4.8 Article

NMR solution structure of an asymmetric intermolecular leaped V-shape G-quadruplex: selective recognition of the d(G2NG3NG4) sequence motif by a short linear G-rich DNA probe

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 3, 页码 1544-1556

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gky1167

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31600621, 21372223, U1232145]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFA0400900]
  3. Hefei Science Center CAS [2012FXCX001]
  4. Major/Innovative Program of Development Foundation of Hefei Center for Physical Science and Technology [2018ZYFX004]
  5. Anhui Province Grant [1308085MC41]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aside from classical loops among G-quadruplexes, the unique leaped V-shape scaffold spans over three G-tetrads, without any intervening residues. This scaffold enables a sharp reversal of two adjacent strand directions and simultaneously participates in forming the G-tetrad core. These features make this scaffold itself distinctive and thus an essentially more accessible target. As an alternative to the conventional antisense method using a complementary chain, forming an intermolecular G-quadruplex from two different oligomers, in which the longer one as the target is captured by a short G-rich fragment, could be helpful for recognizing G-rich sequences and structural motifs. However, such an intermolecular leaped V-shape G-quadruplex consisting of DNA oligomers of quite different lengths has not been evaluated. Here, we present the first nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) study of an asymmetric intermolecular leaped V-shape G-quadruplex assembled between an Oxytricha nova telomeric sequence d(G(2)T(4)G(4)T(4)G(4)) and a single G-tract fragment d(TG(4)A). Furthermore, we explored the selectivity of this short fragment as a potential probe, examined the kinetic discrimination for probing a specific mutant, and proposed the key sequence motif d(G2NG3NG4) essential for building the leaped V-shape G-quadruplexes.

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

4.8
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