Luís Miguel Torres Cadilhe
Protective activity of plant extracts
against genotoxicity of nitric oxide
Universidade do Minho
Escola de Ciências
Março de 2017
Luís
Mig
uel To
rres
Cadilh
eP
rote
cti
ve a
cti
vity
of
pla
nt
extr
acts
again
st g
enoto
xic
ity o
f nit
ric o
xid
eM
inho |
2017
U
Luís Miguel Torres Cadilhe
Protective activity of plant extracts
against genotoxicity of nitric oxide
Universidade do Minho
Escola de Ciências
Março de 2017
Tese de Mestrado
Mestrado de Genética Molecular
Trabalho efetuado sob a orientação do
Professor Doutor Rui Pedro Soares Oliveira
iii
Acknowledgements
To Prof. Rui Pedro Soares de Oliveira, for the opportunity and pleasure to work under his supervision
in something that incites my complete interest. Thank you for being a concerned supervisor, for your
readiness to answer to all my doubts and curiosities, for all the knowledge I was able to gather
throughout this work and most importantly for the thoughtfulness and the chances to expose my work.
To Prof. Pier Parpot, for his help and expertise regarding the chemical analysis of the extracts. The
insights about the method itself were also an important input.
To all my laboratory partners, for creating such a pleasant environment to work in, for all the moments
of friendship, for all your help and specially, for always sharing your material in the most desperate
times. In other words, thank you for making this the most enjoyable experience so far.
To my friends, for sharing successes, failures and the same concerns as me, for constantly reminding
me of what is at stake and to keep my focus and for all the relaxing moments in our short coffee
breaks.
To my family, for making the physical distance that separates us feel irrelevant, for all your support, not
only during this last year, but also in all the moments of my life, in the good and the less good. Thank
you for your concern, for all the motivation, for all the help and for contributing so much to what I am
today.
v
Protective activity of plant extracts against genotoxicity of nitric oxide
Abstract
A good reputation regarding the use of plant extracts has been growing consistently over the last years,
the potential benefits of their use being heavily supported by the literature. However, as most studies
aspire very little by investigating only their antioxidant activities, a lot of work remains to be done on other
activities, such as antigenotoxicity. Excessive production of oxidative species, such as reactive oxygen
species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS), can reveal to be harmful to the cell. Amongst various
targets, these molecules can affect DNA and may lead to the loss of its stability and integrity, imposing a
very dangerous threat to survival. Base excision repair (BER) and homologous recombination (HR) are
two major DNA repair mechanisms of the cell, and are responsible for the repair of several forms of DNA
damage, including base modification and strand breakage.
SNP is a NO-releasing agent and can be used to simulate an excessive increase of NO production
inside the cell. NO may oxidize in many different compounds, depending on the molecules it encounters
within the cell. The most damaging oxidation products include peroxynitrite and dinitrogen trioxide, a very
powerful oxidant and a very strong nitrosating agent, respectively, both being able to directly interact and
modify DNA.
This project purposed to investigate the protective properties of extracts of Dittrichia viscosa (DVE) and
Ginkgo biloba (GBE) against NO-mediated genotoxicity and in what ways protection occurs by using the
Schizosaccharomyces pombe model. In the end, the chemical profiles of DVE and GBE agreed with many
published others, as most of the detected molecules were also detected in those studies. In vitro assays
revealed a relatively (to standard) low IC50 values of DVE in DPPH reduction and iron chelating activity and
GBE in DPPH reduction and NO scavenging. DVE did not provide viability protection against NO-mediated
damage. GBE, however, was able to protect the studied BER and HR Sch. pombe mutants. Additionally,
treatment with GBE alone significantly induced a quicker progression of cell cycle and slightly attenuated
the delay produced by SNP treatment. Both extracts appear to activate oxidative-stress response through
Pap1, although the prevention of oxidative stress by SNP was not achieved in either cases. In conclusion,
GBE protection appears to be independent of BER and it may result from a combination of effects
including the scavenging of NO, the generated ROS and RNS by flavonoids and the activation of oxidative-
stress response proteins.
vii
Actividade protectora de extractos vegetais contra a genotoxicidade do óxido nítrico
Resumo
Nos últimos anos, tem-se vindo a construir uma boa reputação no que toca ao uso de extractos
vegetais, sendo os seus potenciais benefícios fortemente suportados pela literatura. No entanto, a maioria
dos estudos aspira a muito pouco ao investigar apenas as suas actividades antioxidantes, pelo que há
muito trabalho a ser feito em relação a outras actividades, como a antigenotoxicidade. A produção
excessiva de espécies oxidativas, como as espécies reativas de oxigénio (ROS) e de nitrogénio (RNS),
podem revelar-se prejudicial à célula. Entre os seus vários alvos, estas moléculas podem afectar o DNA,
podendo levar à perda da sua estabilidade e integridade, impondo assim uma grave ameaça à
sobrevivência. A reparação por excisão de bases (BER) e a recombinação homóloga (HR) são dois dos
principais mecanismos de reparação de DNA da célula e são responáveis pela reparação de vários tipos
de danos no DNA, incluindo modificações de bases e quebras de cadeia.
O nitroprussiato de sódio é um agente que liberta NO e pode ser utilizado para simular um aumento
excessivo da produção de NO por parte da célula. O NO é capaz de oxidar em muitos compostos
diferentes, dependendo das moléculas que encontra dentro da célula. Os produtos de oxidação mais
prejudiciais são o peroxinitrito e o trióxido de dinitrogénio, um poderoso oxidante e um forte agente
nitrosante, respectivamente, sendo ambos capazes de interagir e modificar directamente o DNA.
Este projecto pretendeu investigar as propriedades protectoras de extractos de Dittrichia viscosa (DVE)
e Ginkgo biloba (GBE) contra a genotoxicidade do NO e de que forma essa protecção ocorreria,
recorrendo ao modelo de Schizosaccharomyces pombe. No fim, os perfis químicos de DVE e GBE foram
semelhantes a muitos outros publicados, pelo que a maioria das moléculas detectadas foram também
detectadas nesses estudos. Os ensaios in vitro revelaram valores de IC50 relativamente (ao padrão) baixos
para DVE na reducção do DPPH e na actividade quelante do ferro e para GBE na reducção do DPPH e
na eliminação do NO. DVE não proporcionou protecção da viabilidade contra danos induzidos pelo NO.
GBE, no entanto, foi capaz de proteger estirpes de Sch. pombe mutantes na BER e HR. Ainda, o
tratamento apenas com GBE induziu uma progressão significativamente mais rápida do ciclo celular e
atenuou ligeiramente o atraso produzido pelo tratamento com SNP. Ambos os extractos pareceram
activar a resposta a stress oxidativo através da Pap1, embora a prevenção do stresse oxidativo induzido
pelo SNP não tenha acontecido em nenhum dos casos. Concluindo, a protecção pelo GBE parece ser
independente da BER e deve resultar de uma combinação de efeitos, incluindo a eliminação do NO, dos
ROS e dos RNS gerados por parte dos flavonóides e a activação de proteínas de resposta a stress
oxidativo.
ix
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. iii
Abstract ................................................................................................................................ v
Resumo .............................................................................................................................. vii
Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................... xi
List of figures ...................................................................................................................... xiii
List of tables ...................................................................................................................... xvii
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1. DNA damage and repair ............................................................................................. 1
1.2. Nitric oxide biochemistry ............................................................................................. 7
1.3. Dittrichia viscosa (L.) Greuter and Ginkgo biloba (L.) .........................................................10
1.4. Schizosaccharomyces pombe .....................................................................................12
1.5. Scientific problem and objectives .................................................................................14
2. Materials and Methods .................................................................................................15
2.1. Yeast strains, media, and growth conditions ...................................................................15
2.2. Plant material and extracts preparation .........................................................................15
2.3. Electrospray Ionisation-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (ESI-MS/MS) ........................................16
2.4. In vitro assays .........................................................................................................16
2.5. Viability assays ........................................................................................................18
2.6. Cell cycle ...............................................................................................................19
2.7. Fluorescence microscopy ...........................................................................................20
3. Results .....................................................................................................................21
3.1. The chemical composition of DVE and GBE is similar to that of other described extracts ............21
3.2. DVE and GBE showed different in vitro activities ..............................................................24
3.3. GBE significantly protected viability loss caused by SNP ....................................................24
3.4. GBE alone induces quicker progression in cell cycle and slightly attenuates SNP-induced delay ...29
3.5. Both extracts induce relocalization of oxidative-stress response proteins ................................32
4. Discussion .................................................................................................................37
5. References ................................................................................................................43
6. Appendix ...................................................................................................................61
xi
Abbreviations and Acronyms
3’-dRP 3’-deoxyribose phosphate
3’-P 3'-phosphate
5’-dRP 5’-deoxyribose phosphate
5’-P 5'-phosphate
6-4PP 6-4 photoproducts
AP Apyrimidinic/apurinic
ATP Adenosine 5'-triphosphate
BER Base excision repair
CDK Cyclin-dependent kinases
CPD Cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer
DEA-NO Diethylamine NONOate
DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid
DPPH 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl
DSB Double-strand break
DSBR Double-strand break repair
DVE Dittrichia viscosa extract
EDTA Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
EMM Edinburgh minimal medium
eNOS Endothelial nitric oxide synthase
GBE Ginkgo biloba leaf extract
GG-NER Global-genome NER
HJ Hollidayjunction
HR Homologous recombination
HU Hydroxyurea
IC50 Inhibition concentration 50
ICA Iron chelating activity
iNOS Inducible nitric oxide synthase
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
MMR Mismatch repair
NED N-1-napthylethylenediamine dihydrochloride
xii
NER Nucleotide excision repair
NHEJ Non-homologous end joining
NMMA NG-monomethyl-L-arginine
nNOS Neuronal nitric oxide synthase
NOS Nitric oxide synthase
OD Optical density
PCNA Proliferating cell nuclear antigen
PI Propidium iodide
RFC Replication factor C
RNA Ribonucleic acid
RNS Reactive nitrogen species
ROS Reactive oxygen species
SDSA Synthesis-dependent strand annealing
SLE Systemic lupus erythematosus
SNP Sodium nitroprusside
SPER-NO Spermine NONOate
SSB Single-strand break
TC-NER Transcription-coupled NER
UV Ultraviolet
UVB Ultraviolet-B
UVER Endonuclease-dependent excision repair
YD Yeast Extract Dextrose
YES Yeast Extract with Supplements
xiii
List of figures
Figure 1 – DNA damage and respective repair pathways in Sch. pombe. Mismatched bases (except C/C) and
loops that occur during replication and recombination are mainly repaired by mismatch repair pathway. Nucleotide
excision repair and endonuclease-dependent excision repair pathways are assembled to remove bulky DNA adducts
caused by exposure to UV radiation; these two pathways have also been associated with other types of DNA damage
(dashed arrows). Base excision repair is the most competent pathway to repair non-bulky modifications that occur
from base modifications or incorporation of modified bases. Finally, homologous recombination and non-
homologous end joining repair double-strand breaks. From Egel, 2004. ................................................... 1
Figure 2 – Base excision repair (BER) pathway in Sch. pombe. Apyrimidinic/apurinic sites are primarily repaired
through short-patch BER (thicker arrows): Nth1 initiates repair by incising the AP site, which results in the formation
of 3 -dRP and 5 -P ends; the blocked 3’-end is converted in a 3’-OH by Apn2; DNA polymerase and DNA ligase fill
the gap and seal the nick, respectively. In long-patch BER, Apn2 is the initiator and incises the AP site, leaving a
5’-dRP end; DNA polymerase synthesizes 2-8 new nucleotides and displaces the damage-containing
oligonucleotide, which is cleaved by Rad2; DNA ligase completes repair by sealing the nick. Besides synthesizing
DNA, Pol4 is able to cleave 5’-dRP, only needing DNA polymerase and DNA ligase to complete the process. The
AP endonuclease independent repair pathway is initiated by Nth1 and followed by Tdp1, which cleaves 3’-dRP,
leaving a 3’-P to be processed by Pnk1 and completed by DNA polymerase and DNA ligase. From Nilsen et al.,
2012. ...................................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 3 – HR comprises SDSA, DSBR and Mus81-dependent pathways. In SDSA, the distension of the D-loop
follows strand invasion, allowing DNA synthesis. The new DNA strand is displaced from the template and returned
to the damaged molecule. DSBR pathway, proposed by Szostak et al. (1983), also involves D-loop distention,
leading to the capture of a second 3’ overhang and formation of a double Holliday junction (HJ). The resolution of
HJ results in gene conversion, with or without associated crossovers. In the last pathway, Mus81 cleaves the
invaded DNA strand disrupting the D-loop. The second 3’ overhang is captured and DNA is synthesized. Lastly,
Mus81 cleaves the strand of DNA keeping the homologs together, resulting in crossover of the strands. Edited from
Raji and Hartsuiker, 2006. ............................................................................................................ 5
Figure 4 – DNA damage checkpoint in Sch. pombe. Upon sensing of DNA damage and signal transduction,
Chk1 indirectly induces the delay of cell cycle by phosphorylating Wee1 and Cdc25. Wee1 and Mik1 phosphorylate
Y15 of Cdc2, resulting in its inactivation. Cdc25, on the other hand, dephosphorylates Cdc2 to activate it and
subsequently, induce mitosis. From Baber-Furnari et al., 2000. ............................................................. 6
xiv
Figure 5 – Chemical structure of quercetin. The three main features required for the antioxidant activity of
flavonoids are the ortho-dihydroxy structure in the B ring which facilitates electron delocalization (A), 2,3-double
bond in conjugation with the 4-oxo(=O) function in the C ring to allow electron delocalization from the B ring (B)
and the hydroxyl groups at positions 3 and 5, which allow binding of hydrogen to the oxo group (C). From
Procházková et al., 2011. ............................................................................................................11
Figure 6 – Viability of 972, Δchk1 and Δrhp51 Sch. pombe cells when cultured on solid medium incorporated
with (from left to right): water (negative control), 750 µg/mL DVE, 1 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 1
mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the photos). The
plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent experiments.
.............................................................................................................................................25
Figure 7 – Viability of 972 and Δchk1 Sch. pombe cells when incubated for 0, 30, 60 and 90 min in liquid
medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 750 µg/mL DVE, 300 mM SNP and both 750
µg/mL DVE and 300 mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top
of the photos). The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. ............................................................................................................26
Figure 8 – Viability of 972, Δsty1 and Δpap1 Sch. pombe cells when pre-incubated in 750 µg/mL DVE-
containing liquid medium and cultured in medium incorporated with (from left to right): water (negative control), 1
mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 1 mM SNP. Cells subjected to pre-treatment without DVE are signalized
by (-) and with DVE by (+). Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the
photos). The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent
experiments. ............................................................................................................................27
Figure 9 – Viability of 972 Sch. pombe cells when incubated for 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 min in liquid medium
containing (from left to right): ethanol (negative control), 300 mM SNP and 1000 µg/mL GBE and 300 mM SNP.
Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the photos). The plates were
incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent experiments. ..........27
Figure 10 – Viability of FO656, Δmag1, Δrhp51, Δnth1 and Δrhp55 Sch. pombe cells when cultured on solid
medium incorporated with (from left to right): ethanol (negative control), 1000 µg/mL GBE, 1 mM SNP and both
1000 µg/mL GBE and 1 mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the
top of the photos). The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. ............................................................................................................28
xv
Figure 11 – Viability of 972, Δchk1, Δsty1 and Δpap1 Sch. pombe cells when cultured in solid medium
incorporated with (from left to right): ethanol (negative control), 1000 µg/mL GBE, 1 mM SNP and both 1000
µg/mL GBE and 1 mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of
the photos). The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. ............................................................................................................29
Figure 12 – Cell cycle progression analysis of Sch. pombe cells under the different treatments. Before analysis,
the cells were treated with hydroxyurea (HU) in order to synchronize their cell cycle and were compared with an
asynchronous culture (top left). After washing HU, the cells were submitted to their respective treatments: water
(negative control), 750 µg/mL DVE, 1 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 1 mM SNP. Every 30 min, a sample
of each treatment was taken and processed for analysis. During the treatments, the cells were incubated at the
standard conditions of 30 °C, 200 rpm. ..........................................................................................31
Figure 13 – Microphotographs of fluorescence microscopy of sty1::GFP transformed Sch. pombe after 0, 10
and 60 min of incubation in liquid minimal medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 750
µg/mL DVE, 4 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 4 mM SNP. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. Magnification: 1000x. ...............................................................................33
Figure 14 – Microphotographs of fluorescence microscopy of of pap1::GFP transformed Sch. pombe after 0,
10 and 60 min of incubation in liquid minimal medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 750
µg/mL DVE, 4 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 4 mM SNP. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. Magnification: 1000x. ...............................................................................34
Figure 15 – Microphotographs of fluorescence microscopy of of pap1::GFP transformed Sch. pombe after 0,
10 and 60 min of incubation in liquid medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 1000 µg/mL
GBE, 4 mM SNP and both 1000 µg/mL GBE and 4 mM SNP. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. Magnification: 1000x. ...............................................................................35
xvii
List of tables
Table 1 – Genotypes of the strains used in this study. ....................................................................15
Table 2 – Complete list of the tentatively identified compounds for DVE. .............................................21
Table 3 – Complete list of the tentatively identified compounds for GBE. Unidentified compounds that were also
detected in other studies have (?) as their identification. ......................................................................22
Table 4 – Values of IC50 (µg/mL) determined for DVE, GBE and standards in DPPH reduction, ICA, and NO
scavenging assays. ....................................................................................................................24
1
1. Introduction
1.1. DNA damage and repair
DNA damage is any chemical or physical alteration in DNA, such as base modification, helix breakage,
adduct formation, among others. Any chemical agent able to cause any sort of DNA damage is termed
as genotoxic. However, DNA damage does not arise exclusively from this kind of agents, since it may also
be spontaneously generated within the cell during normal metabolism (Roger et al., 2006). The
consequences that arise from DNA damage range between point mutations in the DNA sequence and
chromosomal breakage, which might easily result in cell death. In case the existence of the several DNA
repair pathways is not enough to prove the importance of this molecule, many researchers have
extensively studied and documented the harmful effects of DNA repair impairments, proving that the
maintenance of genome stability is crucial to survival. There are five major DNA repair pathways (Figure
1): base excision repair (BER), nucleotide excision repair (NER), mismatch repair (MMR), non-homologous
end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR); each one being more adequate than the others
to repair a specific type of DNA damage. These repair pathways are highly conserved among eukaryotes,
as their central components have been identified in many organisms, including Schizosaccharomyces
pombe. In contrast, only a few organisms possess UV-damaged DNA endonuclease-dependent excision
repair (UVER), including Sch. pombe, which, on the other hand, lacks the ability to directly reverse UV
lesions by photolyase (Richard. Egel, 2004).
Figure 1 – DNA damage and respective repair pathways in Sch. pombe. Mismatched bases (except C/C) and loops
that occur during replication and recombination are mainly repaired by mismatch repair pathway. Nucleotide
excision repair and endonuclease-dependent excision repair pathways are assembled to remove bulky DNA adducts
caused by exposure to UV radiation; these two pathways have also been associated with other types of DNA damage
(dashed arrows). Base excision repair is the most competent pathway to repair non-bulky modifications that occur
2
from base modifications or incorporation of modified bases. Finally, homologous recombination and non-
homologous end joining repair double-strand breaks. From Egel, 2004.
The BER pathway (Figure 2) is mainly directed at oxidized and alkylated bases, as well as some types
of mismatched bases that result during replication or through deamination (Kanamitsu & Ikeda, 2010).
BER is initiated by a DNA glycosylase, which recognizes and nicks the N-glycosylic bond between the
damaged base and deoxyribose to release the damaged base, creating an apyrimidinic/apurinic (AP) site
in the process (H E Krokan, Standal, & Slupphaug, 1997; Hans E Krokan & Bjørås, 2013).
Apyrimidinic/apurinic sites can also occur by spontaneous hydrolysis, representing a DNA lesion as well
(Richard. Egel, 2004). AP sites are resolved by cleaving the 5’ phosphodiester bond of the lesion, by
activity of AP endonucleases or by bifunctional DNA glycosylases (both DNA glycosylase and AP lyase
activities). Then, a DNA polymerase β fills the gap and the process is concluded after ligation of the
remaining nick by a DNA ligase; this process comprises the short-patch BER. In long-patch BER, between
2 and 8 nucleotides 3’ of the lesion are removed instead and polymerase or , through DNA synthesis,
create a flap structure, which is processed by flap endonuclease Rad2. Repair by long-patch BER is
completed by DNA ligase (Richard. Egel, 2004). There is also a proposed repair pathway, independent of
AP endonucleases, which is initiated by bifunctional DNA glycosylase nth1p, followed by tyrosyl
phosphodiesterase Tdp1 and concluded by activity of DNA polymerase and DNA ligase (Nilsen, Forstrøm,
Bjørås, & Alseth, 2012).
So far, there is knowledge of about six genes coding for BER glycosylases: ung1, thp1, mag1, mag2,
myh1 and nth1, the latter being the only bifunctional DNA glycosylase in Sch. pombe; and two AP
endonucleases: apn1 and apn2 (Richard. Egel, 2004). Ung1 is suggested to remove misincorporated
uracil, while Thp1 is suggested to repair uracil residues resulting from deamination of cytosine (Richard.
Egel, 2004). Mag1 is directed to repair alkylated bases (Memisoglu & Samson, 1996). Its paralogous,
Mag2 presents high sequence and active site similarity to mag1, however, it was suggested that, alone,
it might stall at the damaged site without tackling the lesion (Adhikary, Cato, McGary, Rokas, & Eichman,
2013). On the other hand, Mag2 appears to contribute in the resistance to MMS-induced damage as
much as Mag1 (Kanamitsu, Tanihigashi, Tanita, Inatani, & Ikeda, 2007). Myh1 is suggested to prevent
mutations by removal of misincorporated adenines from G/A, C/A and 8-oxoG/A mismatches (Lu &
Fawcett, 1998). Lastly, Apn1, is the major AP endonuclease in Saccharomyces cerevisiae but not in Sch.
pombe nor humans, where it serves as back-up for Apn2, the exact opposite of what happens in the
budding yeast model (Ribar, Izumi, & Mitra, 2004).
3
Figure 2 – Base excision repair (BER) pathway in Sch. pombe. Apyrimidinic/apurinic sites are primarily repaired
through short-patch BER (thicker arrows): Nth1 initiates repair by incising the AP site, which results in the formation
of 3 -dRP and 5 -P ends; the blocked 3’-end is converted in a 3’-OH by Apn2; DNA polymerase and DNA ligase fill
the gap and seal the nick, respectively. In long-patch BER, Apn2 is the initiator and incises the AP site, leaving a
5’-dRP end; DNA polymerase synthesizes 2-8 new nucleotides and displaces the damage-containing
oligonucleotide, which is cleaved by Rad2; DNA ligase completes repair by sealing the nick. Besides synthesizing
DNA, Pol4 is able to cleave 5’-dRP, only needing DNA polymerase and DNA ligase to complete the process. The
AP endonuclease independent repair pathway is initiated by Nth1 and followed by Tdp1, which cleaves 3’-dRP,
leaving a 3’-P to be processed by Pnk1 and completed by DNA polymerase and DNA ligase. From Nilsen et al.,
2012.
MMR in not very well understood in Sch. pombe and consequently, its functioning will be resumed for
eukaryotes in general. Repair is initiated by MutS (or MutS ) binding to base-base mismatches and
small loops, following binding of MutL . This ternary complex suffers a conformational switch and
unbounds the sliding clamp from the mismatch site. The clamp may slide upstream or downstream from
the mismatch site and accordingly, specific factors direct repair. EXO1 is recruited to degrade the
mismatch-containing DNA strand and MutL delimits the extension of EXO1 activity. Pol and DNA ligase
I conclude the repair process (Jiricny, 2006).
The NER pathway is specialized on the removal of larger lesions capable of impairing DNA replication
and transcription, and is particularly important in the prevention of damage by UV radiation. UV irradiation
results in cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) and the 6-4 photoproducts (6-4 PPs) (Balajee, 1999;
Cadet, Sage, & Douki, 2005; Roger et al., 2006), the latter being the most mutagenic (Roger et al., 2006).
4
Impairments in this repair pathway in humans is associated to some genetic disorders, including
xeroderma pigmentosum. This disease is characterized by an extreme sensitivity to sunlight and by cancer
predisposition (Roger et al., 2006).
The two sub-pathways that comprise NER are global-genome NER (GG-NER) and transcription-
coupled NER (TC-NER). GG-NER is independent of transcription status and chromatin structure and it
repairs the non-transcribed strand of genes and non-coding sequences in a very slow reaction. TC-NER,
on the other hand, is responsible for the fast damage removal from active genes and is triggered when a
lesion in the transcribed strand blocks RNA polymerase II (Boiteux & Jinks-Robertson, 2013; Richard.
Egel, 2004). Several Sch. pombe NER factors required for damage repair have known homologs in other
organisms, indicating this pathway is similar between eukaryotes (Richard. Egel, 2004).
UV-induced DNA damage may also be repaired through a NER-independent pathway, UVER, in which
Uve1 is the key factor (Bowman et al., 1994; Yonemasu et al., 1997). Uve1 has endonuclease activity,
being able to incise 5’ of CPDs, 6-4PP, AP sites, and less efficiently 1,2 GpG (cisplatin-induced diadduct
between two adjacent guanines) intrastrand cross-links (Avery et al., 1999; Bowman et al., 1994; Yajima
et al., 1995). Some reports state that some base modifications, base-base mismatches and loops are
also substrates of Uve1 (Avery et al., 1999; Kaur & Doetsch, 2000; Kaur, Fraser, Freyer, Davey, &
Doetsch, 1999). After Uve1 incision, Rad2 (partaker in BER) excises the damaged bases, leaving a gap
to be filled in by DNA polymerase, with aid by accessory factors proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)
and replication factor C (RFC), and sealed by DNA ligase (Richard. Egel, 2004).
DNA-damaging agents may also induce the indirect formation of double-strand breaks (DSB); as BER
removes damaged bases, it creates single-strand breaks (SSB) that if close enough from each other may
turn into a DSB. In addition, if SSB repair fails, a DSB will be produced when encountered by a replication
fork. DSB may be harmful to the cell, as they can lead to the loss of large chromosome fragments and
destabilize genome integrity due to these large-scale deletions (Raji & Hartsuiker, 2006).
Repair of DSB is accomplished through one of two strategies. DSB ends can simply be joint together,
which conduces to incorrect repair in case loss of base pairs have occurred. This strategy corresponds
to NHEJ pathway, and due to this likelihood, it is considered error-prone. The second strategy corresponds
to HR pathway, which really comprises several repair mechanisms, and it involves invasion of the
homologous DNA strand, differing only in the processing of the intermediate structure that forms
afterwards. Strand invasion occurs after nucleolytic resection of DNA, by action of Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1
(MRN) complex, Rad32-Rad50-Nbs1 in Sch. pombe, and Exo1, from which results a 3’ single-stranded
overhang. Rhp51 is able to bind these DNA overhangs to form a nucleoprotein filament and promotes
5
strand exchange with the homologous double-stranded DNA, serving as a primer for DNA synthesis (Raji
& Hartsuiker, 2006). From that point on, HR divides in synthesis-dependent strand annealing (SDSA),
double-strand break repair (DSBR) and mus81p-dependent pathways, each one with a specific
mechanism of repair (see Figure 3 for more details).
Figure 3 – HR comprises SDSA, DSBR and Mus81-dependent pathways. In SDSA, the distension of the D-loop
follows strand invasion, allowing DNA synthesis. The new DNA strand is displaced from the template and returned
to the damaged molecule. DSBR pathway, proposed by Szostak et al. (1983), also involves D-loop distention,
leading to the capture of a second 3’ overhang and formation of a double Holliday junction (HJ). The resolution of
HJ results in gene conversion, with or without associated crossovers. In the last pathway, Mus81 cleaves the
invaded DNA strand disrupting the D-loop. The second 3’ overhang is captured and DNA is synthesized. Lastly,
Mus81 cleaves the strand of DNA keeping the homologs together, resulting in crossover of the strands. Edited from
Raji and Hartsuiker, 2006.
It is noteworthy that Sch. pombe has a very long G2, during which, a sister chromatid is available to
use as a repair template; that is, in an asynchronous culture, HR is the predominant repair pathway
(Manolis et al., 2001; Raji & Hartsuiker, 2006). Being a haploid organism, Sch. pombe, during G1, lacks
6
a repair template, thus HR cannot be performed in this cycle phase (Prudden et al., 2003; Raji &
Hartsuiker, 2006).
The coordination of cell cycle progression plays an important part on the response to DNA damage.
Cell cycle checkpoint pathways monitor the integrity of DNA, preventing the cell from advancing before
completing the previous stage of cell cycle or without repairing damaged DNA (Lehmann, 1996). In
eukaryotes, cell cycle progression is induced by activity of cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) (Pines, 1995).
Wee1 and Mik1 negatively regulate cdc2p, the CDK controlling cell progression into mitosis, by
phosphorylating it at tyrosine 15 and, in turn, Cdc25 phosphatase dephosphorylates cdc2p, activating it
(Figure 4) (Lundgren et al., 1991; MacNeill & Nurse, 1997; Millar, McGowan, Lenaers, Jones, & Russell,
1991; Tang, Coleman, & Dunphy, 1993). Upon DNA damage, Wee1 and Mik1 maintain Cdc2
phosphorylation, which led researchers to suggest them to be targets of the DNA damage checkpoint
pathway (Capasso et al., 2002; Kharbanda et al., 1994; O’Connell, Raleigh, Verkade, & Nurse, 1997;
Rhind, Furnari, & Russell, 1997). Chk1 is an essential kinase in the transduction of a delay signal to the
cell cycle machinery upon DNA damage detection (Capasso et al., 2002). Chk1 phosphorylates Wee1and
Cdc25, indirectly blocking entrance in mitosis until DNA repair is completed, which improves survival
following DNA damage (al-Khodairy et al., 1994; O’Connell, Walworth, & Carr, 2000). It has been
demonstrated that cells lacking chk1, besides failing to delay cell cycle progression, have increased
sensitivity to DNA damaging agents (al-Khodairy et al., 1994; Walworth et al., 1993). Thereby, the intricate
association between the mechanisms of DNA repair and cell cycle progression represent a well-organized
system dedicated to preserve the DNA molecule against damaging effects.
Figure 4 – DNA damage checkpoint in Sch. pombe. Upon sensing of DNA damage and signal transduction, Chk1
indirectly induces the delay of cell cycle by phosphorylating Wee1 and Cdc25. Wee1 and Mik1 phosphorylate Y15
of Cdc2, resulting in its inactivation. Cdc25, on the other hand, dephosphorylates Cdc2 to activate it and
subsequently, induce mitosis. From Baber-Furnari et al., 2000.
7
1.2. Nitric oxide biochemistry
NO is a free radical and a signalling messenger (Dawson, Dawson, & Snyder, 1992), having
cytoprotective as well as tumour promoting activity (Habib & Ali, 2011). NO is produced within the cells
through conversion of L-arginine to L-citrulline by nitric oxide synthase (NOS) enzymes. Sch. pombe was
reported for possessing NOS-like activity, however the genes encoding for that function remain unclear
(Astuti, Nasuno, & Takagi, 2016; Kig & Temizkan, 2009). There are three known isoforms of NOS in
mammals: NOS1 or neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS), NOS2 or inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS)
and NOS3 or endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) (Habib & Ali; 2011).
Both nNOS and eNOS are Ca2+ dependent and constitutively expressed, whereas iNOS is Ca2+
independent and is activated by cytokine exposure (Moncada, Palmer, & Higgs, 1991). nNOS is expressed
in the neurons, more precisely, in its post synaptic terminals. It is activated by the influx of Ca2+ upon
binding of the neurotransmitter glutamate to receptors in the membrane and by membrane depolarization
through the opening of Ca2+ channels (Pfeiffer, Mayer, & Hemmens, 1999). eNOS is expressed in the
endothelium of blood vessels. After synthesis, NO diffuses into smooth muscle cells of blood vessels and
induces smooth muscle relaxation resulting in increased blood flow (Habib & Ali, 2011). The last one,
iNOS, is mainly expressed in macrophages and is induced by inflammatory stimuli, e.g. cytokines (Gordge,
1998), and has a very important role in organism defence.
Phagocytic cells, such as macrophages and neutrophils, are the leading peacekeepers regarding
organism immunity. Upon recognition and internalization of a potential pathogen, these cells become
activated and give rise to an antimicrobial response through the synthesis of both reactive oxygen species
(ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS), the latter being synthesized by the inducible nitric oxide
synthase iNOS (Collette, Zhou, & Lorenz, 2014). NO is implicated in various health conditions, such as
ulcerative colitis (Middleton, Shorthouse, & Hunter, 1993), psoriasis (Kolb-Bachofen, Fehsel, Michel, &
Ruzicka, 1994), arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (Belmont et al., 1997). The latter
disorder is characterized by an immune activated state where iNOS level is increased in macrophages,
splenic and renal tissues, and consequently, NO production is also increased (Weinberg et al., 1994).
The immune activated state promotes induction of iNOS in response to cytokines, which are responsible
for the regulation of immune and inflammatory responses, and the control of the amplitude and duration
of the response (Van der Meide & Schellekens, 1996).
The reactivity of NO mostly relies on its physicochemical properties, such as its small size,
lipophilicity and high diffusion rate (Habib & Ali, 2011). Now, the reactive behaviour of the NO molecule,
due to its unpaired electron, allows it to react with other free radicals, transition metal ions and some
8
biological molecules, since most of the biological molecules have completely filled orbitals making NO
unreactive towards them (Padmaja & Huie, 1993).
NO chemistry involves multiple pathways and processes, such as inhibition of DNA synthesis,
damage to mitochondria, loss of cell membrane integrity, apoptosis, changes in cell cycle and occurrence
of DNA strand breaks (Burney, Caulfield, Niles, Wishnok, & Tannenbaum, 1999). After trespassing the
cell membrane by diffusion, NO can react with non-heme iron or quench tyrosyl radical of ribonucleotide
reductase which may lead to inhibition of DNA synthesis (Kwon, Stuehr, & Nathan, 1991; Roy, Lepoivre,
Henry, & Fontecave, 1995).
NO effects in the mitochondria involve irreversible inactivation of enzymes, reversible inhibition of
respiration and induction of mitochondrial permeability (Murphy, 1999; Sarti et al., 2003). By reversibly
inhibiting the complex IV of the mitochondria, cytochrome c oxidase, leakage of superoxide (O2•) from the
electron transport chain may occur (Cleeter, Cooper, Darley-Usmar, Moncada, & Schapira, 1994).
Other important proteins, such as p53, can be affected by this molecule and initiate programmed
cell death. p53, also referred to as the guardian of the genome, also takes part in the maintenance of
genome stability as exposure of DNA damaging agents cause the rapid increase and accumulation of p53
in the cell (Nicotera, Bonfoco, & Brüne, 1995). The accumulation of p53 precedes DNA fragmentation
and later apoptosis. NO inhibitors such as NMMA (NG-monomethyl-L-arginine) prevent both p53
accumulation and inducible NO generation thus avoiding to apoptosis (Nicotera et al., 1995).
As mentioned previously, the toxic effects of NO mostly involve its oxidation products. The reaction
of NO with superoxide results in peroxynitrite (ONOO-). This molecule may be easily formed in the
mitochondria where superoxide continuously result as a product of respiration. It is a potent oxidant and
can react with and oxidize almost all biological molecules (Pfeiffer et al., 1999). ONOO– inhibits
mitochondrial enzymes, such as complex I, complex II, cytochrome c oxidase, the ATP synthase,
aconitase, Mn-SOD, creatine kinase, and probably many other proteins (Brown, 1999; Cassina & Radi,
1996; Murphy, 1999; Wolosker, Panizzutti, & Engelender, 1996).
The conjugate acid form (ONOOH) can diffuse through membranes and therefore cause damage at
a distance (Marla, Lee, & Groves, 1997). The formation of ONOO– is controlled by the relative amounts of
NO and superoxide, and in the excess of either one of these compounds ONOO– is converted to nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), a stable product (Habib & Ali, 2011).
NO also reacts with molecular oxygen (O2) either in gas or in aqueous phase, leading respectively, to
production of nitrogen dioxide or nitroxyl anion (NO-) and nitrate (NO3-) (Martin N Hughes, 2008).
Ultimately, NO–may still react with O2 to form ONOO– (M. N. Hughes, Nicklin, & Sackrule, 1971).
9
More complex reactions involve the oxidation of catechol-estrogens adducts to quinones which are
able to reduce oxygen to superoxide, or in the presence of NO-releasing compounds, such as sodium
nitroprusside (SNP), diethylamine NONOate (DEA-NO) or spermine NONOate (SPER-NO), lead to
production of ONOO– (Yoshie & Ohshima, 1998). In a similar way, polyhydroxy aromatic compounds,
easily autooxidize into semiquinone radicals to react with dioxygen and generate superoxide, which results
in ONOO– if in combination with a NO-releasing compound (Yoshie & Ohshima, 1997).
Additionally, it has been reported that the quinone derivative of catechol-estrogen, produced by NO-
mediated oxidation, may form adducts with nucleophilic groups of DNA (Dwivedy, Devanesan, Cremonesi,
Rogan, & Cavalieri, 1992). The human uterus and breast are sites of production of catechol-estrogens
(Yager & Liehr, 1996), and consequently, it was suggested a possible mechanism of hormonal
carcinogenesis associated with these organs (Khan, Alam, & Moinuddin, 2007; Liehr et al., 1995; Liehr
& Ricci, 1996). It has been shown that incubation with both NO-donor compound and polyhydroxy
aromatic compounds resulted in strand breakage of DNA (Habib & Ali, 2011).
As it can be noticed already by the examples provided above, NO chemical network involves a
surprisingly wide range of molecules and diverse direct and indirect reactions, evidencing its potential to
disturb the functioning of the cell. The adverse effects of NO do not end here however, as it even affects
DNA stability and its mechanisms of repair. NO exposure leads to deamination of DNA bases, causing
conversion of cytosine to uracil, guanine to xanthine and oxanosine, adenine to hypoxanthine and 5-
methylcytosine to thymine. The deamination process (T. Nguyen et al., 1992; D A Wink et al., 1991) is
caused by N2O3, a powerful nitrosating agent, formed by reaction of NO and molecular oxygen (Lee &
Pfeifer, 2007). Evidence indicates that xanthine is able to base-pair with all four natural DNA bases (Eritja
et al., 1986; Kamiya, Shimizu, Suzuki, Inoue, & Ohtsuka, 1992). Hypoxanthine, on the other hand, is
indicated to preferentially base-pair with cytosine (Vilaivan et al., 2013).
All the mispairing might lead to the transcription of mutant or aberrant proteins and affect the
metabolism of the cell. Furthermore, the instability of both xanthine and hypoxhantine leads to their
depurination and, consequently, single-strand breakage (Lindahl & Andersson, 1972). Amongst all of the
compounds oxidized by ONOO-, DNA bases may too suffer modification, preferentially guanine, producing
8-nitro-2’-deoxyguanosine (8-nitro-dG), which can depurinate and create an AP site; 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2’-
deoxyguanosine (8-oxo-dG), 5-guanidino-4-nitroimidazole, and 2,2-diamino-4-[(2-deoxy- -D-erythro-
pentofuranosyl)amino]-5(2H)-oxazolone (oxazolone) (Dedon & Barth, 2007). 8-oxo-dG efficiently
undergoes further oxidation originating several other products with potential to cause G→T transversions,
similarly to 8-nitro-dG, oxazolone and 8-oxo-dG itself (Yermilov, Rubio, & Ohshima, 1995).
10
RNS, in general, have high affinity to amino acids with thiol groups, making them capable of inhibiting
enzymes having these residues (David A. Wink et al., 1994). DNA-alkyltransferase, which repairs O6-
alkylguanine back to guanine, is inhibited by nitrosation of its thiol residue (Ling-Ling et al., 1992; Zak,
Kleibl, & Laval, 1994), and so does, formamidopyrimidine glycosylase, which ends with the removal of
Zn from its zinc finger (D A Wink & Laval, 1994). Another DNA repair enzyme inhibited by RNS is DNA
ligase by nitrosation of lysine (D. Wink, 1998). DNA repair mechanisms may themselves create breaks in
DNA after the removal of the damaged base, when AP endonucleases cleave DNA at the AP site (Eastman
& Barry, 1992), creating single-strand breaks with 3’- or 5’- blocked ends that prevent DNA polymerase
or DNA ligase to perform their activities (H E Krokan et al., 1997). With DNA repair mechanisms inhibited,
single-strand breaks will eventually turn into double-strands breaks, further bringing the cell closer to
death (Tamir, deRojas-Walker, Wishnok, & Tannenbaum, 1996).
It is important to recall the cytoprotective role of NO in the cell when present in physiological
concentrations, as NO is capable of dealing with intracellular pathogens and block viral replication. NO is
also reported to protect DNA against oxidative stress and can actually prevent ROS-mediated DNA damage
by inhibiting Fenton reaction of hydrogen peroxide, which would lead to generation of the radical •OH.
In turn, this extremely reactive molecule would be available to react with almost all cell components,
including DNA (David A. Wink & Ford, 1995).
1.3. Dittrichia viscosa (L.) Greuter and Ginkgo biloba (L.)
D. viscosa and G. biloba, like many others, belong to a very interesting group of plants with
fascinating properties. Altogether, they have grown a considerable reputation due to their potential
benefits to human health. Plants with such properties are most of the times referred to as medicinal
plants. The evidence gathered among all of them suggests various possible applications, regarding, for
example, diabetes (Gushiken et al., 2016), gastro-duodenal disorders (Parolin, Ion Scotta, & Bresch,
2014) and age-related diseases (Apetz, Munch, Govindaraghavan, & Gyengesi, 2014; Bittencourt et al.,
2013; Mahdy et al., 2012), making them interesting, but mostly useful, research targets.
D. viscosa is an herbaceous plant species, mostly common in Mediterranean areas. Due to its high
resistance to adverse conditions and environmental stresses, it frequently occurs in poor or degraded
soils, such as roadsides, abandoned fields and dry riverbeds (Parolin et al., 2014). D. viscosa has been
used for many years in traditional medicine to treat wounds, bruises, and intestinal disorders (De
Laurentis, Losacco, Milillo, & Lai, 2002). A wide range of activities has been reported for D. viscosa, which
include anti-inflammatory, antidiabetic, antipyretic, antiseptic, balsamic, anti-viral, anti-fungal and anti-
11
bacterial (Barrero, Herrador, Arteaga, & Catalán, 2008; Lauro & Rolih, 1990). This species is mostly rich
in sesquiterpenes and flavonoids, the latter being associated with its antioxidant properties, through
which, D. viscosa is suggested to inhibit lipid peroxidation and also to scavenge superoxide radical
(Schinella, Tournier, Prieto, de Buschiazzo, & Rı́ os, 2002). The antioxidant activity of flavonoids (Figure
5) is dependent on the number as well as the arrangement of their hydroxyl groups (OH) (Heim,
Tagliaferro, & Bobilya, 2002). Flavonoid polymers such as proanthocyanidins, were demonstrated to be
powerful antioxidants in vitro, due to their high number of hydroxyl groups (Lotito et al., 2000). Some
structural features such as ortho-dihydroxy structure in the B ring, 2,3-double bonds in conjugation with
the 4-oxo group and hydroxyl groups at positions 3 and 5 were indicated to grant efficient radical
scavenging activities (Procházková, Boušová, & Wilhelmová, 2011).
Figure 5 – Chemical structure of quercetin. The three main features required for the antioxidant activity of flavonoids
are the ortho-dihydroxy structure in the B ring which facilitates electron delocalization (A), 2,3-double bond in
conjugation with the 4-oxo(=O) function in the C ring to allow electron delocalization from the B ring (B) and the
hydroxyl groups at positions 3 and 5, which allow binding of hydrogen to the oxo group (C). From Procházková et
al., 2011.
Research involving D. viscosa has also revealed some less desirable effects. A study on root
meristem cells of Allium cepa showed chromosomal aberrations and micronuclei formation upon
treatment with D. viscosa extract. This extract also induced cell death, membrane damage, and the
formation of binucleated cells and ghost cells (Aşkin Celik & Aslantürk, 2010). It is known that D. viscosa
is capable of inhibiting seed germination and root growth of other plant species as a competitive
advantage (Levizou, Karageorgou, Psaras, & Manetas, 2002; Parolin et al., 2014), which may be related
to the cytotoxic and genotoxic activities referred before. By contrast, during the investigation of the
epicuticular material of leaves of D. viscosa, it was determined that this material had strong absorbance
in the ultraviolet and that its removal and subsequent leaf exposure to ultraviolet-B (UVB) radiation did
not affect stomata function nor caused epidermal browning, suggesting resistance to UVB-induced
damage (Stephanou, Manetas, Stephanou, & Manetas, 1995).
G. biloba, one of the few living fossils and the only survivor of the Ginkgophyta division, is popularly
known for being among the few surviving species of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
12
This species is currently classified as an endangered species by the IUCN Red List due to the uncertainty
of its persistence in the wild and rarity. The plant itself is known to be highly resistant to environmental
stresses and microbial diseases (Isah, 2015). Scientific research has produced an overwhelmingly large
amount of reports describing its properties and medicinal uses. G. biloba extract (GBE), made from the
leaves, is one of the most sold herbal remedies in the current market (Kressmann, Müller, & Blume,
2002), being usually prescribed to treat blood disorders, such as cerebral insufficiency and peripheral
vascular disease, and to improve memory function (Abad, Bedoya, & Bermejo, 2010; Isah, 2015). The
demand of G. biloba pharmaceutical formulations led to the large-scale cultivation of this tree in countries
such as the United States of America, China and France (Isah, 2015).
Due to its many active compounds, G. biloba has attracted the interest of many researchers. G.
biloba is stated to protect against free radicals, delaying the progress of diabetes and dementia, improve
the cognitive function of Alzheimer’s disease patients and to benefit the treatment of Parkinson’s disease
(Cheng, Xu, & Wang, 2009; M.-S. Kim, Lee, Lee, & Kim, 2004; Weinmann, Roll, Schwarzbach, Vauth, &
Willich, 2010; Yang, Wang, Sun, Zhang, & Liu, 2016; L. Zhou, Meng, Qian, & Yang, 2011). It is also
suggested that it has some beneficial effects on patients suffering angina pectoris but there are also a
number of reports defending that more clinical trials are needed to provide more conclusive evidence
(Sun, Wang, & Xu, 2015). The antihypertensive effect of GBE has been verified in vitro and in vivo (Kudolo,
2001), which suggested it as a new alternative to the treatment of hypertension, although, its
administration in humans did not reduce the incidence of hypertension (Brinkley et al., 2010).
Fairly recently, GBE was shown to protect S. cerevisiae against oxidant and genotoxic agent H2O2
(Marques, Azevedo, Johansson, & Oliveira, 2011), to decrease chromosomal damage induced by
radiofrequency radiation (Esmekaya et al., 2011), and lastly, to be a potential preventive cancer agent in
BRCA1-mutant ovarian epithelial cells by regulating cell proliferation, tumor suppression, and DNA
damage repair pathways (Jiang et al., 2011).
1.4. Schizosaccharomyces pombe
Schizosaccharomyces pombe was originally isolated from millet beer in eastern Africa and first
described by Paul Lindner in 1893 as a single-celled rod-shaped yeast. Lindner was able to point that
Sch. pombe division precedes the appearance of a wall transversal to the cell, which leads to a
constriction that completely separates the two parts. Additionally, because of this new yeast high variability
in size, Lindner named this species Schizosaccharomyces in order to express the morphological
13
difference relative to Saccharomyces as well as its mean of division (fission) and their common features,
such as spore formation and fermentation capacity (Lindner, 1893).
However, as one could possibly assume, the standard strains of today are not related to the strain
isolated by Lindner. In 1924, A. Osterwalder isolated and described what he understood to be a new
species, which he named Schizosaccharomyces liquifaciens. Later on, it ended up being renamed
Schizosaccharomyces pombe, strain liquifaciens (Osterwalder). From the collection of this strain, Urs
Leopold was able to isolate two homothallic clones, of which only one survived. This strain formed roughly
90% spores in pure culture and so, it was named h90. In the same year, 1950, Leopold also isolated two
heterothallic clones of opposite mating types, named h+ and h- (Munz, Wolf, Kohli, & Leupold, 1989).
In Sch. pombe, the mating-type of a cell is determined by the expression of the P (plus) or M (minus)
allele (Richard Egel, 1989). In short, a cluster of genes comprising an expressing locus mat1, and two
silent loci mat2-P and mat3-M control mating-type. The transposition of a copy of mat2-P or mat3-M, into
the expressing mat1, results in the production of P or M pheromone, determining its mating-type (R Egel,
Beach, & Klar, 1984; Hayles & Nurse, 2016). Through this mechanism h90 cells are capable of switching
mating-types and so, a population of this strain comprises about an half of h+ and another half of h- cells,
meaning there is always an available partner to mate (Munz et al., 1989). On the other hand, cells of the
heterothallic strains h+ and h- require the complementary pheromone in order to conjugate, otherwise
vegetative growth is the only mean of propagation (Hayles & Nurse, 2016; Munz et al., 1989). The inability
of h+ and h- strains to switch mating-types is acknowledged to have resulted from single-step events from
a h90 strain, subsequently stabilizing mat1 due to aberrant recombination (Richard Egel, 1989; Munz et
al., 1989). Of a matter of curiosity, despite the cell considering DNA breaks as DNA damage, mating-type
switching involves a site-specific DNA break in the right border of mat1. (Nielsen & Egel, 1989).
The majority of the mutants used nowadays in genetics and molecular biology research are derived
from these strains of close origin, h90, h+ and h-, and are known as 968, 975 and 972, respectively (Munz
et al., 1989). Some of Sch. pombe most appealing characteristics include its ease of culture, short
generation time (2-4 hours), easy manipulation and safe work methods (Giga‐Hama & Kumagai, 1999).
The genome sequencing of Sch. pombe was a fundamental step to encourage research concerning
this yeast due to the determination of highly conserved genes important for eukaryotic cell organization,
regarding the cytoskeleton, compartmentation, cell-cycle control, protein phosphorylation and RNA
splicing, etc. In fact, 67% of the annotated 5059 protein-coding genes are conserved in humans. Fifty of
those genes are significantly similar to human-disease related genes, almost half being involved in DNA
damage and repair, checkpoint controls and the cell cycle; all processes that highly contribute to maintain
14
genome stability (Wood et al., 2002). Sch. pombe chromosomal sequences did not reveal evidence of
large-scale genome duplications in any of its three chromosomes (Wood et al., 2002). Additionally, the
telomeres, centromeres and origins of replication of Sch. pombe are more similar to higher eukaryotes
than S. cerevisiae, the other most used yeast in research (Hayles & Nurse, 2016; Wood et al., 2002).
Throughout the years, Sch. pombe has proven itself as a remarkable model organism for the studies
of the eukaryotic cell cycle and its regulation (Moser & Russell, 2000; Yamamoto, Imai, & Watanabe,
1997), and DNA repair (Elledge & Zhou, 2000) and recombination (Wixon, 2002; Wood et al., 2002).
Sch. pombe has specially contributed to our understanding in microtubule formation (I. M. Hagan &
Petersen, 2000), meiotic differentiation (Yamamoto et al., 1997), cellular morphogenesis (Brunner &
Nurse, 2000) and polarity (Bähler & Peter, 2000) and stress response mechanisms (Toone & Jones,
1998).
1.5. Scientific problem and objectives
DNA is under constant attack from damaging agents, them being by-products of the cell metabolism
or from exogenous origin (Helleday, Eshtad, & Nik-Zainal, 2014). If it were not for the development of
DNA repair mechanisms, accumulation of DNA damage would quickly lead to serious cell dysfunction
and death. DNA damage checkpoint proteins also play an important role in DNA repair by stalling cell
cycle progression, which allows the operation of repair mechanisms. NO, when excessively produced,
causes indirect DNA damage and inhibition of proteins involved in its repair. The fission yeast model have
provided important insights in many cellular processes, regarding cell cycle and DNA repair, thus being,
the righteous subject for this study.
Plant extracts have grown a significant reputation for their potential benefits in human health (Apetz
et al., 2014; Bittencourt et al., 2013; Mahdy et al., 2012). Many plant extracts have been studied already
and a good number of recent reports provide indications of their favourable effects on numerous
conditions and diseases (Esfandiary et al., 2014; Hritcu et al., 2014; Ozarowski et al., 2013; Sutalangka,
Wattanathorn, Muchimapura, & Thukham-mee, 2013). The accumulation of DNA damage throughout life
may induce alterations in the biological functions of organisms. By changing the expression patterns of
proteins, such as transcriptional factors, an abnormal regulation of signalling pathways may be induced
resulting in different pathological processes (Sáez, 2016). Unfortunately, not much work have been
addressed to the antigenotoxic potential of such extracts (Vilar, Leite, & Chen Chen, 2009). Therefore,
the aim of this work, is to investigate if DVE and GBE confer protection against DNA damage upon
exposure to NO, and, if possible, also clarify in which way DNA damage protection occurs.
15
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Yeast strains, media, and growth conditions
In this study, Schizosaccharomyces pombe wild-type haploid strains 972 and FO656 were used;
including DNA repair, oxidative stress-response and DNA damage checkpoint mutants (Table 1). Strains
FO656, FO763, RHP502 and FO767 were kindly provided by Ingrun Alseth (Department of Microbiology,
Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway); SF869 and SF315 by Stefania Francesconi (Genome Dynamics
Unit, Pasteur Institute, Paris, France); and FO661 AV18, AV25, EHH5 and EHH14 provided by Elena
Hidalgo (Department of Experimental and Health Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain).
Strain stocks were kept in 50% glycerol at -80 °C and were cultured every week on solid YD medium
(1% w/v yeast extract (Acros Organics), 3% w/v glucose, and 2% w/v agar) at 30 °C and stored at 4 °C
after 3 days. All solid media contains 2% w/v agar. Media and growth conditions of each experiment is
explained to the detail in the respective subsection.
Table 1 – Genotypes of the strains used in this study.
Strain Genotype Source
972 h–
FO656 h+ ura4-D18 leu1-32 his3-D1 arg3-D4 (Alseth et al., 2004)
FO763 h+ nth1::ura4+ ura4-D18 leu1-32 his3-D1 arg3-D1 (Alseth et al., 2004)
RHP502 apn2::KanMX ura4-D18 leu1-32 his3-D1 arg3-D4+ Magnar Bjørås
FO767 mag1::ura4+ ura4-D18 leu1-32 his3-D1 arg3-D4+ Magnar Bjørås
FO661 h– rhp55Δ::arg3+ 4ura4-D18 leu1-32 his3-D1 arg3-D4+ (Alseth et al., 2004)
SF869 h+ rhp51::ura4 ura4-D18 leu1-32 Stefania Francesconi
SF315 h+ chk1::ura4 leu1-32 ade ura4-D18 Stefania Francesconi
AV18 h– sty1::kanMX6 (Zuin et al., 2005)
AV25 h– pap1::kanMX6 (Zuin et al., 2005)
EHH5 h– leu1 sty1::GFP::kanMX6 (Zuin et al., 2005)
EHH14 h+ his2 ura4 pap1::ura4– leu1 nmt::GFP-pap1::leu1 (Zuin et al., 2005)
2.2. Plant material and extracts preparation
This study relied in the use of extracts prepared from the leaves of D. viscosa and G. biloba. D.
viscosa specimens were identified by Özkan Eren (Department of Biology; University of Adnan Menderes)
and gathered from the surrounding areas of Söke, Kuşadası and Aydın (Turkey) during flowering season
16
(November 2007). D. viscosa leaf extract was prepared as described by Çelik T. and Aslantürk O. (2010).
The leaves were rinsed with water, dried in a ventilated oven at 55 °C for 24h and then reduced to a fine
powder using a blender. The powder was stored at room temperature in the dark. The extract stock
solution was prepared to a concentration of 50 mg/mL by boiling the powder with deionized water for 5
min and letting the solution cool down at room temperature for 10 min, followed by filtering with a 0.22
µm syringe filter unit. DVE stock solution was stored at -20 °C until use.
G. biloba leaves were collected at the University of Minho campus (Braga, Portugal) by the end of
summer (September 2015) and left to dry out in the dark at room temperature. The leaves were
considered dry when they became stiff and broke easily when bent. From that point on, approximately 5
g of leaves (with petiole) were triturated using a blender and put in a cellulose extraction thimble. The
powder-containing thimble was immersed in approximately 100 mL of absolute ethanol inside a 250 mL
laboratory bottle and left to incubate for 7 days at 30 °C, 200 rpm, in the dark. At the end of the incubation
period, the thimble was removed and the ethanolic solution was filtered, followed by evaporation using a
rotovapor (RE121+461, Buchi) at 40 °C, 40 rpm in the dark. Afterwards, a small amount of deionized
water was added to the evaporated extract to collect any remaining residue and facilitate freezing at
-80 °C. After freezing, the extract was put in a freeze dryer (Christ Alpha 2-4, B. Braun) for 4 days in the
dark. The resulting powder was kept at -20 °C. GBE stock solution was prepared with absolute ethanol
to a concentration of 50 mg/mL and stored at -20 °C until use.
2.3. Electrospray Ionisation-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (ESI-MS/MS)
Both GBE and DVE (100 ppm) were dissolved in 20% methanol and injected in a ion trap mass
spectrometer (LXQ Linear, Thermo) equipped with a syringe pump at a flow rate of 5 µL/min and a
vaccum of 5x10–5 Torr. The analyses were performed in the negative selective ion (see Appendix 3 for
more details). The obtained [M-H]– masses were used in the tentative identification of the detected
compounds by literature comparison. The data from the chemical analyses were processed by Xcalibur
software.
2.4. In vitro assays
Both DVE and GBE were tested for 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DDPH) reducing, iron-chelating
(ICA) and NO scavenging activities. Each extract was tested for five concentrations. The samples were
read in a microplate reader (SpectraMaxPlus 284, Molecular Devices). All the assays were performed in
triplicate.
17
2.4.1. DPPH assay
DVE and GBE were tested for anti-radical activity. DDPH solution was prepared just before the assay
to a concentration of 0.004% (w/v) and kept protected from light at all times. Ten µL of DVE/GBE was
added to DPPH-containing wells (reactional volume: 150 µL) and the plate was left in the dark for 60 min
before reading at 515 nm. Gallic acid was used as standard. For the blank samples, water and ethanol
were used in substitution to DVE and GBE, respectively. The percentage of DPPH reduction was
calculated as follows:
% = � − � � ×
Ab – Blank sample absorbance (DPPH)
As – Sample absorbance (DPPH and extract)
DPPH reduction percentages were represented in a linear progression with the corresponding extract
concentration and IC50 was calculated. IC50 corresponds to the concentration at which DPPH is reduced by
50%.
2.4.2. Iron-chelating activity
The ICA assay evaluates the capacity to chelate Fe2+. In reaction with 3-(2-pyridyl)-5,6.diphenyl-1,2,4-
triazine-4´,4’-disulphonic acid sodium salt (ferrozine), Fe2+ forms a complex that can be quantified by
spectrophotometry. Ferrozine and FeSO4 solutions were prepared right before the experiment and kept
protected from light. Fifty µL of 0.3 mM ferrozine and 50 µL of extract were added to the plate. In order
to prevent bias due to reaction with the extract and ferrozine, Fe2+ is added in last place: 50 µL of 0.06
mM FeSO4 (reactional volume: 150 µL). Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was used as standard.
For the blank samples, water and ethanol were used in substitution to DVE and GBE, respectively. The
samples were then incubated in the dark at room temperature for 10 min and read at 562 nm. Iron-
chelating activity was calculated as follows:
� % = � − � − �� ×
Ac – Control absorbance (ferrozine, iron)
Ab – Blank sample absorbance (extract)
As – Sample absorbance (ferrozine, iron and extract)
18
ICA values were represented in a linear progression with the corresponding extract concentration
and IC50 was calculated. IC50 corresponds to the concentration at which formation of ferrozine-Fe2+ is
reduced by 50%.
2.4.3. NO scavenging
NO scavenging activity can be measured through Griess reaction: in acidic conditions, nitrite reacts
with sulfanilamide and N-1-napthylethylenediamine dihydrochloride (NED) to form an azo compound
detectable by spectrophotometry. All the solutions were prepared in the same day the assay was
performed and were kept protected from light. Griess reagent was prepared by mixing 1% w/v
sulfanilamide (dissolved in 5% H3PO4 wt. %) and 0.1% w/v NED SNP in a 1:1 ratio. One hundred µL of
SNP (20 mM) and 100 µL of extract diluted in phosphate buffer KH2PO4 19 mM pH 7.4 were added to
the plate and left under the light for 60 min. One hundred µL of Griess reagent was then added to the
samples (reactional volume: 300 µL) and incubated at room temperature in the dark for 10 min and
absorbance read at 562 nm. For the blank samples, 2% H3PO4 was used in substitution to DVE and GBE,
respectively. NO scavenging activity was calculated as follows:
% = � − � − �� ×
Ac – Control absorbance (buffer, SNP and Griess reagent)
Ab – Blank sample absorbance (extract, SNP and H3PO4)
As – Sample absorbance (extract, SNP and Griess reagent)
NO scavenging values were represented in a linear progression according to the corresponding
extract concentration and IC50 was calculated. IC50 corresponds to the concentration at which Griess
reaction is reduced by 50%.
2.5. Viability assays
Cells were grown on YES liquid medium (0.5% yeast extract, 3% glucose and 225 mg/L supplements
– adenine, histidine, leucine, lysine hydrochloride and uracil) and incubated at 30 °C, 200 rpm to an
OD600 of 0.4. Cells were submitted to four treatments, consisting in a negative control, extract control,
positive control and co-incubation. Treatments involved incorporation of the compounds in the cooling
solid medium, addition to the cellular suspensions or cells pre-treatment with extract and pipetting onto
treated medium. The extracts concentration was the same 750 µg/mL for D. viscosa and 1000 µg/mL
for G. biloba in all viability assays. For the medium incorporation and pre-treatment assays, 1 mM of SNP
19
was incorporated in the medium and 300 mM was used in the suspension assays. Cell cultures were
serially diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting on the plate. Deionized water was used to replace D. viscosa
extract and SNP, and absolute ethanol was used to replace G. biloba extract, in the corresponding
controls.
2.6. Cell cycle
Cells were grown overnight in YES liquid medium to a concentration of 3–4x106 cells/mL. A sample
of 500 µL was taken from the inoculum, for control purposes, and centrifuged (14,100 rcf), following the
discard of the supernatant and fixation of the cells in 500 µL of cold (4 °C) ethanol 70 %. The sample
was then stored at 4 °C in the dark until further processing. Every sample in this experiment was
processed has previously described.
Afterwards, the cell culture was synchronized in S phase by addition of hydroxyurea (HU) (Sigma) to
a final concentration of 12 mM and let to incubate at 30°C, 200 rpm for 4 hours. At the end of incubation
time, another control sample was taken. The culture was then centrifuged and washed twice with sterile
deionized water to remove HU and another sample was taken for control. After HU removal, the culture
was separated in four aliquots and prepared for the four described treatments (GBE at 1000 µg/mL and
SNP at 1 mM). Samples of 500 µL were taken from all the treatments every 30 min, including time 0,
up to 120 min. After collecting, the samples were washed twice with 50 mM sodium citrate pH 7.5 (4°C).
In this step, centrifuging was performed at 4 °C, 2600 rpm for 4 min. The samples remained in 50 mM
sodium citrate pH 7.5 and RNAse A (Macherey Nagel Bioanalysis) was added to a final concentration of
0.1 mg/mL, following overnight incubation at 37 °C. Before storage at 4 °C, the samples were sonicated
twice for 10 seconds at medium intensity.
Just before analysis, propidium iodide (PI) (Acros Organic, Fisher) was added to a final concentration
of 4 µg/mL. In an orderly manner, the three samples taken before the beginning of the treatments served
as references for an asynchronous culture, synchronized culture and hydroxyurea-free culture. In addition,
a nitrogen starved cell culture was also prepared as a control. Cell cycle analysis was performed in a
cytometer (Epics XL, Beckman Coulter) (300 events/s). The results of the experiment were processed
using Flowing Software 2.5.1.
20
2.7. Fluorescence microscopy
Cells were grown in EMM (3 g/L potassium hydrogen phthalate, 2.2 g/L Na2HPO4, 5 g/L NH4Cl,
glucose 2% w/v, 52.5 g/L MgCl2.6H2O, 0.735 g/L CaCl2.2H2O, 50 g/L KCl, 2 g/L Na2SO4, 1 g/L
pantothenic acid, 10 g/L nicotinic acid, 10 g/L inositol, 10 mg/L biotin, 5 g/L boric acid, 4 g/L MnSO4,
4 g/L ZnSO4.7H2O, 2 g/L FeCl2.6H2O, 0.4 g/L molybdic acid, 1 g/L KI, 0.4 g/L CuSO4.5H2O and 10 g/L
citric acid) medium to OD600 of 0.4. Before applying treatments, a sample was taken from the inoculum
and prepared for observation in the fluorescence microscope (DM5000B+CTR5000+ebq100, Leica) for
control purposes. The cell suspension was divided into 4 aliquots and each was given a different
treatment. During the experiment, the four aliquots were incubated at 30 °C, 200 rpm. Samples were
taken at 10 and 60 min and immediately observed in the fluorescence microscope.
21
3. Results
3.1. The chemical composition of DVE and GBE is similar to that of other described extracts
Chemical analysis of both DVE and GBE provided elucidation about their composition, which could
additionally allow a projection of their effects. Compounds identification relied entirely on information
found in literature regarding chemical analysis of similar D. viscosa (Mahmoudi et al., 2015; Mamoci et
al., 2011; Trimech et al., 2014) and G. biloba (Borges, Volmer, & Eberlin, 2013; S. Ding et al., 2008;
He, Bernart, Nolan, Lin, & Lindenmaier, 2000; Lin, Chen, Ozcan, & Harnly, 2008; Ma et al., 2016;
Pandey, Chandra, Arya, & Kumar, 2014; Yao et al., 2014; H. Zhou, Tang, Zeng, & Tang, 2014) extracts.
The chemical composition of D. viscosa extracts is poorly known. Most studies dedicated to the
determination of its compounds aim exclusively at the study of essential oils and consequently, only 5
peaks have been identified out of the 31 detected during mass spectrometry. Among the compounds
detected are 2 flavonoids, 2 sesquiterpenes and 5 caffeoylquinic acids (Table 2). Additionally, no mass
spectrum for D. viscosa was found for comparison.
Table 2 – Complete list of the tentatively identified compounds for DVE.
m/z Tentative identification
251 3- -hydroxycostic acid
ilicic acid
317 unknown dihydroflavonol
353 chlorogenic acid
477 isorhamnetin-O-hexoside
515 1,3-dicaffeoylquinic acid 3,4-dicaffeoylquinic acid 3,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid 4,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid
For GBE, 22 peaks were identified (of 48) corresponding, possibly, to 68 compounds (Table 3).
Unsurprisingly, among these molecules are mostly flavonoids (flavone O-glycosides, flavonoid aglycones,
biflavones, etc) and terpene lactones. Some characteristic G. biloba compounds were identified, including
ginkgolic acid I and II, bilobetin, ginkgolide A (dimer), sequoiaflavone, quercetin, rutin, syringetin,
ginkgetin, isoginkgetin. Additionally, numerous modified molecules derived from quercetin, isoharmnetin
and kaempferol were identified as well. The spectrum of GBE (Appendix 2) was compared to five other
spectra obtained in a study by (Borges et al., 2013). GBE (from this work) and those five extracts
(altogether), share 19 peaks (including unidentified peaks) out of 56, presenting a reasonable similarity
to the very few published chemical profiles of G. biloba.
22
Table 3 – Complete list of the tentatively identified compounds for GBE. Unidentified compounds that were also
detected in other studies have (?) as their identification.
m/z Tentative identification
283 dihydroxymethoxyflavone
301 pentahydroxyflavone
quercetin
345 ginkgolic acid I
syringetin
tetrahydroxydimethoxyflavone
373 ginkgolic acid II
389 ?
447 kaempferol-7-O-glucoside
quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside
quercetin-3-rhamnoside
463 quercetin 3-O-glucoside
477 isorhamnetin-3-O-glucoside
kaempferol-3-O-glucoside
kaempferol-O-hexoside
luteolin-3 -O-glucoside
quercitrin
479 myricetin-3-O-glucoside
551 bilobetin
sequoiaflavone
565 ginkgetin
isoginkgetin
577 ?
593 bisrhamnosyl–glucosylkaempferol
kaempferol-3-O-2 -glucosylrhamnoside
kaempferol-3-O-neohesperidoside
kaempferol-3-O-rhamnoside-glucoside
kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside
kaempferol-3-rutinoside
kaempferol-7-O-rutinoside
(Continues in the next page)
23
m/z Tentative identification
609 bisrhamnosyl–glucosylquercetin
quercetin-2 -glucosylrhamnoside
quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside-glucoside
quercetin-3-O-rutinoside
rutin
623 isorhamnetin 3-O-2 -glucosylrhamnoside
isorhamnetin 3-O-neohesperidoside
isorhamnetin 3-O-rutinoside
639 3’-methoxymyricetin-3-O-rutinoside
laricitrin-3-rutinoside
patuletin 3-O-neohesperidoside
patuletin 3-O-rutinoside
653 syringetin 3-O-2 -glucosylrhamnoside
syringetin-3-O-rutinoside
739 kaempferol 3-O-2 -(6 -p-coumaroyl)glucosylrhamnoside
kaempferol 3-O-2 , 6 -dirhamnosideglucoside
kaempferol 3-O-p-coumaroyldiglycoside
kaempferol 3-O-p-coumaroylrutinoside
kaempferol p-coumaroyldiglycoside
kaempferol-3-O-rhamnoside-glucoside-coumaroyl
755 kaempferol 3-O-2 -glucosyl-6 -rhamnosyl-glucoside
kaempferol 3-O-rhamnosylhexoside-7-O-glucoside
quercetin 3-O-2 , 6 -dirhamnosideglucoside
quercetin 3-O-2 , 6 -dirhamnosylglucoside
quercetin 3-O-2 -(6 -p-coumaroyl)glucosylrhamnoside
quercetin 3-O-p-coumaroyldiglycoside
quercetin p-coumaroyldiglycoside
quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside-glucoside-coumaroyl
769 isorhamnetin 3-O-2 ,6 -dirhamnosylglucoside
771 quercetin 3-O-rhamnosylhexoside-7-O-glucoside
isorhamnetin 3-O-2 , 6 -dirhamnosideglucoside
815 ginkgolide A dimer
24
3.2. DVE and GBE showed different in vitro activities
The IC50 for the activities of DVE and GBE were determined, in vitro, through DPPH, ICA and NO
scavenging assays (Table 4). DVE showed a considerably higher DPPH reduction activity than GBE. On
the other hand, GBE exhibited an equally higher NO scavenging activity than DVE. Lastly, DVE was
determined to overcome GBE regarding iron-chelating activity. Accordingly, DVE exhibited a significantly
lower IC50 than GBE in DPPH assay, of 96.9±4.2 µg/mL and 360.6±18.5 µg/mL, respectively. In ICA
assay, DVE was determined to inhibit Fe2+–ferrozine formation by 50% at 155.9±11.3 µg/mL where the
IC50 of GBE was determined to be 270.0±98.3 µg/mL. For the NO scavenging assay, DVE demonstrated
a high IC50 of 889.4±59.8 µg/mL whereas GBE was 241.2±2.2 µg/mL. The determined IC50 for all the
standard compounds, gallic acid, EDTA and curcumin, was as low as expected; 4.7±0.2 µg/mL, 2.8±0.3
µg/mL and 7.1±0.8 µg/mL, respectively, were needed to produce 50% of the expected effect.
Table 4 – Values of IC50 (µg/mL) determined for DVE, GBE and standards in DPPH reduction, ICA, and NO
scavenging assays.
DPPH reduction Iron-chelating activity NO scavenging
DVE 96.9±4.2 155.9±11.3 889.4±59.8
GBE 360.6±18.5 270.0±98.3 241.2±2.2
Standard 4.7±0.2 2.8±0.3 7.1±0.8
3.3. GBE significantly protected viability loss caused by SNP
Viability protection by DVE and GBE was examined through evaluation of numerous Sch. pombe
strains cell viability after exposure to SNP. The mutants used in these experiments are implicated in DNA
damage checkpoint, BER pathway and oxidative-stress response.
DVE protecting effect was firstly investigated by culturing 972, Δchk1 and Δrhp51 cells in treatment-
incorporated medium. As observed in Figure 6, Δrhp51 strain cells exhibited little less viability and colony
growth than 972 and Δchk1 cells in negative control, which implies a difficulty in growth for the HR-
affected mutant (Δrhp51). Medium incorporation of 750 µg/mL of DVE did not cause any loss of viability
or growth impairment comparing to the negative control, indicating DVE is not cytotoxic at the tested
concentration. The incorporation of SNP virtually caused complete loss of viability in the 3 tested strains,
which, for Δchk1 and Δrhp51, was not rescued by the presence of DVE. Co-incorporation of DVE and
SNP resulted in increased viability for 972 cells comparing to SNP treatment, however, only by an
insignificant extent.
25
Figure 6 – Viability of 972, Δchk1 and Δrhp51 Sch. pombe cells when cultured on solid medium incorporated with
(from left to right): water (negative control), 750 µg/mL DVE, 1 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 1 mM
SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the photos). The plates
were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent experiments.
The extracts were also tested for antigenotoxicity upon transient exposure of cells to SNP (Figure 7).
Cells were taken from liquid media, containing the treatments, after 30, 60 and 90 min from the
respective treatment addition and pipetted onto rich media to continue growth; this way, the effects of
SNP and GBE would be monitored more closely. In negative control, Δchk1 cells displayed a slightly
reduced viability comparing to 972 wild-type cells, as indicated by the relative number of colonies. Once
again, DVE appears not to be cytotoxic towards Sch. pombe cells, as their viability was not affected,
relatively to untreated cells, in both strains. Transient exposure to SNP decreased 972 cells viability,
indicated by the reduced colonies density especially at the more diluted drops (10–3 and 10–4). On the
contrary, 1-3 Δchk1 colonies from 10–3 and 10–4 dilutions managed to grow after incubation with SNP,
however this information should be considered irrelevant due to the smallness of their number.
The co-incubation of 972 cells with SNP and GBE did appear to produce a slight increase in viability
of 972 cells, whereas Δchk1 cells presented a significantly increased viability relative to SNP treatment,
which could be related with the role of chk1 in cell cycle progression.
26
Figure 7 – Viability of 972 and Δchk1 Sch. pombe cells when incubated for 0, 30, 60 and 90 min in liquid medium
containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 750 µg/mL DVE, 300 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE
and 300 mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the photos).
The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent
experiments.
In order to investigate whether oxidative stress-response proteins are involved in the response to NO
increase and consequent nitrosative stress, Δsty1 and Δpap1 cells were submitted to treatment with DVE
prior to culture in treated medium (Figure 8). As a result, all the tested strains 972, Δsty1 and Δpap1
cells appear to maintain viability relatively to negative control however, with significant differences in
colony size; 972 appears to present some behaviour variability as can be seen by the reduced colonies
instead of loss of viability as it was observed in the first viability assay (Figure 6). Co-incorporation with
DVE and SNP following DVE pre-treatment did not rescue cell viability in any of the tested strains, which
suggests DVE is not effective against the genotoxicity of NO.
27
Figure 8 – Viability of 972, Δsty1 and Δpap1 Sch. pombe cells when pre-incubated in 750 µg/mL DVE-containing
liquid medium and cultured in medium incorporated with (from left to right): water (negative control), 1 mM SNP
and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 1 mM SNP. Cells subjected to pre-treatment without DVE are signalized by (-) and
with DVE by (+). Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the photos).
The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent
experiments.
The antigenotoxicity of GBE was also investigated by transiently exposing cells to SNP (Figure 9).
972 cells exhibited little loss of viability after SNP treatment in comparison with the negative control
(Figure 7), also presenting a similar behaviour to what was observed in Figures Additionally, cells co-
incubation with GBE and SNP did not result in any significant differences in viability relatively to SNP-
treated cells thus, a protective effect of GBE cannot be considered.
Figure 9 – Viability of 972 Sch. pombe cells when incubated for 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 min in liquid medium
containing (from left to right): ethanol (negative control), 300 mM SNP and 1000 µg/mL GBE and 300 mM SNP.
Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of the photos). The plates were
incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three independent experiments.
28
GBE was additionally tested using DNA-repair mutants affected in BER (Δmag1, Δapn2, Δnth1) and
HR (Δrhp55). As it can be observed in Figure 10, GBE did not affect the viability of any of the tested
strains relatively to the negative control, which indicates it is not cytotoxic. SNP treatment induced loss of
viability in all the strains with exception to mag1, which was only affected in colony size. Consequently,
Δmag1 viability remains unchanged when cell were in co-incubation with GBE and SNP. The observed
viability decrease in nth1 and rhp55 appears greater than that in Δmag1 and Δapn2 cells, which may
indicate that the corresponding proteins may have a more important role in repairing DNA damage
induced by NO. Additionally, the strains FO656, Δapn2, Δnth1 and Δrhp55 viability is rescued in co-
incubation. In this medium (GBE+SNP), the mutants Δnth1 and Δrhp55 presented less viability than the
wild-type FO656, which would suggest that the affected genes have a role in GBE antigenotoxicity. Based
in this assay, the protective effect of GBE is independent of the repair pathways BER and HR.
Figure 10 – Viability of FO656, Δmag1, Δrhp51, Δnth1 and Δrhp55 Sch. pombe cells when cultured on solid
medium incorporated with (from left to right): ethanol (negative control), 1000 µg/mL GBE, 1 mM SNP and both
1000 µg/mL GBE and 1 mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the
top of the photos). The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments.
Ultimately, Δchk1, Δsty1 and Δpap1 viability under SNP exposure was explored (Figure 11). Similarly
to the previous experiment, GBE has not appeared to diminish cell viability in any of the tested strains.
Growth on SNP-incorporated medium decreased viability in general, however it was more noticeable in
the mutant strains Δchk1, Δsty1 and Δpap1. The fact that the mutant strains showed less viability than
the wild-type cells when exposed to SNP, suggests that Δchk1, Δsty1 and Δpap1 are necessary to
attenuate the effects caused by NO. Lastly, by comparing SNP treatment to co-treatment with both GBE
and SNP it can be stated that viability has not changed in any of the tested strains. This observation
29
indicates that GBE does not protect agains NO, however, this could be due to differences in the genetic
background of the used strains.
Figure 11 – Viability of 972, Δchk1, Δsty1 and Δpap1 Sch. pombe cells when cultured in solid medium
incorporated with (from left to right): ethanol (negative control), 1000 µg/mL GBE, 1 mM SNP and both 1000 µg/mL GBE and 1 mM SNP. Cells were diluted up to 10–4 before pipetting onto the plates (indicated at the top of
the photos). The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30 °C. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments.
3.4. GBE alone induces quicker progression in cell cycle and slightly attenuates SNP-induced delay
Sch. pombe spends, relatively most of the time in G2 phase. During G1 phase, protein synthesis
and accumulation take place and DNA replication is primed as preparation for S phase. Entrance in S
phase is accompanied by DNA replication initiation and ends as replication is completed. G2 phase follows
and cells grow in size as required for M phase (mitosis). During mitosis, chromosomes segregation
occurs into the dividing cells. Cytokinesis is the last step of cell cycle and separates the newly formed
cells. A very particular trait about cell division in the fission yeast is that the cytoplasmic and nuclear
divisions are somewhat out of synch, with cytokinesis being only completed when cells have already
progressed into S (Moser & Russell, 2000; Zhu et al., 2015). And therefore, during cell cycle analysis, a
G1 cell with two 1C nuclei and a G2 cell with a single 2C nucleus will be detected as equals in the
cytometer and both G1 and G2 cells will be represented in the 2C peak (see Appendix 4 for more details).
The protection effect of GBE was investigated by analysing the DNA content of wt 972 cells during
incubation in the presence of GBE, SNP and both simultaneously (Figure 12). At the beginning of the
experiment, the cells were synchronized in S-phase at the time of release from HU. 30 min later, cells of
all treatments were still in S-phase with completed cytokinesis (2C DNA content), with little difference in
progression between treatments with GBE (GBE and GBE+SNP) and without GBE (negative control and
SNP). As cells continued further into S-phase, at 60 min, treatment with GBE alone produced greater
progression in cell cycle than the remaining treatments; SNP treated cells lagged behind negative control
30
cells by very little, while cells treated with GBE+SNP continued to perform better than both negative control
and SNP treatment.
Impressively, at 90 min, most GBE-treated cells have already passed M and G1 phases and entered
S phase without completing cytokinesis (4C DNA content), while untreated cells still exhibited peaks at
both 2C and 4C DNA content, which correspond to G1-phase and S phase (before cytokinesis),
respectively. At this time-point, GBE and SNP co-incubated cells are in the transition between G1 and S
whereas, SNP-treated cells continue to be the most delayed as they are just beginning to enter G1. Finally,
at 120 min, most untreated and GBE-treated cells have 2C DNA content, indicating that cytokinesis has
been completed. Regarding GBE+SNP and SNP treatments, cells achieved to enter S phase, however it
is noteworthy that the proportion of the GBE+SNP-treated cells in the 2C and 4C peaks are roughly the
same, suggesting that half of the population has not completed S phase (2C) and the other half has
completed S phase before cytokinesis (4C), while most of the SNP-treated cells are still in the 2C peak,
which indicates that they did not complete S phase. These results indicate that GBE is abrogating the cell
cycle delay effect of SNP, which is compatible with a protecting activity against SNP genotoxicity. In
addition, it is remarkable that GBE treatment appears to cause cells to progress more rapidly in cell cycle
than untreated cells, at least in the initial stages when cells resume the cell cycle after removal of HU.
31
Figure 12 – Cell cycle progression analysis of Sch. pombe cells under the different treatments. Before analysis,
the cells were treated with hydroxyurea (HU) in order to synchronize their cell cycle and were compared with an
asynchronous culture (top left). After washing HU, the cells were submitted to their respective treatments: water
(negative control), 750 µg/mL DVE, 1 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 1 mM SNP. Every 30 min, a sample
of each treatment was taken and processed for analysis. During the treatments, the cells were incubated at the
standard conditions of 30 °C, 200 rpm.
32
3.5. Both extracts induce relocalization of oxidative-stress response proteins
Considering the anti-radical and NO scavenging of the extracts, the reaction of proteins involved in
oxidative-stress response Sty1 and Pap1 was investigated by fluorescence microscopy. Sty1 belongs to a
family of stress-activated protein kinases (SAPKs), a subfamily of the mitogen-activated protein kinase
(MAPKs) (A. N. Nguyen, Lee, Place, & Shiozaki, 2000), and is activated by a wide range of stress-inducing
factors such as, osmotic stress, heat shock, UV, superoxide, peroxide and certain DNA damaging agents
(Egel, 2004). Studies around Sty1 have implied not only that it is necessary to cellular response to stress
but also it controls other proteins. When stress is sensed and the MAPK cascade triggered, Sty1 relocates
into the nucleus, where it regulates other proteins, such as Atf1 and Pap1. Pap1 is a transcription factor
that accumulates in the nucleus during stress and is implicated in the expression of antioxidant-related
genes catalase, thioredoxin, and superoxide dismutase following oxidative stress (Hong, Roze, & Linz,
2013).
To test the involvement of Sty1 and Pap1, two Sch. pombe strains, in which sty1 and pap1 were
genetically fused with GFP, were used to verify if oxidative-stress response was activated by SNP treatment
and to investigate if DVE and GBE could prevent nuclear accumulation of these proteins.
Cells were incubated in the usual treatments except for SNP, which concentration was increased to
4 mM. As expected, untreated sty1::GFP cells did not exhibit nuclear accumulation throughout the entire
experiment (Figure 13). DVE treatment, however, induced accumulation of Sty1 at 10 min and 60 min of
incubation, indicating that DVE causes activation of Sty1. As expected, SNP treatment induced Sty1
translocation into the nucleus, which seems to decrease after 60 min. Co-incubation of cells in SNP+DVE
also resulted in Sty1 accumulation, although this effect is attenuated at 60 min of experiment.
SNP-induced Sty1 accumulation should most probably have been caused by the generation of RNS
and consequent nitrosative stress. At 10 min of experiment, the three treatments induced Sty1
relocalization which is decreased only in SNP incubation at 60 min, as if DVE maintained Sty1 in an
activated state.
33
Figure 13 – Microphotographs of fluorescence microscopy of sty1::GFP transformed Sch. pombe after 0, 10 and
60 min of incubation in liquid minimal medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 750 µg/mL
DVE, 4 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 4 mM SNP. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. Magnification: 1000x.
Following Pap1 monitoring, the untreated cells did not exhibit nuclear accumulation of Pap1 (Figure
14). All three treatments resulted in Pap1 accumulation only observable at 60 min, representing a delay
relatively to the previous experiment, which could be expected since Pap1 is downstream of Sty1 in the
signalling pathway. Cells incubated with DVE presented the lowest fluorescence in the nucleus, whereas
co-incubated cells exhibited the highest; this could indicate that DVE, in fact, induces the oxidative-stress
response and that SNP, naturally, induces a more intense reaction from that mechanism. Additionally,
treatment with DVE+SNP resulted in an intermediate nuclear fluorescence between DVE and SNP
treatments, suggesting DVE could be attenuating the effect of NO, although that effect was too tenuous
to be considered in the viability assays.
34
Figure 14 – Microphotographs of fluorescence microscopy of of pap1::GFP transformed Sch. pombe after 0, 10
and 60 min of incubation in liquid minimal medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 750
µg/mL DVE, 4 mM SNP and both 750 µg/mL DVE and 4 mM SNP. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. Magnification: 1000x.
Lastly, the effect of GBE on NO-induced Pap1 nuclear accumulation was evaluated (Figure 15).
Unexpectedly, untreated cells presented fluorescence accumulation at 60 min. All the three treatments
induced Pap1 relocalization, although co-incubated cells exhibited what appears to be the cumulative
effect of GBE and SNP. Between 10 and 60 min from the beginning of the experiment, fluorescence in
the nucleus increased, similarly to the previous assay, which involved Pap1 and DVE. Again, GBE+SNP
treatment induced an increased Pap1 nuclear accumulation, apparently resulting from the cumulative
effects of GBE and SNP.
35
Figure 15 – Microphotographs of fluorescence microscopy of of pap1::GFP transformed Sch. pombe after 0, 10
and 60 min of incubation in liquid medium containing (from left to right): water (negative control), 1000 µg/mL
GBE, 4 mM SNP and both 1000 µg/mL GBE and 4 mM SNP. The photographs are representative of three
independent experiments. Magnification: 1000x.
37
4. Discussion
The chemical analysis of the extracts, complemented by literature research, allowed some
elucidation about their composition. None of the identified DVE compounds have been associated with
DNA damage protection, however, it is worthy to highlight the remarkably high antioxidant activities of
1,3-dicaffeoylquinic (1,3-diCQA) and chlorogenic acids (3-caffeoylquinic acid) (Danino, Gottlieb,
Grossman, & Bergman, 2009; Gökbulut et al., 2013). Among the molecules identified for DVE, 3 classes
of compounds are represented, namely flavonoids, sesquiterpene acids and caffeoylquinic acids (Table
2). Sesquiterpene and caffeoylquinic acids were not very explored so far; still, considering the highly
regarded antioxidant activity of flavonoids added to the activities of the caffeoylquinic acids mentioned
above, it is expected from DVE to act mainly through a strong antioxidant activity.
GBE, on the other hand, has been subjected to numerous studies involving the activities of its
individual compounds. With regard to DNA damage protection, only myricetin was found to exhibit those
effects, more specifically, by inhibition of peroxynitrite-mediated damage (Chen et al., 2011). Some of the
remaining compounds were also studied with several flavonoids determined to interfere in cell
proliferation and to induce apoptosis in several cell lines (Klimaszewska-Wiśniewska et al., 2017; Qin,
Cui, Yang, & Tong, 2016). A small group of compounds, ginkgolic acids, are considered the downfall of
G. biloba extracts for their possible cytotoxic, mutagenic, carcinogenic and genotoxic effects, being
currently restricted to less than 5 ppm in commercial extracts (Ude, Schubert-Zsilavecz, & Wurglics,
2013); however, a research group still studied and came to demonstrate the ability of ginkgolic acids to
inhibit HIV protease and infection in vitro (Lü et al., 2012).
The analysis of GBE indicated the presence of flavonoids, most being glycosylated derivatives (Table
3). Flavonoids are best described for their antioxidant activities, which may involve direct scavenging of
ROS (Procházková et al., 2011), activation of antioxidant enzymes (Nijveldt et al., 2001), metal chelating
activity (Ferrali et al., 1997), mitigation of oxidative stress caused by nitric oxide (Vanacker, Tromp,
Haenen, Vandervijgh, & Bast, 1995), among others. In general, glycosylated flavonoids have less in vitro
antioxidant activity than the aglycon from which they are derived (Procházková et al., 2011). A study
determined that the antioxidant contribution of G. biloba flavonoid glycosides was actually higher than
that of aglycons (Ding et al., 2009), which would suggest that G. biloba is much more rich in glycosides.
In accordance, an overwhelming number of flavonoid glycosides were identified in GBE most being derived
from aglycons quercetin and kaempferol, which agrees with the indication that flavonoid glycosides are
38
more abundant in G. biloba than aglycons. In conclusion, GBE may be able to exert some protection
through a single or a combination of the mechanisms referred above.
The extracts were then tested in vitro (Table 4) to better understand which activities they may employ
in vivo. DVE showed an impressive antioxidant activity, considering the comparison of a complex mixture
to a pure compound. This activity could probably be due to the presence of caffeoylquinic acids, namely
1,3-diCQA, which exhibited higher antioxidant activity than some known antioxidants (Danino et al.,
2009). DVE also presented decent iron-chelating activity, however, this could not be directly linked to any
of its characteristic compounds nor it was found in the literature any report concerning this activity and
therefore, remains the supposition that the responsible molecules are yet to be identified. In what
concerns to NO scavenging, DVE performed very poorly, requiring more than 100-fold the concentration
needed for curcumin to scavenge 50% of NO.
On the contrary, GBE showed lesser antioxidant and iron-chelating activities. Taking into account the
vast number of the detected flavonoids and the reports concerning some of GBE compounds and their
DPPH reduction ability (Guo et al., 2015), a considerably high activity was expected, which did not occur.
The lack of insight about compound concentrations could partially explain this result as a more profound
chemical analysis might reveal the low presence of those antioxidants. With regard to iron-chelation,
literature research did not provide any information concerning G. biloba and similarly to DVE, this ability
may reside in a less investigated component of the extract.
The extracts were then put to test against genotoxicity of NO by using the fission yeast Sch. pombe.
DVE was shown not to be cytotoxic to cells in the three performed viability procedures. The use of SNP
as a NO-releasing agent was proven effective at the given concentration as it reduced the viability of yeast
cells in the incubation and suspension assays. During pre-treatment assays however, cells were able to
maintain viability being only affected in colony growth, indicating some variability in their behaviour.
Strains 972, Δchk1 and Δrhp51 were not protected in treatment-incorporated medium (Figure 6). In case
the long exposure to SNP could be too severe and overwhelming to the cells and thus, not allowing any
possible action window to the extract, cell viability upon transient SNP exposure was also evaluated. 972
cells displayed little protection whereas Δchk1 was protected to a higher degree (Figure 7). As referred
previously, Chk1 indirectly prevents cell cycle progression by inhibition of Cdc25, which happens to be
one of the proteins inhibited by NO (Majumdar, Biswas, Subhra Sarkar, Maiti, & Ghosh, 2012) and thus,
the survival of Δchk1 mutants may have relayed in the delay of cell cycle and the operation of DNA repair.
Δchk1 mutant cells are able to bypass cell cycle arrest induced by DNA damage and attempt mitosis
producing a variety of chromosomal abnormalities (Walworth et al., 1993) and so, survival through simple
39
progression of cell cycle is very unlikely, as DNA damage accumulation should be fatal. This same viability
assay could be repeated to ensure results reliability and, most importantly, cell cycle analysis must be
performed, using the same treatments, in order to investigate if Δchk1 cell cycle is effectively delayed by
NO exposure and to what extent, as it would be interesting to see if a more severe delay in cell cycle could
be behind the increased survival.
The inspection of oxidative stress-response Δsty1 and Δpap1 and wild-type 972 strains in the pre-
treatment assay demonstrated that DVE could not protect cellular viability (Figure 8). As referred above,
SNP resulted in reduced colony growth instead of loss of viability and, as strange as that, the expectable
sensitivity of, at least, Δpap1 was not observed. Other reports demonstrated that pap1 mRNA level
increases upon SNP treatment and that the protein is implicated in NO elimination (H.-J. Kim, Jung, &
Lim, 2008), and also that its absence results in increased sensitivity, indicating the involvement in the
protection against nitrosative stress (Sahoo et al., 2006).
On the other side, GBE exhibited protection towards NO exposure of some strains. The transient
exposure of 972 cells to NO did not result in protection by GBE (Figure 9), however, in that same assay,
SNP was unable to significantly reduce cell viability, contrary to what was observed while studying DVE
(Figure 7). This difference in the response to SNP treatments could also be related to the chemical stability
of SNP. The decrease of the effect of SNP could have masked the true effectiveness of GBE due to the
inexistent loss of viability in SNP treatment, which sustains the comparison between treatments.
The DNA repair mutants Δapn2, Δnth1, Δrhp55 and the respective wild-type strain FO 656 exhibited
increased viability in co-incubation of SNP and GBE (Figure 10), which indicates that the extract protects
cells independently of the impaired repair mechanisms. Even though the mutants used reasonably cover
the BER pathway and consequently provide strong evidence of GBE BER-independent mechanism of
action, the inclusion of a double Δapn2 Δnth1 mutant should be investigated as it completely abolishes
DNA repair through this pathway. The addition of HR mutants is also a suggestion as only two mutants
were involved in this study.
The strain Δmag1 was the only one to maintain viability when treated with SNP (Figure 10). The
activity of Mag1 was associated with a mutator phenotype, in which reduced levels of Mag1 activity
decreased this phenotype and high levels increased it (Glassner, Rasmussen, Najarian, Posnick, &
Samson, 1998). Based on this information, the benefit of the lack of Mag1 activity and consequent viability
maintenance of Δmag1 cells is comprehensible. On the other side, Mag1 activity might have revealed
harmful to Δapn2 and Δnth1 cells, as their impairment did not allow them to cope with the formation of
AP sites, which should have remained unrepaired in these mutants. Relatively to the mutant strains
40
Δchk1, Δsty1 and Δpap1, the protective effect of GBE was not observed (Figure 11). Since SNP did not
cause an efficient viability loss, additional assays should be performed as the best approach when looking
for this kind of protective effect is to work in cytotoxic conditions.
The evaluation of cell cycle progression provided some interesting information regarding the
influence of GBE in cellular viability. GBE treatment caused cells to progress faster in cell cycle (Figure
12), which would allow them to complete cell division more often and, consequently, a relative increase
in colony size could have been observable in co-incubation treatment. However, it is noteworthy that the
strain used in flow cytometry was 972, which was not protected by GBE, and, logically, it would be of
major interest to proceed the same test using FO656 strain in order to find out if the same effect occurs.
In addition, the mutant strain Δchk1 should be tested as well to verify if faster cell cycle advance still
occurs or not, which would clarify if GBE acts through Chk1.
It could be observed that GBE appears to take effect almost immediately, as the treatments with
GBE alone and GBE+SNP allowed enhanced cell cycle progression relatively to SNP treatment and even
the negative control at 30 min. The delaying effect of the slow-releasing agent SNP was only observable
after 60 min into the experiment, in which SNP-treated cells lagged behind until the end of the test. Co-
incubated cells started to slow down at 60 min, being ultimately overtaken by negative control cells at 90
min. Overall, the effectiveness of GBE in counteracting the SNP-induced mitotic delay was far from
impressive. Majumdar et al. (2012) reported a mitotic delay caused by NO donor detaNONOate and
investigated the origin of that delay. The group came to demonstrate that Chk1 was not involved in the
replication slowdown during nitrosative stress, although still considered it should play a role in its
maintenance. They also determined that the major protein responsible for replication slowdown was
wee1p, which phosphorylates Tyr 15 of Cdc2, inactivating it. In addition to the study of Δchk1 cell cycle,
it would also be relevant to investigate wee1 for the matter of GBE protection mechanism.
Lastly, the study of oxidative-stress response proteins Sty1 and Pap1 cellular localization revealed
that co-incubation of cells with SNP and the extracts did not prevent protein nuclear accumulation (Figure
13, 14, 15), as if nitrosative stress was not prevented. Both extracts also induced nuclear relocalization
of Sty1 (not tested with GBE) and Pap1, which suggests oxidative-stress response mechanisms were
triggered. In their work, Maeta et al. (2007) concluded that tea polyphenols could act as prooxidants and
induce a response to oxidative stress in yeasts S. cerevisiae and Sch. pombe. Similarly to DVE and GBE
of this study, green tea extract caused Yap1 (Pap1 in Sch. pombe) and Pap1 to relocate to the nucleus.
After treatment with the extract, Yap1 returned to its native localization (cytoplasm) after 60 min, which
did not occur with neither DVE nor GBE. This particular difference between both DVE and GBE relatively
41
to the green tea extract is completely understandable as different extracts should not act exactly alike,
but it is positive enough that DVE and GBE also appear to activate a response to oxidative-stress. In the
case of DVE, however, activation of Sty1 and Pap1 does not appear to have a practical effect since the
effectiveness of DVE in protecting cellular viability upon SNP exposure was not considerable.
In conclusion, despite the significant DPPH reduction and iron chelating activities of DVE and its
induction of Sty1 and Pap1-mediated oxidative stress response, no protection against DNA-damaging
agents was observed. Relatively to GBE, its DNA protection mechanism appears to result from a
combination of effects. GBE exhibited reasonable DPPH reduction and NO scavenging activities. DNA
protection seems to be independent of, at least, the BER pathway. Additionally, treatment with GBE
induced oxidative-stress response following Pap1 relocalization to the nucleus. These effects probably
result from a high flavonoid content of GBE, considering that their reported activities include scavenging
of ROS, activation of antioxidant-related enzymes, and mitigation of nitrosative stress.
43
5. References
Abad, M. J., Bedoya, L. M., & Bermejo, P. (2010). An update on drug interactions with the herbal medicine
Ginkgo biloba. Current Drug Metabolism, 11(2), 171–81. Retrieved from
Adhikary, S., Cato, M. C., McGary, K. L., Rokas, A., & Eichman, B. F. (2013). Non-productive DNA damage
binding by DNA glycosylase-like protein Mag2 from Schizosaccharomyces pombe. DNA Repair,
12(3), 196–204.
al-Khodairy, F., Fotou, E., Sheldrick, K. S., Griffiths, D. J., Lehmann, A. R., & Carr, A. M. (1994).
Identification and characterization of new elements involved in checkpoint and feedback controls in
fission yeast. Molecular Biology of the Cell, 5(2), 147–60.
Apetz, N., Munch, G., Govindaraghavan, S., & Gyengesi, E. (2014). Natural compounds and plant extracts
as therapeutics against chronic inflammation in Alzheimer’s disease--a translational perspective.
CNS & Neurological Disorders Drug Targets, 13(7), 1175–91. Retrieved from
Aşkin Celik, T., & Aslantürk, O. S. (2010). Evaluation of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of Inula viscosa leaf
extracts with Allium test. Journal of Biomedicine & Biotechnology, 2010, 189252.
Astuti, R. I., Nasuno, R., & Takagi, H. (2016). Nitric oxide signaling in yeast. Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 100(22), 9483–9497.
Avery, A. M., Kaur, B., Taylor, J. S., Mello, J. A., Essigmann, J. M., & Doetsch, P. W. (1999). Substrate
specificity of ultraviolet DNA endonuclease (UVDE/Uve1p) from Schizosaccharomyces pombe.
Nucleic Acids Research, 27(11), 2256–2264. Retrieved from
Baber-Furnari, B. A., Rhind, N., Boddy, M. N., Shanahan, P., Lopez-Girona, A., & Russell, P. (2000).
Regulation of mitotic inhibitor Mik1 helps to enforce the DNA damage checkpoint. Molecular Biology
of the Cell, 11(1), 1–11.
Bähler, J., & Peter, M. (2000). Cell polarity in Yeast. In D. Drubin (Ed.), Frontiers in Molecular Biology:
Cell polarity (pp. 21–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Balajee, A. (1999). DNA repair of pyrimidine dimers and 6-4 photoproducts in the ribosomal DNA. Nucleic
Acids Research, 27(12), 2511–2520.
44
Barrero, A. F., Herrador, M. M., Arteaga, P., & Catalán, J. V. (2008). Dittrichia viscosa L. Greuter:
Phytochemistry and Biological Activity, 3(11), 1799–1804.
Belmont, H. M., Levartovsky, D., Goel, A., Amin, A., Giorno, R., Rediske, J., … Abramson, S. B. (1997).
Increased nitric oxide production accompanied by the up-regulation of inducible nitric oxide synthase
in vascular endothelium from patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis and
Rheumatism, 40(10), 1810–6.
Bittencourt, L. S., Machado, D. C., Machado, M. M., Dos Santos, G. F. F., Algarve, T. D., Marinowic, D.
R., … Cruz, I. B. M. (2013). The protective effects of guaraná extract (Paullinia cupana) on fibroblast
NIH-3T3 cells exposed to sodium nitroprusside. Food and Chemical Toxicology : An International
Journal Published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 53, 119–25.
Boiteux, S., & Jinks-Robertson, S. (2013). DNA repair mechanisms and the bypass of DNA damage in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics, 193(4), 1025–1064.
Borges, E. M., Volmer, D. A., & Eberlin, M. N. (2013). Comprehensive analysis of Ginkgo tablets by easy
ambient sonic spray ionization mass spectrometry. Canadian Journal of Chemistry, 91(8), 671–
678.
Bowman, K. K., Sidik, K., Smith, C. A., Taylor, J. S., Doetsch, P. W., & Freyer, G. A. (1994). A new ATP-
independent DNA endonuclease from Schizosaccharomyces pombe that recognizes cyclobutane
pyrimidine dimers and 6-4 photoproducts. Nucleic Acids Research, 22(15), 3026–32. Retrieved
from
Brinkley, T. E., Lovato, J. F., Arnold, A. M., Furberg, C. D., Kuller, L. H., Burke, G. L., … Ginkgo Evaluation
of Memory (GEM) Study Investigators. (2010). Effect of Ginkgo biloba on Blood Pressure and
Incidence of Hypertension in Elderly Men and Women. American Journal of Hypertension, 23(5),
528–533.
Brown, G. C. (1999). Nitric oxide and mitochondrial respiration. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1411(2–
3), 351–69.
Brunner, D., & Nurse, P. (2000). New concepts in fission yeast morphogenesis. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 355(1399), 873–877.
45
Burney, S., Caulfield, J. L., Niles, J. C., Wishnok, J. S., & Tannenbaum, S. R. (1999). The chemistry of
DNA damage from nitric oxide and peroxynitrite. Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular
Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, 424(1–2), 37–49.
Cadet, J., Sage, E., & Douki, T. (2005). Ultraviolet radiation-mediated damage to cellular DNA. Mutation
Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, 571(1–2), 3–17.
Capasso, H., Palermo, C., Wan, S., Rao, H., John, U. P., O’Connell, M. J., & Walworth, N. C. (2002).
Phosphorylation activates Chk1 and is required for checkpoint-mediated cell cycle arrest. Journal of
Cell Science, 115(23).
Cassina, A., & Radi, R. (1996). Differential inhibitory action of nitric oxide and peroxynitrite on
mitochondrial electron transport. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 328(2), 309–16.
Cheng, S.-Y., Xu, F., & Wang, Y. (2009). Advances in the study of flavonoids in Ginkgo biloba leaves.
Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 3(13), 1248–1252.
Cleeter, M. W., Cooper, J. M., Darley-Usmar, V. M., Moncada, S., & Schapira, A. H. (1994). Reversible
inhibition of cytochrome c oxidase, the terminal enzyme of the mitochondrial respiratory chain, by
nitric oxide. Implications for neurodegenerative diseases. FEBS Letters, 345(1), 50–4.
Collette, J. R., Zhou, H., & Lorenz, M. C. (2014). Candida albicans suppresses nitric oxide generation
from macrophages via a secreted molecule. PLoS ONE, 9(4).
Danino, O., Gottlieb, H. E., Grossman, S., & Bergman, M. (2009). Antioxidant activity of 1,3-
dicaffeoylquinic acid isolated from Inula viscosa. Food Research International, 42(9), 1273–1280.
Dawson, T. M., Dawson, V. L., & Snyder, S. H. (1992). A novel neuronal messenger molecule in brain:
the free radical, nitric oxide. Annals of Neurology, 32(3), 297–311.
De Laurentis, N., Losacco, V., Milillo, M. A., & Lai, O. (2002). Chemical investigations of volatile
constituents of Inula viscosa (L.) Aiton (Asteraceae) from different areas of Apulia, Southern Italy.
Delpinoa, 44, 115–119.
Dedon, P. C., & Barth, M. C. (2007). Oxidatively Damaged DNA and Inflammation. In M. D. Evans & M.
S. Cooke (Eds.), Oxidative Damage to Nucleic acids (pp. 188–206).
46
Ding, S., Dudley, E., Plummer, S., Tang, J., Newton, R. P., & Brenton, A. G. (2008). Fingerprint profile of
Ginkgo biloba nutritional supplements by LC/ESI-MS/MS. Phytochemistry, 69(7), 1555–1564.
Ding, X.-P., Qi, J., Chang, Y.-X., Mu, L.-L., Zhu, D.-N., & Yu, B.-Y. (2009). Quality control of flavonoids in
Ginkgo biloba leaves by high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection and on-
line radical scavenging activity detection. Journal of Chromatography A, 1216(11), 2204–2210.
Dwivedy, I., Devanesan, P., Cremonesi, P., Rogan, E., & Cavalieri, E. (1992). Synthesis and
characterization of estrogen 2,3- and 3,4-quinones. Comparison of DNA adducts formed by the
quinones versus horseradish peroxidase-activated catechol estrogens. Chemical Research in
Toxicology, 5(6), 828–33.
Eastman, A., & Barry, M. A. (1992). The origins of DNA breaks: a consequence of DNA damage, DNA
repair, or apoptosis? Cancer Investigation, 10(3), 229–40. Retrieved from
Egel, R. (1989). Mating-Type Genes, Meiosis, and Sporulation. In A. Nasim, P. Young, & B. F. Johnson
(Eds.), Molecular Biology of the Fission Yeast (pp. 31–73). San Diego: Academic Press.
Egel, R. (2004). The Molecular Biology of Schizosaccharomyces pombe : Genetics, Genomics and
Beyond. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Egel, R., Beach, D. H., & Klar, A. J. (1984). Genes required for initiation and resolution steps of mating-
type switching in fission yeast. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States
of America, 81(11), 3481–5.
Elledge, S. J., & Zhou, B.-B. S. (2000). The DNA damage response: putting checkpoints in perspective.
Nature, 408(6811), 433–439.
Eritja, R., Horowitz, D. M., Walker, P. A., Ziehler-Martin, J. P., Boosalis, M. S., Goodman, M. F., … Kaplan,
B. E. (1986). Synthesis and properties of oligonucleotides containing 2’-deoxynebularine and 2’-
deoxyxanthosine. Nucleic Acids Research, 14(20), 8135–53.
Esfandiary, E., Karimipour, M., Mardani, M., Alaei, H., Ghannadian, M., Kazemi, M., … Esmaeili, A.
(2014). Novel effects of Rosa damascena extract on memory and neurogenesis in a rat model of
Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 92(4), 517–30.
Esmekaya, M. A., Aytekin, E., Ozgur, E., Güler, G., Ergun, M. A., Ömeroğlu, S., & Seyhan, N. (2011).
47
Mutagenic and morphologic impacts of 1.8GHz radiofrequency radiation on human peripheral blood
lymphocytes (hPBLs) and possible protective role of pre-treatment with Ginkgo biloba (EGb 761).
Science of The Total Environment, 410–411, 59–64.
Ferrali, M., Signorini, C., Caciotti, B., Sugherini, L., Ciccoli, L., Giachetti, D., & Comporti, M. (1997).
Protection against oxidative damage of erythrocyte membrane by the flavonoid quercetin and its
relation to iron chelating activity. FEBS Letters, 416(2), 123–129.
Giga‐Hama, Y., & Kumagai, H. (1999). Expression system for foreign genes using the fission yeast
Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry, 30(3), 235–244.
Glassner, B. J., Rasmussen, L. J., Najarian, M. T., Posnick, L. M., & Samson, L. D. (1998). Generation
of a strong mutator phenotype in yeast by imbalanced base excision repair. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 95(17), 9997–10002.
Gökbulut, A., Ozhan, O., Satilmiş, B., Batçioğlu, K., Günal, S., & Sarer, E. (2013). Antioxidant and
antimicrobial activities, and phenolic compounds of selected Inula species from Turkey. Natural
Product Communications, 8(4), 475–8. Retrieved from
Gordge, M. P. (1998). How cytotoxic is nitric oxide? Experimental Nephrology, 6(1), 12–6. Retrieved from
Guo, R.-Z., Liu, X.-G., Gao, W., Dong, X., Fanali, S., Li, P., & Yang, H. (2015). A strategy for screening
antioxidants in Ginkgo biloba extract by comprehensive two-dimensional ultra high performance
liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography A, 1422, 147–154.
Gushiken, L. F., Beserra, F. P., Rozza, A. L., Bérgamo, P. L., Bérgamo, D. A., & Pellizzon, C. H. (2016).
Chemical and Biological Aspects of Extracts from Medicinal Plants with Antidiabetic Effects. The
Review of Diabetic Studies, 13(2–3), 96–112.
Habib, S., & Ali, A. (2011). Biochemistry of nitric oxide. Indian Journal of Clinical Biochemistry, 26(1), 3–
17.
Hagan, I. M., & Petersen, J. (2000). The microtubule organizing centers of Schizosaccharomyces pombe.
Current Topics in Developmental Biology, 49, 133–59. Retrieved from
Hayles, J., & Nurse, P. (2016). Introduction to Fission Yeast as a Model System. In I. Hagan (Ed.), Fission
Yeast: A Laboratory Manual (pp. 1–11). Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
48
He, X., Bernart, M. W., Nolan, G. S., Lin, L., & Lindenmaier, M. P. (2000). High-performance liquid
chromatography-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry study of ginkgolic acid in the leaves and
fruits of the ginkgo tree (Ginkgo biloba). Journal of Chromatographic Science, 38(4), 169–73.
Heim, K. E., Tagliaferro, A. R., & Bobilya, D. J. (2002). Flavonoid antioxidants: chemistry, metabolism
and structure-activity relationships. The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, 13(10), 572–584.
Helleday, T., Eshtad, S., & Nik-Zainal, S. (2014). Mechanisms underlying mutational signatures in human
cancers. Nature Reviews Genetics, 15(9), 585–598.
Hong, S.-Y., Roze, L., & Linz, J. (2013). Oxidative Stress-Related Transcription Factors in the Regulation
of Secondary Metabolism. Toxins, 5(4), 683–702.
Hritcu, L., Noumedem, J. A., Cioanca, O., Hancianu, M., Kuete, V., & Mihasan, M. (2014). Methanolic
extract of Piper nigrum fruits improves memory impairment by decreasing brain oxidative stress in
amyloid beta(1-42) rat model of Alzheimer’s disease. Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology, 34(3),
437–49.
Hughes, M. N. (2008). Chemistry of nitric oxide and related species. Methods in Enzymology, 436, 3–
19.
Hughes, M. N., Nicklin, H. G., & Sackrule, W. A. C. (1971). The chemistry of peroxonitrites. Part III. The
reaction of peroxonitrite with nucleophiles in alkali, and other nitrite producing reactions. Journal of
the Chemical Society A: Inorganic, Physical, Theoretical, 23, 3722.
Isah, T. (2015). Rethinking Ginkgo biloba L.: Medicinal uses and conservation. Pharmacognosy Reviews,
9(18), 140.
Jiang, W., Qiu, W., Wang, Y., Cong, Q., Edwards, D., Ye, B., & Xu, C. (2011). Ginkgo may prevent genetic-
associated ovarian cancer risk. European Journal of Cancer Prevention, 20(6), 508–517.
Jiricny, J. (2006). The multifaceted mismatch-repair system. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 7(5),
335–346.
Kamiya, H., Shimizu, M., Suzuki, M., Inoue, H., & Ohtsuka, E. (1992). Mutation Induced by
Deoxyxanthosine in Codon 12 of A Synthetic c-Ha-ras Gene. Nucleosides and Nucleotides, 11(2–4),
247–260.
49
Kanamitsu, K., & Ikeda, S. (2010). Early Steps in the DNA Base Excision Repair Pathway of a Fission
Yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Journal of Nucleic Acids, 2010, 1–9.
Kanamitsu, K., Tanihigashi, H., Tanita, Y., Inatani, S., & Ikeda, S. (2007). Involvement of 3-methyladenine
DNA glycosylases Mag1p and Mag2p in base excision repair of methyl methanesulfonate-damaged
DNA in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genes & Genetic Systems, 82(6), 489–494.
Kaur, B., & Doetsch, P. W. (2000). Ultraviolet damage endonuclease (Uve1p): a structure and strand-
specific DNA endonuclease. Biochemistry, 39(19), 5788–96. Retrieved from
Kaur, B., Fraser, J. L., Freyer, G. A., Davey, S., & Doetsch, P. W. (1999). A Uve1p-mediated mismatch
repair pathway in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Molecular and Cellular Biology, 19(7), 4703–10.
Khan, W. A., Alam, K., & Moinuddin. (2007). Catechol-estrogen modified DNA: a better antigen for cancer
autoantibody. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 465(1), 293–300.
Kharbanda, S., Saleem, A., Datta, R., Yuan, Z. M., Weichselbaum, R., & Kufe, D. (1994). Ionizing radiation
induces rapid tyrosine phosphorylation of p34cdc2. Cancer Research, 54(6), 1412–4.
Kig, C., & Temizkan, G. (2009). Nitric oxide as a signaling molecule in the fission yeast
Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Protoplasma, 238(1–4), 59–66.
Kim, H.-J., Jung, H.-Y., & Lim, C.-J. (2008). The pap1+ gene of fission yeast is transcriptionally regulated
by nitrosative and nutritional stress. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 280(2), 176–181.
Kim, M.-S., Lee, J.-I., Lee, W.-Y., & Kim, S.-E. (2004). Neuroprotective effect of Ginkgo biloba L. extract
in a rat model of Parkinson’s disease. Phytotherapy Research, 18(8), 663–666.
Klimaszewska-Wiśniewska, A., Hałas-Wiśniewska, M., Izdebska, M., Gagat, M., Grzanka, A., & Grzanka,
D. (2017). Antiproliferative and antimetastatic action of quercetin on A549 non-small cell lung
cancer cells through its effect on the cytoskeleton. Acta Histochemica, 119(2), 99–112.
Knutsen, J. H. J., Rein, I. D., Rothe, C., Stokke, T., Grallert, B., Boye, E., … Nurse, P. (2011). Cell-Cycle
Analysis of Fission Yeast Cells by Flow Cytometry. PLoS ONE, 6(2), e17175.
Kolb-Bachofen, V., Fehsel, K., Michel, G., & Ruzicka, T. (1994). Epidermal keratinocyte expression of
inducible nitric oxide synthase in skin lesions of psoriasis vulgaris. Lancet (London, England),
50
344(8915), 139.
Kressmann, S., Müller, W. E., & Blume, H. H. (2002). Pharmaceutical quality of different Ginkgo biloba
brands. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 54(5), 661–669.
Krokan, H. E., & Bjørås, M. (2013). Base excision repair. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology,
5(4), a012583.
Krokan, H. E., Standal, R., & Slupphaug, G. (1997). DNA glycosylases in the base excision repair of DNA.
The Biochemical Journal, 325 ( Pt 1, 1–16. Retrieved from
Kudolo, G. B. (2001). The effect of 3-month ingestion of Ginkgo biloba extract (EGb 761) on pancreatic
beta-cell function in response to glucose loading in individuals with non-insulin-dependent diabetes
mellitus. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 41(6), 600–11.
Kwon, N. S., Stuehr, D. J., & Nathan, C. F. (1991). Inhibition of tumor cell ribonucleotide reductase by
macrophage-derived nitric oxide. The Journal of Experimental Medicine, 174(4), 761–7.
Lauro, L., & Rolih, C. (1990). Observations and research on an extract of Inula viscosa Ait. Bollettino Della
Societa Italiana Di Biologia Sperimentale, 66(9), 829–34.
Lee, D. H., & Pfeifer, G. P. (2007). Mutagenesis induced by the nitric oxide donor sodium nitroprusside
in mouse cells. Mutagenesis, 22(1), 63–67.
Lehmann, A. R. (1996). Molecular biology of DNA repair in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe.
Mutation Research/DNA Repair, 363(3), 147–161.
Levizou, E. f. i., Karageorgou, P., Psaras, G. K., & Manetas, Y. (2002). Inhibitory effects of water soluble
leaf leachates from Dittrichia viscosa on lettuce root growth, statocyte development and
graviperception. Flora - Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants, 197(2), 152–157.
Liehr, J. G., & Ricci, M. J. (1996). 4-Hydroxylation of estrogens as marker of human mammary tumors.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 93(8), 3294–6.
Liehr, J. G., Ricci, M. J., Jefcoate, C. R., Hannigan, E. V, Hokanson, J. A., & Zhu, B. T. (1995). 4-
Hydroxylation of estradiol by human uterine myometrium and myoma microsomes: implications for
the mechanism of uterine tumorigenesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
51
United States of America, 92(20), 9220–4.
Lin, L.-Z., Chen, P., Ozcan, M., & Harnly, J. M. (2008). Chromatographic profiles and identification of
new phenolic components of Ginkgo biloba leaves and selected products. Journal of Agricultural
and Food Chemistry, 56(15), 6671–9.
Lindahl, T., & Andersson, A. (1972). Rate of chain breakage at apurinic sites in double-stranded
deoxyribonucleic acid. Biochemistry, 11(19), 3618–23.
Lindner, P. (1893). Schizosaccharomyces pombe n.sp., ein neuer Gährungserreger. Wochenschrift Für
Brauerei, 10, 1298–1300.
Ling-Ling, C., Nakamura, T., Nakatsu, Y., Sakumi, K., Hayakawa, H., & Sekiguchi, M. (1992). Specific
amino acid sequences required for O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase activity: analyses of
three residues at or near the methyl acceptor site. Carcinogenesis, 13(5), 837–843.
Lotito, S. B., Actis-Goretta, L., Renart, M. L., Caligiuri, M., Rein, D., Schmitz, H. H., … Fraga, C. G. (2000).
Influence of Oligomer Chain Length on the Antioxidant Activity of Procyanidins. Biochemical and
Biophysical Research Communications, 276(3), 945–951.
Lu, A. L., & Fawcett, W. P. (1998). Characterization of the recombinant MutY homolog, an adenine DNA
glycosylase, from yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. The Journal of Biological Chemistry,
273(39), 25098–105.
Lü, J.-M., Yan, S., Jamaluddin, S., Weakley, S. M., Liang, Z., Siwak, E. B., … Chen, C. (2012). Ginkgolic
acid inhibits HIV protease activity and HIV infection in vitro. Medical Science Monitor : International
Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research, 18(8), BR293-298.
Lundgren, K., Walworth, N., Booher, R., Dembski, M., Kirschner, M., & Beach, D. (1991). mik1 and wee1
cooperate in the inhibitory tyrosine phosphorylation of cdc2. Cell, 64(6), 1111–22.
Ma, Y.-C., Mani, A., Cai, Y., Thomson, J., Ma, J., Peudru, F., … Shi, Z.-T. (2016). An effective identification
and quantification method for Ginkgo biloba flavonol glycosides with targeted evaluation of
adulterated products. Phytomedicine, 23(4), 377–387.
MacNeill, S. A., & Nurse, P. (1997). Cell cycle control in fission yeast. In J. R. Pringle, J. R. Broach, & E.
W. Jones (Eds.), The Molecular and Cellular Biology of the Yeast Saccharomyces: Cell Cycle and
52
Cell Biology (pp. 697–763). New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Maeta, K., Nomura, W., Takatsume, Y., Izawa, S., & Inoue, Y. (2007). Green tea polyphenols function as
prooxidants to activate oxidative-stress-responsive transcription factors in yeasts. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology, 73(2), 572–80.
Mahdy, K., Shaker, O., Wafay, H., Nassar, Y., Hassan, H., & Hussein, A. (2012). Effect of some medicinal
plant extracts on the oxidative stress status in Alzheimer’s disease induced in rats. European Review
for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, 16 Suppl 3, 31–42.
Mahmoudi, H., Hosni, K., Zaouali, W., Amri, I., Zargouni, H., Hamida, N. Ben, … Ouerghi, Z. (2015).
Comprehensive Phytochemical Analysis, Antioxidant and Antifungal Activities of Inula viscosa Aiton
Leaves. Journal of Food Safety, 36(1), 77–88.
Majumdar, U., Biswas, P., Subhra Sarkar, T., Maiti, D., & Ghosh, S. (2012). Regulation of cell cycle and
stress responses under nitrosative stress in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Free Radical Biology and
Medicine, 52(11), 2186–2200.
Mamoci, E., Cavoski, I., Simeone, V., Mondelli, D., Al-Bitar, L., & Caboni, P. (2011). Chemical
Composition and In Vitro Activity of Plant Extracts from Ferula communis and Dittrichia viscosa
against Postharvest Fungi. Molecules, 16(12), 2609–2625.
Manolis, K. G., Nimmo, E. R., Hartsuiker, E., Carr, A. M., Jeggo, P. A., & Allshire, R. C. (2001). Novel
functional requirements for non-homologous DNA end joining in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. The
EMBO Journal, 20(1–2), 210–21.
Marla, S. S., Lee, J., & Groves, J. T. (1997). Peroxynitrite rapidly permeates phospholipid membranes.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94(26), 14243–
8.
Marques, F., Azevedo, F., Johansson, B., & Oliveira, R. (2011). Stimulation of DNA repair in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae by Ginkgo biloba leaf extract. Food and Chemical Toxicology : An
International Journal Published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 49(6),
1361–6.
Memisoglu, A., & Samson, L. (1996). Cloning and characterization of a cDNA encoding a 3-methyladenine
53
DNA glycosylase from the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Gene, 177(1–2), 229–35.
Middleton, S. J., Shorthouse, M., & Hunter, J. O. (1993). Increased nitric oxide synthesis in ulcerative
colitis. Lancet (London, England), 341(8843), 465–6.
Millar, J. B., McGowan, C. H., Lenaers, G., Jones, R., & Russell, P. (1991). p80cdc25 mitotic inducer is
the tyrosine phosphatase that activates p34cdc2 kinase in fission yeast. The EMBO Journal, 10(13),
4301–9.
Moncada, S., Palmer, R. M., & Higgs, E. A. (1991). Nitric oxide: physiology, pathophysiology, and
pharmacology. Pharmacological Reviews, 43(2), 109–42.
Moser, B. A., & Russell, P. (2000). Cell cycle regulation in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Current Opinion
in Microbiology, 3(6), 631–6.
Munz, P., Wolf, K., Kohli, J., & Leupold, U. (1989). Genetics Overview. In A. Nasim, P. Young, & B. F.
Johnson (Eds.), Molecular Biology of the Fission Yeast (pp. 1–30). San Diego: Academic Press.
Murphy, M. P. (1999). Nitric oxide and cell death. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1411(2–3), 401–14.
Nguyen, A. N., Lee, A., Place, W., & Shiozaki, K. (2000). Multistep phosphorelay proteins transmit
oxidative stress signals to the fission yeast stress-activated protein kinase. Molecular Biology of the
Cell, 11(4), 1169–81.
Nguyen, T., Brunson, D., Crespi, C. L., Penman, B. W., Wishnok, J. S., & Tannenbaum, S. R. (1992).
DNA damage and mutation in human cells exposed to nitric oxide in vitro. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 89(7), 3030–3034.
Nicotera, P., Bonfoco, E., & Brüne, B. (1995). Mechanisms for nitric oxide-induced cell death: involvement
of apoptosis. Advances in Neuroimmunology, 5(4), 411–20.
Nielsen, O., & Egel, R. (1989). Mapping the double-strand breaks at the mating-type locus in fission yeast
by genomic sequencing. The EMBO Journal, 8(1), 269–76.
Nijveldt, R. J., van Nood, E., van Hoorn, D. E., Boelens, P. G., van Norren, K., & van Leeuwen, P. A.
(2001). Flavonoids: a review of probable mechanisms of action and potential applications. The
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 74(4), 418–25.
54
Nilsen, L., Forstrøm, R. J., Bjørås, M., & Alseth, I. (2012). AP endonuclease independent repair of abasic
sites in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nucleic Acids Research, 40(5), 2000–9.
O’Connell, M. J., Raleigh, J. M., Verkade, H. M., & Nurse, P. (1997). Chk1 is a wee1 kinase in the G2
DNA damage checkpoint inhibiting cdc2 by Y15 phosphorylation. The EMBO Journal, 16(3), 545–
554.
O’Connell, M. J., Walworth, N. C., & Carr, A. M. (2000). The G2-phase DNA-damage checkpoint. Trends
in Cell Biology, 10(7), 296–303.
Ozarowski, M., Mikolajczak, P. L., Bogacz, A., Gryszczynska, A., Kujawska, M., Jodynis-Liebert, J., …
Mrozikiewicz, P. M. (2013). Rosmarinus officinalis L. leaf extract improves memory impairment and
affects acetylcholinesterase and butyrylcholinesterase activities in rat brain. Fitoterapia, 91, 261–
71.
Padmaja, S., & Huie, R. E. (1993). The reaction of nitric oxide with organic peroxyl radicals. Biochemical
and Biophysical Research Communications, 195(2), 539–44.
Pandey, R., Chandra, P., Arya, K. R., & Kumar, B. (2014). Development and validation of an ultra high
performance liquid chromatography electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry method for
the simultaneous determination of selected flavonoids in Ginkgo biloba. Journal of Separation
Science, 37(24), 3610–3618.
Parolin, P., Ion Scotta, M., & Bresch, C. (2014). Biology of Dittrichia viscosa, a Mediterranean ruderal
plant: a review. Phyton, 83, 251–262.
Pfeiffer, S., Mayer, B., & Hemmens, B. (1999). Nitric Oxide: Chemical Puzzles Posed by a Biological
Messenger. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 38(12), 1714–1731.
Pines, J. (1995). Cyclins and cyclin-dependent kinases: a biochemical view. Biochemical Journal, 308(3).
Procházková, D., Boušová, I., & Wilhelmová, N. (2011). Antioxidant and prooxidant properties of
flavonoids. Fitoterapia, 82(4), 513–523.
Prudden, J., Evans, J. S., Hussey, S. P., Deans, B., O’Neill, P., Thacker, J., & Humphrey, T. (2003).
Pathway utilization in response to a site-specific DNA double-strand break in fission yeast. The EMBO
Journal, 22(6), 1419–1430.
55
Qin, Y., Cui, W., Yang, X., & Tong, B. (2016). Kaempferol inhibits the growth and metastasis of
cholangiocarcinoma in vitro and in vivo. Acta Biochimica et Biophysica Sinica, 48(3), 238–245.
Raji, H., & Hartsuiker, E. (2006). Double-strand break repair and homologous recombination in
Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Yeast, 23(13), 963–976.
Rhind, N., Furnari, B., & Russell, P. (1997). Cdc2 tyrosine phosphorylation is required for the DNA
damage checkpoint in fission yeast. Genes & Development, 11(4), 504–11.
Ribar, B., Izumi, T., & Mitra, S. (2004). The major role of human AP-endonuclease homolog Apn2 in
repair of abasic sites in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nucleic Acids Research, 32(1), 115–26.
Roger, A. S., Wolfram, S., Graham, C. W., Tom, E., Richard, D. W., & Errol, C. F. (2006). DNA Repair and
Mutagenesis, Second Edition. American Society of Microbiology.
Roy, B., Lepoivre, M., Henry, Y., & Fontecave, M. (1995). Inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase by nitric
oxide derived from thionitrites: reversible modifications of both subunits. Biochemistry, 34(16),
5411–8.
Sáez, G. T. (2016). DNA Damage and Repair in Degenerative Diseases 2016. International Journal of
Molecular Sciences, 18(1), 166.
Sahoo, R., Dutta, T., Das, A., Sinha Ray, S., Sengupta, R., & Ghosh, S. (2006). Effect of nitrosative stress
on Schizosaccharomyces pombe: Inactivation of glutathione reductase by peroxynitrite. Free Radical
Biology and Medicine, 40(4), 625–631.
Sarti, P., Arese, M., Bacchi, A., Barone, M. C., Forte, E., Mastronicola, D., … Giuffrè, A. (2003). Nitric
oxide and mitochondrial complex IV. IUBMB Life, 55(10–11), 605–11.
Schinella, G. R., Tournier, H. A., Prieto, J. M., de Buschiazzo, P. M., & Rı́os, J. L. (2002). Antioxidant
activity of anti-inflammatory plant extracts. Life Sciences, 70(9), 1023–1033.
Stephanou, M., Manetas, Y., Stephanou, M., & Manetas, Y. (1995). Allelopathic and Water Conserving
Functions of Leaf Epicuticular Exudates in the Mediterranean Shrub Dittrichia viscosa. Australian
Journal of Plant Physiology, 22(5), 755.
Sun, T., Wang, X., & Xu, H. (2015). Ginkgo Biloba extract for angina pectoris: A systematic review. Chinese
56
Journal of Integrative Medicine, 21(7), 542–550.
Sutalangka, C., Wattanathorn, J., Muchimapura, S., & Thukham-mee, W. (2013). Moringa oleifera
mitigates memory impairment and neurodegeneration in animal model of age-related dementia.
Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, 2013, 695936.
Szostak, J. W., Orr-Weaver, T. L., Rothstein, R. J., & Stahl, F. W. (1983). The double-strand-break repair
model for recombination. Cell, 33(1), 25–35.
Tamir, S., deRojas-Walker, T., Wishnok, J. S., & Tannenbaum, S. R. (1996). DNA damage and genotoxicity
by nitric oxide. Methods in Enzymology, 269(96), 230–243.
Tang, Z., Coleman, T. R., & Dunphy, W. G. (1993). Two distinct mechanisms for negative regulation of
the Wee1 protein kinase. The EMBO Journal, 12(9), 3427–36.
Toone, W. M., & Jones, N. (1998). Stress-activated signalling pathways in yeast. Genes to Cells : Devoted
to Molecular & Cellular Mechanisms, 3(8), 485–98.
Trimech, I., Weiss, E. K., Chedea, V. S., Marin, D., Detsi, A., Ioannou, E., … Kefalas, P. (2014). Evaluation
of Anti-oxidant and Acetylcholinesterase Activity and Identification of Polyphenolics of the Invasive
Weed Dittrichia viscosa. Phytochemical Analysis, 25(5), 421–428.
Ude, C., Schubert-Zsilavecz, M., & Wurglics, M. (2013). Ginkgo biloba Extracts: A Review of the
Pharmacokinetics of the Active Ingredients. Clinical Pharmacokinetics, 52(9), 727–749.
Vanacker, S. A. B. E., Tromp, M. N. J. L., Haenen, G. R. M. M., Vandervijgh, W. J. F., & Bast, A. (1995).
Flavonoids as Scavengers of Nitric Oxide Radical. Biochemical and Biophysical Research
Communications, 214(3), 755–759.
Van der Meide, P. H., & Schellekens, H. (1996). Cytokines and the immune response. Biotherapy
(Dordrecht, Netherlands), 8(3–4), 243–9.
Vilaivan, C., Srinarang, W., Yotapan, N., Mansawat, W., Boonlua, C., Kawakami, J., … Vilaivan, T. (2013).
Specific recognition of cytosine by hypoxanthine in pyrrolidinyl peptide nucleic acid. Organic &
Biomolecular Chemistry, 11(14), 2310–7.
Vilar, J. B., Leite, K. R., & Chen Chen, L. (2009). Antimutagenicity protection of Ginkgo biloba extract
57
(Egb 761) against mitomycin C and cyclophosphamide in mouse bone marrow. Genetics and
Molecular Research : GMR, 8(1), 328–33.
Walworth, N., Davey, S., & Beach, D. (1993). Fission yeast chk1 protein kinase links the rad checkpoint
pathway to cdc2. Nature, 363(6427), 368–371.
Weinberg, J. B., Granger, D. L., Pisetsky, D. S., Seldin, M. F., Misukonis, M. A., Mason, S. N., … Gilkeson,
G. S. (1994). The role of nitric oxide in the pathogenesis of spontaneous murine autoimmune
disease: increased nitric oxide production and nitric oxide synthase expression in MRL-lpr/lpr mice,
and reduction of spontaneous glomerulonephritis and arthritis by orally admi. The Journal of
Experimental Medicine, 179(2), 651–60.
Weinmann, S., Roll, S., Schwarzbach, C., Vauth, C., & Willich, S. N. (2010). Effects of Ginkgo biloba in
dementia: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Geriatrics, 10(1), 14.
Wink, D. (1998). The multifaceted roles of nitric oxide in cancer. Carcinogenesis, 19(5), 711–721.
Wink, D. A., & Ford, P. C. (1995). Nitric Oxide Reactions Important to Biological Systems: A Survey of
Some Kinetics Investigations. Methods, 7(1), 14–20.
Wink, D. A., Kasprzak, K. S., Maragos, C. M., Elespuru, R. K., Misra, M., Dunams, T. M., … Allen, J. S.
(1991). DNA deaminating ability and genotoxicity of nitric oxide and its progenitors. Science (New
York, N.Y.), 254(5034), 1001–3.
Wink, D. A., & Laval, J. (1994). The Fpg protein, a DNA repair enzyme, is inhibited by the biomediator
nitric oxide in vitro and in vivo. Carcinogenesis, 15(10), 2125–9.
Wink, D. A., Nims, R. W., Darbyshire, J. F., Christodoulou, D., Hanbauer, I., Cox, G. W., … Cook, J. A.
(1994). Reaction Kinetics for Nitrosation of Cysteine and Glutathione in Aerobic Nitric Oxide
Solutions at Neutral pH. Insights into the Fate and Physiological Effects of Intermediates Generated
in the NO/O2 Reaction. Chemical Research in Toxicology, 7(4), 519–525.
Wixon, J. (2002). Featured organism: Schizosaccharomyces pombe, the fission yeast. Comparative and
Functional Genomics, 3(2), 194–204.
Wolosker, H., Panizzutti, R., & Engelender, S. (1996). Inhibition of creatine kinase by S-nitrosoglutathione.
FEBS Letters, 392(3), 274–6.
58
Wood, V., Gwilliam, R., Rajandream, M.-A., Lyne, M., Lyne, R., Stewart, A., … Cerrutti, L. (2002). The
genome sequence of Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nature, 415(6874), 871–880.
Yager, J. D., & Liehr, J. G. (1996). Molecular mechanisms of estrogen carcinogenesis. Annual Review of
Pharmacology and Toxicology, 36, 203–32.
Yajima, H., Takao, M., Yasuhira, S., Zhao, J. H., Ishii, C., Inoue, H., & Yasui, A. (1995). A eukaryotic gene
encoding an endonuclease that specifically repairs DNA damaged by ultraviolet light. The EMBO
Journal, 14(10), 2393–2399.
Yamamoto, M., Imai, Y., & Watanabe, Y. (1997). Mating and sporulation in S. pombe. In J. R. Pringle, J.
R. Broach, & E. W. Jones (Eds.), The molecular and cellular biology of the yeast Saccharomyces
(pp. 1037–1106). New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Yang, G., Wang, Y., Sun, J., Zhang, K., & Liu, J. (2016). Ginkgo Biloba for Mild Cognitive Impairment and
Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry, 16(5), 520–8.
Yao, X., Zhou, G., Tang, Y., Guo, S., Qian, Y., Jin, C., … Duan, J. (2014). UPLC-PDA-TOF/MS coupled
with multivariate statistical analysis to rapidly analyze and evaluate Ginkgo biloba leaves from
different origin. Drug Testing and Analysis, 6(3), 288–294.
Yermilov, V., Rubio, J., & Ohshima, H. (1995). Formation of 8-nitroguanine in DNA treated with
peroxynitrite in vitro and its rapid removal from DNA by depurination. FEBS Letters, 376(3), 207–
210.
Yonemasu, R., McCready, S. J., Murray, J. M., Osman, F., Takao, M., Yamamoto, K., … Yasui, A. (1997).
Characterization of the alternative excision repair pathway of UV-damaged DNA in
Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Nucleic Acids Research, 25(8), 1553–1558.
Yoshie, Y., & Ohshima, H. (1997). Nitric oxide synergistically enhances DNA strand breakage induced by
polyhydroxyaromatic compounds, but inhibits that induced by the Fenton reaction. Archives of
Biochemistry and Biophysics, 342(1), 13–21.
Yoshie, Y., & Ohshima, H. (1998). Synergistic induction of DNA strand breakage by catechol-estrogen
and nitric oxide: implications for hormonal carcinogenesis. Free Radical Biology & Medicine, 24(2),
59
341–8.
Zak, P., Kleibl, K., & Laval, F. (1994). Repair of O6-methylguanine and O4-methylthymine by the human
and rat O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferases. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, 269(1),
730–3.
Zhou, H., Tang, W., Zeng, J., & Tang, C. (2014). Screening of Terpene Lactones and Flavonoid Glycosides
in Gingko biloba Capsule by UPLC- Orbitrap High Resolution MS, with Emphasis on Isomer
Differentiation. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, 2(7), 369–376.
Zhou, L., Meng, Q., Qian, T., & Yang, Z. (2011). Ginkgo biloba extract enhances glucose tolerance in
hyperinsulinism-induced hepatic cells. Journal of Natural Medicines, 65(1), 50–56.
Zhu, Z., Frey, O., Haandbaek, N., Franke, F., Rudolf, F., & Hierlemann, A. (2015). Time-lapse electrical
impedance spectroscopy for monitoring the cell cycle of single immobilized S. pombe cells. Scientific
Reports, 5, 17180.
61
6. Appendix
Appendix 1 – Mass spectrum of DVE.
Appendix 2 – Mass spectrum of GBE.
62
Appendix 3 – Specific parameters regarding the negative mode of ESI-MS/MS used in the analyses of the extracts.
Sheat gas flow rate 20 (arbitrary)
Aux. gas flow rate 5 (arbitrary)
Sweep gas flow rate 5 (arbitrary)
Spray voltage 5 kV
Capillary temperature 250 °C
Capillary voltage -11 V
Tube lens -55.7 V
Appendix 4 – Cell cycle in Sch. pombe. The four phases of the cell cycle are represented as G1, S, G2 and M. The
black segmented circle represents the relative duration of each cell cycle phase. A representation of the cells and
nuclei can also be seen next to their respective stage in cell cycle. An exponentially growing G1 cell is binucleated
and each nucleus has 1C DNA content. During S phase, DNA replication occurs. Cytokinesis is only completed at
this stage; resulting in binucleated cells with 2C DNA content each. By reaching G2 phase, cells have accomplished
cytoplasmatic division and hold a single 2C nucleus. The nuclei separate in the M phase and septation occurs,
bringing the cells to G1 again. Edited from Knutsen et al., 2011.