Advertisement

Cell Biology and Toxicology

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 75–87 | Cite as

Effect of bromodeoxyuridine on the proliferation and growth of ethyl methanesulfonate-exposed P3 cells: Relationship to the induction of sister-chromatid exchanges

  • Suzanne M. Morris
  • Olen E. Domon
  • Lynda J. McGarrity
  • Ralph L. Kodelo
  • Daniel A. Casciano
Article

Although sister-chromatid exchange (SCE) analysis is recognized as an indicator of exposure to DNA-damaging agents, the results of these analyses have been confounded by the use of bromodeoxyuridine (BrdUrd) to differentially label the sister chromatids. Not only does BrdUrd itself induce SCE, it also modulates the frequency of SCE induced by certain DNA-damaging agents. In order to examine this effect of BrdUrd on SCE frequency, an indirect method which lends itself to measurements both with and without BrdUrd was employed. Human teratocarcinoma-derived (P3) cells were exposed to ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) and cultured with increasing concentrations of BrdUrd for lengths of time corresponding to one, two, and three generations of cell growth. At each time point, the distribution of nuclei among the phases of the cell-cycle and cell growth were evaluated for each concentration and chemical. A statistical model was employed which tested both for the main effects of chemicals and culture times and for interactions between these factors. Both EMS and BrdUrd significantly affected the percentages of nuclei within the cell-cycle. Exposure to EMS resulted in decreases in the percentages of nuclei in G0 + G1 and increases in the G2 + M compartment. Exposure to BrdUrd affected the size of the G0 + G1 compartment as well as the percentage of S-phase nuclei. Cell growth was reduced as a consequence of increasing EMS concentration and as a function of BrdUrd concentration; the effects of these chemicals were more readily apparent at the later time points. Most importantly, for both the cell-cycle kinetics data and the cell growth data, no evidence of an interaction between the effects of EMS and the effects of BrdUrd was detected statistically. These results may be interpreted to mean that while both EMS and BrdUrd affect the induction of SCE, under the conditions of this experiment, the effects are additive rather than interactive.

Key words

cell proliferation sister-chromatid exchange ethyl methanesulfonate bromodeoxyuridine 

Abbreviations:

EMS,

ethyl methanesulfonate

BrdUrd,

bromodeoxyuridine

BrdUTP,

bromodeoxyuridine triphosphate

dCTP,

deoxycytidine triphosphate

SCE,

sister-chromatid exchange

P3,

human teratocarcinoma derived

HBSS,

Hank's Balanced Salt Solution

HOUR,

culture time

REP,

replicate

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ANSON, J.A., HINSON, W.G., SCHOL, H., and PIPKIN, J.L. (1983). “The use of stimulated primary spleen cell cultures in evaluating cell cycle response to toxicant insult.” J. Tiss. Cult. Methods 8: 13–16.Google Scholar
  2. BAGWELL, C.B., HUDSON, J.L., and IRVIN, G.L. (1979). “Nonparametric flow cytometry analysis.” J. Histochem. Cytochem. 27: 293–296.Google Scholar
  3. BRENNAND, J., MCMILLAN, S., and FOX, M. (1981). “Effects of metabolic inhibitors on cell lethality and mutation induction in Chinese hamster cells. II. The effects of posttreatment with non-toxic concentrations of thymidine.” Chem.-Biol.- Interact. 36: 89–106.Google Scholar
  4. CLEAVER, J.E.. (1981). “Correlations between sister chromatid exchange frequencies and replicon size.” Exp. Cell Res. 136: 27–39.Google Scholar
  5. DILLEHAY, L.E., JACOBSEN-KRAM, D., and WILLIAMS, J.R. (1989). “DNA topoisomerases and models of sister-chromatid exchange.” Mutat. Res. 215: 15–23.Google Scholar
  6. HUBERMAN, E., McKEOWN, C.K., JONES, C.A., HOFFMAN, D.R., and MURAO, S. (1984). “Induction of mutations by chemical agents at the hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyl transferase locus in human epithelial teratoma cells.” Mutat. Res. 130: 127–137.Google Scholar
  7. KAUFMAN, E.R. (1986). “Induction of sister-chromatid exchanges by the replication of 5-bromouracil-substituted DNA under conditions of nucleotide pool imbalance.” Mutat. Res. 163: 41–50Google Scholar
  8. KAUFMAN, E.R. (1987). “Uncoupling of the induction of mutations and sister-chromatid exchanges by the replication of 5-bromouracil-substituted DNA.” Mutat. Res. 176: 133–141.Google Scholar
  9. KAUFMAN, E.R., (1988a). “Analysis of mutagenesis and sister-chromatid exchanges induced by 5-bromo-2′-deoxyuridine in somatic hybrids derived from Syrian hamster melanoma cells and Chinese hamster ovary cells.” Mutat. Res. 199: 65–74.Google Scholar
  10. KAUFMAN, E.R. (1988b). “The role of deoxyribonucleotide metabolism in 5-bromo-2′-deoxyuridine mutagenesis in mammalian cells.” Mutat. Res. 200: 149–155.Google Scholar
  11. KUNZ, B.A. (1988). “Mutagenesis and deoxyribonucleotide pool imbalance.” Mutat. Res. 200:133–147.Google Scholar
  12. LATT, S.A. (1973). “Microfluorometric analysis of DNA synthesis in human metaphase chromosomes.” PNAS(USA) 70: 3395–3399.Google Scholar
  13. MEUTH, M. (1981). “Role of deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate pools in the cytotoxic and mutagenic effects of DNA alkylating agents.” Somat. Cell Genet. 7: 89–102.Google Scholar
  14. MEUTH, M. (1983). “Deoxycytidine kinase-deficient mutants of Chinese hamster ovary cells are hypersensitive to DNA alkylating agents.” Mutat. Res. 110: 383–391.Google Scholar
  15. MEUTH, M. (1984). “The genetic consequences of nucleotide pool imbalance in mammalian cells.” Mutat. Res. 126: 107–112.Google Scholar
  16. MEUTH, M. (1989). “The molecular basis of mutations induced by deoxyribonucleotide triphosphate imbalances in mammalian cells.” Exp. Cell Res. 181: 305–316.Google Scholar
  17. MEUTH, M. and GREEN, H. (1974). “Induction of a deoxycytidineless state in cultured mammalian cells by bromodeoxyuridine.” Cell 2: 109–112.Google Scholar
  18. MORGAN, W.F. and WOLFF, S. (1984). “Effect of 5-bromodeoxyuridine substitution on sister chromatid exchange induction by chemicals.” Chromosoma 89: 285–289.Google Scholar
  19. MORGAN, W.F., BODYCOTE, J., DOIDA, Y., FERO, M.L., HAHN, P., and KAPP, L.N. (1986). “Spontaneous and 3-aminobenzamide-induced sister-chromatid exchange frequencies estimated by ring chromosome analysis.” Mutagenesis 1: 453–459.Google Scholar
  20. MORRIS, S.M. (1991). “The genetic toxicology of 5-bromodeoxyuridine in mammalian cells.” Mutat. Res. (Reviews in Genetic Toxicology) 258: 161–188.Google Scholar
  21. MORRIS, S.M., DOMON, O.E., KODELL, R.L., MCGARRITY, L.J., and STEGALL, D.R. (1988). “Sister-chromatid exchange frequency, cellular replication and relative cloning efficiency in human teratocarcinoma-derived (P3) cells.” Cell Biol. Tox. 4: 281–294.Google Scholar
  22. MORRIS, S.M., MCGARRITY, L.J., DOMON, O.E., HINSON, W.G., and KODELL, R.L. (1989). “Flow cytometric analysis of bromodeoxyuridine-induced inhibition of cell proliferation in the human teratocarcinoma-derived cell line, P3.” Environ. Molec. Mutagen. 14:107–114.Google Scholar
  23. MORRIS, S.M., DOMON, O.E., MCGARRITY, L.J., KODELL, R.L., and CASCIANO, D.A. (1991).“Flow cytometric evaluation of cell-cycle progression in ethyl methanesulfonate and methyl methane sulfonate-exposed P3 cells. Relationship to the induction of sister chromatid exchanges and cellular toxicity.” Environ. Molec. Mutagen. 18: 139–149.Google Scholar
  24. OCKEY, C.H. (1981). “Methyl methane-sulphonate (MMS) induced SCEs are reduced by the BrdU used to visualize them.” Chromosoma 84: 243–256.Google Scholar
  25. OCKEY, C.H., SAFFHILL, R., and BOOTH, J.A. (1984). “The effect of cell proliferation, bromodeoxyuridine concentration, and deoxynucleoside triphosphate pools on sister chromatid exchange induction." In: Sister Chromatid Exchanges. Twenty-five years of Experimental Research, Part A. The nature of SCEs (R.R. Tice and A. Hollaender, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, NY, pp. 267–280.Google Scholar
  26. O'NEILL, J.P. (1984). “Quantification of the induction of SCE due to the replication of unsubstituted and BrdU- or CldU-substituted DNA in CHO cells.” Mutat. Res. 140: 21–25.Google Scholar
  27. O'Nupeill, J.P. Hupeartlein, M.W., and Pupreston, R.J. (1983). “Sister-chromatid exchanges and gene mutations are induced by the replication of 5-bromo- and 5-chloro-deoxyuridine substituted DNA.”Google Scholar
  28. PAINTER, R.B. (1980). “A replication model for sister-chromatid exchange.” Mutat. Res. 70: 337–341.Google Scholar
  29. PINKEL, D., THOMPSON, L.H., GRAY, J.W., and VANDERLAAN, M. (1985). “Measurement of sister chromatid exchanges at very low bromodeoxyuridine substitution levels using a monoclonal antibody in Chinese hamster ovary cells.” Cancer Res. 45: 5795–5798.Google Scholar
  30. POPESCU, N.C., AMSBAUGH, S.A., and DiPAOLO, J.A. (1980). “Reduced N-Methyl-N′-Nitro-N-Nitrosoguanidine sister chromatid exchange induction in Chinese hamster V79 cells preexposed to 5-bromodeoxyuridine.” Chromosoma 76: 329–338.Google Scholar
  31. REICHARD, P. (1988). “Interactions between deoxyribonucleotide and DNA synthesis.” Ann. Rev. Biochem. 57: 349–374.Google Scholar
  32. SAFFHILL, R., and OCKEY, C.H. (1985). “Strand breaks arising from the repair of the 5-bromodeoxyuridine-substituted template and methyl methane sulfonate-induced lesions can explain the formation of sister chromatid exchanges.” Chromosoma 92: 224–228.Google Scholar
  33. SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5 Edition (1985). SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
  34. SHIRAISHI, Y. and OHTSUKI, Y. (1987). “SCE levels in Bloom syndrome cells at very low bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) concentrations: Monoclonal anti-BrdU antibody.” Mutat. Res. 176: 157–164.Google Scholar
  35. VINDELOV, L.L. (1977). “Flow microflurometric analysis of nuclear DNA in cells from solid tumors and cell suspension.” Virchow's Arch. [B. Cell Pathol.] 24: 227–242.Google Scholar
  36. WOLFF, S. and PERRY, P. (1974). “Differential Giemsa staining of sister chromatids and the study of sister chromatid exchange without autoradiography.” Chromosoma 48: 341–353. received: 9/30/91 accepted: 12/18/91Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Princeton Scientific Publishing Co., Inc 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suzanne M. Morris
    • 1
  • Olen E. Domon
    • 1
  • Lynda J. McGarrity
    • 1
  • Ralph L. Kodelo
    • 2
  • Daniel A. Casciano
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Genetic ToxicologyDepartment of Health and Human Services, U.S. Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration, National Center for Toxicological ResearchJefferson
  2. 2.Biometry StaffDepartment of Health and Human Services, U.S. Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration, National Center for Toxicological ResearchJefferson

Personalised recommendations