4.5 Article

Rapid agarose gel electrophoretic mobility shift assay for quantitating protein: RNA interactions

期刊

ANALYTICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 511, 期 -, 页码 36-41

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ab.2016.07.027

关键词

RNA binding; DNA binding; Binding affinity; Nucleic acid binding protein; Electrophoretic mobility shift assay; Gel shift assay

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [NSF 1407736]
  2. National Institutes of Health - National Institute for General Medical Sciences [GM099049, GM119096]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interactions between proteins and nucleic acids are frequently analyzed using electrophoretic mobility shift assays (EMSAs). This technique separates bound protein:nucleic acid complexes from free nucleic acids by electrophoresis, most commonly using polyacrylamide gels. The current study utilizes recent advances in agarose gel electrophoresis technology to develop a new EMSA protocol that is simpler and faster than traditional polyacrylamide methods. Agarose gels are normally run at low voltages (similar to 10 V/cm) to minimize heating and gel artifacts. In this study we demonstrate that EMSAs performed using agarose gels can be run at high voltages (>= 20 V/cm) with 0.5 x TB (Tris-borate) buffer, allowing for short run times while simultaneously yielding high band resolution. Several parameters affecting band and image quality were optimized for the procedure, including gel thickness, agarose percentage, and applied voltage. Association of the siRNA-binding protein p19 with its target RNA was investigated using the new system. The agarose gel and conventional polyacrylamide gel methods generated similar apparent binding constants in side-by-side experiments. A particular advantage of the new approach described here is that the short run times (5-10 min) reduce opportunities for dissociation of bound complexes, an important concern in non-equilibrium nucleic acid binding experiments. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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