4.5 Article

Force unfolding kinetics of RNA using optical tweezers. I. Effects of experimental variables on measured results

Journal

BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 92, Issue 9, Pages 2996-3009

Publisher

BIOPHYSICAL SOCIETY
DOI: 10.1529/biophysj.106.094052

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM010840, GM-32543, R37 GM032543, R01 GM010840-48, R01 GM010840-49, R01 GM032543, R37 GM010840, GM-10840] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Experimental variables of optical tweezers instrumentation that affect RNA folding/unfolding kinetics were investigated. A model RNA hairpin, P5ab, was attached to two micron-sized beads through hybrid RNA/DNA handles; one bead was trapped by dual-beam lasers and the other was held by a micropipette. Several experimental variables were changed while measuring the unfolding/refolding kinetics, including handle lengths, trap stiffness, and modes of force applied to the molecule. In constant-force mode where the tension applied to the RNA was maintained through feedback control, the measured rate coefficients varied within 40% when the handle lengths were changed by 10-fold (1.1-10.2 Kbp); they increased by two- to threefold when the trap stiffness was lowered to one-third (from 0.1 to 0.035 pN/nm). In the passive mode, without feedback control and where the force applied to the RNA varied in response to the end-to-end distance change of the tether, the RNA hopped between a high-force folded-state and a low-force unfolded-state. In this mode, the rates increased up to twofold with longer handles or softer traps. Overall, the measured rates remained with the same order-of-magnitude over the wide range of conditions studied. In the companion article on pages 3010-3021, we analyze how the measured kinetics parameters differ from the intrinsic molecular rates of the RNA, and thus how to obtain the molecular rates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available