ArticleBiophysical journal2011
Structural rigidity of paranemic crossover and juxtapose DNA nanostructures.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Paranemic Cohesion of DNA under Isothermal Conditions.JACS Au · 2026Article
- Exceptional Nuclease Resistance of Paranemic Crossover (PX) DNA and Crossover-Dependent Biostability of DNA Motifs.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2020Article
- Structure and electrical properties of DNA nanotubes embedded in lipid bilayer membranes.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Size extensivity of elastic properties of alkane fragments.Journal of molecular modeling · 2018Article
- Quantum dot-loaded monofunctionalized DNA icosahedra for single-particle tracking of endocytic pathways.Nature nanotechnology · 2016Article
- Elasticity of DNA and the effect of dendrimer binding.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2013Article
- Interaction of nucleic acids with carbon nanotubes and dendrimers.Journal of biosciences · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Crossover motifs are integral components for designing DNA-based nanostructures and nanomechanical devices due to their enhanced rigidity compared to the normal B-DNA. Although the structural rigidity of the double helix B-DNA has been investigated extensively using both experimental and theoretical tools, to date there is no quantitative information about structural rigidity and the mechanical strength of parallel crossover DNA motifs. We have used fully atomistic molecular dynamics simulations in explicit solvent to get the force-extension curve of parallel DNA nanostructures to characterize their mechanical rigidity. In the presence of monovalent Na(+) ions, we find that the stretch modulus (γ(1)) of the paranemic crossover and its topoisomer JX DNA structure is significantly higher (~30%) compared to normal B-DNA of the same sequence and length. However, this is in contrast to the original expectation that these motifs are almost twice as rigid compared to the double-stranded B-DNA. When the DNA motif is surrounded by a solvent with Mg(2+) counterions, we find an enhanced rigidity compared to Na(+) environment due to the electrostatic screening effects arising from the divalent nature of Mg(2+) ions. To our knowledge, this is the first direct determination of the mechanical strength of these crossover motifs, which can be useful for the design of suitable DNA for DNA-based nanostructures and nanomechanical devices with improved structural rigidity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.