Image3_Analysis of Ionizing Radiation Induced DNA Damage by Superresolution dSTORM Microscopy.tif
The quantitative detection of radiation caused DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) by immunostained γ-H2AX foci using direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (dSTORM) provides a deeper insight into the DNA repair process at nanoscale in a time-dependent manner. Glioblastoma (U251) cells were irradiated with 250 keV X-ray at 0, 2, 5, 8 Gy dose levels. Cell cycle phase distribution and apoptosis of U251 cells upon irradiation was assayed by flow cytometry. We studied the density, topology and volume of the γ-H2AX foci with 3D confocal microscopy and the dSTORM superresolution method. A pronounced increase in γ-H2AX foci and cluster density was detected by 3D confocal microscopy after 2 Gy, at 30 min postirradiation, but both returned to the control level at 24 h. Meanwhile, at 24 h a considerable amount of residual foci could be measured from 5 Gy, which returned to the normal level 48 h later. The dSTORM based γ-H2AX analysis revealed that the micron-sized γ-H2AX foci are composed of distinct smaller units with a few tens of nanometers. The density of these clusters, the epitope number and the dynamics of γ-H2AX foci loss could be analyzed. Our findings suggest a discrete level of repair enzyme capacity and the restart of the repair process for the residual DSBs, even beyond 24 h. The dSTORM superresolution technique provides a higher precision over 3D confocal microscopy to study radiation induced γ-H2AX foci and molecular rearrangements during the repair process, opening a novel perspective for radiation research.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s13104-018-3438-y
- https://doi.org//10.3892/mmr.2015.4004
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s40659-018-0203-6
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2010.11.003
- https://doi.org//10.3390/genes11010099
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2016.12.008
- https://doi.org//10.1083/jcb.146.5.905
- https://doi.org//10.1146/annurev-biochem-060614-034335
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.dnarep.2010.09.010
- https://doi.org//10.4061/2010/920161
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fmolb.2020.00024
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0038165
- https://doi.org//10.3390/cancers13010018
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41598-020-58084-6
- https://doi.org//10.1074/jbc.273.10.5858
- https://doi.org//10.4161/cc.5.17.3169
- https://doi.org//10.1139/o03-042
- https://doi.org//10.1080/0955300032000093128
- https://doi.org//10.1074/jbc.M310030200
- https://doi.org//10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-1433
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41467-020-20047-w
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.biochi.2012.06.019
- https://doi.org//10.1002/anie.200802376
- https://doi.org//10.1039/c9nr03696b
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s11010-020-03809-4
- https://doi.org//10.1007/978-1-4939-2080-8_14
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.radphyschem.2020.108899
- https://doi.org//10.3390/ijms21145135
- https://doi.org//10.1016/0165-1684(94)90060-4
- https://doi.org//10.1080/2151237x.2007.10129236
- https://doi.org//10.1007/978-3-662-03939-7_6
- https://doi.org//10.1109/TPAMI.2003.1177156
- https://doi.org//10.1364/oe.21.010978
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ymeth.2015.01.010
- https://doi.org//10.1088/2040-8978/15/9/094012
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nprot.2011.336
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0127989
- https://doi.org//10.1096/FJ.201500106R
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ncomms15760
- https://doi.org//10.3109/10409238609083735
- https://doi.org//10.1096/fj.201701435
- https://doi.org//10.4161/cc.5.24.3569
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.dnarep.2020.102974
- https://doi.org//10.1186/2041-9414-3-8
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cub.2016.11.049
- https://doi.org//10.1042/ebc20190007
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00411-019-00778-1
- https://doi.org//10.1107/S1600577514011424