Skip Navigation


Mutagenesis Advance Access originally published online on November 28, 2005
Mutagenesis 2006 21(1):29-34; doi:10.1093/mutage/gei066
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/1/29    most recent
gei066v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, B. L.
Right arrow Articles by Heflich, R. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, B. L.
Right arrow Articles by Heflich, R. H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the UK Environmental Mutagen Society 2006. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Levels of H-ras codon 61 CAA to AAA mutation: response to 4-ABP-treatment and Pms2-deficiency

Barbara L. Parsons1,*, Robert R. Delongchamp2, Frederick A. Beland3 and Robert H. Heflich1

1Division of Genetic and Reproductive Toxicology, 2Division of Biometry and Risk Assessment and 3Division of Biochemical Toxicology, National Center for Toxicological Research, USFDA, Jefferson, AR 72079, USA

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiencies result in increased frequencies of spontaneous mutation and tumor formation. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that a chemically-induced mutational response would be greater in a mouse with an MMR-deficiency than in the MMR-proficient mouse models commonly used to assay for chemical carcinogenicity. To accomplish this, the induction of H-ras codon 61 CAA->AAA mutation was examined in Pms2 knockout mice (Pms2–/–, C57BL/6 background) and sibling wild-type mice (Pms2+/+). Groups of five or six neonatal male mice were treated with 0.3 µmol 4-aminobiphenyl (4-ABP) or the vehicle control, dimethylsulfoxide. Eight months after treatment, liver DNAs were isolated and analysed for levels of H-ras codon 61 CAA->AAA mutation using allele-specific competitive blocker-PCR. In Pms2-proficient and Pms2-deficient mice, 4-ABP treatment caused an increase in mutant fraction (MF) from 1.65 x 10–5 to 2.91 x 10–5 and from 3.40 x 10–5 to 4.70 x 10–5, respectively. Pooling data from 4-ABP-treated and control mice, the ~2-fold increase in MF observed in Pms2-deficient as compared with Pms2-proficient mice was statistically significant (P = 0.0207) and consistent with what has been reported previously in terms of induction of G:C->T:A mutation in a Pms2-deficient background. Pooling data from both genotypes, the increase in H-ras MF in 4-ABP-treated mice, as compared with control mice, did not reach the 95% confidence level of statistical significance (P = 0.0606). The 4-ABP treatment caused a 1.76-fold and 1.38-fold increase in average H-ras MF in Pms2-proficient and Pms2-deficient mice, respectively. Furthermore, the levels of induced mutation in Pms2-proficient and Pms2-deficient mice were nearly identical (1.26 x 10–5 and 1.30 x 10–5, respectively). We conclude that Pms2-deficiency does not result in an amplification of the H-ras codon 61 CAA->AAA mutational response induced by 4-ABP.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Barbara Parsons, Division of Genetic and Reproductive Toxicology, HFT-120, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR 72079, USA; Tel: 870 543 7946; Fax: 870 543 7393; Email: bparsons{at}nctr.fda.gov


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.