I was thinking about this is micro lab today, but I can not really find the answer to my question anywhere. Could you say that bacterial DNA is more susceptible mutagens then say human or other eukaryotic cells?
-
Scholarship Access: Becoming a Student Doctor course
Free access to comprehensive medical school prep. Eligible students include AAMC FAP recipients and HS graduates from underserved areas. Apply today.
Quick Science Opinion?
- Thread starter bbeventer
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 18,998
- Reaction score
- 11,459
- Points
- 5,341
- Location
- The Countryside
- Veterinarian
Yeah, they have some rules about that.
don't know if this is a homework question, or a conceptual question, but I'm not sure there is a definitive answer.
It probably depends on the mutagen, as well as the specific cell type, and the amount of DNA, and the methylation, and the cell cycle, etc. Thinks likely balance out...like more DNA > greater oppurtunities for errors, but less DNA > greater impact of DNA change. Even within a Eukaryotic organism, mutagens may impact one cell type more than another.
It probably depends on the mutagen, as well as the specific cell type, and the amount of DNA, and the methylation, and the cell cycle, etc. Thinks likely balance out...like more DNA > greater oppurtunities for errors, but less DNA > greater impact of DNA change. Even within a Eukaryotic organism, mutagens may impact one cell type more than another.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 112
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Pre-Veterinary
That's pretty impossible to determine. There are so many variables here. For one, there are toxicants that are mutagens to animals but not to bacteria because of how they are metabolized by the liver. (i.e. liver metabolism is what makes them toxic.) But if you just had a bacterial cell that does not contain those enzymes that effect will be missed.
Look into the Ames Assay (and the addition of the S9 fraction) for more info about this.
Edit: not sure if I was supposed to ignore this because it may be against the rules? I just get really excited about the Ames assay...
Look into the Ames Assay (and the addition of the S9 fraction) for more info about this.
Edit: not sure if I was supposed to ignore this because it may be against the rules? I just get really excited about the Ames assay...
Similar threads
