Advertisement

Journal of Genetics

, Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 146–164 | Cite as

Cytogenetic analysis of the action of carcinogens and tumour inhibitors inDrosophila melanogaster V. Differential genetic response to the alkylating mutagens and x-radiation

With one text-figure
  • O. G. Fahmy
  • Myrtle J. Fahmy
Article

Summary

  1. 1.

    Chemical mutagens have been shown to act on gene loci which are apparently stable to X-radiation. By the use of a group of alkylating compounds it was possible to induce nearly 200 ‘new’ sex-linked recessive visibles (ranks 1 and 2), different in phenotype and genetic position from those induced by the physical agent.

     
  2. 2.

    The ratio of sex-linked recessive visibles/lethals in the same sample of treated chromosornes is exceptionally high for a particular amino-acid mustard (p-N-di(chloroethyl)phenylalanine); which mutates 2–3 times as many morphogenesis loci (relative to lethals) as X-rays or any other alkylating compound.

     
  3. 3.

    The distribution of the loci of recessive lethals along the X-chromosome is the same for three representative alkylating mutagens, and is significantly different from that for X-rays. A significant difference also occurs in the distribution of theF 1 viable breaks induced by an imine (tri(ethyleneimino)triazine) as compared to X-radiation.

     
  4. 4.

    The rate of induction of small deficiencies by the alkylating compounds is nearly twice that produced by mutagenically equivalent doses of X-rays. Evidence is available that chemically induced deficiencies result from errors in gene reproduction rather than chromosome breaks.

     
  5. 5.

    There is a shortage in major structural rearrangements in viable sperm, as well as among the sex-linked recessive lethals, under the effect of the alkylating agents compared with mutagenically equivalent doses of X-rays. This shortage, in the case of the tri(ethyleneimino)triazine rearrangement lethals, has been shown to be due to differences in the properties of the chromosome breaks induced by the imine and X-rays, rather than a lower efficiency in the induction of the primary chromosome breaks by the chemical agent.

     
  6. 6.

    The dose effects as regards the induction of sex-linked recessive lethals, dominant lethals and viable chromosome breaks, are identical for tri(ethyleneirnmo)triazne and X-rays. This suggests that the hypothesis of direct action of radiations on the genetic material is not conclusively proved by evidence based solely on dose relations.

     
  7. 7.

    Among the sex-linked recessive lethals induced by various closes of tri(ethyleneimiao)triazine there is a fixed proportion showing cytoiogically detectable chromosome aberrations: major rearrangements and deficiencies. Within this fixed proportion, the fraction with rearrangements increases and that with deficiencies decreases with increase in dose. The bearing of this observation on the mechanism of induction of chromosome breaks by chemical means has been outlined.

     

Keywords

Triazine Chromosome Aberration Chromosome Break Nitrogen Mustard Chemical Mutagen 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Auerbach.C. (1949). Chemical mutagenesis.Biol. Rev.24. 355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auerbach, C. &Moser, H. (1953). An analysis of the mutagenic action of formaldehyde-food. I. Sensitivity ofDrosophila germ cells.Z. indukt. Abstamm. u. VererbLehre,85. 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Auerbach, C. &Robson, J. M. (1947). The production of mutations by chemical substances.Proe. Roy. Soc.Edinb. B,62 271.Google Scholar
  4. Bird, M. J. &Fahmy, O. G. (1953). Cytogenetic analysis of the action of carcinogens and tumour inhibitors inDrosophila mdanogaster. I. 1:2, 3:4-diepoxybutane.Proc. Roy. Soc. B,140, 556.Google Scholar
  5. Bridges, C. B. (1938). Revised map of the salivary gland X-chxomosome ofDrosophila mdanogaster.J.Hered.29, 11.Google Scholar
  6. Catoheside, D. G. (1948). Genetic effects of radiations.Advanc. Genet.2.Google Scholar
  7. Delbrück, M. (1935). über die Natur der Genmutation und der Genstruktur. Fritter Teil: Atomphysi kalisches Miodell der Genmutabion.Nachr. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen (Math.-phys. KL, Biol.),1. 223.Google Scholar
  8. Demetec, M. (1937). Relationship between various chromosomal changes inDrosophila melanogaster.Cytologia, Fujii Jubil. vol. p. 1125.Google Scholar
  9. Demerec, M. (1955). What is a gene? Twenty years later.Amer. Nat.89. 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Famy, O. G. &Bird, M. J. (1953). Chromosome breaks among recessive lethals induced by chemical mutagens inDrosophila mdanogaster.Heredity, Suppl.6, 149.Google Scholar
  11. Fahmy, O. G. &Fahmy, M, J. (1954). Cytogenetic analysis of the action of carcinogens and tumou inhibitors inDrosophila melanogasler. II. The mechanism of induction of dominant lethals by 2:4:6-tri(etkyleneimino)-1:3:5-triazine.J. Genet.52, 603.Google Scholar
  12. Fahmy, O. G. &Fahmy, M. J. (1955a). Cytogenetic analysis of the action of carcinogens and tumour inhibitcors inDrosophila melanogaster. III. Chromosome structural changes induced by 2:4:6-tri-(ethyleueimino)-l:3:5-tnazine.J. Genet.53, 181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fahmy, O. G. &Fahhy, M. J. (1956). Cytogenetic analysis of the action of carcinogens and tumour inhibitors inDrosophila melanogaster. IV. The cell stage during spermatogenesis and the induction of intra- and intergenic mutations by 2:4:6-tri(ethyIeneininio)-l:3:5-triazine.J. Genet.53, 563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ford, C. E. (1949). Chromosome breakage in nitrogen mustard treatedVicia faba root tips cells.Proc. Sth Int. Cong. Genet. Suppl. to Hereditas, p. 570.Google Scholar
  15. Fricke, H. &Demerec, M. (1937). The influence of wave-length on genetic effects of X-rays.Proc. Nat Acad. Sci., Wash.,23 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gray, L. H. (1952). Actions of radiations on living cells, 1946 and after. The Second Douglas Lea Memorial lecture.Brit. J. Radiol.25, 235.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Gray, L. H. (1953). Characteristics of chromosome breakage by different agents.Heredity, Suppl.6, 311.Google Scholar
  18. Gustaesson, A. &Mackey, J. (1948). The genetical effects of mustard gas substances and neutrons.Hereditas, Lund,34 371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaufmann.B. P. (1946). Organization of the chromosome. I. Break distribution and chromosome recombination inDrosophila melanogaster.J. Exp. Zool.102, 293.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Muller, H. J. (1927). Artificial transmutation of the gene.Science,66, 84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Muller, H. J. (1940). An analysis of the process of structural change in chromosomes ofDrosophila.J. Genet.40, 1.Google Scholar
  22. Muller, H. J. (1951). The development of the gene theory. Chapter inGenetics in the 20th Century. New York: The Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
  23. Muller, H. J. (1952). Gene mutations caused by radiation.Symposium on Radiology, Nat. Acad. Sci., New York: J. Wiley and Son.Google Scholar
  24. Oliver, C. P. (1932). An analysis of the effect of varying the duration of X-ray treatment upon the frequency of mutations.Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre,61, 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rapoprt, J. A. (1946). Carbonyl compounds and the chemical mechanism of mutations.G.R. Acad. Sci. U.R.S.S., N.S.,54, 65.Google Scholar
  26. Revell, S. H. (1953). Chromosome breakage by X-rays and radiomimetio substances inVicia.Heredity, Suppl.6, 107.Google Scholar
  27. Slizynska, H. &Slizyhski, B. M. (1947). Genetical and cytological studies of lethals induced by chemical treatment inDrosopkila melanogaster.Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. B,62, 234.Google Scholar
  28. Smith, C. A. B. (1952). A simplified heterogeneity test.Ann. Eugen., Loud.,17, 35.Google Scholar
  29. Spencer, W. P. &Stern, C. (1948). Experiments to test the validity of the linear r.-dose/mutation frequency inDrosophila at low dosage.Genetics,33, 43.Google Scholar
  30. Thoday, J. M. (1953). Sister-union isolocus breaks in irradiatedVicia faba.Heredity, Suppl.6, 299.Google Scholar
  31. Timoe éefe-Ressovsey, N. W. &Delbr ück, M. (1936). Strahlengenetische Versuche über sichtbare Mntationen und die Mutabilität einzelner Gene beiDrosophila melanogaster.Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre,71, 322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 1956

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. G. Fahmy
    • 1
  • Myrtle J. Fahmy
    • 1
  1. 1.Chester Beatty Research InstituteInstitute of Cancer Research, Royal Cancer HospitalLondon

Personalised recommendations