ArticlePloS one2013
Screening for protein-DNA interactions by automatable DNA-protein interaction ELISA.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A reverse chromatin immunoprecipitation technique based on the CRISPR-dCas9 system.Plant physiology · 2023Article
- Tools to map target genes of bacterial two-component system response regulators.Environmental microbiology reports · 2020Review
- I-Block: a simple Escherichia coli-based assay for studying sequence-specific DNA binding of proteins.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- The Striking Flower-in-Flower Phenotype ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- A simple method to measure CLOCK-BMAL1 DNA binding activity in tissue and cell extracts.F1000Research · 2017Article
- Regulation of gene expression by NFAT transcription factors in hibernating ground squirrels is dependent on the cellular environment.Cell stress & chaperones · 2016Article
- A CAPS-based binding assay provides semi-quantitative validation of protein-DNA interactions.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Expression of nuclear factor of activated T cells (NFAT) and downstream muscle-specific proteins in ground squirrel skeletal and heart muscle during hibernation.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2016Article
- The Arabidopsis GAGA-Binding Factor BASIC PENTACYSTEINE6 Recruits the POLYCOMB-REPRESSIVE COMPLEX1 Component LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN1 to GAGA DNA Motifs.Plant physiology · 2015Article
- A rapid and sensitive high-throughput screening method to identify compounds targeting protein-nucleic acids interactions.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- Overexpression of GhWRKY27a reduces tolerance to drought stress and resistance to Rhizoctonia solani infection in transgenic Nicotiana benthamiana.Frontiers in physiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DNA-binding proteins (DBPs), such as transcription factors, constitute about 10% of the protein-coding genes in eukaryotic genomes and play pivotal roles in the regulation of chromatin structure and gene expression by binding to short stretches of DNA. Despite their number and importance, only for a minor portion of DBPs the binding sequence had been disclosed. Methods that allow the de novo identification of DNA-binding motifs of known DBPs, such as protein binding microarray technology or SELEX, are not yet suited for high-throughput and automation. To close this gap, we report an automatable DNA-protein-interaction (DPI)-ELISA screen of an optimized double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) probe library that allows the high-throughput identification of hexanucleotide DNA-binding motifs. In contrast to other methods, this DPI-ELISA screen can be performed manually or with standard laboratory automation. Furthermore, output evaluation does not require extensive computational analysis to derive a binding consensus. We could show that the DPI-ELISA screen disclosed the full spectrum of binding preferences for a given DBP. As an example, AtWRKY11 was used to demonstrate that the automated DPI-ELISA screen revealed the entire range of in vitro binding preferences. In addition, protein extracts of AtbZIP63 and the DNA-binding domain of AtWRKY33 were analyzed, which led to a refinement of their known DNA-binding consensi. Finally, we performed a DPI-ELISA screen to disclose the DNA-binding consensus of a yet uncharacterized putative DBP, AtTIFY1. A palindromic TGATCA-consensus was uncovered and we could show that the GATC-core is compulsory for AtTIFY1 binding. This specific interaction between AtTIFY1 and its DNA-binding motif was confirmed by in vivo plant one-hybrid assays in protoplasts. Thus, the value and applicability of the DPI-ELISA screen for de novo binding site identification of DBPs, also under automatized conditions, is a promising approach for a deeper understanding of gene regulation in any organism of choice.
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.