Poly(dG)–poly(dC) DNA appears shorter than poly(dA)–poly(dT) and possibly adopts an A‐related conformation on a mica surface under ambient conditions | Zendy

Borovok Natalia | Zendy; Molotsky Tatiana | Zendy; Ghabboun Jamal | Zendy; Cohen Hezy | Zendy; Porath Danny | Zendy; Kotlyar Alexander | Zendy

Premium

Poly(dG)–poly(dC) DNA appears shorter than poly(dA)–poly(dT) and possibly adopts an A‐related conformation on a mica surface under ambient conditions

Author(s) -

Borovok Natalia,

Molotsky Tatiana,

Ghabboun Jamal,

Cohen Hezy,

Porath Danny,

Kotlyar Alexander

Publication year - 2007

Publication title -

febs letters

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 1.593

H-Index - 257

eISSN - 1873-3468

pISSN - 0014-5793

DOI - 10.1016/j.febslet.2007.11.058

Subject(s) - puc19 , mica , atomic force microscopy , dna , plasmid , molecule , morphology (biology) , chemistry , materials science , polymer chemistry , crystallography , nanotechnology , biology , biochemistry , organic chemistry , composite material , genetics

Three types of DNA: ∼2700 bp polydeoxyguanylic olydeoxycytidylic acid [poly(dG)–poly(dC)], ∼2700 bp polydeoxyadenylic polydeoxythymidylic acid [poly(dA)–poly(dT)] and 2686 bp linear plasmid pUC19 were deposited on a mica surface and imaged by atomic force microscopy. Contour length measurements show that the average length of poly(dG)–poly(dC) is ∼30% shorter than that of poly(dA)–poly(dT) and the plasmid. This led us to suggest that individual poly(dG)–poly(dC) molecules are immobilized on mica under ambient conditions in a form which is likely related to the A‐form of DNA in contrast to poly(dA)–poly(dT) and random sequence DNA which are immobilized in a form that is related to the DNA B‐form.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research