Previous Issue
Volume 4, March
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
DNA
Volume 4
Issue 2
share announcement

DNA, Volume 4, Issue 2 (June 2024) – 3 articles

  • Issues are regarded as officially published after their release is announced to the table of contents alert mailing list.
  • You may sign up for e-mail alerts to receive table of contents of newly released issues.
  • PDF is the official format for papers published in both, html and pdf forms. To view the papers in pdf format, click on the "PDF Full-text" link, and use the free Adobe Reader to open them.
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
13 pages, 2596 KiB  
Brief Report
Exploring the Roles of Different DNA Repair Proteins in Short Inverted Repeat Mediated Genomic Instability: A Pilot Study
by Pooja Mandke and Karen M. Vasquez
DNA 2024, 4(2), 141-153; https://doi.org/10.3390/dna4020008 - 05 Apr 2024
Viewed by 438
Abstract
Repetitive DNA sequences are abundant in the human genome and can adopt alternative (i.e., non-B) DNA structures. These sequences contribute to diverse biological functions, including genomic instability. Previously, we found that Z-DNA-, H-DNA- and cruciform DNA-forming sequences are mutagenic, implicating them in cancer [...] Read more.
Repetitive DNA sequences are abundant in the human genome and can adopt alternative (i.e., non-B) DNA structures. These sequences contribute to diverse biological functions, including genomic instability. Previously, we found that Z-DNA-, H-DNA- and cruciform DNA-forming sequences are mutagenic, implicating them in cancer etiology. These sequences can stimulate the formation of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), causing deletions via cleavage by the endonuclease ERCC1-XPF. Interestingly, the activity of ERCC1-XPF in H-DNA-induced mutagenesis is nucleotide excision repair (NER)-dependent, but its role in Z-DNA-induced mutagenesis is NER-independent. Instead, Z-DNA is processed by ERCC1-XPF in a mechanism dependent on the mismatch repair (MMR) complex, MSH2-MSH3. These observations indicate distinct mechanisms of non-B-induced genomic instability. However, the roles of NER and MMR proteins, as well as additional nucleases (CtIP and MRE11), in the processing of cruciform DNA remain unknown. Here, we present data on the processing of cruciform-forming short inverted repeats (IRs) by DNA repair proteins using mammalian cell-based systems. From this pilot study, we show that, in contrast to H-DNA and Z-DNA, short IRs are processed in a NER- and MMR-independent manner, and the nucleases CtIP and MRE11 suppress short IR-induced genomic instability in mammalian cells. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

13 pages, 1002 KiB  
Review
Activity and Silencing of Transposable Elements in C. elegans
by Sylvia E. J. Fischer
DNA 2024, 4(2), 129-140; https://doi.org/10.3390/dna4020007 - 02 Apr 2024
Viewed by 322
Abstract
Since the discovery of transposable elements (TEs) in maize in the 1940s by Barbara McClintock transposable elements have been described as junk, as selfish elements with no benefit to the host, and more recently as major determinants of genome structure and genome evolution. [...] Read more.
Since the discovery of transposable elements (TEs) in maize in the 1940s by Barbara McClintock transposable elements have been described as junk, as selfish elements with no benefit to the host, and more recently as major determinants of genome structure and genome evolution. TEs are DNA sequences that are capable of moving to new sites in the genome and making additional copies of themselves while doing so. To limit the propagation of TEs, host silencing mechanisms are directed at transposon-encoded genes that are required for mobilization. The mutagenic properties of TEs, the potential of TEs to form new genes and affect gene expression, together with the host silencing mechanisms, shape eukaryotic genomes and drive genome evolution. While TEs constitute more than half of the genome in many higher eukaryotes, transposable elements in the nematode C. elegans form a relatively small proportion of the genome (approximately 15%). Genetic studies of transposon silencing, and the discovery of RNA interference (RNAi) in C. elegans, propelled Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans) to the forefront of studies of RNA-based mechanisms that silence TEs. Here, I will review the transposable elements that are present and active in the C. elegans genome, and the host defense mechanisms that silence these elements. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue DNA Organization in Model Organisms)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 3540 KiB  
Perspective
Transposon and Transgene Tribulations in Mosquitoes: A Perspective of piRNA Proportions
by Nelson C. Lau and Vanessa M. Macias
DNA 2024, 4(2), 104-128; https://doi.org/10.3390/dna4020006 - 30 Mar 2024
Viewed by 509
Abstract
Mosquitoes, like Drosophila, are dipterans, the order of “true flies” characterized by a single set of two wings. Drosophila are prime model organisms for biomedical research, while mosquito researchers struggle to establish robust molecular biology in these that are arguably the most [...] Read more.
Mosquitoes, like Drosophila, are dipterans, the order of “true flies” characterized by a single set of two wings. Drosophila are prime model organisms for biomedical research, while mosquito researchers struggle to establish robust molecular biology in these that are arguably the most dangerous vectors of human pathogens. Both insects utilize the RNA interference (RNAi) pathway to generate small RNAs to silence transposons and viruses, yet details are emerging that several RNAi features are unique to each insect family, such as how culicine mosquitoes have evolved extreme genomic feature differences connected to their unique RNAi features. A major technical difference in the molecular genetic studies of these insects is that generating stable transgenic animals are routine in Drosophila but still variable in stability in mosquitoes, despite genomic DNA-editing advances. By comparing and contrasting the differences in the RNAi pathways of Drosophila and mosquitoes, in this review we propose a hypothesis that transgene DNAs are possibly more intensely targeted by mosquito RNAi pathways and chromatin regulatory pathways than in Drosophila. We review the latest findings on mosquito RNAi pathways, which are still much less well understood than in Drosophila, and we speculate that deeper study into how mosquitoes modulate transposons and viruses with Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) will yield clues to improving transgene DNA expression stability in transgenic mosquitoes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue DNA Organization in Model Organisms)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Previous Issue
Back to TopTop