Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Mol Cell Biol, January 1998, p. 39-50, Vol. 18, No. 1
Department of Biochemistry, University of
Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
Received 23 April 1997/Returned for modification 27 June
1997/Accepted 2 October 1997
There is general agreement that DNA synthesis in the single-copy
and amplified dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) loci of CHO cells
initiates somewhere within the 55-kb spacer region between the DHFR and
2BE2121 genes. However, results of lagging-strand, early-labelling
fragment hybridization (ELFH), and PCR-based nascent-strand abundance
assays have been interpreted to suggest a very narrow zone of
initiation centered at a single locus known as ori- To analyze the replication pattern
of a defined mammalian chromosomal locus, we have taken advantage of a
methotrexate-resistant CHO cell line (CHOC 400) in which one allele of
the early-replicating dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) locus is amplified
ca. 1,000 times (30). The high copy number of the 240-kb
repeating unit (amplicon) has facilitated a number of studies designed
to identify the replication start site(s) (reviewed in references
8 and 17). By radiolabelling the
DNA synthesized at the beginning of the S phase, it was possible to
show that replication initiates preferentially in the region lying
between the convergently transcribed DHFR and 2BE2121 genes (20) (Fig. 1). In a more
quantitative and higher-resolution in-gel renaturation approach, two
somewhat preferred initiation regions (termed ori-
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Lagging-Strand, Early-Labelling, and Two-Dimensional Gel Assays
Suggest Multiple Potential Initiation Sites in the Chinese Hamster
Dihydrofolate Reductase Origin
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials & Methods
Results
Discussion
References
, while two-dimensional (2-D) gel analyses suggest that initiation can
occur at any of a large number of potential sites scattered throughout
the intergenic region. The results of a leading-strand assay and two
intrinsic labelling techniques are compatible with a broad initiation
zone in which ori-
and a second locus
(ori-
) are somewhat preferred. To determine how these
differing views are shaped by differences in experimental manipulations
unrelated to the biology itself, we have applied the lagging-strand,
ELFH, neutral-neutral, and/or neutral-alkaline 2-D gel assays to CHOC 400 cell populations synchronized and manipulated in the same way. In
our experiments, the lagging-strand assay failed to identify a template
strand switch at ori-
; rather, we observed a gradual, undulating change in hybridization bias throughout the
intergenic spacer, with hybridization to the two templates being
approximately equal near a centered matrix attachment region.
In the ELFH assay, all of the fragments in the 55-kb intergenic region
were labelled in the first few minutes of the S phase, with the regions
encompassing ori-
and ori-
being somewhat
preferred. Under the same conditions, neutral-neutral and
neutral-alkaline 2-D gel analyses detected initiation sites at multiple
locations in the intergenic spacer. Thus, the results of all existing
replicon-mapping methods that have been applied to the amplified DHFR
locus in CHOC 400 cells are consistent with a model in which two
somewhat preferred subzones reside in a larger zone of multiple
potential initiation sites in the intergenic region.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials & Methods
Results
Discussion
References
and
ori-
) were identified within the intergenic spacer (Fig.
1, ELF in-gel) (26). ori-
and
ori-
are ~22 kb apart and lie on either side of a
prominent matrix attachment region (MAR) (9). In recent
years, several additional replicon-mapping techniques with potentially
higher resolution and/or sensitivity have been applied to the DHFR
locus either in CHOC 400 cells or in parental CHO cells. However, the
results from these different approaches do not paint a unified picture.

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
The DHFR initiation locus. A 110-kb region encompassing
the convergently transcribed DHFR and 2BE2121 genes and the intergenic
region of the DHFR domain is shown. Positions of ori-
,
ori-
, and the MAR on the EcoRI map are
indicated by open circles and the square, respectively. The results of
seven different replicon-mapping assays are shown diagramatically in
the figure. Note that the data from the ELFH, ELF in-gel renaturation,
and PCR-based nascent-strand abundance assays have been normalized to
one another, with the maximum relative values in each case being set
equal to 10 on the scale. The superscript numbers correspond to the
following: 1, in-gel renaturation data (26); relative
intrinsic radiolabelling of amplified restriction fragments in the
indicated 33-kb region in the first 30 min (lower boxes) or 60 min
(taller boxes) of the S phase, as quantified by densitometry of
labelled amplified restriction fragments after in-gel renaturation; 2, leading-strand data; relative numbers of leading strands moving in the
two directions when lagging-strand replication is inhibited by emetine,
as estimated by eye from the data in reference 19
(note that the sum of the intensities of the two arrows at any one
position was arbitrarily adjusted to be approximately equal, since
absolute amounts of labelling to each pair of templates were not
assessed in this study); 3, neutral-neutral (N/N) 2-D gel data;
relative approximate quantities (indicated by the intensities of the
bubbles) of replication bubbles detected in the indicated
EcoRI fragments on neutral-neutral 2-D gels in several
independent studies (see, e.g., references 10, 11,
13, and 39); note that no bubbles have
ever been detected in the DHFR gene; 4, neutral-alkaline (N/A) 2-D gel
data; approximate relative quantities of replication forks moving into
each end of the indicated fragments, as detected on neutral-alkaline
2-D gels (13, 39); note that the thickness of the arrows
corresponds to relative fork numbers at each position; 5, results of
the lagging-strand assay (5); hybridization bias of lagging
Okazaki fragments to template strands after correction for
hybridization to the vector (calculated by dividing the larger of the
two values by the smaller); 6, ELFH data (replotted from reference
14) after normalizing the highest value to the
highest relative value in the in-gel renaturation data; 7, PCR-based
nascent-strand analysis; relative quantities of small nascent strands
at different template positions in asynchronous CHO cells, as detected
by PCR (replotted from data presented in reference
34 after normalizing the highest value to the
highest value in the in-gel renaturation data set). See the original
references for experimental details.
One view was suggested by measurements of the template bias of lagging
nascent strands, which should switch dramatically at a fixed origin of
replication. When this technique was applied to the 11-kb region
surrounding ori-
in synchronized CHOC 400 and CHO cells,
a pronounced switch in template bias suggested that >80% of
initiations occur within a 480-bp fragment centered in the
ori-
region (Fig. 1, Lagging St) (5). Thus,
ori-
has been designated an origin of bidirectional
replication (5). The same result was reported for
asynchronous CHOC 400 cells (5), which excluded the
possibility of a second active origin in the region of
ori-
; this follows because Okazaki fragments in forks replicating through ori-
from either direction would not
change templates at this site, resulting in a much lower switch in
template bias than was actually observed. The results of PCR-based
nascent-strand abundance assays (34, 38) also argue that
ori-
is a highly preferred initiation locus (Fig. 1, PCR)
(34). However, neither the lagging-strand nor nascent-strand
abundance assay examined the region surrounding ori-
.
Thus, the presence of a preferred initiation site or zone in this
region was not formally excluded.
At the other end of the spectrum are results from two-dimensional (2-D)
gel analyses of the DHFR locus. A neutral-neutral 2-D gel
replicon-mapping method (3) suggests that initiation can
occur at virtually any location within the 55-kb intergenic region,
with relatively more initiations occurring in the central 30 to 35 kb
encompassing ori-
and ori-
(Fig. 1, N/N
2-D) (10, 11, 13, 39). In apparent agreement, a
neutral-alkaline 2-D gel method (33) detects replication
forks travelling in both directions within this central region in the
early S phase (Fig. 1, N/A 2-D) (11, 13, 39). Two recent
variations of the 2-D gel methods that were designed specifically to
detect a highly favored start site at ori-
failed to do
so (22, 23), lending support to a model in which potential
initiation sites are scattered throughout the intergenic region, with
ori-
and ori-
being only somewhat
preferred.
The results of other approaches could accommodate either view. In an
early-labelling fragment hybridization (ELFH) assay, DNA labelled
either in vitro (4, 16) or in vivo (4) in the
first 5 to 30 min of the S phase was used to probe immobilized clones
from the intergenic region to determine which restriction fragments are
the first to be synthesized at the beginning of the S phase. In two
studies (4, 16), the resulting hybridization patterns
identified a peak of early labelling that encompassed ori-
. However, because of the absence of clones
containing and surrounding ori-
, neither study examined
the possibility of a second preferred initiation locus in this region
(Fig. 1, ELFH) (16). Indeed, in an in vivo variation of this
approach in which psoralen cross-links were used to confine labelling
to the region immediately surrounding the origins, a very sharp peak
was detected over ori-
and a much broader peak was
detected over ori-
(1). However, the signal
from the ori-
region was subsequently shown to arise, at
least in part, from two closely spaced copies of the
AluI-like repeated sequence family in this region (6,
25), and hybridization could be completely eliminated by
inclusion of excess unlabelled CHO DNA in the hybridization solution
(25). Thus, although the work described in reference 1 was
subsequently cited as evidence for a highly favored initiation site in
the region of ori-
(5, 8, 38), the specific
labelling of ori-
itself (but not ori-
,
which contains no repeated elements) was indeterminate owing to
cross-hybridization with other early-replicating repetitive sequences
in the genome.
Finally, determinations of the template bias of leading strands
could accommodate either highly preferred sites at
ori-
and ori-
or a much broader zone with
ori-
and ori-
being only somewhat preferred, since the nearest probes lay 5 to 8 kb on either side of the
two regions and since there was significant hybridization to both
strands at all positions (Fig. 1, Leading St) (19).
There are other inconsistencies among the data sets. As mentioned
above, the lagging-strand assay was reported to detect a template
switch at the ori-
locus even in asynchronous CHOC 400 cell populations (5). Even if one excludes the possible
existence of an ori-
, this data implies that the DHFR
origin is extremely efficient, with initiation occurring in all of the
amplicons almost simultaneously in the early S phase in every cell
cycle. Thus, at a fork rate of 3 kb/min (21), it should take
less than 1 h to replicate most of the 240-kb amplicons. However,
intrinsic labelling studies showed that it takes at least 8 h to
replicate all of the amplicons (20); furthermore,
neutral-neutral and neutral-alkaline 2-D gel methods detected bubbles
in the intergenic zone only in the first 2 h of the S phase but
single forks persisted for more than 6 h (10, 11, 13, 18,
39). Thus, initiation must occur in only 10 to 15% of the
amplicons in any one S phase, with the remainder being replicated
passively by forks from distant amplicons. Thus, in an asynchronous
culture, a strand switch at ori-
in 10 to 15% of
amplicons should be largely obscured by readthrough of this locus in
the remaining 80 to 85% that is passively replicated.
Clearly, each replicon-mapping method measures different properties of replicating DNA and each has its own strengths and weaknesses. For example, the neutral-neutral 2-D gel technique can detect initiation events even at minor sites but cannot detect small differences in the relative number of bubbles from one position to the next along a template, owing primarily to differences in restriction fragment sizes along a region of interest (29). The leading- and lagging-strand assays have the advantage that hybridization biases to the two template strands can be reasonably accurately quantified within a given experiment; however, the bias to one strand or the other is never absolute (5, 19, 24, 36) and, unlike 2-D gel approaches, leading- and lagging-strand assays cannot distinguish between minor initiation sites distributed throughout the replicon under study and unavoidable background hybridization.
It is also significant that the indicators in the lagging-strand and ELFH assays are fragments that were labelled in vitro by a 1.5-min pulse of radioactive deoxyribonucleotides (5) and therefore qualify as short-lived replication intermediates whereas 2-D gel methods measure the steady-state in vivo distribution of intermediates and therefore bias toward longer-lived species. Furthermore, the lagging-strand and ELFH assays were performed on cells just as they were entering the S phase (i.e., ~4 min after release from aphidicolin [5, 16]), while most 2-D gel measurements were performed when initiation in the DHFR locus was maximal (either 20 to 30 min after release from aphidicolin [39] or 80 to 90 min after release from mimosine [10, 11, 13]).
We assume that each assay is valid and accurately reports some aspect
of the biological initiation reaction. Therefore, in the present study
we attempted to fix several of the experimental variables that could
complicate the interpretations of the data. We have applied the
lagging-strand, ELFH, neutral-neutral 2-D gel, and/or neutral-alkaline
2-D gel assays to replication intermediates prepared from CHOC 400 cells under the same experimental conditions. Results from these assays
appear to be consistent with one another and suggest that there is a
broad zone of initiation in the intergenic region of the amplified DHFR
domain, with the region encompassing ori-
and
ori-
being somewhat preferred.
(This work fulfills part of the requirement for a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Virginia for S.W.)
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cell culture and synchronization. CHOC 400 cells were developed as previously described (30) and were maintained in minimal essential medium supplemented with nonessential amino acids (Bethesda Research Laboratories [BRL]), and 10% Hyclone II (BRL) in an atmosphere of 5% CO2. Synchronization near the G1/S boundary was achieved by first arresting cells in G0 by isoleucine starvation for 45 h and then incubating them in complete medium containing either 10 µg of aphidicolin (Sigma) per ml (12-h incubation) or 400 µM mimosine (Aldrich) (14-h incubation) (10, 27, 32). Drug-containing media were washed out with cold (after aphidicolin) or warm (after mimosine) serum-free medium and replaced with complete medium. Approximately 4 min after removal of aphidicolin or 90 min after removal of mimosine, the cells were harvested for analysis.
In vitro replication reactions and isolation of replication
intermediates.
Except where noted, in vitro replication reactions
were carried out as previously described (5). Briefly, the
cells were washed with ice-cold minimal essential medium, scraped from
the plate, and pelleted at 300 × g in an Eppendorf
centrifuge for 3 min. A 100-µl aliquot of the cell pellet (~3 × 107 cells per reaction) was mixed with 120 µl of
ice-cold 2× DNA replication cocktail (100 mM HEPES; 0.2 mM each dGTP
and dCTP; 0.4 mM each GTP, UTP, and CTP; 8 mM ATP; 20 mM
MgCl2; 0.2 mg of bovine serum albumin per ml; 2 mM
dithiothreitol; 30% glycerol); note that bromodeoxy-UTP (BrdUTP) was
omitted in the present study. Then 10 µl each of
[
-32P]dATP and [
-32P]dTTP (Amersham;
3,000 Ci/mmol) and 5 µl of 20% Nonidet P-40 (NP40) were added, and
in vitro replication was initiated by incubation at 34°C for 1.5 min.
The reactions were quenched by adding 2 ml of 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8)-10
mM EDTA-400 mM NaCl-1% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) containing 10 µg of proteinase K (E.M. Laboratories) per ml and 20 µg of RNase A
(Qiagen) per ml and incubating the mixture at 37°C for 1 to 2 h.
In the pulse-chase experiment, dATP and dTTP were added to 0.1 mM at
the end of the labelling period and incubation was continued for 30 min
at 34°C before the quenching step.
Isolation of Okazaki and early-labelled fragments. The lysates received one-third volume of room temperature 5 M NaCl and were quickly and thoroughly mixed. Denatured proteins were precipitated by centrifugation (10,000 rpm at 25°C in an HB-6 rotor [Dupont/Sorvall] for 1 h). The DNA in the supernatant was precipitated with 2 volumes of cold ethanol and centrifuged in the cold at 10,000 rpm in the HB-6 rotor for 1 h, and the pellet was washed several times with 70% ethanol containing 2 M ammonium acetate. For the lagging-strand assay, DNA was dissolved in TE buffer (10 mM Tris [pH 8], 1 mM EDTA) at 100 µl of TE buffer per plate equivalent and subjected to alkaline gel electrophoresis (5). The labelled fraction migrating between 50 and 300 nucleotides (nt) was excised from the gel and recovered by electroelution with a Schleicher & Schuell apparatus. Residual RNA was hydrolyzed by incubation with 0.2 N NaOH for 24 h at 37°C. For the ELFH assay, DNA was dissolved in 0.2 M NaOH-5 mM EDTA and incubated at 37°C for 24 h to degrade residual RNA. The labelled genomic DNA was sonicated for 3 min on ice with a Fisher Scientific Sonic Dismembrator 550 at a setting of 3 with a microtip, and the size of the sonicated DNA was ascertained on an alkaline agarose gel. The solution was neutralized and ethanol precipitated. DNA samples were redissolved in TE buffer and used for hybridization.
Preparation of plasmids and RNA transcripts.
Restriction
fragments from 16 different locations in the 110-kb region shown
in Fig. 1 were cloned into a pBS(+) vector (Stratagene); the insert
sizes were as follows: 103, 1.2 kb; HCC, 0.8 kb; 3, 0.9 kb; 38, 0.5 kb;
8, 0.9 kb; DGK, 1.2 kb; 14, 0.6 kb; 9, 0.5 kb; 10, 0.7 kb; and 206, 0.7 kb. pBS clones containing fragments HCB and HCC were gifts from Howard
Cedar (Hebrew University), and the SK(
) clone DGK was obtained from
David Gilbert (Syracuse University). To confirm the absence of repeated
sequences, each clone was labelled with [32P]dCTP (3,000 Ci/mmol; Amersham) by random priming (15) and used to probe
a restriction digest of genomic CHO DNA separated on a 0.8% agarose
gel and transferred to HyBond N+ (Amersham).
Dot-blotting and hybridization procedures. A 1-µg portion of each pair of RNA samples or 1 µg of each double-stranded plasmid was dotted onto HyBond N+ with a 96-well Schleicher & Schuell manifold as described in reference 35. The filters were hybridized as described by Church and Gilbert (7) in 5 ml of hybridization fluid containing either ~ 2 × 106 cpm of 32P-labelled Okazaki fragments or (6 to 10) × 106 cpm of sheared total DNA from the in vitro replication reactions. The membranes were washed for 30 min each in 2× SSC (1× SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus 0.015 M sodium citrate)-2% SDS and 0.2× SSC-0.2% SDS at 65°C, and hybridization signals were detected and quantified with a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager.
2-D gel electrophoresis. The cells were harvested at the indicated times in the same way as for in vitro replication assays and were incubated in replication cocktail for 1.5 min, at which time the nuclei were diluted into cell lysis buffer containing digitonin. The matrix-attached replication intermediates were then purified as previously described (12). Briefly, the nuclei were incubated with isotonic lithium diiodosalicylate to remove histone and soluble nonhistone chromosomal proteins (31). The resulting DNA halo was separated from matrix-attached replication intermediates with EcoRI, and the two fractions were separated by centrifugation and finally enriched by benzoylated naphthoylated DEAE-cellulose chromatography (28). The matrix fraction was analyzed by 2-D gel electrophoresis as previously described (3, 10, 12, 13). The digests were transferred to HyBond N+ and were hybridized with the fragments indicated above, which were labelled with [32P]dCTP by random priming (15).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Experimental design of lagging-strand and ELFH assays. The purpose of this study was to compare the results obtained by lagging-strand, ELFH, and 2-D gel assays as applied to cells synchronized and manipulated under the same conditions. We have had extensive experience with 2-D gel assays, but since the lagging-strand and ELFH assays were new to our laboratory, we devoted considerable effort to standardizing these methods to avoid conditions that could artificially influence the outcomes. The theory and overall experimental design for the two assays are shown in Fig. 2.
|
, the analysis was limited to a small part of the
intergenic region. Large corrections in hybridization values were also
required owing to hybridization of labelled CHO or CHOC 400 DNA with
the M13 vector itself; in the critical case of the two clones between
which a template switch was recorded, this correction changed biases of
only 2:1 on either side of the midpoint to more than 5:1
(5).
In the present study, both [32P]dATP and
[32P]dTTP were included in the replication cocktail and
BrdUTP was omitted, to avoid any potential bias generated by an uneven
distribution of thymidines between the two complementary strands
(24). To give a relatively complete picture of the
initiation reaction in the DHFR locus, 16 different indicator fragments
from the intergenic region and the two flanking genes were subcloned
into a pBS vector. The insert sizes of these probes are given in
Materials and Methods. Ten of these probes were used in the
lagging-strand assay, and all 16 were used in the ELFH assay. The
smaller number of probes used in the lagging-strand assay was dictated
by the capacity of the dot blot apparatus (96 wells), the requirement
for duplicate samples of both plus- and minus-strand transcripts, and
the requirement for an identical blot to hybridize with the sheared
radioactive control DNA prepared from asynchronous cells. In most
experiments, 12 different probes were used, but only 10 of these were
common to all experiments. The results obtained with these probes are presented below.
Each insert was shown to be free of repetitive DNA by hybridization to
genomic blots of CHO DNA by using the single-copy probe 103, which is
derived from an exon of the DHFR gene, as an internal standard (Fig.
3A). The patterns obtained with two
fragments containing moderately and highly repeated elements (X and Y,
respectively) are included for comparison.
|
|
The lagging-strand assay suggests a broad zone of potential initiation sites in the intergenic region. Labelled Okazaki fragments isolated from very early S-phase cells were used to probe dot blots containing immobilized plus- and minus-strand transcripts of 10 different fragments from the DHFR locus (Fig. 5A). Hybridization values to each of the template strands were determined with a PhosphorImager. These hybridization values were normalized to values obtained when duplicate dot blots were probed with total sheared DNA isolated from in vitro-labelled asynchronous CHOC 400 cultures (Fig. 5B), which corrects for any potential intrinsic hybridization bias. Normalized hybridization values of early S-phase Okazaki fragments to plus and minus strands (expressed as a percentage of the total hybridization to both strands) are plotted as a function of map position in Fig. 5C. For comparison, the results of Burhans et al. (5) are also presented (Fig. 5C) but were transformed from fold-of-bias to the percentage of total counts hybridizing to each strand. Note that the size range of inserts is 0.4 to 1.2 kb and that equal amounts (1 µg) of DNA were loaded into each well. Thus, the signals will be lower for the smallest fragments (e.g., probe 38). Also note that there is some variation among individual experiments (reflected by the error bars in Fig. 5C and observed by others [5, 24]); thus, the observed biases in the example shown in Fig. 5A may differ somewhat from those measured in the other two experiments and, as a consequence, from the mean of the three experiments reflected in the graph.
|
(probe 38) to ~35% near probe 10. This result is predicted for a broad initiation zone (note that probe
38 is the smallest cloned insert in the series tested in the experiment
depicted in Fig. 5; thus, the hybridization signal is correspondingly
small). To the right of probe 10, an apparent transition occurs,
resulting in a 50:50 distribution of hybridization to the two templates
in the 5' end of the 2BE2121 gene. This data is compatible with the
results of neutral-neutral and neutral-alkaline 2-D gel analyses, in
which a low level of initiation was shown to occur within and to the
right of 2BE2121 (11, 13).
Thus, the strand bias observed near the ori-
region
differs from the data of Burhans et al. (5). In that study,
an equal and opposite template bias of ~85% was detected between
their probes C and D, which correspond approximately to the two halves of our probe 38 (Fig. 5C). Based on the magnitude of the observed shift
in template bias, it was estimated that more than 80% of all
initiations in the DHFR locus occur within ±240 bp of the center of
probe 38 (5). This proposal predicts that hybridization to
the two different template strands of probe 38 itself should be
approximately equal. However, in our experiments, hybridization to
probe 38 displays a 60% hybridization bias toward the minus-strand template while equal hybridization to the two strands occurs
approximately at the position of the MAR, which lies ~14 kb
downstream (Fig. 5C).
We have tested directly whether there is a shift in template bias in
the center of probe 38. The two halves of this fragment (probes C and D
in reference 5) were subcloned into a pBS vector and
were again probed with Okazaki fragments synthesized in vitro in
very-early-S-phase nuclei. In seven independent experiments, Okazaki
fragments appeared by eye to hybridize about equally to the
minus-strand templates in both halves of probe 38 (Fig.
6, left panel). However, since each half
of probe 38 is only ~250 bp long, the signals were not strong enough
to assign accurate template biases. The same blot was stripped and
reprobed with total sheared genomic DNA from an asynchronous CHOC 400 culture, and the results show that approximately equal amounts of each RNA template were loaded onto the filter (Fig. 6, center panel). Finally, we confirmed that the sense of the plus and minus strands was
correctly assigned by stripping the blot and reprobing with a
transcript of the entire probe 38 insert (Fig. 6, right panel).
|
Only minimal hybridization biases are detected in the
DHFR locus when Okazaki fragments are isolated from asynchronous CHOC
400 cells.
In the original application of the lagging-strand assay
to the DHFR locus, it was reported that even in asynchronous CHOC 400 cell cultures, a pronounced switch in hybridization bias was detected
between the two halves of the ori-
-containing fragment (probe 38) (5). In the absence of fixed termination sites
between amplicons and/or between ori-
and
ori-
, this outcome requires that initiation in the DHFR
locus occur very synchronously in the early S phase in the great
majority of amplicons, since passive readthrough of ori-
from the ori-
region or from neighboring amplicons would
decrease the switch in template bias in proportion to the percentage of
inactive amplicons. However, both neutral-neutral and neutral-alkaline
2-D analyses (11, 13, 18), as well as intrinsic labelling
data (20), show clearly that only 10 to 15% of the 1,000 DHFR amplicons in CHOC 400 cells actually sustain active initiation
events, with the remaining 85 to 90% of amplicons being replicated by
forks moving through passively later in the S phase.
|
Results of the ELFH assay on early-S-phase cells are consistent
with a broad zone of initiation encompassing both ori-
and ori-
.
Three different in vivo intrinsic
labelling studies suggested the presence of a second, somewhat
preferred initiation site or zone other than ori-
within
the intergenic region of the DHFR domain (termed ori-
[Fig. 1]) (1, 19, 26). In the absence of a strong terminus
somewhere near the MAR, for which there is no compelling evidence from
neutral-neutral 2-D gel analyses, the presence of a second preferred
initiation region near ori-
is not compatible with a
strong lagging-strand switch at ori-
: in amplicons in
which only ori-
is active, ori-
should be
read through passively and therefore would not display a template
switch.
region and concluded that it constituted the major
nascent-strand start site in this domain (5, 16). Neither of
these studies examined the region of ori-
directly.
Furthermore, both studies examined replication intermediates prepared
only a few minutes after entry into the S phase, whereas the studies
that detected ori-
focused either on log-phase cells
(19) or on cells that had been in the S phase for at least
30 min after the release from aphidicolin (1, 26). Thus, if
ori-
were to fire slightly later than ori-
,
it could have escaped detection in these studies.
The ELFH assay was therefore repeated with 16 clones covering the
intergenic region as well as the two flanking genes. CHOC 400 cells
were synchronized at the G1/S boundary with aphidicolin as
described above, released into the S phase for 4 min, and harvested and
incubated in the in vitro replication cocktail for 1.5 min. Total DNA
was isolated, sheared to ~150 bp in length, and used as a
hybridization probe on dot blots containing the immobilized double-stranded subclones.
As shown in Fig. 8, at this very early
time point after the release from aphidicolin, the entire intergenic
region, including both ori-
and ori-
, is
labelled substantially, with a slight bias toward the
ori-
half of the region and a somewhat lower labelling
index near the DGK probe. These data are quite similar to those
obtained by intrinsic labelling approaches (1, 26) and by
2-D gel analyses (39) performed on cells 30 min after the
release from aphidicolin, when initiation in this locus is maximal.
Furthermore, they are quite similar to those obtained by Gilbert et al.
(16), with the exception of the region encompassing ori-
, which was not examined in their study (Fig. 1,
dotted line).
|
2-D gel methods detect multiple nascent-strand start sites in the
very early S phase.
Both the lagging-strand and ELFH assays, which
have been interpreted to suggest a very circumscribed initiation zone
in or near ori-
, were performed on cells just after entry
into the S phase (i.e., 4 min after removal of aphidicolin) (5,
16). In contrast, most of the 2-D gel analyses that suggest a
broad zone of initiation throughout the intergenic region were
performed on cells at the peak initiation period (i.e., 30 min after
release from aphidicolin or 90 min after release from mimosine)
(10, 11, 13, 39). (Note that there is a 50- to 60-min lag
after mimosine removal before substantial amounts of replication begin [10, 32].) Therefore, differences in sampling times
could yield different results.
.
However, we have not previously determined the 2-D gel patterns of
replication intermediates in DNA sampled and isolated under the same
conditions as those used for the lagging-strand and ELFH assays.
Therefore, CHOC 400 cells were collected at the G1/S
boundary with aphidicolin, released for 4 min, permeabilized with NP40, and incubated at 34°C for 1.5 min in the in vitro replication cocktail. Replication intermediates were then isolated by our standard
method (12), using EcoRI to digest the DNA, and
were analyzed by the neutral-neutral 2-D gel replicon-mapping method (3). The principle of this assay is diagrammed in Fig.
9A to D, and the results are shown in
Fig. 9E.
|
, a typical composite pattern consisting of
a faint bubble arc and a strong single fork arc was observed.
Therefore, at this very early time point, this fragment sometimes
sustains internal initiation events but most often is replicated
passively by forks originating from outside of the fragment.
Hybridization of the blot with probe 103, which detects the DHFR gene,
detects very few replication intermediates at this very early time
point, consistent with the ELFH data in Fig. 7 and confirming that most of the observed replication forks in the intergenic zone must have
initiated from within the zone itself and would not have had time to
enter the gene from neighboring amplicons. This suggestion is supported
by the presence of both bubble arcs and strong single-fork arcs in the
6.1- and 5.9-kb intergenic fragments, which are detected with probes 19 and probes 9 plus 10, respectively (Fig. 9E). Thus, by the criterion of
neutral-neutral 2-D gel analysis of very-early-S-phase cells,
initiation sites appear to be chosen from a broad region encompassing a
large part of the intergenic zone. (Note that the bubble arcs in all
three intergenic fragments are weak relative to those that would be
observed in these fragments in the early S phase in vivo. This result
is predicted since no new initiations occur in the in vitro reaction;
therefore, only bubbles that have not yet matured beyond the bounds of
the restriction fragment in which they initiated in vivo are detected.)
In a second approach, the lagging-strand and neutral-alkaline and
neutral-neutral 2-D gel assays were applied to the same preparation of
CHOC 400 cells sampled 90 min after the release from mimosine. Most
cells have entered the S phase by this time, initiation in the DHFR
locus is maximal (10, 11), and most of our recent 2-D gel
analyses were performed on material sampled at this time. The principle
of the neutral-alkaline 2-D gel replicon-mapping method is diagrammed
in Fig. 10A and B, and the results are
shown in Fig. 10C and D.
|
(lower panels), strong diagonals were detected with both probes,
showing that approximately equal numbers of replication forks enter
this fragment from the directions of ori-
and from sites
situated to the right of this fragment. Thus, ori-
cannot represent the only (or even the predominant) initiation site in this
locus.
The neutral-neutral 2-D gel assay results on the same material are
shown in Fig. 10D. Consistent with the results of all earlier 2-D gel
analyses on mimosine-synchronized cells sampled at 90 min (10, 11,
13), a probe specific for the DHFR gene detected a relatively
weak single fork arc but no replication bubbles (Fig. 10D, upper
panel). In the same material, probe 19 for the 6.1-kb EcoRI
fragment to the right of ori-
detected a complete bubble arc and a stronger single fork, confirming the delocalized initiation mode in the intergenic zone (lower panel).
Finally, in the same cell preparation sampled 90 min after the release
from mimosine, the distribution of Okazaki fragment hybridization to
the minus-strand template in the DHFR gene (i.e., probe 103) was
approximately 75% in this experiment whereas hybridization to the
minus strand in the region of probe 8 was ~55%. Therefore, the
results of the lagging-strand assay agree qualitatively with those of
the neutral-alkaline 2-D gel assay on the same material, but the
lagging-strand assay appears to be less sensitive to strand bias, based
on results with the DHFR gene. Furthermore, the results of the
lagging-strand assay are very similar whether the cells are sampled
~4 min after the release from aphidicolin or 90 min after the release
from mimosine.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In two previous studies, novel variations of the neutral-neutral
and neutral-alkaline 2-D gel methods were developed to determine whether these methods could fail to detect a major initiation site near
ori-
(22, 23). Instead, the results supported
our previous proposal that nascent-strand start sites are chosen from many potential sites scattered throughout the 55-kb intergenic region,
with a concentration of sites in the central 30- to 35-kb encompassing
the ori-
and ori-
regions (10, 11, 13,
39).
In previous reports, results of the lagging-strand (5) and
ELFH (16) assays were interpreted to mean that
ori-
is the major initiation site in the DHFR locus
(5, 16). In the present study, we have adapted these two
assays to our laboratory and have modified them in the following ways
in an effort to avoid inadvertent bias in the results: (i) BrdUTP was
omitted from and [32P]dTTP was included in the in vitro
replication cocktail along with [32P]dATP to normalize
any bias from an unequal distribution of thymidines on the two strands;
(ii) indicator clones were chosen so as to examine the entire
intergenic region as well as the flanking genes; and (iii) in the
lagging-strand assay, plus- and minus-strand RNA transcripts served as
substrates on dot blots to avoid background hybridization to the
vector. In addition, we have performed the lagging-strand, ELFH, and
one or both 2-D gel approaches on cell cultures manipulated in the same
way, thereby avoiding as much as possible laboratory-to-laboratory
variations in cell culture, synchronization methods, or other factors
that could affect experimental outcomes.
By using the modified lagging-strand assay, we detected approximately
the same hybridization bias (~80%) to the minus-strand template in
the DHFR gene as was observed in two previous studies on CHOC 400 cells
synchronized in early S phase by release from aphidicolin (5,
16). However, unlike the study of Burhans et al. (5),
we did not detect a prominent switch in template bias in the region of
ori-
(Fig. 5); rather, the hybridization bias increased
gradually toward the positive strand from one end of the intergenic
region to the other (with minor undulations), approximating 50% near
the MAR. In addition, when we examined hybridization bias to probes C
and D, which defined the origin of bidirectional replication in a
previous study (5), a strand switch between the two
fragments was not detected, and it was shown experimentally that the
strand assignments of the two immobilized transcripts were correct.
In this regard, our data are more compatible with those of Gilbert et
al. (16), who also observed a relatively gradual change in
hybridization bias throughout the 5' half of the intergenic region in
CHOC 400 cells (the region to the right of probe DGK was not examined
in their study). Importantly, the position at which hybridization to
the two templates was equal in that study did not coincide with the
strand switch site at ori-
defined by Burhans et al.;
instead, equal hybridization to the two templates lay 5 to 6 kb to the
right, which is 5 to 6 kb left of the 50:50 position detected in the
present study (i.e., the MAR [Fig. 5]). It is possible to imagine
that the position at which Okazaki fragments switch templates differs
in experiments performed in different laboratories if cell culture
conditions are capable of affecting the relative initiation frequencies
in different portions of a broad initiation zone. However, such a
change in the position of the switch is difficult to fit to a model in
which a single, narrowly localized origin is dictated by the position
of a genetic replicator.
In Fig. 5, we have purposely presented the lagging-strand assay data as a percentage of total counts hybridizing to each strand of a probe pair (rather than as a ratio of hybridization to the two separate strands [5]) to emphasize that significant hybridization occurs to both strands in the intergenic region. Given that there is no background hybridization to the cloned inserts used in this experiment, this result must mean that replication forks are moving in both directions at any of the positions examined in this study. Therefore, in this case, the position at which hybridization to the two templates is equal (i.e., 50%) corresponds not to a single origin of bidirectional replication but, rather, to the position at which the numbers of forks moving in the two directions are equal (in our study, approximately at the MAR). An important corollary is that a switch in hybridization bias from one strand to another would suggest the presence of a fixed origin of bidirectional replication only if the switch were very abrupt at that position and if the hybridization biases to the right and left of the switch site were equal and opposite throughout the length of the replicon under study.
In theory, in a domain containing a broad zone of initiation flanked by two passively replicated regions (the DHFR and 2BE2121 genes in this case), one should observe nearly infinite hybridization bias to the lagging-strand template in one flank, which should change gradually throughout the zone to approach infinite bias to the lagging-strand template in the other flank. Our data approximate this model but deviate from it somewhat. As in two other studies (5, 16), hybridization to the lagging-strand template in the DHFR gene averaged only ~80%, with values ranging from 66 to 90%. Therefore, in only some experiments did strand bias achieve the apparent 10- to 20-fold biases measured in the same material by the neutral-alkaline 2-D gel method in this and several previous studies (Fig. 10) (11, 13, 39). The source of this discrepancy is unclear, although the low levels of radioactivity incorporated into the DHFR and 2BE2121 genes in the very early S phase in the lagging-strand assay can introduce more variability into measurements (and, thus, the signal-to-noise ratio) than in the intergenic region itself, where the values are higher. It is also possible that there is some contamination of the Okazaki fraction with fragmented leading strands, which would reduce biases somewhat and which could vary from experiment to experiment. In the 2BE2121 gene, Okazaki fragment hybridization to the two templates is roughly equal, in agreement with the results for 2-D gels, which also detected a low level of initiation in the early S phase leading to forks moving in both directions (2).
Results from the ELFH assay on the same starting material as used in
the lagging-strand assay show that radioactivity is distributed throughout the entire intergenic zone after a pulse time of only 1.5 min delivered ~4 min after removal of aphidicolin (Fig. 8). These
data are similar to those obtained by Gilbert et al. (16) (Fig. 1), except that the region around ori-
was not
examined in that study. Interpolation of their data in this region
therefore led them to suggest a single, somewhat asymmetric peak of
early labelling centered at ori-
. With the inclusion of
clones for the ori-
region in the present study, we
suggest that the data are more compatible with a broad zone of
initiation, with the regions around ori-
and
ori-
being somewhat preferred, as originally suggested by
in-gel renaturation experiments on early-labelled DNA (26).
However, it is important to point out that in the absence of perfectly
synchronous entry of the cell population into the S phase, the ELFH
assay cannot distinguish between fixed initiation sites in the
ori-
and ori-
regions as opposed to two
somewhat preferred regions within a broad zone of potential sites. For example, labelling near the MAR could result either from initiations occurring in that region or from early forks that have already reached
that region from fixed sites at ori-
and
ori-
in the 4-min interval after removal of aphidicolin.
Therefore, it was important to show directly that the labelling patterns we observed in the lagging-strand and ELFH assays on cells sampled ~4 min after entry into the S phase do, indeed, reflect a delocalized initiation mode. Accordingly, 2-D gel analyses were performed on cell populations that were either synchronized and sampled identically (Fig. 9) or performed on the very same preparations used to examine Okazaki template strand bias (Fig. 10). These studies show that initiation sites are scattered widely in the intergenic zone even in the first few minutes of the S phase, as indicated by the presence of both bubbles and single forks in the same fragments on neutral-neutral 2-D gels (Fig. 9) and by the presence of forks moving into intergenic fragments from both ends, as detected in neutral-alkaline gels (Fig. 10). Importantly, these findings argue that kinetic in vitro and steady-state in vivo approaches see the initiation reaction in essentially the same way.
Finally, when the lagging-strand assay was applied to asynchronous CHOC 400 cell cultures in the present study, only a very small bias to either of the template strands could be detected at any position in the intergenic zone or the two flanking genes. This is the predicted result if 85 to 90% of amplicons are read through passively by forks from a small number of active amplicons, which was suggested by the results of neutral-neutral and neutral-alkaline 2-D gel assays performed on log-phase cultures (10, 13), as well as earlier intrinsic labelling studies (20). We do not understand the difference between the results of our experiments on log-phase cells and those of Burhans et al. (5). However, it has been suggested that the CHOC 400 cultures that were thought to be asynchronous in those studies may have been inadvertently synchronized (16).
In summary, the lagging-strand, ELFH, and neutral-neutral and
neutral-alkaline 2-D gel studies reported here, as well as all previous
experimental approaches that have been applied to the DHFR locus in
CHOC 400 cells, all paint a very similar picture of the initiation
reaction in the DHFR locus. These findings are summarized in the model
in Fig. 11, where several amplicons are arrayed side by side to suggest that (i) initiation probably occurs at
different locations within the intergenic zone in different copies of
the amplicon, with the regions of ori-
and
ori-
being somewhat preferred, and (ii) only some
amplicons sustain active initiation events in any one S period, with
the remainder being replicated passively at later times in the S phase.
Whether an initiation reaction with these characteristics might be
regulated by genetic replicators, which could presumably be located at
or near ori-
and ori-
, remains to be
determined.
|
An important caveat is that our studies here have focused on the
initiation reaction in the amplified DHFR domain of CHOC 400 cells,
which could differ somewhat from the initiation reaction in the
single-copy locus in CHO cells, which contributed to the data set in
the previous lagging-strand analysis on this locus (5).
Furthermore, a PCR-based nascent-strand abundance assay that detected a
rather sharp peak of initiation at ori-
examined CHO
cells exclusively (34; the remainder of the
intergenic zone was not examined in this study). It is conceivable, for
example, that the initiation reaction has become delocalized as a
consequence of the amplification process. However, the spectra of
replication intermediates in the intergenic zone in the single-copy and
amplified DHFR domains are nearly identical when analyzed by
neutral-neutral or neutral-alkaline 2-D gel approaches (11).
Thus, we believe that the differences must lie elsewhere. Studies are
under way in our laboratory to determine whether the PCR-based
nascent-strand abundance assay detects a well-defined initiation spike
at ori-
in the same starting material that suggests a
zone on 2-D gels.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank John Kolman and Geoff Wahl (Salk Institute) and Mike Leffak (Wright State University) for very helpful advice concerning the lagging-strand assay. We also thank Howard Cedar (Hebrew University) and Dave Gilbert (Syracuse University) for sharing genomic clones. We are indebted to Carlton White and Kevin Cox for excellent technical assistance.
This work was supported by NIH grant GM26108 to J.L.H.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Biochemistry, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Box 440, Charlottesville, VA 22908. Phone: (804) 924-5858. Fax: (804) 924-1789. E-mail: jlh2d{at}virginia.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Anachkova, B., and J. L. Hamlin.
1989.
Replication in the amplified dihydrofolate reductase domain in CHO cells may initiate at two distinct sites, one of which is a repetitive sequence element.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:532-540 |
| 2. | Baker, T. A., and A. Kornberg. 1988. Transcriptional activation of initiation of replication from the E. coli chromosomal origin: an RNA-DNA hybrid near oriC. Cell 55:113-123[Medline]. |
| 3. | Brewer, B. J., and W. L. Fangman. 1987. The localization of replication origins on ARS plasmids in S. cerevisiae. Cell 51:463-471[Medline]. |
| 4. |
Burhans, W. C.,
J. E. Selegue, and N. H. Heintz.
1986.
Isolation of the origin of replication associated with the amplified Chinese hamster dihydrofolate reductase domain.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
83:7790-7794 |
| 5. | Burhans, W. C., L. T. Vassilev, M. S. Caddle, N. H. Heintz, and M. L. DePamphilis. 1990. Identification of an origin of bidirectional DNA replication in mammalian chromosomes. Cell 62:955-965[Medline]. |
| 6. | Caddle, M. S., R. H. Lussier, and N. H. Heintz. 1990. Intramolecular DNA triplexes, bent DNA and DNA unwinding elements in the initiation region of an amplified dihydrofolate reductase replicon. J. Mol. Biol. 211:19-33[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Church, G. M., and W. Gilbert.
1984.
Genomic sequencing.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:1991-1995 |
| 8. | DePamphilis, M. L. 1993. Eukaryotic DNA replication: anatomy of an origin. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 62:29-63[Medline]. |
| 9. |
Dijkwel, P. A., and J. L. Hamlin.
1988.
Matrix attachment regions are positioned near replication initiation sites, genes, and an interamplicon junction in the amplified dihydrofolate reductase domain of Chinese hamster ovary cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8:5398-5409 |
| 10. |
Dijkwel, P. A., and J. L. Hamlin.
1992.
Initiation of DNA replication in the dihydrofolate reductase locus is confined to the early S period in CHO cells synchronized with the plant amino acid mimosine.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:3715-3722 |
| 11. | Dijkwel, P. A., and J. L. Hamlin. 1995. The Chinese hamster dihydrofolate reductase origin consists of multiple potential nascent-strand start sites. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:3023-3031[Abstract]. |
| 12. |
Dijkwel, P. A.,
J. P. Vaughn, and J. L. Hamlin.
1991.
Mapping of replication initiation sites in mammalian genomes by two-dimensional gel analysis: stabilization and enrichment of replication intermediates by isolation on the nuclear matrix.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:3850-3859 |
| 13. |
Dijkwel, P. A.,
J. P. Vaughn, and J. L. Hamlin.
1994.
Replication initiation sites are distributed widely in the amplified CHO dihydrofolate reductase domain.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:4989-4996 |
| 14. |
Dimitrova, D. S.,
M. Giacca,
F. Demarchi,
G. Biamonti,
S. Riva, and A. Falaschi.
1996.
In vivo protein-DNA interactions at human DNA replication origin.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:1498-1503 |
| 15. | Feinberg, A. P., and B. Vogelstein. 1983. A technique for radiolabeling DNA restriction endonuclease fragments to high specific activity. Anal. Biochem. 132:6-13[Medline]. |
| 16. | Gilbert, D. M., H. Miyazawa, and M. L. DePamphilis. 1995. Site-specific initiation of DNA replication in Xenopus egg extract requires nuclear structure. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:2942-2954[Abstract]. |
| 17. | Hamlin, J. L., and P. A. Dijkwel. 1995. On the nature of replication origins in higher eukaryotes. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 5:153-161[Medline]. |
| 18. | Hamlin, J. L., P. A. Dijkwel, and J. P. Vaughn. 1992. Initiation of replication in the Chinese hamster dihydrofolate reductase domain. Chromosoma 102:17-23. |
| 19. | Handeli, S., A. Klar, M. Meuth, and H. Cedar. 1989. Mapping replication units in animal cells. Cell 57:909-920[Medline]. |
| 20. |
Heintz, N. H., and J. L. Hamlin.
1982.
An amplified chromosomal sequence that includes the gene for dihydrofolate reductase initiates replication within specific restriction fragments.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
79:4083-4087 |
| 21. | Huberman, J. A., and A. D. Riggs. 1968. On the mechanism of DNA replication in mammalian chromosomes. J. Mol. Biol. 32:327-341[Medline]. |
| 22. | Kalejta, R. F., and J. L. Hamlin. 1996. Composite patterns in neutral/neutral two-dimensional gels demonstrate inefficient replication origin usage. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:4915-4922[Abstract]. |
| 23. | Kalejta, R. F., H. B. Lin, P. A. Dijkwel, and J. L. Hamlin. 1996. Characterizing replication intermediates in the amplified CHO dihydrofolate reductase domain by two novel gel electrophoretic techniques. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:4923-4931[Abstract]. |
| 24. | Kelly, R. E., M. L. DeRose, B. W. Draper, and G. M. Wahl. 1995. Identification of an origin of bidirectional DNA replication in the ubiquitously expressed mammalian CAD gene. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:4136-4148[Abstract]. |
| 25. | Leu, T. H., B. Anachkova, and J. L. Hamlin. 1990. Repetitive sequence elements in an initiation locus of the amplified dihydrofolate reductase domain in CHO cells. Genomics 7:428-433[Medline]. |
| 26. |
Leu, T. H., and J. L. Hamlin.
1989.
High-resolution mapping of replication fork movement through the amplified dihydrofolate reductase domain in CHO cells by in-gel renaturation analysis.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:523-531 |
| 27. |
Levenson, V., and J. L. Hamlin.
1993.
A general protocol for evaluating the specific effects of DNA replication inhibitors.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:3997-4004 |
| 28. | Levine, A. J., H. S. Kang, and F. E. Billheimer. 1970. DNA replication in SV40-infected cells. I. Analysis of replicating SV40 DNA. J. Mol. Biol. 50:549-568[Medline]. |
| 29. |
Linskens, M. H., and J. A. Huberman.
1990.
Ambiguities in results obtained with 2D gel replicon mapping techniques.
Nucleic Acids Res.
18:647-652 |
| 30. |
Milbrandt, J. D.,
N. H. Heintz,
W. C. White,
S. M. Rothman, and J. L. Hamlin.
1981.
Methotrexate-resistant Chinese hamster ovary cells have amplified a 135-kilobase-pair region that includes the dihydrofolate reductase gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
78:6043-6047 |
| 31. | Mirkovitch, J., M. E. Mirault, and U. K. Laemmli. 1984. Organization of the higher-order chromatin loop: specific DNA attachment sites on nuclear scaffold. Cell 39:223-232[Medline]. |
| 32. |
Mosca, P. J.,
P. A. Dijkwel, and J. L. Hamlin.
1992.
The plant amino acid mimosine may inhibit initiation at origins of replication in Chinese hamster cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:4375-4383 |
| 33. |
Nawotka, K. A., and J. A. Huberman.
1988.
Two-dimensional gel electrophoretic method for mapping DNA replicons.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8:1408-1413 |
| 34. | Pelizon, C., S. Diviacco, A. Falaschi, and M. Giacca. 1996. High-resolution mapping of the origin of DNA replication in the hamster dihydrofolate reductase gene domain by competitive PCR. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:5358-5364[Abstract]. |
| 35. | Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. . Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 36. |
Tasheva, E. S., and D. J. Roufa.
1994.
Densely methylated DNA islands in mammalian chromosomal replication origins.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:5636-5644 |
| 37. |
Vassilev, L., and E. M. Johnson.
1990.
An initiation zone of chromosomal DNA replication located upstream of the c-myc gene in proliferating HeLa cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:4899-4904 |
| 38. |
Vassilev, L. T.,
W. C. Burhans, and M. L. DePamphilis.
1990.
Mapping an origin of DNA replication at a single-copy locus in exponentially proliferating mammalian cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:4685-4689 |
| 39. | Vaughn, J. P., P. A. Dijkwel, and J. L. Hamlin. 1990. Replication initiates in a broad zone in the amplified CHO dihydrofolate reductase domain. Cell 61:1075-1087[Medline]. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»