2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0303-7207(00)00311-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Apparent coactivation due to interference of expression constructs with nuclear receptor expression

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ethanol (EtOH) was used as vehicle at a constant final concentration of 0.1%. Forty-eight hours (or the time indicated) after addition of the androgen, cells were collected in 500 l of passive lysis buffer (Promega) and assayed for luciferase activity as described by Hofman et al (12). Protein concentrations of the lysates were determined as follows: 40 l of the lysate was incubated on ice for 10 min with 0.5 ml 0.03% sodium deoxycholate.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ethanol (EtOH) was used as vehicle at a constant final concentration of 0.1%. Forty-eight hours (or the time indicated) after addition of the androgen, cells were collected in 500 l of passive lysis buffer (Promega) and assayed for luciferase activity as described by Hofman et al (12). Protein concentrations of the lysates were determined as follows: 40 l of the lysate was incubated on ice for 10 min with 0.5 ml 0.03% sodium deoxycholate.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reporter activity was measured after treatment of cells with the prototypic MR and GR agonists, aldosterone and dexamethasone, respectively; both ligands were applied at a dose of 10 Ϫ6 M. Controls. As demonstrated recently, cotransfection of different expression vectors can influence the transactivation of the reporter gene through squelching phenomena and alteration of the concentrations of individual components; i.e., the resulting data may not necessarily reflect the influence of the factor being tested on receptor-mediated transcription (Hofman et al, 2000). Therefore, the expression levels of MR and GR were monitored by immunoblotting in the presence of transfected DAXX, FLASH, and FAF-1 cDNAs.…”
Section: Selection Of Potential Mr-interacting Partnersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cotransfection experiments were performed using the Fugene-6 method (Roche) as previously described (Hofman et al 2000) with (per well) 100 ng reporter construct (C3 ARE-luciferase), 0·17 ng pSG5-AR and various amounts of pSG5 expression constructs as indicated in the figures. For the mammalian two-hybrid experiments, cells were transfected with (per well) 100 ng p(Gal4) 5 -TK-luciferase reporter construct, 0·67 ng pAB-Gal4 DBD-ARLBD construct and 0·67 ng pSNATCHII, pSNATCHIIRBaK(S) or pSNATCHII-RBaK(AS) construct respectively.…”
Section: Transfections Of Mammalian Cellsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these experiments the effect of a sense RBaK expression construct (RBaK(S)) was compared with an antisense RBaK expression construct (RBaK(AS)) or to the pSG5 1 control. This construct contains an unrelated cDNA fragment (NuRIP-6) without coregulator properties but which has approximately the same size as the RBaK insert and therefore produces nearly the same suppression of the concentration of the AR (Hofman et al 2000). As shown in Fig.…”
Section: Influence Of Rbak On Ar-mediated Transcriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%