The involvement of cell cycle checkpoint-mutations in the mutagenesis induced in Drosophila by a longer wavelength light band of solar UV

Mutation and apoptosis are well-coordinated for protecting against DNA damage-inducing toxicity in Drosophila

BACKGROUND

Apoptotic cell death is an important survival system for multicellular organisms because it removes damaged cells. Mutation is also a survival method for dealing with damaged cells in multicellular and also unicellular organisms, when DNA lesions are not removed. However, to the best of our knowledge, no reports have comprehensively explored the direct relationship between apoptosis and somatic cell mutations induced by various mutagenic factors.

RESULTS

Mutation was examined by the wing-spot test, which is used to detect somatic cell mutations, including chromosomal recombination. Apoptosis was observed in the wing discs by acridine orange staining in situ. After treatment with chemical mutagens, ultraviolet light (UV), and X-ray, both the apoptotic frequency and mutagenic activity increased in a dose-dependent manner at non-toxic doses. When we used DNA repair-deficient Drosophila strains, the correlation coefficient of the relationship between apoptosis and mutagenicity, differed from that of the wild-type. To explore how apoptosis affects the behavior of mutated cells, we determined the spot size, i.e., the number of mutated cells in a spot. In parallel with an increase in apoptosis, the spot size increased with MNU or X-ray treatment dose-dependently; however, this increase was not seen with UV irradiation. In addition, BrdU incorporation, an indicator of cell proliferation, in the wing discs was suppressed at 6 h, with peak at 12 h post-treatment with X-ray, and that it started to increase again at 24 h; however, this was not seen with UV irradiation.

CONCLUSION

Damage-induced apoptosis and mutation might be coordinated with each other, and the frequency of apoptosis and mutagenicity are balanced depending on the type of DNA damage. From the data of the spot size and BrdU incorporation, it is possible that mutated cells replace apoptotic cells due to their high frequency of cell division, resulting in enlargement of the spot size after MNU or X-ray treatment. We consider that the induction of mutation, apoptosis, and/or cell growth varies in multi-cellular organisms depending on the type of the mutagens, and that their balance and coordination have an important function to counter DNA damage for the survival of the organism.

UVA causes specific mutagenic DNA damage through ROS production, rather than CPD formation, in Drosophila larvae

Evidence is accumulating that ultraviolet A (UVA) plays an important role in photo-carcinogenesis. However, the types of DNA damage involved in the resulting mutations remain unclear. Previously, using Drosophila, we found that UVA from light-emitting diode (LED-UVA) induces double-strand breaks in DNA through oxidative damage in an oxidative damage-sensitive (urate-null) strain. Recently, it was proposed that cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs), which also are induced by UVA irradiation, might play a significant role in the induction of mutations. In the present study, we investigated whether reactive oxygen species (ROS) and CPDs are produced in larval bodies following LED-UVA irradiation. In addition, we assessed the somatic cell mutation rate in urate-null Drosophila induced by monochromatic UVA irradiation. The production of ROS through LED-UVA irradiation was markedly higher in the urate-null strain than in the wild-type Drosophila. CPDs were detected in the DNA of both of UVA- and UVB-irradiated larvae. The level of CPDs was unexpectedly higher in the wild-type strain than in urate-null flies following UVA irradiation, whereas this parameter was expectedly similar between the urate-null and wild-type Drosophila following UVB irradiation. The somatic cell mutation rate induced by UVA irradiation was higher in the urate-null strain than in the wild-type strain. These results suggest that mutations induced by UVA-specific pathways occur through ROS production, rather than via CPD formation.

Increased Levels of 8-Hydroxy-2′-Deoxyguanosine in Drosophila Larval DNA after Irradiation with 364-nm Laser Light but not with X-rays

Exposure to UVA light causes damage to cellular components such as DNA and membrane lipids. We showed previously that UVA irradiation can induce mutations in Drosophila larvae and that the major lesions responsible for mutations were not thymidine dimers when wavelengths tested became longer. The use of a longer wavelength with UVA laser apparatus (364 nm) has made it possible to test the effects of this powerful light in biological organisms. In the present study, we irradiated third instar larvae of the urate-null Drosophila mutant strain y v ma-l, which is sensitive to oxidative stress, and compared the effects of 364 nm light irradiation with the effects of X-rays. To assay viability, some of the larvae were kept at 25 degrees C until they eclosed in order to obtain a measure of viability. The remaining larvae were used to measure the amount of 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine (8-OHdG), an indicator of oxidative DNA damage. The amount of 8-OHdG increased and viability decreased in response to increased UV dose in both the y v ma-l and wild-type strains. With irradiation of 600 kJ m(-2), 8-OHdG/10(6)dG was 7.2 +/- 3.2 and 6.2 +/- 2.0 in y v ma-l and wild-type strains, respectively, whereas the respective levels were 2.2 +/- 0.6 and 2.3 +/- 0.8 without irradiation. Our results indicated that irradiation with a 364-nm laser light caused significant oxidative damage in Drosophila larval DNA; however, induction of the damage was not prohibited by urate. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a study in whole animals that shows increased levels of 8-OHdG in response to 364-nm UVA. X-ray ionizing radiation is also thought to generate reactive oxygen species in irradiated cells. We found that the amount of 8-OHdG in DNA following X-ray radiation remained unchanged in both strains, though survival rates were affected. X-ray-generated oxidative damage in Drosophila cells was followed by cell death but not DNA base oxidation, and the damage was suppressed by urate. The overall results suggest significant differences in the major in vivo oxidative damage caused by 364-nm light and X-rays.