↓ Skip to main content

Three-Color Chromosome Painting as Seen through the Eyes of mFISH: Another Look at Radiation-Induced Exchanges and Their Conversion to Whole-Genome Equivalency

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Three-Color Chromosome Painting as Seen through the Eyes of mFISH: Another Look at Radiation-Induced Exchanges and Their Conversion to Whole-Genome Equivalency
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bradford D. Loucas, Igor Shuryak, Michael N. Cornforth

Abstract

Whole-chromosome painting (WCP) typically involves the fluorescent staining of a small number of chromosomes. Consequently, it is capable of detecting only a fraction of exchanges that occur among the full complement of chromosomes in a genome. Mathematical corrections are commonly applied to WCP data in order to extrapolate the frequency of exchanges occurring in the entire genome [whole-genome equivalency (WGE)]. However, the reliability of WCP to WGE extrapolations depends on underlying assumptions whose conditions are seldom met in actual experimental situations, in particular the presumed absence of complex exchanges. Using multi-fluor fluorescence in situ hybridization (mFISH), we analyzed the induction of simple exchanges produced by graded doses of (137)Cs gamma rays (0-4 Gy), and also 1.1 GeV (56)Fe ions (0-1.5 Gy). In order to represent cytogenetic damage as it would have appeared to the observer following standard three-color WCP, all mFISH information pertaining to exchanges that did not specifically involve chromosomes 1, 2, or 4 was ignored. This allowed us to reconstruct dose-responses for three-color apparently simple (AS) exchanges. Using extrapolation methods similar to those derived elsewhere, these were expressed in terms of WGE for comparison to mFISH data. Based on AS events, the extrapolated frequencies systematically overestimated those actually observed by mFISH. For gamma rays, these errors were practically independent of dose. When constrained to a relatively narrow range of doses, the WGE corrections applied to both (56)Fe and gamma rays predicted genome-equivalent damage with a level of accuracy likely sufficient for most applications. However, the apparent accuracy associated with WCP to WGE corrections is both fortuitous and misleading. This is because (in normal practice) such corrections can only be applied to AS exchanges, which are known to include complex aberrations in the form of pseudosimple exchanges. When WCP to WGE corrections are applied to true simple exchanges, the results are less than satisfactory, leading to extrapolated values that underestimate the true WGE response by unacceptably large margins. Likely explanations for these results are discussed, as well as their implications for radiation protection. Thus, in seeming contradiction to notion that complex aberrations be avoided altogether in WGE corrections - and in violation of assumptions upon which these corrections are based - their inadvertent inclusion in three-color WCP data is actually required in order for them to yield even marginally acceptable results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 50%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Other 1 8%
Librarian 1 8%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 33%
Engineering 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,324
of 22,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,507
of 314,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#60
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,440 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.