Lesion recognition by XPC is ATP dependent. (A) Cells stably expressing GFP-DDB2 (VH10) or XPC-GFP (XP4PA) were mock treated or ATP depleted (depl.) and subjected to Strip-FRAP analysis, as indicated. (B and C) Quantitative analysis of the mobility of GFP-DDB2 (B) or XPC-GFP (C) in unchallenged cells that were either mock treated (red lines) or ATP depleted (blue lines). (D) Cells stably expressing GFP-DDB2 or XPC-GFP were mock treated or ATP depleted, globally UV-C irradiated (8 J/m2), and subjected to Strip-FRAP analysis, as indicated. (E and F) Quantitative analysis of the mobility of GFP-DDB2 (E) or XPC-GFP (F) in unchallenged cells (red lines) or globally UV-irradiated, mock-treated (orange lines) or ATP-depleted (green lines) cells. Values represent the mean of ∼20 cells. (G) Examples of GFP-DDB2–expressing cells that were mock treated (top row) or ATP depleted (bottom row), locally UV irradiated (50 J/m2), and subsequently stained for endogenous XPC. (H) A quantification of the recruitment of GFP-DDB2 and endogenous XPC in the same cells is shown (∼30 cells for each condition). Error bars represent the SD. Asterisks indicate significant differences based on a t test (P < 0.01).
