4.8 Article

Guanine quadruplex monoclonal antibody 1H6 cross-reacts with restrained thymidine-rich single stranded DNA

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 45, 期 10, 页码 5913-5919

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx245

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Research Council [294740, 638988-G4DSB]
  2. European Research Council (ERC) [294740] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previously we reported the production and characterization of monoclonal antibody 1H6 raised against (T(4)G(4))(2) intermolecular guanine quadruplex (G4) DNA structures (Henderson A. et al. (2014) Nucleic Acids Res., 42, 860-869; Hoffmann R. F. et al. (2016) Nucleic Acids Res., 44, 152-163). It was shown that 1H6 strongly stains nuclei and has exquisite specificity for heterochromatin by immuno-electron microscopy. Here we extend our studies of 1H6 reactivity using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and microscale thermophoresis (MST). As previously reported, 1H6 was found to strongly bind intermolecularG4 structureswith a (T(4)G(4))(2) sequence motif. However, using both methods we did not detect significant binding to G4 structures without thymidines in their sequence motif or to G4 structures made with (T(2)G(4))(2) oligonucleotides. In addition, we observed strong, sequence-specific binding of 1H6 by ELISA to immobilized single stranded poly(T) DNA but not to immobilized poly(C) or poly(A) homo-polymers. Cross-reactivity of 1H6 to poly(T) was not measured in solution using MST. 1H6 was furthermore found to bind to selected areas on DNA fibers but only after DNA denaturation. Based on these observations we propose that 1H6 binds with high affinity to adjacent T's that are restricted in their movement in selected G4 structures and denatured DNA. Cross-reactivity of 1H6 to immobilized single stranded T-rich DNA next to its previously reported specificity for bona fide G4 structures needs to be taken into account in the interpretation of 1H6 binding to (sub-) cellular structures.

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