4.5 Article

Ion Competition in Condensed DNA Arrays in the Attractive Regime

期刊

BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 105, 期 4, 页码 984-992

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2013.07.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. George Washington University
  2. Gettysburg College

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physical origin of DNA condensation by multivalent cations remains unsettled. Here, we report quantitative studies of how one DNA-condensing ion (Cobalt(3+) Hexammine, or Co(3+)Hex) and one nonDNA-condensing ion (Mg2+) compete within the interstitial space in spontaneously condensed DNA arrays. As the ion concentrations in the bath solution are systematically varied, the ion contents and DNA-DNA spacings of the DNA arrays are determined by atomic emission spectroscopy and x-ray diffraction, respectively. To gain quantitative insights, we first compare the experimentally determined ion contents with predictions from exact numerical calculations based on nonlinear Poisson-Boltzmann equations. Such calculations are shown to significantly underestimate the number of Co(3+)Hex ions, consistent with the deficiencies of nonlinear Poisson-Boltzmann approaches in describing multivalent cations. Upon increasing the concentration of Mg2+, the Co(3+)Hex-condensed DNA array expands and eventually redissolves as a result of ion competition weakening DNA-DNA attraction. Although the DNA-DNA spacing depends on both Mg2+ and Co(3+)Hex concentrations in the bath solution, it is observed that the spacing is largely determined by a single parameter of the DNA array, the fraction of DNA charges neutralized by Co(3+)Hex. It is also observed that only similar to 20% DNA charge neutralization by Co(3+)Hex is necessary for spontaneous DNA condensation. We then show that the bath ion conditions can be reduced to one variable with a simplistic ion binding model, which is able to describe the variations of both ion contents and DNA-DNA spacings reasonably well. Finally, we discuss the implications on the nature of interstitial ions and cation-mediated DNA-DNA interactions.

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