Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-02T02:26:28.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bystander effect in human lymphocytes incubated with irradiated mitochondrial DNA deficient yeast cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 January 2012

O.P. Vasylenko
Affiliation:
National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Volodymyrska, 64, 01033 Kyiv, Ukraine
O.V. Pronina
Affiliation:
National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Volodymyrska, 64, 01033 Kyiv, Ukraine
S.R. Rushkovsky
Affiliation:
National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Volodymyrska, 64, 01033 Kyiv, Ukraine
Get access

Abstract

The comparison of strength of bystander effect induction in human lymphocytes by rho0 (complete loss of mitochondrial DNA) and rho+ (with fully functional mtDNA) strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiaewas carried out. The cultures of human peripheral blood were experimentally contaminated with nonirradiated or X-ray irradiated yeast cells (haploid rho0 and rho+ strains of S. cerevisiae). The doses of irradiation were 1 and 10 Gy. Well spread human metaphases were scored for chromosomal aberrations (CA). It was found that nonirradiated yeast cells (no matter rho0 or rho+) had no effect on lymphocytes chromosomal stability. Statistically significant increased level of CA was observed in lymphocytes incubated with irradiated rho+ yeast cells. The increasing of the CA was dose independent. However, after cocultivation with irradiated rho0 cells the bystander effect was revealed for dose 10 Gy only and his manifestation was mild in comparison with rho+ data. Thus, our findings suggest that strength of bystander effect depends on existence of mitochondrial DNA and normally functioning mitochondria.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Rzeszowska-Wolny J., Przybyszewski W., Widel M. European Journal of Pharmacology 625 (2009) 156–164.
DeVeaux L., Durtschi L., Case J., Wells D. Mutat. Res. 597 (2006) 78–86.
Zhou H., Randers-Pherson G., Waldern C., Vannais D., Hall E., Hei T. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97 (2000) 2099–2104.
Chen S., Zhao Y., Han W., Zhao G., Zhu L., Wang J., Bao L., Jiang E., Xu A., Hei TK., Yu Z., Wu L.British Journal of Cancer 98 (2008) 1839–1844.
Watson G., Lorimore S., Macdonald D., Wright E. Canser. Res. 60 (2000) 5608–5611.
Yang G., Wu L., Chen L., Pei B., Wang Y., Zhan F., Wu Y., Yu Z., Radiat. Res. 167 (2007) 298–305.
Daev E.V., Kazarova V.E., Vyborova A.M., Dukelskaya A.V., “Crimean Meeting” Proceedings of the Third International Conference Modern problems of genetics, radiobiology, radioecology and evolution, Alushta, 2010, (Dubna, JINR, 2010) pp. 55.
Sroya R., Smith R., Seymour C., Mothersill C. Dose-Response 8 (2010) 317–330.
Rushkovsky S., Vasylenko O., Pronina O. and Shepeta Y. Radioprotection, 43 (2008) 5.
Leach KJ., Van Tuyle G., Lin PS., Schmidt-Ullrich R., Mikkelsen RB. Canser. Res., 61 (2001)3894–3901.
Zubko M.K., Guillard S., Lydall D Genetics 168 (2004) 103–115.
Tawn E.J., Holdsworth D. Mutagen induced chromosome damage in human lymphocytes. In: D. E. Rooney and B.H. Czepulkowski (Eds.) – Human Cytogenetics. Volume II. Malignancy and acquired abnormalities. A practical approach. (Irl press, Oxford, New York, Tokyo, 1991) pp. 189–208.
Hsu T.C., Wu X., Trizna Z. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 87(1996) 127–132.
Sokal, R.R., and F.J. Rohlf. Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. 3rd edition. (W.H. Freeman, New York, 1995)