Skip to main content
Log in

X-ray induced mutations, DNA and target theory

  • Letter
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Abstract

THAT X-ray induced, specific locus, germ-line mutation rates vary significantly in eukaryotes is generally known, but the factors that are responsible for such differences have not been assessed in detail. It was recently proposed1 for a variety of species that mutability is closely and simply related to total DNA per genome. This approach, however, has not stood the test of critical review2; in fact, even within one species (mouse) there are major differences between the rates for different genes, and even for different germ cells3–5. I have therefore taken a different approach by considering the radiobiology of the individual gene. The analysis leads to three major conclusions. (1) Mutation rates tend to be much lower than radiation theory predicts. (2) Selection and/or repair are major factors that determine the rates. (3) The mouse 7-locus test, which provides a principal data base for the standards of human radiation hygiene, may not provide adequate overall representation of the mutability of the mammalian genome, so more research is needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abrahamson, S., Bender, M. A., Conger, A. D., and Wolff, S., Nature, 245, 460–461 (1975).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Schalet, A. P., and Sankaranarayanan, K., Mutat. Res., 35, 341–370 (1976).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Russell, W. L., in Advances in Radiation Research Biology and Medicine (edit. by Duplan, J. F. and Chapiro, A.), 323–334 (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Russell, W. L., in Repair from Genetic Radiation Damage, (edit. by Sobels, F. H.), 205–217 (Pergamon, Oxford, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kohn, H. I., and Melvold, R. W., Nature, 259, 209–210 (1916).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lea, D. E., Actions of Radiations on Living Cells (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1946).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pollard, E. C., Guild, W. R., Hutchinson, F., and Setlow, R. B., Progress in Biophysics, 5 (edit. by Butler, J. A. V., and Randall, J. T.), 72–108 (Academic, New York, 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hutchinson, F., Science, 134, 533–538 (1961).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dertinger, H., and Jung, H., Molecular Radiation Biology (Springer, New York, 1970).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Augustine, L. G., Brustad, T., and Mason, R., Adv. Radiat. Biol., 1 (edit. by Augenstein, L. G., Mason, R., and Quastler, H.) 227–266 (Academic, New York, 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lyon, M. F., and Morris, T., Mutat. Res., 8, 191–198 (1969).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

KOHN, H. X-ray induced mutations, DNA and target theory. Nature 263, 766–767 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1038/263766a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/263766a0

  • Springer Nature Limited

Navigation