4.5 Article

Modular assembly of designer PUF proteins for specific post-transcriptional regulation of endogenous RNA

期刊

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1754-1611-8-7

关键词

Protein engineering; RNA-binding protein; Post-transcriptional regulation; PUF; Pumilio; Tristetraprolin; TTP; Golden Gate

资金

  1. Centennial Chair Professorship in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Due to their modular repeat structure, Pumilio/fem-3 mRNA binding factor (PUF) proteins are promising candidates for designer RNA-binding protein (RBP) engineering. To further facilitate the application of the PUF domain for the sequence-specific RBP engineering, a rapid cloning approach is desirable that would allow efficient introduction of multiple key amino acid mutations in the protein. Here, we report the implementation of the Golden Gate cloning method for an efficient one-step assembly of a designer PUF domain for RNA specificity engineering. Results: We created a repeat module library that is potentially capable of generating a PUF domain with any desired specificity. PUF domains with multiple repeat modifications for the recognition of altered RNA targets were obtained in a one-step assembly reaction, which was found to be highly efficient. The new PUF variants exhibited high in vitro binding efficiencies to cognate RNA sequences, corroborating the applicability of the modular approach for PUF engineering. To demonstrate the application of the PUF domain assembly method for RBP engineering, we fused the PUF domain to a post-transcriptional regulator and observed a sequence-specific reporter and endogenous gene repression in human cell lines. Conclusions: The Golden Gate based cloning approach thus should allow greater flexibility and speed in implementing the PUF protein scaffold for engineering designer RBPs, and facilitate its use as a tool in basic and applied biology and medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据