English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Previously, in a random mutagenesis study, the (+)- anti  diol epoxide of benzo[ a ]pyrene [(+)- anti -B[a]PDE] was shown to induce a complex mutational spectrum in the  supF  gene of an  Escherichia coli  plasmid, which included insertions, deletions and base substitution mutations, notably a significant fraction of GC→TA, GC→AT and GC→CG mutations. At some sites, a single type of mutation dominated and to understand individual mutagenic pathways these sites were chosen for study by site-specific means to determine whether the major adduct, [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG, was responsible. [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG was shown to induce ~95% G→T mutations in a 5′-TGC-3′ sequence context and ~80% G→A mutations in a 5′-CGT-3′ sequence context. (+)- anti -B[a]PDE induced principally GC→CG mutations in the G133 sequence context (5′-AGA-3′) in studies using both SOS-uninduced or SOS-induced  E.coli . Herein, [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG is shown to induce principally G→A mutations (&gt;90%) either without or with SOS induction in a closely related 5′-AGA-3′ sequence context (identical over 7 bp). This is the first time that there has been a discrepancy between the mutagenic specificity of (+)-anti-B[a]PDE versus [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG. Eight explanations for this discordance are considered. Four are ruled out; e.g. the second most prevalent adduct [+ca]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG also induces a preponderance of G→A mutations (&gt;90%), so it also is not responsible for (+)-anti-B[a]PDE-induced G133→C mutations. The four explanations not ruled out are discussed and include that another minor adduct might be responsible and that the 5′-AGA-3′ sequence context differed slightly in the studies with [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG versus (+)-anti-B[a]PDE. In spite of the discordance, [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG induces G→A mutations in the context studied herein and this result has proven useful in generating a hypothesis for what conformations of [+ta]-B[a]P– N  2 -dG are responsible for G→T versus G→A mutations.

The major, N 2 -dG adduct of (+)- anti -B[a]PDE induces G→A mutations in a 5′-AGA-3′ sequence context