title: Mechanisms of direct radiation damage in DNA, based on a study of the yields of base damage, deoxyribose damage, and trapped radicals in d(GCACGCGTGC)(2).
abstract: Dose-response curves were measured for the formation of direct-type DNA products in X-irradiated d(GCACGCGTGC)(2)prepared as dry films and as crystalline powders. Damage to deoxyribose (dRib) was assessed by HPLC measurements of strand break products containing 3' or 5' terminal phosphate and free base release. Base damage was measured using GC/ MS after acid hydrolysis and trimethylsilylation. The yield of trappable radicals was measured at 4 K by EPR of films X-irradiated at 4 K. With exception of those used for EPR, all samples were X-irradiated at room temperature. There was no measurable difference between working under oxygen or under nitrogen. The chemical yields (in units of nmol/J) for trapped radicals, free base release, 8-oxoGua, 8-oxoAde, diHUra and diHThy were G(total)(fr) = 618 +/- 60, G(fbr) = 93 +/- 8, G(8-oxoGua) = 111 +/- 62, G(8-oxoAde) = 4 +/- 3, G(diHUra) = 127 +/- 160, and G(diHThy) = 39 +/- 60, respectively. The yields were determined and the dose-response curves explained by a mechanistic model consisting of three reaction pathways: (1) trappable-radical single-track, (2) trappable-radical multiple-track, and (3) molecular. If the base content is projected from the decamer's GC:AT ratio of 4:1 to a ratio of 1:1, the percentage of the total measured damage (349 nmol/J) would partition as follows: 20 +/- 16% 8-oxoGua, 3 +/- 3% 8-oxoAde, 28 +/- 46% diHThy, 23 +/- 32% diHUra, and 27 +/- 17% dRib damage. With a cautionary note regarding large standard deviations, the projected yield of total damage is higher in CG-rich DNA because C combined with G is more prone to damage than A combined with T, the ratio of base damage to deoxyribose damage is approximately 3:1, the yield of diHUra is comparable to the yield of diHThy, and the yield of 8-oxoAde is not negligible. While the quantity and quality of the data fall short of proving the hypothesized model, the model provides an explanation for the dose-response curves of the more prevalent end products and provides a means of measuring their chemical yields, i.e., their rate of formation at zero dose. Therefore, we believe that this comprehensive analytical approach, combined with the mechanistic model, will prove important in predicting risk due to exposure to low doses and low dose rates of ionizing radiation.
authors: Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.
authors: Steven G
authors: SG
authors: Swarts
authors: David C
authors: DC
authors: Gilbert
authors: Kiran K
authors: KK
authors: Sharma
authors: Yuriy
authors: Y
authors: Razskazovskiy
authors: Shubhadeep
authors: S
authors: Purkayastha
authors: Katerina A
authors: KA
authors: Naumenko
authors: William A
authors: WA
authors: Bernhard
mesh_terms: D020029:Base Pairing / Q000528:radiation effects*; D003198:Computer Simulation; D004249:DNA Damage / Q000528:radiation effects*; D003855:Deoxyribose / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000528:radiation effects*; D004307:Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; D005609:Free Radicals / Q000528:radiation effects; D008956:Models, Chemical; D008957:Models, Genetic; D009841:Oligonucleotides / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000528:radiation effects*; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D014965:X-Rays
chemical_list: D005609:Free Radicals; D009841:Oligonucleotides; D003855:Deoxyribose
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33(17):5553-64
references: 16204456
references: Radiat Res. 1993 Aug;135(2):146-54
references: 8396268
references: J Am Chem Soc. 2002 Jul 31;124(30):8859-66
references: 12137539
references: Free Radic Res Commun. 1992;16(6):349-79
references: 1325399
references: Radiat Res. 2005 May;163(5):591-602
references: 15850421
references: Radiat Res. 2002 Mar;157(3):227-34
references: 11839083
references: Radiat Res. 1999 Aug;152(2):196-201
references: 10409330
references: Radiat Res. 1996 Mar;145(3):304-14
references: 8927698
references: Radiat Res. 1995 Dec;144(3):251-7
references: 7494867
references: Biol Chem. 1997 Nov;378(11):1293-7
references: 9426189
references: Radiat Res. 1995 Aug;143(2):144-50
references: 7631006
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34(5):1501-11
references: 16537838
references: Radiat Res. 2003 Sep;160(3):334-9
references: 12926992
references: Radiat Res. 2005 Jan;163(1):85-9
references: 15606311
references: Radiat Res. 1999 Dec;152(6):583-9
references: 10581528
references: Radiat Res. 1994 Apr;138(1):9-17
references: 8146305
references: J Phys Chem B. 2005 Sep 8;109(35):16967-73
references: 16853159
references: Radiat Res. 1998 Jul;150(1):101-14
references: 9650607
references: Radiat Res. 2006 Jul;166(1 Pt 1):1-8
references: 16808596
references: Radiat Res. 2007 May;167(5):501-7
references: 17474798
references: Radiat Res. 1996 Oct;146(4):361-8
references: 8927707
references: Radiat Res. 2000 Apr;153(4):436-41
references: 10761004
references: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2007;46(4):561-4
references: 17154191
references: Radiat Res. 1992 Apr;130(1):7-14
references: 1313984
references: J Am Chem Soc. 2001 Mar 28;123(12):2917-8
references: 11456993
references: Radiat Res. 1994 Jan;137(1):2-10
references: 8265784
references: J Phys Chem B. 2006 Dec 28;110(51):26286-91
references: 17181287
references: Chem Rev. 1998 May 7;98(3):1089-1108
references: 11848926
references: J Phys Chem B. 2004 Nov 25;108(47):18377-82
references: 17361311
references: Radiat Res. 2000 Aug;154(2):163-70
references: 10931688
references: Radiat Res. 1992 Mar;129(3):333-44
references: 1542721
references: Biophys J. 1996 Sep;71(3):1222-7
references: 8873996
references: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2005 Sep 26;44(38):6210-3
references: 16136620
references: Radiat Res. 2003 May;159(5):663-9
references: 12710878
references: Radiat Res. 2006 Apr;165(4):479-84
references: 16579661