» Articles » PMID: 14580212

Effects of DNA Adduct Structure and Sequence Context on Strand Opening of Repair Intermediates and Incision by UvrABC Nuclease

Overview
Journal Biochemistry
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 2003 Oct 29
PMID 14580212
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

DNA damage recognition of nucleotide excision repair (NER) in Escherichia coli is achieved by at least two steps. In the first step, a helical distortion is recognized, which leads to a strand opening at the lesion site. The second step involves the recognition of the type of chemical modification in the single-stranded region of DNA during the processing of the lesions by UvrABC. In the current work, by comparing the efficiencies of UvrABC incision of several types of different DNA adducts, we show that the size and position of the strand opening are dependent on the type of DNA adducts. Optimal incision efficiency for the C8-guanine adducts of 2-aminofluorene (AF) and N-acetyl-2-aminofluorene (AAF) was observed in a bubble of three mismatched nucleotides, whereas the same for C8-guanine adduct of 1-nitropyrene and N(2)-guanine adducts of benzo[a]pyrene diol epoxide (BPDE) was noted in a bubble of six mismatched nucleotides. This suggests that the size of the aromatic ring system of the adduct might influence the extent and number of bases associated with the opened strand region catalyzed by UvrABC. We also showed that the incision efficiency of the AF or AAF adduct was affected by the neighboring DNA sequence context, which, in turn, was the result of differential binding of UvrA to the substrates. The sequence context effect on both incision and binding disappeared when a bubble structure of three bases was introduced at the adduct site. We therefore propose that these effects relate to the initial step of damage recognition of DNA structural distortion. The structure-function relationships in the recognition of the DNA lesions, based on our results, have been discussed.

Citing Articles

Establishing Linkages Among DNA Damage, Mutagenesis, and Genetic Diseases.

Basu A, Essigmann J Chem Res Toxicol. 2022; 35(10):1655-1675.

PMID: 35881568 PMC: 10201539. DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00155.


Carcinogen-induced DNA structural distortion differences in the RAS gene isoforms; the importance of local sequence.

Menzies G, Prior I, Brancale A, Reed S, Lewis P BMC Chem. 2021; 15(1):51.

PMID: 34521464 PMC: 8439098. DOI: 10.1186/s13065-021-00777-8.


A Peek Inside the Machines of Bacterial Nucleotide Excision Repair.

Kraithong T, Hartley S, Jeruzalmi D, Pakotiprapha D Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22(2).

PMID: 33477956 PMC: 7835731. DOI: 10.3390/ijms22020952.


DNA base sequence effects on bulky lesion-induced conformational heterogeneity during DNA replication.

Cai A, Wilson K, Patnaik S, Wetmore S, Cho B Nucleic Acids Res. 2018; 46(12):6356-6370.

PMID: 29800374 PMC: 6158707. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gky409.


Dissociation Dynamics of XPC-RAD23B from Damaged DNA Is a Determining Factor of NER Efficiency.

Hilton B, Gopal S, Xu L, Mazumder S, Musich P, Cho B PLoS One. 2016; 11(6):e0157784.

PMID: 27327897 PMC: 4915676. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157784.


References
1.
Cho B, Beland F, Marques M . NMR structural studies of a 15-mer DNA duplex from a ras protooncogene modified with the carcinogen 2-aminofluorene: conformational heterogeneity. Biochemistry. 1994; 33(6):1373-84. DOI: 10.1021/bi00172a013. View

2.
Eckel L, Krugh T . 2-Aminofluorene modified DNA duplex exists in two interchangeable conformations. Nat Struct Biol. 1994; 1(2):89-94. DOI: 10.1038/nsb0294-89. View

3.
Gordienko I, RUPP W . A specific 3' exonuclease activity of UvrABC. EMBO J. 1998; 17(2):626-33. PMC: 1170412. DOI: 10.1093/emboj/17.2.626. View

4.
Zou Y, Luo C, Geacintov N . Hierarchy of DNA damage recognition in Escherichia coli nucleotide excision repair. Biochemistry. 2001; 40(9):2923-31. DOI: 10.1021/bi001504c. View

5.
Hildebrand E, Grossman L . Oligomerization of the UvrB nucleotide excision repair protein of Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem. 1999; 274(39):27885-90. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.274.39.27885. View