond, J. T.,
Murchie, A. I. M.,
Readon, J. T.,
Sancar, A.,
Lilley, D. M.,
and Modrich, P.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
6443-6447 26.
Mello, J. A.,
Acharya, S.,
Fishel, R.,
and Essigman, J. M.
(1996)
Chem. Biol.
3,
579-589
[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] 27.
Li, G. -M.,
Wang, H.,
and Romano, L. J.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
24084-24088 28.
Yamada, M.,
O'Regan, E.,
Brown, R.,
and Karran, P.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
491-495 29.
Biswas, I.,
and Hsieh, P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
13355-13364 30.
Malkov, V. A.,
Biswas, I.,
Camerini-Otero, R. D.,
and Hsieh, P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
23811-23817 31.
Jiricny, J.,
Hughes, M.,
Corman, N.,
and Rudkin, B. B.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
8860-8864 32.
Su, S.-S.,
and Modrich, P.
(1986)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
83,
5057-5061 33.
Saito, Y.,
Uraki, F.,
Nakajima, S.,
Asaeda, A.,
Ono, K.,
Kubo, K.,
and Yamamoto, K.
(1997)
J. Bacteriol.
179,
3773-3785 34.
Feng, G.,
Tsui, H. T.,
and Winkler, M. E.
(1996)
J. Bacteriol.
178,
2388-2396 35.
Bjelland, S.,
and Seeberg, E.
(1987)
Nucleic Acids Res.
15,
2787-2801 36.
Michaels, M. L.,
and Miller, J. H.
(1992)
J. Bacteriol.
174,
6321-6325 37.
Fujikawa, K.,
Kamiya, H.,
and Kasai, H.
(1998)
Nucleic Acids Res.
26,
4582-4587 38.
Zhang, Q. -M.,
Sugiyama, H.,
Miyabe, I.,
Matsuda, S.,
Saito, I.,
and Yonei, S.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
3969-3973 39.
Yu, M.,
Eritja, R.,
Bloom, L. B.,
and Goodman, M. F.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
15935-15943 40.
Rydberg, B.
(1977)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
152,
19-28[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
41.
Rydberg, B.
(1978)
Mutat. Res.
52,
11-24[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
42.
Yamamoto, Y.,
Katsuki, M.,
Sekiguchi, M.,
and Otsuji, N.
(1978)
J. Bacteriol.
135,
144-152 43.
Ide, H.,
Kow, Y. W.,
and Wallace, S. S.
(1985)
Nucleic Acids Res.
13,
8035-8052 44.
Ide, H.,
Petrullo, L. A.,
Hatahet, Z.,
and Wallace, S. S.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
1469-1477 45.
Evans, J.,
Macabee, M.,
Hatahet, Z.,
Courcelle, J.,
Bockrath, R.,
Ide, H.,
and Wallace, S. S.
(1993)
Mutat. Res.
299,
147-156[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
46.
Jiang, D.,
Hatahet, Z.,
Blaisdell, J. O.,
Melamede, R. J.,
and Wallace, S. S.
(1997)
J. Bacteriol.
179,
3773-3782
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G.ég. Eot-Houllier, Sév. Eon-Marchais, D. Gasparutto, and E. Sage Processing of a complex multiply damaged DNA site by human cell extracts and purified repair proteins Nucleic Acids Res., January 12, 2005; 33(1): 260 - 271. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Matsubara, T. Tanaka, H. Terato, E. Ohmae, S. Izumi, K. Katayanagi, and H. Ide Mutational analysis of the damage-recognition and catalytic mechanism of human SMUG1 DNA glycosylase Nucleic Acids Res., October 5, 2004; 32(17): 5291 - 5302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Nakano, H. Terato, K. Asagoshi, A. Masaoka, M. Mukuta, Y. Ohyama, T. Suzuki, K. Makino, and H. Ide DNA-Protein Cross-link Formation Mediated by Oxanine: A NOVEL GENOTOXIC MECHANISM OF NITRIC OXIDE-INDUCED DNA DAMAGE J. Biol. Chem., June 27, 2003; 278(27): 25264 - 25272. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||