DNA damage and repair in somatic and germ cells in vivo

Alkylation-induced germ cell mutagenesis in the mouse versus Drosophila is compared based on data from forward mutation assays (specific-locus tests in the mouse and in Drosophila and multiple-locus assays in the latter species) but not including assays for structural chromosome aberrations. To facilitate comparisons between mouse and Drosophila, forward mutation test results have been grouped into three categories. Representatives of the first category are MMS (methyl methanesulfonate) and EO (ethylene oxide), alkylating agents with a high s value which predominantly react with ring nitrogens in DNA. ENU (N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea), MNU (N-methyl-N-nitrosourea), PRC (procarbazine), DEN (N-nitrosodiethylamine), and DMN (N-nitrosodimethylamine) belong to the second category. These agents have in common a considerable ability for modification at oxygens in DNA. Cross-linking agents (melphalan, chlorambucil, hexamethylphosphoramide) from the third category.The most unexpected, but encouraging outcome of this study is the identification of common features for three vastly different experimental indicators of genotoxicity: hereditary damage in Drosophila males, genetic damage in male mice, and tumors (TD₅₀ estimates) in rodents. Based on the above three category classification scheme the following tentative conclusions are drawn. Monofunctional agents belonging to category 1, typified by MMS and EO, display genotoxic effects in male germ cell stages that have passed meiotic division. This phenomenon seems to be the consequence of a repair deficiency during spermiogenesis for a period of 3–4 days in Drosophila and 14 days in the mouse. We suggest that the reason for the high resistance of premeiotic stages, and the generally high TD₅₀ estimates observed for this class in rodents, is the efficient error-free repair of N-alkylation damage. If we accept this hypothesis, then the increased carcinogenic potential in rodents, seen when comparing category 2 (ENU-type mutagens) to category 1 (MMS-type mutagens), along with the ability of category 2 genotoxins to induce genetic damage in premeiotic stages, must presumably be due to their enhanced ability for alkylations at oxygens in DNA; it is this property that actually distinguishes the two groups from each other. In contrast to category 1, examination of class 2 genotoxins (ENU and DEN) in premeiotic cells of Drosophila gave no indication for a significant role of germinal selection, and also removal by DNA repair was less dramatic compared to MMS. Thus category 2 mutagens are expected to display activity in a wide range of both post- and premeiotic germ cell stages. A number of these agents have been demonstrated to be among the most potent carcinogens in rodents. In terms of both hereditary damage and the initiation of cancers (low TD₅₀), cross-linking agents (category 3) comprise a considerable genotoxic hazard. Doubling doses for the mouse SLT have been determined for four cross-linking agents not requiring metabolic conversion and in all four cases the doubling doses for these agents were lower than those for MMS, DES and EMS. In support of this conclusion, two of 10 genotoxic agents, for which data on chromosomal aberrations were available for both somatic cells and germ cells in mice, were cross-linking agents and again the doubling dose estimates are lower than for monofunctional agents. Four cross-linking agents induced mutations in stem cell spermatogonia indicating that this type of agent can be active in a wide range of germ cell stages.Quite in contrast to what is generally observed in unicellular systems and in mammalian cells in culture, both cross-linking agents and MMS-type mutagens (high s value) predominantly produce deletion mutations in postmeiotic male germ cell stages. This is the uniform picture found for both Drosophila and the mouse. It is concluded that in vitro systems, in contrast to Drosophila germ cells, fail to predict this very intriguing feature of mouse germ line mutagenesis. In addition to their potential for induction of deletions and other rearrangements, cross-linking agents are among the most efficient inducers of mitotic recombination in Drosophila. Thus there are several mechanisms by which cross-linking agents may cause loss of heterozygosity for long stretches of DNA sequences, leading to expression of recessive genes. Since a substantial portion of agents used in the chemotherapy of cancers have cross-linking potential, the potential hazards of hereditary damage and cancers associated with this class of genotoxins should, in our opinion, receive more attention than they have in the past.