These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Single strand breaks and mutagenesis in yeast induced by photodynamic treatment with chloroaluminum phthalocyanine.
    Author: Paardekooper M, De Bruijne AW, Van Gompel AE, Verhage RA, Averbeck D, Dubbelman TM, Van den Broek PJ.
    Journal: J Photochem Photobiol B; 1997 Sep; 40(2):132-40. PubMed ID: 9345783.
    Abstract:
    Photodynamic treatment of the yeast Kluyveromyces marxianus with the sensitizer aluminum phthalocyanine results in loss of clonogenicity. In this paper the effect of this treatment on DNA of this yeast was investigated by searching for single strand breaks and forward mutations. Using the alkaline step elution technique it was found that illumination of the yeast in the presence of aluminum phthalocyanine resulted in an increase in single strand breaks. These could, partially, be repaired by post-incubating illuminated cells in growth medium. At comparable survival levels, photodynamic treatment with aluminum phthalocyanine induced fewer single strand breaks than X-ray treatment. By using a medium containing 5-fluoroorotic acid, mutants in the uracil biosynthetic pathway were selected. Photodynamic treatment resulted in a light dose dependent increase of the mutation frequency. The observed mutagenicity of photodynamic treatment of the yeast with phthalocyanine was lower than the mutagenicity of UVC and X-ray treatment at equal colony forming capacity, indicating that photodynamic treatment is the least mutagenic of those treatments. It is concluded that photodynamic treatment of K. marxianus results in DNA damage. Saccharomyces cerevisiae rad14 and rad52 mutants were used to determine the effect of the nucleotide excision repair and recombinational repair pathways, respectively, on survival after photodynamic treatment. Our data indicate that DNA damage is not the main determinant for cell killing by photodynamic treatment and that the type of damage induced is apparently not subject to RAD14- or RAD52 controlled repair.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]