Open AccessDifferent Epidermal Cell Kinetic Effects of Hydroxyurea When Injected At Two Different Times of the Day
Author(s) -
Thorud E.,
Clausen O. P. F.,
Kauffman S. L.
Publication year - 1984
Publication title -
cell proliferation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.647
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1365-2184
pISSN - 0960-7722
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2184.1984.tb00614.x
Subject(s) - colcemid , hairless , mitosis , cell cycle , cell , dna synthesis , flow cytometry , mitotic index , cell division , andrology , biology , kinetics , endocrinology , circadian rhythm , medicine , chemistry , microbiology and biotechnology , dna , biochemistry , physics , quantum mechanics
Circadian rhythms in epidermal basal cell‐cycle progression in hairless mouse skin have been repeatedly demonstrated. A dose of 10 mg/animal hydroxyurea (HU), given to inhibit DNA synthesis was injected intraperitoneally to two groups of hairless mice. One group was injected at 10.00 hours MET, when the cell‐cycle progression and cell division rate are relatively high, and another group was injected at 20.00 hours, when the same variables are at minimum values. Various cell kinetic methods—[ 3 H]TdR autoradiography, DNA flow cytometry and the stathmokinetic method (Colcemid)—were used to study HU‐induced alterations in cell kinetics. Hydroxyurea (HU) immediately reduced the labelling index (LI) to less than 10% of controls when injected at both times of the day, and higher then normal values were observed 8 hr later. A subsequent decrease towards normal values was steeper in the 20.00 hours injected group. the proportion of cells with S‐phase DNA content was transiently reduced in both series, but the reduction was less pronounced and control values were reached earlier in the series injected at 10.00 hours. the observed alterations in LI and fraction of cells in S phase were followed by comparable alterations in the fraction of cells in G 2 and in the mitotic rate. Hence the changes in G 2 and mitotic rate are easily explained as consequences of the previous perturbations in the S phase. The time‐dependent differences in the cell kinetic perturbations caused by HU in the S phase may be explained by a circadian‐phase‐dependent action of HU on the influx and efflux of cells to and from the S phase, respectively. At 10.00 hours the efflux of cells from S is most heavily inhibited; at 20.00 hours the influx is predominantly blocked. Hence, when physiological flux is high HU mainly blocks the efflux from S, but when flux normally is low, HU mainly blocks the entrance to S. Within 20 hours after the HU injection, the cell kinetic variables had approached the unperturbed circadian pattern.