Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Statistics
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login

The interplay of mutations and electronic properties in disease-related genes

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Shih, Chi-Tin, Wells, Stephen A., Hsu, Ching-Ling, Cheng, Yun-Yin and Roemer, Rudolf A.. (2012) The interplay of mutations and electronic properties in disease-related genes. Scientific Reports, Vol.2 (No.272). ISSN 2045-2322

[img]
Preview
PDF
WRAP_Roemer_srep00272.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader

Download (962Kb)
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep00272

Abstract

Electronic properties of DNA are believed to play a crucial role in many phenomena in living organisms, for example the location of DNA lesions by base excision repair (BER) glycosylases and the regulation of tumor-suppressor genes such as p53 by detection of oxidative damage. However, the reproducible measurement and modelling of charge migration through DNA molecules at the nanometer scale remains a challenging and controversial subject even after more than a decade of intense efforts. Here we show, by analysing 162 disease-related genes from a variety of medical databases with a total of almost 20,000 observed pathogenic mutations, a significant difference in the electronic properties of the population of observed mutations compared to the set of all possible mutations. Our results have implications for the role of the electronic properties of DNA in cellular processes, and hint at the possibility of prediction, early diagnosis and detection of mutation hotspots.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: Q Science > QH Natural history > QH426 Genetics
Divisions: Faculty of Science > Physics
Faculty of Science > Centre for Scientific Computing
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): DNA -- Electric properties, Mutation (Biology), Medical genetics
Journal or Publication Title: Scientific Reports
Publisher: Nature Publishing Group
ISSN: 2045-2322
Date: 15 February 2012
Volume: Vol.2
Number: No.272
Identification Number: 10.1038/srep00272
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Open Access
Funder: Guo jia ke xue wei yuan hui [National Science Council (Taiwan)], Leverhulme Trust (LT)
Grant number: 97-2112-M-029-002-MY3 (NSC), 100-2112-M-029-001-MY3 (NSC), F/00215/AH (LT)
References: 1. Sherbet, G. V. Genetic Recombination in Cancer (Academic Press, 2003). 2. Frank, S. A. Dynamics of Cancer: Incidence, Inheritance and Evolution. Princeton Series in Evolutionary Biology (Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford, 2007). 3. McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine. Online Mendelian inheritance in man (2010). URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/omim/. Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, MD) and National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine (Bethesda, MD). 4. Steson, P. D. et al. Human gene mutation database (HGMD): 2003 update. Hum. Mutat. 21, 577–581 (2003). URL http://www.hgmd.cf.ac.uk/ac/index.php. 5. Petitjean, A. et al. Impact of mutant p53 functional properties on TP53 mutation patterns and tumor phenotype: lessons from recent developments in the IARC TP53 database. Hum. Mutat. 28, 622–29 (2007). Http://www-p53.iarc.fr/ index.html, R11. 6. Lohmann, D. R. & Gallie, B. A. L. Retinoblastoma: Revisiting themodel prototype of inherited cancer. Am. J. Med. Genet. C 129C, 23–28 (2005). Http:// www.verandi.de/joomla. 7. Nagl, S. (ed.) Cancer Bioinformatics (Wiley, Chichester, England, 2006). 8. Enkemann, S. A., McLoughlin, J. M., Jensen, E. H. & Yeatman, T. J. Wholegenome analysis of cancer. In Gordon, G. J. (ed.) Cancer Drug Discovery and Development, chap. 3, 25–55 (Humana Press, 2009). 9. The International Cancer Genome Consortium. International network of cancer genome projects. Nature 464, 993–998 (2010). 10. Starikov, E. B., Lewis, J. P. & Tanaka, S. (eds.) Modern Methods for Theoretical Physical Chemistry of Biopolymers (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006). 11. Chakraborty, T. (ed.) Charge Migration in DNA: Perspectives from Physics, Chemistry and Biology (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2007). 12. Berashevich, J. & Chakraborty, T. Mutational hot spots in DNA: where biology meets physics. Physics in Canada 63, 103–107 (2007). 13. Genereux, J., Boal, A. & Barton, J. DNA-mediated charge transport in redox sensing and signalling. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 891–905 (2010). 14. Guo, X.,Gorodetsky, A. A.,Hone, J., Barton, J. K. & Nuckolls, C. Conductivity of a single DNA duplex bridging a carbon nanotube gap. Nature Nanotechnology 3, 163 (2008). 15. Shih, C. -T., Roche, S. & Ro¨mer, R. A. Point-mutation effects on charge-transport properties of the tumor-suppressor gene p53. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 018105 (2008). 16. Wells, S. A., Shih, C. -T. & Ro¨mer, R. A. Modelling charge transport in DNA using transfer matrices with diagonal terms. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 23, 4138–4149 (2009). 17. Collins, D. & Jukes, T. Rates of transition and transversion in coding sequences since the human-rodent divergence. Genomics 20, 386–396 (1994). 18. Powell, B. J. Computational Methods for Large Systems: Electronic Structure Approaches for Biotechnology and Nanotechnology, chap. An introduction to effective low-energy Hamiltonians in condensed matter physics and chemistry (Wiley, Hoboken, 2011). 19. Cuniberti, G., Craco, L., Porath, D. & Dekker, C. Backbone-induced semiconducting behavior in short DNA wires. Phys. Rev. B 65, 241314(R)–4 (2002). 20. Kramer, B. & MacKinnon, A. Localization: theory and experiment. Rep. Prog. Phys. 56, 1469–1564 (1993). 21. Ndawana, M. L., Ro¨mer, R. A. & Schreiber, M. Effects of scale-free disorder on the Anderson metal-insulator transition. Europhys. Lett. 68, 678–684 (2004). 22. Klotsa, D. K., Ro¨mer, R. A. & Turner, M. S. Electronic transport in DNA. Biophys. J. 89, 2187–2198 (2005). 23. Hegerman, P. J. Flexibility of DNA. Ann. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem 17, 265–286 (1988). 24. Blake, R.,Hess, S. &Nicholson-Tuell, J. The influence of nearesst neighbors on the rate and pattern of spontaneous point mutations. J Mol Evol 34, 189–200 (1992). 25. Galtier, N. & Duret, L. Adaptation of biased gene conversion? extending the null hypothesis of molecular evolution. TRENDS in Genetics 23, 273–277 (2007). 26. Marais, G. Biased gene conversion; implications for genome and sex evolution. TRENDS in Genetics 19, 330–338 (2003). 27. Nunez, M., Holmquist, G. & Barton, J. Evidence for DNA charge transport in the nucleus. Biochemistry 40, 12465–12471 (2001). 28. Augustyn, K. E., Merino, E. J. & Barton, J. K. A role for DNA-mediated charge transport in regulating p53: Oxidation of the DNA-bound protein from a distance. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 104, 18907–18912 (2007). 29. Boal, A., Yavin, E. & Barton, J. DNA repair glycosylases with a [4fe-4s] cluster: a redox cofactor for DNA-mediated charge transport? J. Inorg. Biochem. 101, 1913– 1921 (2007). 30. Yavin, E., Stemp, E. D. A., O’Shea, V. L., David, S. S. & Barton, J. K. Electron trap for DNA-bound repair enzymes: A strategy for DNA-mediated signaling. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 103, 3610 (2006). 31. Cherstvy, A., Kolomeisky, A. & Kornyshev, A. Protein-DNA interactions; reaching and recognizing the targets. J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 4741–4750 (2008). 32. Ferguson, D. & Alt, F. DNA double strand break repair and chromosomal translocation: lessons from animal models. Oncogene 20, 5572–5579 (2001). 33. Jackson, S. Sensing and repairing DNA double-strand breaks- commentary. Carcinogenesis 23, 687–696 (2002). 34. Khanna, K. & Jackson, S. DNA double-strand breaks: signalling, repair and the cancer connection. Nature Genetics 27, 247–254 (2001). 35. Baldwin, G. S. et al.DNAdouble helices recognize mutual sequence homology in a protein free environment. J. Phys. Chem. B 114, 1060–1064 (2008). 36. Kornyshev, A. A. & Leikin, S. Sequence recognition in the pairing of DNA duplexes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3666–3669 (2001). 37. Cherstvy, A. Positively charged residues in DNA-binding domains of structural proteins follow sequence-specific positions of DNA phosphate groups. J. Phys. Chem. B 113, 4242–4247 (2009). 38. Cherstvy, A. DNA-DNA sequence homology recognition: physical mechanisms and open questions. J. Mol. Recognit. 24, 283–287 (2010). 39. Rak, J., Voityuk, A.,Marquez, A.&Ro¨sch,N. The effect of pyrimidine bases on the holetransfer coupling in DNA. J. Phys. Chem. B 106, 7919–7926 (2002). 40. Roche, S. Sequence dependent DNA-mediated conduction. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 108101–4 (2003).
URI: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/41953

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Document Downloads

More statistics for this item...
twitter

Email us: publications@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us