In Vitro

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 288–294 | Cite as

Methylation of satellite deoxyribonucleic acid in mouse neoplastic and non-neoplastic cell cultures

  • Raymond Gantt
  • Frida Montes De Oca
  • Virgina J. Evans
Article

Summary

Comparisons of nucleic acid methylation between paired neoplastic and non-neoplastic mouse cell lines have shown a striking difference in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) peak eluted from methylated albumin-kieselguhr columns (R. Gantt and V. J. Evans, 1969, Cancer Res. 29: 536–541). Since mouse satellite DNA is relatively highly methylated, its 5-methylcytosine content was compared with mainband DNA in these two paired cell lines to determine whether this might account for the observed differences. The cell DNA was labeled with methyl-labeled methionine and isolated from the cells by repeated neutral cesium chloride isopycnic centrifugation. The satellite DNA strands were then separated in an alkaline cesium chloride gradient. Both the 5-methylcytosine content and the relative amounts of satellite DNA were indistinguishable in the paired cell lines. Further, the results showed that both strands of satellite DNA had virtually equal amounts of 5-methylcytosine, although the heavy strand contains 1.5 times more cytosine than the light strand.

Keywords

Sulfur Mustard Cesium Chloride Equilibrium Sedimentation Optical Density Profile Paired Cell Line 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Gold, M., J. Hurwitz, and M. Anders. 1963. The enzymatic methylation of RNA and DNA. I. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 11: 107–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gold, M., J. Hurwitz, and M. Anders. 1963. Enzymatic methylation of RNA and DNA. II. On the species specificity of the methylation enzymes. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 50: 164–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Meselson, M., and R. Yuan. 1968. DNA restriction enzyme fromE. coli. Nature (London) 217: 1110–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hattman, S., E. Gold, and A. Plotnik. 1972. Methylation of cytosine residues in DNA controlled by a drug resistance factor. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 69: 187–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scarano, E., M. Iaccarino, P. Grippo, and E. Parisi. 1967. The heterogeneity of thymine methyl group origin in DNA pyrimidine isostichs of developing sea urchin embryos. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 57: 1394–1400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lark, C. 1968. Effect of the methionine analogs, ethionine and norleucine, on DNA synthesis inEscherichia coli 15T−. J. Mol. Biol. 31: 401–414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maio, J. 1971. DNA strand reassociation and polyribonucleotide binding in the African green monkey,Cercopithecus aethiops. J. Mol. Biol. 56: 579–595.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ritzi, E., and A. J. Levine. 1969. DNA replication in simian virus 40-infected cells. J. Virol. 5: 686–692.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gantt, R., and V. J. Evans. 1969. Comparison of soluble RNA methylase capacity in paired neoplastic and nonneoplastic cell linesin vitro. Cancer Res. 29: 536–541.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Evans, V. J., and W. F. Andresen. 1966. Effect of serum on spontaneous neoplastic transformationin vitro. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 37: 247–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flamm, W., M. Birnstiel, and P. M. B. Walker. 1967. Preparation and fractionation, and isolation of single strands of DNA by isopycnic ultracentrifugation in fixed-angle rotors. In: G. D. Birnie and S. M. Fox (Eds.),Subcellular Components, Preparation and Fractionation. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 125–155.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Srinivasan, P. R., and E. Borek. 1964. Enzymatic alteration of nucleic acid structure. Science 145: 548–553.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salomon, R., A. M. Kaye, and M. Herzberg. 1969. Mouse nuclear satellite DNA: 5-methyl-cytosine content, pyrimidine isoplith distribution and electron microscopic appearance. J. Mol. Biol. 43: 581–592.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Flamm, W. G., P. M. B. Walker, and M. McCallum. 1969. Some properties of the single strands isolated from the DNA of the nuclear satellite of the mouse (Mus musculus). J. Mol. Biol. 40: 423–443.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Flamm, W. G., M. McCallum, and P. M. B. Walker. 1967. The isolation of complementary strands from a mouse DNA fraction. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., U. S. A. 57: 1729–1734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith, B. J. 1970. Light satellite-band DNA in mouse cells infected with polyoma virus. J. Mol. Biol. 47: 101–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Flamm, W. G., N. J. Bernheim, and P. E. Brubaker. 1971. Density gradient analysis of newly replicated DNA from synchronized mouse lymphoma cells. Exp. Cell Res. 64: 97–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dawid, I. B., D. D. Brown, and R. H. Reeder. 1970. Composition and structure of chromosomal and amplified ribosomal DNA's ofXenopus laevis. J. Mol. Biol. 51: 341–360.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sneider, T. W., and V. R. Potter. 1969. Methylation of mammalian DNA: studies on Novikoff hepatoma cells in tissue culture. J. Mol. Biol. 42: 271–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Flamm, W. G., N. J. Berheim, and J. Spalding. 1969. Selective inhibition of the semicon-servative replication of mouse satellite DNA. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 195: 273–275.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Tissue Culture Association 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raymond Gantt
    • 1
  • Frida Montes De Oca
    • 1
  • Virgina J. Evans
    • 1
  1. 1.Tissue Culture Section, Laboratory of BiologyNational Cancer InstituteBethesda

Personalised recommendations