banner



Home  ›  How Does Mismatch Repair Work In Prokaryotic

How Does Mismatch Repair Work In Prokaryotic

Written By Saturday, 12 March 2022 Add Comment Edit

Diagram of Dna mismatch repair pathways. The first column depicts mismatch repair in eukaryotes, while the second depicts repair in most bacteria. The third column shows mismatch repair, to exist specific in E. coli.

Deoxyribonucleic acid mismatch repair (MMR) is a system for recognizing and repairing erroneous insertion, deletion, and mis-incorporation of bases that can arise during DNA replication and recombination, as well as repairing some forms of Deoxyribonucleic acid damage.[1] [2]

Mismatch repair is strand-specific. During Deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis the newly synthesised (daughter) strand will normally include errors. In club to begin repair, the mismatch repair machinery distinguishes the newly synthesised strand from the template (parental). In gram-negative bacteria, transient hemimethylation distinguishes the strands (the parental is methylated and daughter is not). Nevertheless, in other prokaryotes and eukaryotes, the exact mechanism is not clear. Information technology is suspected that, in eukaryotes, newly synthesized lagging-strand DNA transiently contains nicks (before being sealed past Dna ligase) and provides a betoken that directs mismatch proofreading systems to the appropriate strand. This implies that these nicks must be present in the leading strand, and testify for this has recently been plant.[3] Contempo work[four] has shown that nicks are sites for RFC-dependent loading of the replication sliding clamp PCNA, in an orientation-specific style, such that one face of the donut-shape protein is juxtaposed toward the 3'-OH end at the nick. Loaded PCNA then directs the action of the MutLalpha endonuclease [5] to the daughter strand in the presence of a mismatch and MutSalpha or MutSbeta.

Whatever mutational event that disrupts the superhelical structure of DNA carries with it the potential to compromise the genetic stability of a cell. The fact that the damage detection and repair systems are equally complex as the replication machinery itself highlights the importance evolution has attached to DNA fidelity.

Examples of mismatched bases include a G/T or A/C pairing (come across DNA repair). Mismatches are unremarkably due to tautomerization of bases during Deoxyribonucleic acid replication. The impairment is repaired by recognition of the deformity caused by the mismatch, determining the template and non-template strand, and excising the wrongly incorporated base of operations and replacing it with the correct nucleotide. The removal process involves more than than just the mismatched nucleotide itself. A few or up to thousands of base of operations pairs of the newly synthesized DNA strand can be removed.

Mismatch repair proteins [edit]

DNA mismatch repair protein, C-terminal domain
PDB 1h7u EBI.jpg

hpms2-atpgs
Identifiers
Symbol DNA_mis_repair
Pfam PF01119
Pfam clan CL0329
InterPro IPR013507
PROSITE PDOC00057
SCOP2 1bkn / Scope / SUPFAM

Mismatch repair is a highly conserved process from prokaryotes to eukaryotes. The first evidence for mismatch repair was obtained from S. pneumoniae (the hexA and hexB genes). Subsequent piece of work on E. coli has identified a number of genes that, when mutationally inactivated, cause hypermutable strains. The cistron products are, therefore, called the "Mut" proteins, and are the major active components of the mismatch repair system. Iii of these proteins are essential in detecting the mismatch and directing repair machinery to information technology: MutS, MutH and MutL (MutS is a homologue of HexA and MutL of HexB).

MutS forms a dimer (MutStwo) that recognises the mismatched base of operations on the daughter strand and binds the mutated DNA. MutH binds at hemimethylated sites along the daughter Deoxyribonucleic acid, just its action is latent, beingness activated only upon contact past a MutL dimer (MutL2), which binds the MutS-Deoxyribonucleic acid complex and acts every bit a mediator between MutS2 and MutH, activating the latter. The Deoxyribonucleic acid is looped out to search for the nearest d(GATC) methylation site to the mismatch, which could be upwards to 1 kb away. Upon activation past the MutS-Dna complex, MutH nicks the daughter strand virtually the hemimethylated site. MutL recruits UvrD helicase (DNA Helicase Ii) to separate the two strands with a specific 3' to 5' polarity. The entire MutSHL complex then slides along the Deoxyribonucleic acid in the direction of the mismatch, liberating the strand to be excised every bit information technology goes. An exonuclease trails the complex and digests the ss-Deoxyribonucleic acid tail. The exonuclease recruited is dependent on which side of the mismatch MutH incises the strand – v' or three'. If the nick made past MutH is on the 5' stop of the mismatch, either RecJ or ExoVII (both 5' to 3' exonucleases) is used. If, however, the nick is on the 3' finish of the mismatch, ExoI (a 3' to 5' enzyme) is used.

The entire process ends past the mismatch site - i.e., both the site itself and its surrounding nucleotides are fully excised. The single-strand gap created by the exonuclease can then exist repaired by DNA Polymerase III (assisted past single-strand-bounden poly peptide), which uses the other strand equally a template, and finally sealed past Dna ligase. DNA methylase and so quickly methylates the daughter strand.

MutS homologs [edit]

When bound, the MutSii dimer bends the Deoxyribonucleic acid helix and shields approximately 20 base pairs. It has weak ATPase activity, and binding of ATP leads to the formation of tertiary structures on the surface of the molecule. The crystal structure of MutS reveals that information technology is uncommonly asymmetric, and, while its agile conformation is a dimer, only ane of the two halves interacts with the mismatch site.

In eukaryotes, One thousandutS homologs form two major heterodimers: Msh2/Msh6 (MutSα) and Msh2/Msh3 (MutSβ). The MutSα pathway is involved primarily in base substitution and minor-loop mismatch repair. The MutSβ pathway is too involved in small-loop repair, in addition to large-loop (~10 nucleotide loops) repair. However, MutSβ does not repair base substitutions.

MutL homologs [edit]

MutL besides has weak ATPase activity (it uses ATP for purposes of movement). Information technology forms a complex with MutS and MutH, increasing the MutS footprint on the DNA.

However, the processivity (the altitude the enzyme can movement along the DNA before dissociating) of UvrD is only ~xl–50 bp. Because the distance between the nick created past MutH and the mismatch can average ~600 bp, if there is not another UvrD loaded the unwound section is then complimentary to re-anneal to its complementary strand, forcing the procedure to outset over. Yet, when assisted by MutL, the rate of UvrD loading is greatly increased. While the processivity (and ATP utilisation) of the individual UvrD molecules remains the same, the full effect on the Deoxyribonucleic acid is boosted considerably; the Deoxyribonucleic acid has no chance to re-anneal, as each UvrD unwinds 40-50 bp of Dna, dissociates, so is immediately replaced by another UvrD, repeating the process. This exposes big sections of Dna to exonuclease digestion, allowing for quick excision (and later replacement) of the incorrect DNA.

Eukaryotes accept five Mut50 homologs designated as MLH1, MLH2, MLH3, PMS1, and PMS2. They form heterodimers that mimic MutL in E. coli. The human homologs of prokaryotic MutL form three complexes referred to equally MutLα, MutLβ, and MutLγ. The MutLα complex is fabricated of MLH1 and PMS2 subunits, the MutLβ heterodimer is made of MLH1 and PMS1, whereas MutLγ is made of MLH1 and MLH3. MutLα acts as an endonuclease that introduces strand breaks in the girl strand upon activation by mismatch and other required proteins, MutSα and PCNA. These strand interruptions serve as entry points for an exonuclease activity that removes mismatched DNA. Roles played by MutLβ and MutLγ in mismatch repair are less-understood.

MutH: an endonuclease present in E. coli and Salmonella [edit]

MutH is a very weak endonuclease that is activated one time leap to MutL (which itself is bound to MutS). Information technology nicks unmethylated Dna and the unmethylated strand of hemimethylated DNA merely does non nick fully methylated Dna. Experiments accept shown that mismatch repair is random if neither strand is methylated.[ citation needed ] These behaviours led to the proposal that MutH determines which strand contains the mismatch. MutH has no eukaryotic homolog. Its endonuclease office is taken up by MutL homologs, which have some specialized five'-3' exonuclease activity. The strand bias for removing mismatches from the newly synthesized daughter strand in eukaryotes may exist provided by the free 3' ends of Okazaki fragments in the new strand created during replication.

PCNA β-sliding clamp [edit]

PCNA and the β-sliding clench associate with MutSα/β and MutS, respectively. Although initial reports suggested that the PCNA-MutSα complex may enhance mismatch recognition,[vi] information technology has been recently demonstrated[7] that there is no apparent change in analogousness of MutSα for a mismatch in the presence or absence of PCNA. Furthermore, mutants of MutSα that are unable to interact with PCNA in vitro showroom the capacity to conduct out mismatch recognition and mismatch excision to near wild type levels. Such mutants are defective in the repair reaction directed by a 5' strand break, suggesting for the first time MutSα function in a post-excision step of the reaction.

Clinical significance [edit]

Inherited defects in mismatch repair [edit]

Mutations in the human homologues of the Mut proteins bear upon genomic stability, which can outcome in microsatellite instability (MSI), implicated in some man cancers. In specific, the hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancers (HNPCC or Lynch syndrome) are attributed to dissentious germline variants in the genes encoding the MutS and MutL homologues MSH2 and MLH1 respectively, which are thus classified as tumour suppressor genes. One subtype of HNPCC, the Muir-Torre Syndrome (MTS), is associated with peel tumors. If both inherited copies (alleles) of a MMR gene bear damaging genetic variants, this results in a very rare and severe status: the mismatch repair cancer syndrome (or constitutional mismatch repair deficiency, CMMR-D), manifesting equally multiple occurrences of tumors at an early on age, often colon and brain tumors.[8]

Epigenetic silencing of mismatch repair genes [edit]

Desultory cancers with a Deoxyribonucleic acid repair deficiency only rarely accept a mutation in a DNA repair gene, simply they instead tend to have epigenetic alterations such as promoter methylation that inhibit DNA repair gene expression.[9] Nearly xiii% of colorectal cancers are deficient in Dna mismatch repair, commonly due to loss of MLH1 (nine.8%), or sometimes MSH2, MSH6 or PMS2 (all ≤1.5%).[10] For near MLH1-scarce sporadic colorectal cancers, the deficiency was due to MLH1 promoter methylation.[10] Other cancer types have higher frequencies of MLH1 loss (see table below), which are again largely a effect of methylation of the promoter of the MLH1 gene. A different epigenetic machinery underlying MMR deficiencies might involve over-expression of a microRNA, for case miR-155 levels inversely correlate with expression of MLH1 or MSH2 in colorectal cancer.[eleven]

Cancers deficient in MLH1
Cancer type Frequency of deficiency in cancer Frequency of deficiency in next field defect
Stomach 32%[12] [13] 24%-28%
Stomach (foveolar type tumors) 74%[14] 71%
Stomach in high-incidence Kashmir Valley 73%[15] 20%
Esophageal 73%[16] 27%
Caput and cervix squamous prison cell carcinoma (HNSCC) 31%-33%[17] [18] xx%-25%
Non-small jail cell lung cancer (NSCLC) 69%[xix] 72%
Colorectal 10%[x]

MMR failures in field defects [edit]

A field defect (field cancerization) is an area of epithelium that has been preconditioned past epigenetic or genetic changes, predisposing it towards development of cancer. As pointed out past Rubin " ...there is evidence that more 80% of the somatic mutations found in mutator phenotype human colorectal tumors occur before the onset of concluding clonal expansion."[20] [21] Similarly, Vogelstein et al.[22] point out that more than than one-half of somatic mutations identified in tumors occurred in a pre-neoplastic phase (in a field defect), during growth of apparently normal cells.

MLH1 deficiencies were mutual in the field defects (histologically normal tissues) surrounding tumors; see Table above. Epigenetically silenced or mutated MLH1 would probable not confer a selective advantage upon a stem cell, however, it would cause increased mutation rates, and 1 or more of the mutated genes may provide the cell with a selective advantage. The deficientMLH1 gene could then exist carried along equally a selectively near-neutral passenger (hitch-hiker) gene when the mutated stem cell generates an expanded clone. The continued presence of a clone with an epigenetically repressed MLH1 would continue to generate further mutations, some of which could produce a tumor.

MMR components in humans [edit]

In humans, seven Dna mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1, MLH3, MSH2, MSH3, MSH6, PMS1 and PMS2) work coordinately in sequential steps to initiate repair of Deoxyribonucleic acid mismatches.[23] In improver, there are Exo1-dependent and Exo1-independent MMR subpathways.[24]

Other gene products involved in mismatch repair (subsequent to initiation past MMR genes) in humans include Dna polymerase delta, PCNA, RPA, HMGB1, RFC and DNA ligase I, plus histone and chromatin modifying factors.[25] [26]

In certain circumstances, the MMR pathway may recruit an error-decumbent DNA polymerase eta (POLH). This happens in B-lymphocytes during somatic hypermutation, where POLH is used to innovate genetic variation into antibody genes.[27] However, this error-prone MMR pathway may be triggered in other types of man cells upon exposure to genotoxins [28] and indeed it is broadly agile in various human being cancers, causing mutations that behave a signature of POLH activity.[29]

MMR and mutation frequency [edit]

Recognizing and repairing mismatches and indels is of import for cells considering failure to do so results in microsatellite instability (MSI) and an elevated spontaneous mutation rate (mutator phenotype). In comparison to other cancer types, MMR-scarce (MSI) cancer has a very loftier frequency of mutations, close to melanoma and lung cancer,[xxx] cancer types acquired by much exposure to UV radiation and mutagenic chemicals.

In addition to a very high mutation burden, MMR deficiencies result in an unusual distribution of somatic mutations across the man genome: this suggests that MMR preferentially protects the gene-rich, early on-replicating euchromatic regions.[31] In dissimilarity, the gene-poor, late-replicating heterochromatic genome regions showroom high mutation rates in many human tumors.[32]

The histone modification H3K36me3, an epigenetic mark of agile chromatin, has the ability to recruit the MSH2-MSH6 (hMutSα) complex.[33] Consistently, regions of the man genome with high levels of H3K36me3 accumulate less mutations due to MMR activity.[29]

Loss of multiple Dna repair pathways in tumors [edit]

Lack of MMR often occurs in coordination with loss of other Dna repair genes.[ix] For instance, MMR genes MLH1 and MLH3 likewise every bit 11 other Dna repair genes (such as MGMT and many NER pathway genes) were significantly down-regulated in lower grade as well as in higher grade astrocytomas, in contrast to normal brain tissue.[34] Moreover, MLH1 and MGMT expression was closely correlated in 135 specimens of gastric cancer and loss of MLH1 and MGMT appeared to be synchronously accelerated during tumor progression.[35]

Deficient expression of multiple DNA repair genes is often found in cancers,[nine] and may contribute to the thousands of mutations usually establish in cancers (come across Mutation frequencies in cancers).

Aging [edit]

A popular idea, that has failed to gain pregnant experimental back up, is the idea that mutation, as distinct from Dna damage, is the primary cause of aging. Mice defective in the mutL homolog Pms2 have about a 100-fold elevated mutation frequency in all tissues, but exercise non announced to age more rapidly.[36] These mice display mostly normal development and life, except for early on onset carcinogenesis and male infertility.

See besides [edit]

  • Base excision repair
  • Nucleotide excision repair

References [edit]

  1. ^ Iyer RR, Pluciennik A, Burdett V, Modrich PL (February 2006). "DNA mismatch repair: functions and mechanisms". Chemical Reviews. 106 (two): 302–23. doi:10.1021/cr0404794. PMID 16464007.
  2. ^ Larrea AA, Lujan SA, Kunkel TA (May 2022). "SnapShot: DNA mismatch repair". Jail cell. 141 (iv): 730–730.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jail cell.2010.05.002. PMID 20478261. S2CID 26969788.
  3. ^ Heller RC, Marians KJ (December 2006). "Replisome assembly and the direct restart of stalled replication forks". Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology. 7 (12): 932–43. doi:ten.1038/nrm2058. PMID 17139333. S2CID 27666329.
  4. ^ Pluciennik A, Dzantiev L, Iyer RR, Constantin N, Kadyrov FA, Modrich P (September 2022). "PCNA office in the activation and strand management of MutLα endonuclease in mismatch repair". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 107 (37): 16066–71. doi:ten.1073/pnas.1010662107. PMC2941292. PMID 20713735.
  5. ^ Kadyrov FA, Dzantiev L, Constantin Northward, Modrich P (July 2006). "Endonucleolytic function of MutLalpha in human mismatch repair". Jail cell. 126 (ii): 297–308. doi:10.1016/j.jail cell.2006.05.039. PMID 16873062. S2CID 15643051.
  6. ^ Flores-Rozas H, Clark D, Kolodner RD (November 2000). "Proliferating jail cell nuclear antigen and Msh2p-Msh6p collaborate to form an active mispair recognition complex". Nature Genetics. 26 (3): 375–viii. doi:10.1038/81708. PMID 11062484. S2CID 20861705.
  7. ^ Iyer RR, Pohlhaus TJ, Chen S, Hura GL, Dzantiev L, Beese LS, Modrich P (May 2008). "The MutSalpha-proliferating cell nuclear antigen interaction in human Deoxyribonucleic acid mismatch repair". The Periodical of Biological Chemical science. 283 (19): 13310–nine. doi:10.1074/jbc.M800606200. PMC2423938. PMID 18326858.
  8. ^ Online Mendelian Inheritance in Human being (OMIM): 276300
  9. ^ a b c Bernstein C, Bernstein H (May 2022). "Epigenetic reduction of DNA repair in progression to gastrointestinal cancer". Globe Periodical of Gastrointestinal Oncology. seven (5): thirty–46. doi:x.4251/wjgo.v7.i5.30. PMC4434036. PMID 25987950.
  10. ^ a b c Truninger Chiliad, Menigatti M, Luz J, Russell A, Haider R, Gebbers JO, et al. (May 2005). "Immunohistochemical analysis reveals high frequency of PMS2 defects in colorectal cancer". Gastroenterology. 128 (5): 1160–71. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.01.056. PMID 15887099.
  11. ^ Valeri Due north, Gasparini P, Fabbri M, Braconi C, Veronese A, Lovat F, et al. (April 2022). "Modulation of mismatch repair and genomic stability by miR-155". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences of the United states of America. 107 (15): 6982–7. Bibcode:2010PNAS..107.6982V. doi:10.1073/pnas.1002472107. PMC2872463. PMID 20351277.
  12. ^ Kupčinskaitė-Noreikienė R, Skiecevičienė J, Jonaitis L, Ugenskienė R, Kupčinskas J, Markelis R, et al. (2013). "CpG island methylation of the MLH1, MGMT, DAPK, and CASP8 genes in malignant and adjacent noncancerous stomach tissues". Medicina. 49 (8): 361–half-dozen. doi:x.3390/medicina49080056. PMID 24509146.
  13. ^ Waki T, Tamura 1000, Tsuchiya T, Sato 1000, Nishizuka Southward, Motoyama T (Baronial 2002). "Promoter methylation status of E-cadherin, hMLH1, and p16 genes in nonneoplastic gastric epithelia". The American Journal of Pathology. 161 (two): 399–403. doi:ten.1016/S0002-9440(10)64195-eight. PMC1850716. PMID 12163364.
  14. ^ Endoh Y, Tamura Yard, Ajioka Y, Watanabe H, Motoyama T (September 2000). "Frequent hypermethylation of the hMLH1 gene promoter in differentiated-type tumors of the stomach with the gastric foveolar phenotype". The American Journal of Pathology. 157 (three): 717–22. doi:10.1016/S0002-9440(ten)64584-1. PMC1949419. PMID 10980110.
  15. ^ Wani 1000, Afroze D, Makhdoomi G, Hamid I, Wani B, Bhat K, et al. (2012). "Promoter methylation condition of Deoxyribonucleic acid repair factor (hMLH1) in gastric carcinoma patients of the Kashmir valley" (PDF). Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 13 (8): 4177–81. doi:10.7314/apjcp.2012.13.viii.4177. PMID 23098428.
  16. ^ Chang Z, Zhang W, Chang Z, Song M, Qin Y, Chang F, et al. (January 2022). "Expression characteristics of FHIT, p53, BRCA2 and MLH1 in families with a history of oesophageal cancer in a region with a high incidence of oesophageal cancer". Oncology Letters. 9 (1): 430–436. doi:10.3892/ol.2014.2682. PMC4246613. PMID 25436004.
  17. ^ Tawfik HM, El-Maqsoud NM, Hak BH, El-Sherbiny YM (2011). "Caput and neck squamous cell carcinoma: mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and promoter hypermethylation of hMLH1 gene". American Periodical of Otolaryngology. 32 (6): 528–36. doi:x.1016/j.amjoto.2010.11.005. PMID 21353335.
  18. ^ Zuo C, Zhang H, Spencer HJ, Vural E, Suen JY, Schichman SA, et al. (October 2009). "Increased microsatellite instability and epigenetic inactivation of the hMLH1 cistron in head and neck squamous prison cell carcinoma". Otolaryngology–Caput and Neck Surgery. 141 (four): 484–xc. doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2009.07.007. PMID 19786217. S2CID 8357370.
  19. ^ Safar AM, Spencer H, Su 10, Coffey Grand, Cooney CA, Ratnasinghe LD, et al. (June 2005). "Methylation profiling of archived non-small cell lung cancer: a promising prognostic system". Clinical Cancer Research. 11 (12): 4400–5. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-2378. PMID 15958624.
  20. ^ Rubin H (March 2022). "Fields and field cancerization: the preneoplastic origins of cancer: asymptomatic hyperplastic fields are precursors of neoplasia, and their progression to tumors can be tracked by saturation density in culture". BioEssays. 33 (iii): 224–31. doi:x.1002/bies.201000067. PMID 21254148. S2CID 44981539.
  21. ^ Tsao JL, Yatabe Y, Salovaara R, Järvinen HJ, Mecklin JP, Aaltonen LA, et al. (Feb 2000). "Genetic reconstruction of individual colorectal tumor histories". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 97 (3): 1236–41. Bibcode:2000PNAS...97.1236T. doi:10.1073/pnas.97.3.1236. PMC15581. PMID 10655514.
  22. ^ Vogelstein B, Papadopoulos N, Velculescu VE, Zhou S, Diaz LA, Kinzler KW (March 2022). "Cancer genome landscapes". Science. 339 (6127): 1546–58. Bibcode:2013Sci...339.1546V. doi:ten.1126/scientific discipline.1235122. PMC3749880. PMID 23539594.
  23. ^ Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Sellers TA (Baronial 2008). "A review of the clinical relevance of mismatch-repair deficiency in ovarian cancer". Cancer. 113 (4): 733–42. doi:x.1002/cncr.23601. PMC2644411. PMID 18543306.
  24. ^ Goellner EM, Putnam CD, Kolodner RD (August 2022). "Exonuclease 1-dependent and independent mismatch repair". Dna Repair. 32: 24–32. doi:x.1016/j.dnarep.2015.04.010. PMC4522362. PMID 25956862.
  25. ^ Li GM (January 2008). "Mechanisms and functions of Deoxyribonucleic acid mismatch repair". Jail cell Research. xviii (1): 85–98. doi:10.1038/cr.2007.115. PMID 18157157.
  26. ^ Li GM (July 2022). "New insights and challenges in mismatch repair: getting over the chromatin hurdle". Deoxyribonucleic acid Repair. xix: 48–54. doi:10.1016/j.dnarep.2014.03.027. PMC4127414. PMID 24767944.
  27. ^ Chahwan R, Edelmann Westward, Scharff MD, Roa Southward (August 2022). "AIDing antibiotic diversity by error-decumbent mismatch repair". Seminars in Immunology. 24 (4): 293–300. doi:x.1016/j.smim.2012.05.005. PMC3422444. PMID 22703640.
  28. ^ Hsieh P (September 2022). "Deoxyribonucleic acid mismatch repair: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde?". Molecular Prison cell. 47 (five): 665–half-dozen. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2012.08.020. PMC3457060. PMID 22980456.
  29. ^ a b Supek F, Lehner B (July 2022). "Amassed Mutation Signatures Reveal that Error-Decumbent Dna Repair Targets Mutations to Agile Genes". Jail cell. 170 (3): 534–547.e23. doi:ten.1016/j.cell.2017.07.003. hdl:10230/35343. PMID 28753428.
  30. ^ Tuna M, Amos CI (November 2022). "Genomic sequencing in cancer". Cancer Letters. 340 (2): 161–seventy. doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2012.11.004. PMC3622788. PMID 23178448.
  31. ^ Supek F, Lehner B (May 2022). "Differential DNA mismatch repair underlies mutation rate variation beyond the human genome". Nature. 521 (7550): 81–four. Bibcode:2015Natur.521...81S. doi:10.1038/nature14173. PMC4425546. PMID 25707793.
  32. ^ Schuster-Böckler B, Lehner B (Baronial 2022). "Chromatin organization is a major influence on regional mutation rates in human cancer cells". Nature. 488 (7412): 504–7. Bibcode:2012Natur.488..504S. doi:ten.1038/nature11273. PMID 22820252. S2CID 205229634.
  33. ^ Li F, Mao G, Tong D, Huang J, Gu Fifty, Yang W, Li GM (Apr 2022). "The histone marker H3K36me3 regulates man Dna mismatch repair through its interaction with MutSα". Prison cell. 153 (3): 590–600. doi:ten.1016/j.cell.2013.03.025. PMC3641580. PMID 23622243.
  34. ^ Jiang Z, Hu J, Li Ten, Jiang Y, Zhou West, Lu D (December 2006). "Expression analyses of 27 DNA repair genes in astrocytoma by TaqMan low-density assortment". Neuroscience Messages. 409 (two): 112–7. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2006.09.038. PMID 17034947.
  35. ^ Kitajima Y, Miyazaki M, Matsukura S, Tanaka M, Sekiguchi M (2003). "Loss of expression of DNA repair enzymes MGMT, hMLH1, and hMSH2 during tumor progression in gastric cancer". Gastric Cancer. half dozen (two): 86–95. doi:x.1007/s10120-003-0213-z. PMID 12861399.
  36. ^ Narayanan L, Fritzell JA, Baker SM, Liskay RM, Glazer PM (April 1997). "Elevated levels of mutation in multiple tissues of mice deficient in the Deoxyribonucleic acid mismatch repair gene Pms2". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the Usa of America. 94 (7): 3122–7. doi:x.1073/pnas.94.7.3122. PMC20332. PMID 9096356.

Further reading [edit]

  • Hsieh P, Yamane K (2008). "DNA mismatch repair: molecular mechanism, cancer, and ageing". Mechanisms of Ageing and Evolution. 129 (7–viii): 391–407. doi:10.1016/j.mad.2008.02.012. PMC2574955. PMID 18406444.
  • Iyer RR, Pluciennik A, Burdett V, Modrich PL (February 2006). "DNA mismatch repair: functions and mechanisms". Chemical Reviews. 106 (2): 302–23. doi:10.1021/cr0404794. PMID 16464007.
  • Joseph Northward, Duppatla 5, Rao DN (2006). Prokaryotic DNA mismatch repair. Progress in Nucleic Acid Inquiry and Molecular Biology. Vol. 81. pp. 1–49. doi:x.1016/S0079-6603(06)81001-9. ISBN9780125400817. PMID 16891168.
  • Yang W (Baronial 2000). "Structure and function of mismatch repair proteins". Mutation Research. 460 (3–iv): 245–56. doi:ten.1016/s0921-8777(00)00030-6. PMID 10946232.
  • Griffiths JF, Gilbert WM, Lewontin RC, Wessler SR, Suzuki DT, Miller JH (2004). An introduction to genetic analysis (8th ed.). New York, NY: Freeman. ISBN978-0-7167-4939-four.
  • Kunkel TA, Erie DA (2005). "DNA mismatch repair". Annual Review of Biochemistry. 74: 681–710. doi:10.1146/annurev.biochem.74.082803.133243. PMID 15952900.
  • Friedberg EC, Walker GC, Siede Due west, Wood RD, Schultz RA, Ellenberger (2005). Deoxyribonucleic acid repair and mutagenesis (2d ed.). Washington, D.C.: ASM Printing. ISBN978-i-55581-319-two.

External links [edit]

  • Dna Repair
  • DNA+Mismatch+Repair at the The states National Library of Medicine Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_mismatch_repair

Posted by: taymosted1971.blogspot.com

0 Response to "How Does Mismatch Repair Work In Prokaryotic"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel