PLoS One. 2021 Mar 8;16(3):e0243517. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243517. eCollection 2021.
ABSTRACT
Deuterium (D), the second most abundant isotope of hydrogen is present in natural waters at an approximate concentration of 145-155 ppm (ca. 1.5E-4 atom/atom). D is known to influence various biological processes due to its physical and chemical properties, which significantly differ from those of hydrogen. For example, increasing D-concentration to >1000-fold above its natural abundance has been shown to increase the frequency of genetic mutations in several species. An interesting deterministic hypothesis, formulated with the intent of explaining the mechanism of D-mutagenicity is based on the calculation that the theoretical probability of base pairs to comprise two adjacent D-bridges instead of H-bridges is 2.3E-8, which is equal to the mutation rate of certain species. To experimentally challenge this hypothesis, and to infer the mutagenicity of D present at natural concentrations, we investigated the effect of a nearly 100-fold reduction of D concentration on the bacterial mutation rate. Using fluctuation tests, we measured the mutation rate of three Escherichia coli genes (cycA, ackA and galK) in media containing D at either <2 ppm or 150 ppm concentrations. Out of 15 pair-wise fluctuation analyses, nine indicated a significant decrease, while three marked the significant increase of the mutation/culture value upon D-depletion. Overall, growth in D-depleted minimal medium led to a geometric mean of 0.663-fold (95% confidence interval: 0.483-0.911) change in the mutation rate. This falls nowhere near the expected 10,000-fold reduction, indicating that in our bacterial systems, the effect of D abundance on the formation of point mutations is not deterministic. In addition, the combined results did not display a statistically significant change in the mutation/culture value, the mutation rate or the mutant frequency upon D-depletion. The potential mutagenic effect of D present at natural concentrations on E. coli is therefore below the limit of detection using the indicated methods.
PMID:33684107 | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0243517
