Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Jul;25(4):343-9.
doi: 10.1093/mutage/geq011. Epub 2010 Mar 12.

Comparison of germ line minisatellite mutation detection at the CEB1 locus by Southern blotting and PCR amplification

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of germ line minisatellite mutation detection at the CEB1 locus by Southern blotting and PCR amplification

Malcolm Taylor et al. Mutagenesis. 2010 Jul.

Abstract

Identification of de novo minisatellite mutations in the offspring of parents exposed to mutagenic agents offers a potentially sensitive measure of germ line genetic events induced by ionizing radiation and genotoxic chemicals. Germ line minisatellite mutations (GMM) are usually detected by hybridizing Southern blots of unamplified size-fractionated genomic DNA with minisatellite probes. However, this consumes a relatively large amount of DNA, requires several steps and may lack sensitivity. We have developed a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based GMM assay, which we applied to the hypermutable minisatellite, CEB1. Here, we compare the sensitivity and specificity of this assay with the conventional Southern hybridization method using DNA from 10 spouse pairs, one parent of each pair being a survivor of cancer in childhood, and their 20 offspring. We report that both methods have similar specificity but that the PCR method uses 250 times less DNA, has fewer steps and is better at detecting GMM with single repeats provided that specific guidelines for allele sizing are followed. The PCR GMM method is easier to apply to families where the amount of offspring DNA sample is limited.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
(A and B) Representative gel images obtained for Families 2–6 using the (A) Southern and (B) PCR-based CEB1 genotyping assays. The two sets of images were assembled independently by the two laboratories, the Southern images from five separate assays and the PCR images from a single gel. Family members are denoted as: F, father; M, mother; C1, Child 1; C2, Child 2. The vertical black downward arrows show the position of 1-kb allele-sizing ladders; this only approximates to allele sizes in the Southern images of Families 2, 3, 4 and 6 because assays were carried out on separate occasions. The asterisk shows germ line mutant bands and the vertical black upward arrows , the appropriate parental progenitor alleles.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Wyrobek AJ, Mulvihill JJ, Wassom JS, et al. Assessing human germ-cell mutagenesis in the post-genome era: a celebration of the legacy of William (Bill) Lawson Russell. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 2007;48:71–95. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sankaranaryanan K, Wassom JS. Reflections on the impact of advances in the assessment of genetic risks of exposure to ionizing radiation on international radiation protection recommendations between the mid-1950s and the present. Mutat. Res. 2008;658:1–27. - PubMed
    1. Shelby MD. Human germ cell mutagens. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 1994;23(Suppl. 24):30–34. - PubMed
    1. Olshan AF. Lessons learned from epidemiologic studies of environmental exposure and genetic disease. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 1995;25(Suppl. 26):74–80. - PubMed
    1. Winther JF, Boice JD, Jr., Frederiksen K, Bautz A, Mulvihil JJ, Stovall M, Olsen JH. Radiotherapy for childhood cancer and risk of congenital malformations in offspring: a population-based cohort study. Clin. Genet. 2009;75:50–56. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances