Previous Article | Next Article 
Mol Cell Biol, March 1998, p. 1436-1443, Vol. 18, No. 3
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
DNA Mismatch Repair Catalyzed by Extracts of Mitotic,
Postmitotic, and Senescent Drosophila Tissues and
Involvement of mei-9 Gene Function for Full
Activity
Arvinder
Bhui-Kaur,1,2
Myron F.
Goodman,1,2 and
John
Tower1,*
Department of Biological
Sciences1 and
Hedco Molecular Biology
Laboratories,2 University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California 90089-1340
Received 8 August 1997/Returned for modification 23 September
1997/Accepted 11 December 1997
 |
ABSTRACT |
Extracts of Drosophila embryos and adults have been
found to catalyze highly efficient DNA mismatch repair, as well as
repair of 1- and 5-bp loops. For mispairs T · G and G · G, repair is nick dependent and is specific for the nicked strand of
heteroduplex DNA. In contrast, repair of A · A, C · A,
G · A, C · T, T · T, and C · C is not nick
dependent, suggesting the presence of glycosylase activities. For
nick-dependent repair, the specific activity of embryo extracts was
similar to that of extracts derived from the entirely postmitotic cells
of young and senescent adults. Thus, DNA mismatch repair activity is
expressed in Drosophila cells during both development and
aging, suggesting that there may be a function or requirement for
mismatch repair throughout the Drosophila life span.
Nick-dependent repair was reduced in extracts of animals mutant for the
mei-9 gene. mei-9 has been shown to be required in vivo for certain types of DNA mismatch repair, nucleotide excision repair (NER), and meiotic crossing over and is the
Drosophila homolog of the yeast NER gene rad1.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
DNA mismatch repair has long been
known to be involved in two important cellular processes: the repair of
mismatches generated by misincorporation of nucleotides during DNA
replication, and the processing of recombination intermediates,
resulting in novel configurations of genetic markers (24,
37). More recently DNA mismatch repair has been found to be
involved in three additional processes: regulation of recombination
between divergent DNA sequences associated with genetic instability
(40, 47); nucleotide excision repair (NER) involved in
repair of physical and chemical damage to DNA (14, 22, 34);
and the recognition of DNA damage and the initiation of responses to
this damage, such as cell cycle arrest (1, 19).
The best-characterized mismatch repair pathway is the Escherichia
coli MutHLS system (36, 37). The MutHLS system
recognizes and repairs all single-base mismatches as well as insertions
and deletions
3 bp in size. The efficiency of mismatch repair depends on the specific mispair formed; e.g., Pu · Pu mispairs are
repaired at higher efficiencies than Py · Py mispairs. Repair of
a given mispair generally depends on surrounding sequence context
(21), but C · C mismatches appear not to be repaired
in the sequence contexts that have been studied (36, 51).
Repair proceeds through mismatch-dependent nicking of the unmethylated
DNA strand opposite a GATC site containing a methylated adenine,
degradation from the nick through the mismatch site, and then
resynthesis of the excision tract (36); these excision
repair tracts can span as many as several thousand nucleotides
(53). The MutS protein recognizes and binds to DNA at the
mismatch. MutL interacts with MutS bound to the mismatch and is
required for optimal activity of MutH endonuclease which nicks the
unmethylated strand.
Eukaryotes possess a mismatch repair system related to the bacterial
MutHLS system (24, 37). Multiple homologs of MutS and MutL
(but not MutH) have been identified in yeast and in mammals, and
certain of these genes have been demonstrated to be required for
mismatch repair in vivo and in vitro. Mutations in the gene encoding a
human MutS homolog (hMSH2) are common in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer families (15, 31). This
observation is consistent with the idea that defects in the mismatch
repair system may lead to genomic instability which predisposes the
affected individuals to certain types of cancers. DNA methylation does not appear to play a role in eukaryotic mismatch repair, and the in
vivo mechanism by which eukaryotes distinguish the newly replicated DNA
strand from the parental strand is currently unknown. In vitro, strand-specific repair is initiated from a nick in the DNA of one of
the strands (37).
NER is the repair of damaged DNA involving excision of oligomers with
lengths of 27 to 29 nucleotides in eukaryotes and 12 to 13 nucleotides
in prokaryotes (44, 56). In eukaryotes, there appears to be
some functional overlap between NER and DNA mismatch repair, and
certain gene products are required for both processes. NER systems
appear to be highly conserved through evolution from yeast to mammals.
Genes required for NER in yeast were first identified as UV-sensitive
rad mutations (16). In humans, genes required for NER have
been identified as the seven repair-deficient complementation
groups (A to G) of the disease xeroderma pigmentosum (XP)
(44). XP is characterized by extreme UV sensitivity and a
predisposition to certain types of cancer. In Drosophila,
several genes required for DNA repair have been identified in screens for mutations which confer increased sensitivity to mutagens
(8). One of these genes, mei-9, had previously
been identified as a gene required for meiotic crossing over and normal
meiotic chromosome disjunction (4). Mutant mei-9
females are able to generate heteroduplex DNA in recombination
intermediates but are unable to repair mismatches within the
heteroduplex regions and to resolve the recombination intermediates as
reciprocal exchanges (11, 43). Drosophila mei-9
mutants have also been shown to be slow in clearing UV-induced
pyrimidine dimers from genomic DNA, indicating that mei-9 is required
for Drosophila NER in vivo (9). The mei-9 gene has been cloned from Drosophila and
found to encode a homolog of the yeast NER protein Rad1 (46)
and the human NER XP complementation group F protein (10,
48). We report here an in vitro system (51) using
extracts of mitotic, postmitotic, or senescent Drosophila
tissues, which efficiently catalyzes DNA mismatch repair. The specific
activities of extracts derived from the entirely postmitotic cells of
young and senescent adults were similar to those of extracts derived
from rapidly dividing embryos. These results suggest that the mismatch
repair system may function throughout the Drosophila life
span. Specific activities of Drosophila extracts were
considerably greater than those of HeLa cell extracts. Mismatch repair
in Drosophila may be inducible, as specific activities are
increased five- to sixfold by X-ray irradiation of flies. There are
specific defects in repair in extracts generated from mei-9
mutant animals, consistent with previous reports that mei-9 is required in vivo for certain types of DNA mismatch repair (11, 43) and NER (9).
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Drosophila strains and culture.
All
Drosophila strains are as previously described
(32). mei-9AT2 and
mei-9a Drosophila stocks were obtained from R. Scott Hawley, University of California, Davis, Calif. Oregon-R strain
flies were grown on cornmeal-molasses-agar medium (2).
Embryos were collected on molasses-agar plates coated with yeast paste.
Flies were cultured and aged as previously described (55).
To obtain flies of defined ages, flies were cultured at 25°C until 0 to 2 days posteclosion, and then the male flies were maintained at
29°C, at 50 flies per vial. Aging flies were transferred to fresh
vials every 4 days to prevent growth of bacteria or fungus in the
cultures. "Young" refers to flies 4 to 5 days posteclosion, and
"old" refers to flies 35 days posteclosion. At 35 days posteclosion
at 29°C, only ~15% of the cohort is still surviving, and thus
these flies are highly senescent.
X-ray treatment.
Young male flies were separated from female
flies and distributed at 50 flies per vial. These flies were X-ray
irradiated for 4 h at 320 rads/min. The flies were allowed to
recover for 48 h before preparation of extracts. The
mock-irradiated control flies were handled and cultured identically to
the irradiated flies.
E. coli strains.
E. coli NR9099, NR9162,
and CSH50 and bacteriophage M13mp2 have been previously described
(7, 26, 27, 29, 41). Mutant M13mp2 derivatives, previously
described (26-28), were obtained from T. A. Kunkel,
Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
Preparation of single-stranded DNA.
To prepare phage stocks,
mutant phage were grown for 5 to 6 h by adding 50 µl of plaque
suspension to 5 ml of an early-log-phase culture of CSH50 cells in LB
medium at 37°C. Cultures were then transferred to sterile
microcentrifuge tubes and centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 5 min at room
temperature. Supernatants were aliquoted to sterile tubes; these stocks
can be stored indefinitely at 4 or
20°C without loss of
infectivity. One-half milliliter of the appropriate phage stock was
added to an early-log-phase culture of CSH50 cells (2.5 ml) and allowed
to stand for 5 min at room temperature. These infected cells were
diluted into 500 ml of fresh LB medium and incubated overnight at
37°C with constant vigorous shaking. The phage were precipitated from
500 ml of the supernatant by adding 0.25 volume of NaCl and 20%
PEG-8000 and stirring for 1 h in the cold room, followed by
centrifugation at 11,800 rpm for 30 min at 4°C. The virus pellet was
resuspended by adding the cationic detergent cetyltrimethylammonium
bromide (24 ml/pellet obtained from 250 ml of the supernatant) and
vortexing vigorously. The suspension was centrifuged at 14,000 rpm for
15 min, and the pellet was resuspended in 7 ml of 1.2 M NaCl/250 ml of
supernatant. DNA was precipitated by adding 17.5 ml of ethanol and
incubating the sample at
20°C overnight. The DNA was pelleted by
centrifuging at 14,000 rpm for 15 min at 4°C. The pellet was washed
with 70% ethanol, spun for 5 min, dried, and resuspended in 2 ml of
Tris-EDTA (pH 8.0), and the final DNA concentration was determined.
Preparation and purification of RF DNA.
Replicative-form
(RF) DNA was prepared and purified by using the Wizard Maxipreps DNA
purification system.
Construction of heteroduplexes containing mispairs.
Heteroduplex DNA was generated as described previously (50).
Briefly, the appropriate mutant RF DNA was digested to completion with
restriction endonuclease AvaII, which incises once in M13mp2 at position
264 (where position +1 is the first transcribed base of
lacZ
). This genome-length linear (minus-strand) DNA was
annealed to mutant, single-stranded, circular, viral (plus-strand) DNA, to generate a completely double-stranded but nicked heteroduplex molecule. This nicked, circular DNA species was purified by 0.8% agarose gel electrophoresis. The nicked heteroduplex migrated as a
distinct band, well separated from other DNA species on the gel (data
not shown). The nicked heteroduplex was then isolated by
electroelution, ethanol precipitated, and resuspended in 10 mM Tris-HCl
(pH 8.0)-1 mM EDTA.
Preparation of competent cells, transfection, and plating.
Preparation of competent cells, transfection, and plating were done
essentially as described previously (7, 42). NR9162 cells
which are deficient in mismatch repair system were derived from MC1061
and yield a very high efficiency for transfection, ~105
plaques/ng of DNA. Plating efficiency was not affected by pretreatment of the DNA with HeLa cell or Drosophila embryo extracts
(data not shown). Transfection was accomplished with a Bio-Rad Gene Pulser set at 1.8 kV, 400
, and 25 µF. Typical time constant is
9.3 ms. Immediately following electroporation, 1 ml of SOC medium
(42) (at room temperature) was added to the cells, which were kept at room temperature. An appropriate amount of the
electroporated cells was used to yield 200 to 500 plaques per plate for
this assay. The total number of plaques was determined by counting all
plaques for which the color phenotype was obvious. Tiny plaques, plaques at the edge of the plate, or those on regions of the plate smeared by a drop of water were not counted.
Preparation of extracts.
Extracts from Drosophila
embryos and adults were prepared essentially as previously described
(35) except that both of the centrifugation steps were
performed at 10,000 × g instead of 100,000 × g. Briefly, adults of Drosophila melanogaster
Oregon-R were cultured in population cages, and the embryos were
collected for 0 to 18 h on apple juice-agar plates coated with a
thin layer of live yeast paste. The embryos were washed extensively in
distilled H2O and then dechorionated by immersion in 2.25%
sodium hypochlorite (bleach) for 90 s. The embryos were then
rinsed extensively with 0.7% NaCl-0.04% Triton X-100 solution and
finally with distilled H2O. The dechorionated embryos were
filtered through Miracloth (Calbiochem), blotted dry from below,
resuspended in 25 to 50 ml of homogenization buffer (20 mM HEPES-NaOH
[pH 7.5], 5 mM magnesium acetate, 50 mM potassium acetate, 1.0 mM
EGTA, 0.5 mM EDTA, 0.1% [vol/vol] Triton X-100, 10% [vol/vol]
glycerol, 10 mM Na2S2O5, 1.0 mM
dithiothreitol, 5 µg of leupeptin per ml, 5 µg of pepstatin A per
ml), and incubated on ice for 10 min. The embryo slurry was refiltered,
blotted dry and weighed. The embryos were then homogenized (1 ml of
buffer and 0.04 ml of 100 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride/g of
embryos) in a Dounce homogenizer with a tight-fitting (A) pestle. The
volume of the homogenate was measured, and one-ninth volume of 5 M NaCl
was added to produce a final concentration of 0.5 M NaCl. This mixture
was then homogenized with a B pestle and incubated for 30 min on ice
with occasional stirring with a sterile plastic pipette. The homogenate
was then centrifuged at 10,000 × g for 1 h at
4°C. The supernatant was collected, carefully avoiding the loose
chromatin pellet. The supernatant was recentrifuged at 10,000 × g for 1 h at 4°C, and the supernatant was collected. The crude extract was frozen in liquid nitrogen as drops and stored at
80°C. Protein estimation was done by Bradford's method.
For generation of extracts from adult flies, Drosophila
young or old adult flies were weighed and then homogenized in
homogenization buffer at 1 ml of buffer and 0.04 ml of 100 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride/g of flies. The homogenate was filtered
through four layers of cheesecloth, and the volume of the filtrate was
measured. Subsequent steps were performed as described above. The same
procedure was followed for X-ray-treated flies as well as for the
mutant flies (both homozygous and heterozygous). When small numbers of flies were used, as in the case of cephalothoraces and X-ray-treated flies and controls, 150 µl of homogenization buffer was used per 100 cephalothoraces or whole flies. The filtration step was omitted, and
subsequent steps were performed as described above. Extracts prepared
in this way from small numbers of whole flies generally had about half
of the specific activity of extracts prepared from large numbers of
whole flies as described above.
Mismatch repair reaction.
The mismatch repair reaction was
as previously described (51). The standard mismatch repair
reaction mixture (25 µl) contained 30 mM HEPES (pH 7.8), 7 mM
MgCl2, 4 mM ATP, 200 µM each CTP, GTP, and UTP, 100 µM
each dATP, dGTP, dTTP, and dCTP, 40 mM creatine phosphate, 100 µg of
creatine phosphokinase per ml, 15 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.5), 5 ng of
purified heteroduplex DNA, and the extract. After incubation at 37°C
for the desired time, the reaction was terminated by the addition of 25 µl of stop mix (2% sodium dodecyl sulfate, 50 mM
EDTA-Na2 [pH 8.0], 2 mg of proteinase K per ml) and
further incubated for 30 min. To this, 30 µl of tRNA (800 µg of
tRNA per ml-4.6 M ammonium acetate) was added, and the sample was
precipitated with 80 µl of isopropanol, extracted twice with 80 µl
of phenol-chloroform-isoamyl alcohol, reprecipitated, and finally
resuspended in 40 µl of distilled water. Transfection of E. coli NR9162 with this DNA was carried out by using a Bio-Rad Gene
Pulser electroporation system. Repair efficiency is expressed in
percent as 100 × (1
ratio of percentages of mixed bursts obtained from extract-treated and untreated samples) (51).
 |
RESULTS |
The mismatch repair assay.
The mismatch repair assay is based
on the analysis of plaque color phenotypes resulting from the
transfection of a mutS E. coli strain with purified M13mp2
heteroduplex DNAs that have been treated with various extracts
(45, 51). The heteroduplexes contain base mispairs in the
E. coli lacZ
gene; this gene can carry out
complementation, yielding blue phage plaques on host indicator plates
(51). The composition of the mispair is such that expression
of one strand yields a light or dark blue plaque phenotype whereas the
other strand contains a stop codon and leads to a white plaque. Upon
transfection, any unrepaired molecules are potentially capable of
forming mixed-color plaques at a certain frequency, as well as
pure-color plaques. Pure-color bursts are obtained even without extract
treatment, and this is characteristic of M13 phage replication in
E. coli (51). When the template is first treated
with extract and repair occurs, the ratios change such that mixed
bursts decrease, and one or both pure bursts will increase depending on
the extent of repair of either strand (51).
Mismatch repair requires a nick and is directed toward the nicked
strand.
The methylation state of adenine in d(GATC) sequences
serves as the signal for strand discrimination of mismatch correction by the E. coli methyl-directed MutHLS pathway; a nick is
made by MutH endonuclease, in the presence of MutL, at the d(GATC) site
in the unmethylated strand (25, 33, 36). However, a persistent nick or strand break can bypass the requirements for both
d(GATC) sequences and mutH for the E. coli
mismatch repair system in vitro (30, 54). Transfection
experiments suggest that a nick may suffice to determine strand
specificity of mismatch repair in mammalian cells (17).
Nuclear extracts derived from Drosophila Kc and
HeLa cell lines have been found to correct single-base mispairs within
open circular DNA heteroduplexes containing a strand-specific,
site-specific nick located 808 bp from the mismatch (20). To
determine whether a strand-specific and site-specific nick is required
for efficient repair of G · G and T · G heteroduplexes in
the Drosophila embryo extract, the relative frequencies of repair of the nicked and unnicked strands were assayed.
For both the G · G and T · G heteroduplexes, increasing
Drosophila embryo extract amounts from 0 to 75 µg or 0 to
50 µg increased
the repair efficiency to 87 and 67.2%, respectively
(Table
1).
Repair efficiency (defined in
Materials and Methods) is a function
of the degree to which extract
treatment reduces the number of
mixed-phenotype plaque bursts. The nick
was always present in
the minus strand, and as expected, repair was
specific for the
nicked strand. The frequency of mixed and minus-strand
plaque
phenotypes decreased dramatically with increasing extract, while
the frequency of plus-strand plaque phenotypes increased (Table
1).
Repair of G · G and T · G was also specific for the
nicked
strand in adult
Drosophila extracts (data not shown).
When the nicked heteroduplex was ligated, repair of G · G and
T · G was greatly reduced, as expected for nick-dependent repair
(data not shown). In the presence of a nick, the nicked strand
of the
C · C heteroduplex also exhibited some preference for repair.
However, ligation of the nicked C · C heteroduplex did not
reduce
the efficiency of repair, and now both strands were equally
repaired
(data not shown). This suggests the presence of an additional
activity for C · C repair, as was previously reported for
E. coli (
39). The nick dependence of repair for
each mispair is summarized
in Table
4.
Repair of mispairs G · A, C · A, A · A, C
· T, and T · T is not specific for the nicked strand.
When the G · A and C · A mispairs were assayed for repair
of the nicked and nonnicked DNA strands, repair was found to be specific for the nonnicked (plus) strand (Table
2). A likely explanation for this result
is that the G · A and C · A mispairs were being repaired
by the activity of an A-glycosylase. Consistent with this idea, repair
of the A · A mispair was found to occur on both strands (Table
2). Repair of the A · G mispair was found to be specific for the
nicked strand; however, since the nicked strand also contains the A of
the A · G mispair, this might or might not represent an
A-glycosylase activity. Similarly, repair of mispairs C · T and
T · T was not specific for the nicked strand. This repair may be
the result of a T-glycosylase activity. A T-glycosylase has recently
been purified from HeLa cell extracts (38).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 2.
Repair of A · G, G · A, C · A, and
A · A heteroduplexes by Drosophila young adult fly
extract for 2 min at 37°C
|
|
Specific activity of mismatch repair in Drosophila
extracts is maintained throughout development and aging.
To
compare mismatch repair activities during different stages of
Drosophila development, it was necessary to measure the
specific activities of extracts from embryos and from young and old
adult flies. We also compared the specific activities of
Drosophila extracts with those of HeLa cell extracts. The
specific activities for correction of the mispairs G · G and
C · C were determined by assaying repair in the linear range
both for protein amount and time of incubation (Fig.
1). Conditions were identified for each
type of extract (HeLa, Drosophila embryo, and
Drosophila adult) for which repair activity was
approximately linear with regard to protein concentration and time of
reaction.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Mismatch repair efficiencies of HeLa cell and
Drosophila extracts. The percent repair efficiency was
calculated as a function of amount of extract protein for the various
types of extracts. Reaction mixtures were incubated for 15 min for HeLa
cell extracts and for 2 min for Drosophila extracts. Results
are expressed as total repair efficiencies and are based on counts of
several hundred to several thousand plaques per data point. A small
amount of C · C repair was observed in HeLa cell extracts, but
it was not strand specific. The data are plotted as means ± standard errors. Open circles, repair of G · G; closed circles,
repair of C · C.
|
|
HeLa cell extract (0 to 25 µg of protein) shows an approximately
linear response for percent repair efficiency when the reaction
is
carried out for 15 min (Fig.
1A). This range was used to determine
the
specific activity (percent repair efficiency/minute/microgram
of protein) for the HeLa cell extract. For the more active
Drosophila extracts (Fig.
1B to D), 0 to 1 µg of extract
shows an approximately
linear increase in the percent repair efficiency
with 2-min incubation
times. This range was thus used to determine the
specific activities
of mismatch repair in the various
Drosophila extracts (Table
3).
Mismatch repair activities were found to be approximately linear
for
repair efficiencies in the range of 0 to 20% (Fig.
1).
In
E. coli, mismatch repair activity decreases as cells
enter stationary phase because of a loss of MutS activity and, to
a
lesser extent, a decrease in MutH activity (
13). It was of
interest to determine if mismatch repair activity would be maintained
in the postmitotic cells of the
Drosophila adult and during
aging.
No significant difference in specific activity was found in
extracts
prepared from
Drosophila embryos, young adults, and
old adults
(Table
3). Thus, expression of the mismatch repair pathway
factors
is maintained throughout the adult
Drosophila life
span. All of
the tissues of adult
Drosophila are postmitotic
with the exception
of the gonads, which are located in the abdomen. To
confirm that
the mismatch repair activity in extracts of adults was
indeed
present in the postmitotic tissues and was not being contributed
by the dividing cells of the gonads, extracts were prepared from
young
and old cephalothoraces, which consist entirely of postmitotic
tissues.
Specific activity of the cephalothorax extracts was even
higher than
that of whole-fly extracts, demonstrating that mismatch
repair
activities are indeed expressed in the postmitotic tissues
of young and
senescent adults.
For comparison, specific activities were calculated for HeLa cell
extracts which had been prepared according to both published
procedures
(
42) and by the same method as the
Drosophila
extracts
were prepared (Table
3). The specific activity obtained for
the
HeLa cell extracts (maximum 0.14% repair/min/µg of protein) was
comparable to published reports for activity of HeLa cell extracts
(
51). Strikingly, the
Drosophila extracts
averaged an approximately
150-fold higher specific activity than the
HeLa cell extracts.
Mismatch repair activities in adults are induced by X-ray
irradiation.
It was of interest to determine whether the mismatch
repair activity detected in the Drosophila extracts was an
inducible system. To test for inducibility, extracts were prepared from adult flies which had been subjected to 76,800 rads of X-ray
irradiation and from mock-irradiated control flies. The specific
activity of the extracts for repair of G · G mismatch was found
to be five- to sixfold induced by X-ray irradiation, indicating that
the mismatch repair system detected in the extracts is inducible in
adult flies (Table 3).
Relative efficiency of repair of different mismatches.
To
determine the relative efficiency of repair of different mismatches in
Drosophila extracts, a variety of base mispairs were assayed
for specific activity of repair in two independent embryo extracts
(Table 4). A · A, T · G,
and G · G were found to be the most efficiently repaired, C
· C, T · T, and C · T were intermediate, and C · A, G · A, and A · G were the least efficiently repaired.
In E. coli, the MutHLS system can also repair 1- to 3-bp
loops but does not efficiently repair a 5-bp loop. The
Drosophila embryo extract was found to efficiently repair
both 1- and 5-bp loops; however, the repair was not nick dependent
(Table 4).
Extracts of mei-9 mutant animals exhibit defects in
nick-dependent DNA mismatch repair.
The Drosophila
mei-9 gene is homologous to yeast rad1 and is required
for meiotic recombination and certain types of mismatch repair and NER
in vivo in Drosophila. To determine whether mei-9 gene function is required for mismatch repair in the in vitro assay,
extracts were prepared from animals homozygous for either of two strong
mei-9 alleles, as well as from heterozygous controls. Both
the mei-9AT2 and mei-9a
mutant alleles were found to significantly reduce the repair of G
· G and T · G mispairs. Relative to extracts of heterozygous flies, repair of G · G and T · G mispairs was reduced
5.7- and 9-fold, respectively, in mei-9AT2
mutant extracts and reduced 12.5- and 10-fold, respectively, in
mei-9a mutant extracts. The decrease in repair
relative to wild-type flies may be even greater, as even the
heterozygous fly extracts appear to be slightly reduced in activity
relative to wild-type extracts. (Fig. 2).
The mei-9 mutations did not significantly affect the repair
of the A · G or G · A mispairs (Fig. 2) or the other
mispairs such as C · C, where repair was non-nick dependent (data not shown). Thus, mei-9 mutations specifically reduce
nick-dependent DNA mismatch repair in vitro.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Repair of G · G, T · G, A · G, and
G · A mispairs by Drosophila wild-type and
mei-9 mutant extracts. Extracts were prepared from Oregon-R
strain (wild-type) young adults and from flies heterozygous (het) and
homozygous (hom) for mei-9 alleles
mei-9AT2 and mei-9a, as
indicated. Results are expressed as specific activity (percent repair
efficiency/minute/microgram of protein) and are based on counts of
several hundred to several thousand plaques per assay. Reaction
mixtures contained 0.5 µg of protein and were incubated for 2 min at
37°C, which is within the approximately linear range of the assay
(Fig. 1C). The data are plotted as means ± standard errors of two
to four independent measurements. All mispairs were efficiently
repaired by a mixture of wild-type and mei-9 mutant extracts
(data not shown).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
We have characterized an in vitro system for DNA mismatch repair
that uses extracts of Drosophila embryos and adults. Repair was nick dependent and specific for the nicked DNA strand of the heteroduplex for mispairs T · G and G · G. In contrast,
repair of A · A, C · A, G · A, C · T,
T · T, and C · C was not nick dependent and may be
catalyzed by glycosylases. A-glycosylase activity has been observed in
other systems, for example, the MutY activity of E. coli
(3). A T-glycosylase has previously been purified from HeLa
cell extracts (38). The range of relative activities for the
repair of the different mispairs was similar to that previously reported for extracts of mammalian cells and Drosophila
tissue culture cells. Strikingly, the Drosophila embryo and
adult extracts have >100-fold-higher specific activity for
nick-dependent repair than HeLa tissue culture cell extracts.
The developing Drosophila embryo exhibits the most rapid
S phase known for a multicellular eukaryote, and it is therefore not surprising that these cells would express high levels of the factors required for postreplicative DNA mismatch repair. In E. coli, cessation of cell division by entry into stationary phase causes a down-regulation of DNA mismatch repair activities: a 10-fold
decrease in mutS activity and a 3-fold decrease in
mutH activity (13). In contrast, extracts of the
entirely postmitotic cells of adult Drosophila had a
specific activity for mismatch repair equal to that of the rapidly
dividing Drosophila embryo. Moreover, equally high specific
activity was obtained from extracts of highly senescent
Drosophila adults. This finding indicates that the relevant
activities are continuously expressed up to the end of the
Drosophila life span. The continued high level expression of
these DNA mismatch repair activities suggests that they may be required
to maintain DNA sequence integrity throughout the adult
Drosophila life span.
DNA mismatch repair activity in the postmitotic cells of adult
Drosophila may be inducible, in that the specific activity of extracts was increased five- to sixfold by pretreatment of the
adults with X rays. X rays produce hydroxyl radicals, which in turn
cause double-strand breaks in DNA (5). In
Drosophila, repair of double-strand breaks created by
transposable element excision appears to involve exonucleolytic
digestion of the free DNA ends and then resynthesis of the
double-strand DNA gap, using homologous sequences as the template
(12). X-ray-induced double-strand breaks may be repaired by
a similar pathway, and we hypothesize that mismatch repair activities
may be induced to correct any misincorporated nucleotides in the newly
synthesized DNA. Consistent with this idea, double-strand break
repair in yeast is associated with high rates of DNA synthesis errors
(49). Alternatively, X-ray-generated oxygen radicals may
directly damage certain DNA bases, and activities involved in both NER
and mismatch repair may be induced to repair this damage.
Requirement for mei-9 activity.
Mutations in the
Drosophila mei-9 gene were first identified in a screen for
mutations causing increased levels of meiotic nondisjunction
(4). The meiotic nondisjunction results from a reduced level
of meiotic crossing over (reciprocal exchange) to <10% of wild-type
levels. While reciprocal exchange is greatly reduced by
mei-9 mutations, meiotic gene conversion is nearly normal.
In addition, mei-9 females exhibit high levels of
postmeiotic segregation, where progeny can inherit a single maternal
chromosome yet be mosaic for both maternal alleles of a particular gene
on that chromosome (11, 43). These data have been
interpreted as indicating that mei-9 females are able to
generate heteroduplex DNA in recombination intermediates but are unable
to repair mismatches within the heteroduplex regions and to resolve the
recombination intermediates as reciprocal exchanges (46).
Drosophila DNA repair genes, including
mei-9,
have also been identified in screens for mutations which cause
increased sensitivity
to mutagens (
8). Strong
mei-9 alleles were found to decrease
NER, as evidenced by a
decreased rate at which pyrimidine dimers
are cleared from genomic DNA
of
mei-9 animals after UV irradiation
(
9,
18).
The
mei-9 gene was recently cloned from
Drosophila and found to encode the homolog of the
Saccharomyces cerevisiae rad1 and
Schizosaccharomyces
pombe rad16 genes, both of which
are required for NER.
mei-9 is also homologous to human XP complementation
group
F, which is also required for NER (
10,
48). In
S. cerevisiae,
rad1 functions in combination with the
product of another gene
required for NER,
rad10, as a
single-stranded DNA endonuclease
in vitro (
52). It is
hypothesized that the yeast Rad1/Rad10
endonuclease is responsible for
generating the nick 5' to DNA
damage sites during NER (
6),
and it appears likely that
mei-9 has an analogous function
in
Drosophila. It has recently been
reported that repair of
a 26-base loop in yeast involves the action
of both Msh2 and Rad1,
demonstrating that mismatch repair and
NER systems can act in concert
to eliminate specific aberrant
DNA structures (
23).
One important aspect of the in vitro DNA mismatch repair system
reported here is that highly active extracts can be prepared
from whole
adult
Drosophila flies. This result allows extracts
to be
made from animals mutant for suspected or known DNA repair
genes, such
as
mei-9. Our results demonstrate that in vitro DNA
mismatch
repair in extracts of
mei-9 adults exhibits specific
defects. Nick-dependent repair of the mismatches G · G and
T ·
G is reduced 5- to 12-fold. In contrast, the
non-nick-dependent
repair of the other mispairs such as A · G
and G · A is not detectably
affected. These results are
consistent with a specific requirement
for
mei-9 gene
function during nick-dependent DNA mismatch repair.
The availability of
an in vitro system which is dependent on
mei-9 gene product
for full activity should be useful in elucidating
the exact role of
mei-9 function in DNA repair. Similarly, this
system can
potentially be used to characterize other DNA repair
mutations for
their affects on in vitro DNA mismatch repair.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Scott Hawley and Tom Kunkel for providing stocks and
advice.
This research was supported by grants from the National Institutes of
Health to M.F.G. (AG11398) and J.T. (AG11644).
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Biological Sciences, SHS 172, University of Southern California,
University Park, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1340. Phone: (213) 740-5384. Fax: (213) 740-8631. E-mail: jtower{at}mizar.usc.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Anthoney, D. A.,
A. J. McIlwrath,
W. M. Gallagher,
A. R. M. Edlin, and R. Brown.
1996.
Microsatellite instability, apoptosis, and loss of p53 function in drug-resistant tumor cells.
Cancer Res.
56:1374-1381[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Ashburner, M.
1989.
.
Drosophila: a laboratory handbook.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, N.Y.
|
| 3.
|
Au, K. G.,
S. Clark,
J. H. Miller, and P. Modrich.
1988.
Escherichia coli mutY gene encodes an adenine glycosylase active on G/A mispairs.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
86:8877-8881.
|
| 4.
|
Baker, B. S., and A. T. C. Carpenter.
1972.
Genetic analysis of sex chromosomal meiotic mutants in Drosophila melanogaster.
Genetics
71:255-286[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Baker, M. A., and S. Q. He.
1991.
Elaboration of cellular DNA breaks by hydroperoxides.
Free Radical Biol. Med.
11:563-572[Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Bardwell, A. J.,
L. Bardwell,
A. Tomkinson, and E. C. Friedberg.
1994.
Specific cleavage of model recombination and repair intermediates by the yeast Rad1-Rad10 DNA endonuclease.
Science
265:2082-2085[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Bebenek, K., and T. A. Kunkel.
1995.
Analyzing the fidelity of DNA polymerases.
Methods Enzymol.
262:217-232[Medline].
|
| 8.
|
Boyd, J. B.,
M. Golino,
T. Nguyen, and M. M. Green.
1976.
Isolation and characterization of X-linked mutants of Drosophila melanogaster which are sensitive to mutagens.
Genetics
84:485-506[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Boyd, J. B.,
M. D. Golino, and R. B. Setlow.
1976.
The mei-9a mutant of Drosophila melanogaster increases mutagen sensitivity and decreases excision repair.
Genetics
84:527-544[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Brookman, K. W.,
J. E. Lamerdin,
M. P. Thelen,
M. Hwang,
J. T. Reardon,
A. Sancar,
Z. Zhou,
C. A. Walter,
C. N. Parris, and L. H. Thompson.
1996.
ERCC4 (XPF) encodes a human nucleotide excision repair protein with eukaryotic homologs.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:6553-6562[Abstract].
|
| 11.
|
Carpenter, A. T. C.
1982.
Mismatch repair, gene conversion, and crossing-over in two recombination-defective mutants of Drosophila melanogaster.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
79:5961-5965[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Engels, W. R.,
D. M. Johnson-Schlitz,
W. B. Eggleston, and J. Sved.
1990.
High-frequency P element loss in Drosophila is homolog-dependent.
Cell
62:515-525[Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Feng, G.,
H. T. Tsui, and M. E. Winkler.
1996.
Depletion of the cellular amounts of the MutS and MutH methyl-directed mismatch repair proteins in stationary-phase Escherichia coli K-12 cells.
J. Bacteriol.
178:2388-2396[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Feng, W. Y.,
E. H. Lee, and J. B. Hays.
1991.
Recombinogenic processing of UV-light photoproducts in nonreplicating phage DNA by the Escherichia coli methyl-directed mismatch repair system.
Genetics
129:1007-1020[Abstract].
|
| 15.
|
Fishel, R.,
M. K. Lescoe,
M. R. S. Rao,
N. G. Copeland,
N. A. Jenkins,
J. Garber,
M. Kane, and R. Kolodner.
1993.
The human mutator gene homolog MSH2 and its association with hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer.
Cell
75:1027-1038[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Friedberg, E. C.
1988.
Deoxyribonucleic acid repair in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Microbiol. Rev.
52:70-102[Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Hare, J. T., and J. H. Taylor.
1985.
One role for DNA methylation in vertebrate cells is strand discrimination in mismatch repair.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
82:7350-7354[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Harris, P. V., and J. B. Boyd.
1980.
Excision repair in Drosophila. Analysis of strand breaks appearing in DNA of mei-9 mutants following mutagen treatment.
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
610:116-129[Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Hawn, M. T.,
A. Umar,
J. M. Caretthers,
G. Marra,
T. A. Kunkel,
R. C. Boland, and M. Koi.
1995.
Evidence for a connection between the mismatch repair system and the G2 cell cycle checkpoint.
Cancer Res.
55:3721-3725[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Holmes, J. J.,
S. Clark, and P. Modrich.
1990.
Strand-specific mismatch correction in nuclear extracts of human and Drosophila melanogaster cell lines.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
87:5837-5841[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Jones, M.,
R. Wagner, and M. Radman.
1987.
Repair of a mismatch is influenced by the base composition of the surrounding nucleotide sequence.
Genetics
115:605-610[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Karran, P., and M. G. Marinus.
1982.
Mismatch correction of O6-methylguanine residues in E. coli DNA.
Nature
296:868-869[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Kirkpatrick, D. T., and T. D. Petes.
1997.
Repair of DNA loops involves DNA-mismatch and nucleotide-excision repair proteins.
Nature
387:929-931[Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Kolodner, R.
1996.
Biochemistry and genetics of eukaryotic mismatch repair.
Genes Dev.
10:1433-1442[Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Kramer, B.,
W. Kramer, and H.-J. Fritz.
1984.
Different base/base mismatches are corrected with different efficiencies by the methyl-directed DNA mismatch-repair system of E. coli.
Cell
38:879-887[Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Kunkel, T. A.
1985.
The mutational specificity of DNA polymerase- during in vitro DNA synthesis.
J. Biol. Chem.
260:5787-5796[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Kunkel, T. A.
1985.
The mutational specificity of DNA polymerases- and during in vitro DNA synthesis.
J. Biol. Chem.
260:12866-12874[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Kunkel, T. A., and P. S. Alexander.
1986.
The base substitution fidelity of eucaryotic DNA polymerases. Mispairing frequencies, site preferences, insertion preferences, and base substitution by dislocation.
J. Biol. Chem.
261:160-166[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Kunkel, T. A., and A. Soni.
1988.
Exonucleolytic proofreading enhances the fidelity of DNA synthesis by chick embryo DNA polymerase .
J. Biol. Chem.
263:4450-4459[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Lahue, R. S.,
K. G. Au, and P. Modrich.
1989.
DNA mismatch correction in a defined system.
Science
245:160-164[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Leach, F. S.,
N. C. Nicolaides,
N. Papadopoulos,
B. Liu,
J. Jen,
R. Parsons,
P. Peltomaki,
P. Sistonen,
L. A. Aaltonen,
M. Nystrom-Lahti,
X. Y. Guan,
J. Zhang,
P. S. Meltzer,
J. W. Yu,
F. T. Kao,
D. J. Chen,
K. M. Cerosaletti,
R. E. K. Fournier,
S. Todd,
T. Lewis,
R. J. Leach,
S. L. Naylor,
J. Weissenbach,
J. P. Mecklin,
H. Jarvinen,
G. M. Petersen,
S. R. Hamilton,
J. Green,
J. Jass,
P. Watson,
H. T. Lynch,
J. M. Trent,
A. de la Chapelle,
K. W. Kinsler, and B. Vogelstein.
1993.
Mutations of a mutS homolog in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.
Cell
75:1215-1225[Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Lindsley, D. L., and G. G. Zimm.
1992.
.
The genome of Drosophila melanogaster.
Academic Press, San Diego, Calif.
|
| 33.
|
Lu, A.-L.,
S. Clark, and P. Modrich.
1983.
Methyl-directed repair of DNA base-pair mismatches in vitro.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
80:4639-4643[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Mellon, I., and G. N. Champe.
1996.
Products of DNA mismatch repair genes mutS and mutL are required for transcription-coupled nucleotide excision repair of the lactose operon in Escherichia coli.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:1292-1297[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Mitsis, P. G.,
S. C. Kowalczykowski, and I. R. Lehman.
1993.
A single-stranded DNA binding protein from Drosophila melanogaster: characterization of the heterotrimeric protein and its interaction with single-stranded DNA.
Biochemistry
32:5257-5266[Medline].
|
| 36.
|
Modrich, P.
1991.
Mechanisms and biological effects of mismatch repair.
Annu. Rev. Genet.
25:229-253[Medline].
|
| 37.
|
Modrich, P., and R. Lahue.
1996.
Mismatch repair in replication fidelity, genetic recombination, and cancer biology.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65:101-133[Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Neddermann, P., and J. Jiricny.
1993.
The purification of a mismatch-specific thymine-DNA glycosylase from HeLa cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:21218-21224[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Radicella, J. P.,
E. A. Clark, and M. S. Fox.
1988.
Some mismatch repair activities in Escherichia coli.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
85:9674-9678[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 40.
|
Rayssiguier, C.,
D. S. Thaler, and M. Radman.
1989.
The barrier to recombination between Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium is disrupted in mismatch-repair mutants.
Nature
342:396-401[Medline].
|
| 41.
|
Roberts, J. D.,
K. Bebenek, and T. A. Kunkel.
1988.
The accuracy of reverse transcriptase from HIV-1.
Science
242:1171-1173[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 42.
|
Roberts, J. D., and T. A. Kunkel.
1993.
Fidelity of DNA replication in human cells.
Methods Mol. Genet.
2:295-313.
|
| 43.
|
Romans, P.
1980.
Gene conversion in mei-9a, a crossover defective in Drosophila melanogaster.
Drosophila Inf. Serv.
55:130-132.
|
| 44.
|
Sancar, A.
1994.
Mechanisms of DNA excision repair.
Science
266:1954-1956[Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Schaaper, R. M.
1989.
Escherichia coli mutator mutD5 is defective in the mutHLS pathway of DNA mismatch repair.
Genetics
121:205-212[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Sekelsky, J. J.,
K. S. McKim,
G. M. Chin, and R. S. Hawley.
1995.
The Drosophila meiotic recombination gene mei-9 encodes a homologue of the yeast excision repair protein Rad1.
Genetics
141:619-627[Abstract].
|
| 47.
|
Selva, E. M.,
L. New,
G. F. Crouse, and R. S. Lahue.
1995.
Mismatch correction acts as a barrier to homeologous recombination in Saccharoymces cerevisiae.
Genetics
139:1175-1188[Abstract].
|
| 48.
|
Sijbers, A. M.,
W. L. de Laat,
R. R. Ariza,
M. Biggerstaff,
Y. F. Wei,
J. G. Moggs,
K. C. Carter,
B. K. Shell,
E. Evans,
M. C. de Jong,
S. Rademakers,
J. de Rooij,
N. G. J. Jaspers,
J. H. J. Hoeijmakers, and R. D. Wood.
1996.
Xeroderma pigmentosum group F caused by a defect in a structure-specific DNA repair endonuclease.
Cell
86:811-822[Medline].
|
| 49.
|
Strathern, J. N.,
B. K. Shafer, and C. B. McGill.
1995.
DNA synthesis errors associated with double-strand-break repair.
Genetics
140:965-972[Abstract].
|
| 50.
|
Thomas, D. C.,
T. A. Kunkel,
N. J. Casna,
J. P. Ford, and A. Sancar.
1986.
Activities and incision patterns of ABC excinuclease on modified DNA containing single-base mismatches and extrahelical bases.
J. Biol. Chem.
261:14496-14505[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 51.
|
Thomas, D. C.,
J. D. Roberts, and T. A. Kunkel.
1991.
Heteroduplex repair in extracts of human HeLa cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:3744-3751[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 52.
|
Tomkinson, A. E.,
A. J. Bardwell,
L. Bardwell,
N. J. Tappe, and E. C. Friedberg.
1993.
Yeast DNA repair and recombination proteins Rad1 and Rad10 constitute a single-stranded-DNA endonuclease.
Nature
263:860-862.
|
| 53.
|
Wagner, J. R., and M. Meselson.
1976.
Repair tracts in mismatched DNA heteroduplexes.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
73:4135-4139[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Welsh, K. M.,
A.-L. Lu,
S. Clark, and P. Modrich.
1987.
Isolation and characterization of the Escherichia coli mutH gene product.
J. Biol. Chem.
262:15624-15629[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 55.
|
Wheeler, J. C.,
E. T. Bieschke, and J. Tower.
1995.
Muscle-specific expression of Drosophila hsp70 in response to aging and oxidative stress.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:10408-10412[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 56.
|
Wood, R. D.
1996.
DNA repair in eukaryotes.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65:135-167[Medline].
|
Mol Cell Biol, March 1998, p. 1436-1443, Vol. 18, No. 3
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Radford, S. J., McMahan, S., Blanton, H. L., Sekelsky, J.
(2007). Heteroduplex DNA in Meiotic Recombination in Drosophila mei-9 Mutants. Genetics
176: 63-72
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Berry, S. E., Loh, T., Yan, T., Kinsella, T. J.
(2003). Role of MutS{alpha} in the Recognition of Iododeoxyuridine in DNA. Cancer Res.
63: 5490-5495
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Marti, T. M., Kunz, C., Fleck, O.
(2003). Repair of Damaged and Mismatched DNA by the XPC Homologues Rhp41 and Rhp42 of Fission Yeast. Genetics
164: 457-467
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Birdsell, J. A.
(2002). Integrating Genomics, Bioinformatics, and Classical Genetics to Study the Effects of Recombination on Genome Evolution. Mol Biol Evol
19: 1181-1197
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Matton, N., Simonetti, J., Williams, K.
(1999). Inefficient in vivo repair of mismatches at an oncogenic hotspot correlated with lack of binding by mismatch repair proteins and with phase of the cell cycle. Carcinogenesis
20: 1417-1424
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
de Laat, W. L., Jaspers, N. G.J., Hoeijmakers, J. H.J.
(1999). Molecular mechanism of nucleotide excision repair. Genes Dev.
13: 768-785
[Full Text]
-
Flores, C., Engels, W.
(1999). Microsatellite instability in Drosophila spellchecker1 (MutS homolog) mutants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96: 2964-2969
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Bertrand, P., Tishkoff, D. X., Filosi, N., Dasgupta, R., Kolodner, R. D.
(1998). Physical interaction between components of DNA mismatch repair and nucleotide excision repair. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95: 14278-14283
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hohl, M., Christensen, O., Kunz, C., Naegeli, H., Fleck, O.
(2001). Binding and Repair of Mismatched DNA Mediated by Rhp14, the Fission Yeast Homologue of Human XPA. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 30766-30772
[Abstract]
[Full Text]