1997
DOI: 10.1128/jvi.71.6.4300-4309.1997
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The adeno-associated virus type 2 p40 promoter requires a proximal Sp1 interaction and a p19 CArG-like element to facilitate Rep transactivation

Abstract: We have identified the sequence elements that are required for adeno-associated virus type 2 p40 promoter activity. Mutation of specific promoter elements showed that two Sp1 sites at approximately ؊50 (Sp1-50) and ؊70 (GGT-70) bp upstream of the start of the p40 messages were necessary for maximal promoter activity. As expected, the TATA site at ؊30 was also essential. In vitro DNA binding experiments confirmed that the Sp1-50 and GGT-70 sites were bound by Sp1 or Sp1-like proteins. Two other transcription el… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
28
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
1
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on our recent observations Ye and Pintel, 2007;Ye et al, 2006), and together with previously established AAV2 transcription activation models (Pereira and Muzyczka, 1997), we summarize in Fig. 5 an overview of the capsid gene transcription strategies employed by these three different AAVs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Based on our recent observations Ye and Pintel, 2007;Ye et al, 2006), and together with previously established AAV2 transcription activation models (Pereira and Muzyczka, 1997), we summarize in Fig. 5 an overview of the capsid gene transcription strategies employed by these three different AAVs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…1E). Therefore, although genetically closer to AAV5, the transcription pattern of B-AAV was more similar to that of AAV2, whose large Rep proteins bind a RBE and recruits transcription factors for capsid promoter activation (Pereira and Muzyczka, 1997). Based on our previous comparison study between AAV2 and AAV5 (10), this could have been due to either differences in the activation ability of the two Rep proteins (Ye et al, 2006), and/or the nature of the cis sequences around the capsid promoters themselves (Ye and Pintel, 2007).…”
Section: Rna Expression Profile Differences Between B-aav and Aav5mentioning
confidence: 89%
See 3 more Smart Citations