Trinucleotide models for DNA bending propensity: comparison of models based on DNaseI digestion and nucleosome packaging data - PubMed (original) (raw)
Review
Trinucleotide models for DNA bending propensity: comparison of models based on DNaseI digestion and nucleosome packaging data
I Brukner et al. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 1995 Oct.
Abstract
DNaseI digestion studies (Brukner et al, EMBO J 14, 1812-1818 1995) and nucleosomebinding data (Satchwell et al, J. Mol. Biol. 191, 639-659 1986, Goodsell and Dickerson, Nucleic trinucleotides. A detailed comparison of the two models suggests that while both of them represent improvements with respect to dinucleotide based descriptions, the individual trinucleotide parameters are not highly correlated (linear correlation coefficient is 0.53), and a number of motifs such as TA-elements and CCA/TGG motifs are more realistically described in the DNaseI-based model. This may be due to the fact that the DNaseI-based model does not rely on a static geometry but rather captures a dynamic ability of ds DNA to bend towards the major grove. Future refinement of both models of both models on larger experimental data sets is expected to further improve the prediction of macroscopic DNA-curvature.
Similar articles
- Sequence-dependent bending propensity of DNA as revealed by DNase I: parameters for trinucleotides.
Brukner I, Sánchez R, Suck D, Pongor S. Brukner I, et al. EMBO J. 1995 Apr 18;14(8):1812-8. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb07169.x. EMBO J. 1995. PMID: 7737131 Free PMC article. - Bending and curvature calculations in B-DNA.
Goodsell DS, Dickerson RE. Goodsell DS, et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 1994 Dec 11;22(24):5497-503. doi: 10.1093/nar/22.24.5497. Nucleic Acids Res. 1994. PMID: 7816643 Free PMC article. - DNA recognition by DNase I.
Suck D. Suck D. J Mol Recognit. 1994 Jun;7(2):65-70. doi: 10.1002/jmr.300070203. J Mol Recognit. 1994. PMID: 7826675 Review. - Pyrimidine dimer formation as a probe of nucleosome core and linker structure in situ.
Pehrson JR, Litwin S, Myers CB, Cohen LH. Pehrson JR, et al. Methods. 1999 Nov;19(3):447-56. doi: 10.1006/meth.1999.0881. Methods. 1999. PMID: 10579940 Review.
Cited by
- iNuc-PhysChem: a sequence-based predictor for identifying nucleosomes via physicochemical properties.
Chen W, Lin H, Feng PM, Ding C, Zuo YC, Chou KC. Chen W, et al. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47843. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047843. Epub 2012 Oct 29. PLoS One. 2012. PMID: 23144709 Free PMC article. - Structural properties of promoters: similarities and differences between prokaryotes and eukaryotes.
Kanhere A, Bansal M. Kanhere A, et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Jun 6;33(10):3165-75. doi: 10.1093/nar/gki627. Print 2005. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005. PMID: 15939933 Free PMC article. - Nucleosome mobility and the regulation of gene expression: Insights from single-molecule studies.
Rudnizky S, Malik O, Bavly A, Pnueli L, Melamed P, Kaplan A. Rudnizky S, et al. Protein Sci. 2017 Jul;26(7):1266-1277. doi: 10.1002/pro.3159. Epub 2017 Apr 2. Protein Sci. 2017. PMID: 28329910 Free PMC article. Review. - Prediction of fine-tuned promoter activity from DNA sequence.
Siwo G, Rider A, Tan A, Pinapati R, Emrich S, Chawla N, Ferdig M. Siwo G, et al. F1000Res. 2016 Feb 11;5:158. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.7485.1. eCollection 2016. F1000Res. 2016. PMID: 27347373 Free PMC article. - The TNFalpha receptor TNFRSF1A and genes encoding the amiloride-sensitive sodium channel ENaC as modulators in cystic fibrosis.
Stanke F, Becker T, Cuppens H, Kumar V, Cassiman JJ, Jansen S, Radojkovic D, Siebert B, Yarden J, Ussery DW, Wienker TF, Tümmler B. Stanke F, et al. Hum Genet. 2006 Apr;119(3):331-43. doi: 10.1007/s00439-006-0140-2. Epub 2006 Feb 4. Hum Genet. 2006. PMID: 16463024
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources