1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0014-5793(99)00026-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of nucleoside analog incorporation on DNA binding to the DNA binding domain of the GATA‐1 erythroid transcription factor

Abstract: We investigate here the effects of the incorporation of the nucleoside analogs araC (1-L L-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine) and ganciclovir (9-[(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxy)methyl] guanine) into the DNA binding recognition sequence for the GATA-1 erythroid transcription factor. A 10-fold decrease in binding affinity was observed for the ganciclovir-substituted DNA complex in comparison to an unmodified DNA of the same sequence composition. AraC substitution did not result in any changes in binding affinity. I H-IS N HS… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
(61 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, AraC substitution into the recognition site for the GATA-1 erythroid transcription factor did not affect the affinity of a DNA duplex for the cognate DNA binding domain. 41 In contrast, the antiviral agent ganciclovir did reduce protein binding by a factor of 10 in this system. These researchers had previously investigated the effect of AraC substitution in duplex DNA and also identified localized structural perturbations due to AraC substitution.…”
Section: 22mentioning
confidence: 70%
“…For example, AraC substitution into the recognition site for the GATA-1 erythroid transcription factor did not affect the affinity of a DNA duplex for the cognate DNA binding domain. 41 In contrast, the antiviral agent ganciclovir did reduce protein binding by a factor of 10 in this system. These researchers had previously investigated the effect of AraC substitution in duplex DNA and also identified localized structural perturbations due to AraC substitution.…”
Section: 22mentioning
confidence: 70%
“…The weaknesses of aptamer beacons appeared to be: 1) the potential failure of some candidate beacons to open their stem region and allow the dequenching or fluorescence emission of F upon analyte binding, 2) difficulty in identifying secondary loop structures that could be used as potential beacons especially if ligandinduced fit in a duplex or double-stranded (ds) stem region was the mode of aptamer binding. The weaknesses of signaling aptamers appeared to be: 1) the relatively weak quenching ability of NTPs [1,3,5], thereby leading to potentially higher background fluorescence and reduced assay sensitivity, 2) relatively complicated multi-step methods for identifying naturally selected signaling aptamers or engineering signaling aptamers based on large bodies of data to place F in the binding region of an aptamer structure such that F would not affect aptamer binding to the target ligand [27].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We were also conscious of the need to place F and Q in such a way that they did not affect the binding affinity or specificity of the aptamer [27]. This can be quite problematic even when one knows the aptamer binding site or pocket and subsequently attempts to engineer the placement of F and Q.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%