| Literature DB >> 17966113 |
Shuwen Wu1, Junqiang Xu, Jiangxia Liu, Xuan Yan, Xiaodong Zhu, Gengfu Xiao, Lunquan Sun, Po Tien.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The worldwide epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 was caused by a novel coronavirus called SARS-CoV. We report the use of DNAzyme (catalytic DNA) to target the 5'-untranslated region (5'UTR) of a highly conserved fragment in the SARS genome as an approach to suppression of SARS-CoV replication. A mono-DNA enzyme (Dz-104) possessing the 10-23 catalytic motif was synthesized and tested both in vitro and in cell culture.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17966113 PMCID: PMC7166399 DOI: 10.1002/jgm.1111
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Gene Med ISSN: 1099-498X Impact factor: 4.565
Figure 1Composition of the 8–17 and 10–23 catalytic motifs. The DNAzyme (lower strand) binds the RNA substrate (top strand) through Watson–Crick pairing. Cleavage occurs at the position indicated by the arrow. R = A or G; Y = U or C
Figure 2DNA enzyme target sites and two designed DNA enzymes. The target sequence is shown together with (A) active DNAzyme (Dz‐104) and (B) the mutated control (Dz‐104 (mut))
Figure 3In vitro cleavage of SARS‐CoV 5′UTR by DNAzyme‐104. (A) Gel analysis of the cleaved product with Dz‐104 (upper panel) and Dz‐104 (mut) (lower panel). S, substate RNA; P, cleavage products. (B) Kinetic profile of DNAzyme‐104 under single turnover conditions with a 10‐fold enzyme excess. (C) Kinetic profile of DNAzyme‐104 under multiple turnover conditions with a 10‐fold substrate excess. Y axis represents the % of cleaved product
Figure 4Fusion construct of SARS‐CoV 5′UTR and eGFP. The construct is based on the peGFP‐N1 vector with insertion of the 5′UTR of SARS at EcoR1 and BamH1 sites at the 5′ end of the eGFP gene. The resultant construct is designated as p5′UTR‐eGFP
Figure 5Dz‐104‐mediated reduction of GFP expression. Dz‐104 or Dz‐104 (mut) was co‐transfected with 1 µg of peGFP‐N1 (left panel) or p5′UTR‐eGFP (right panel) into Vero cells. Various concentrations of the DNAzyme or its control are shown as 0.7, 3.5 and 7 µg. The experiments were performed twice and one set of representative data are presented here (100×)
FACS analysis of the transfected Vero cells
| Vector | Dosage (µg) | Percentage of fluorescent cells (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dz‐104 | Dz‐104 (mt) | ||
| eGFP‐N1 | 0.0 | 69.5 | 69.5 |
| 0.7 | 68.6 | 71.6 | |
| 3.5 | 66.8 | 68.5 | |
| 7.0 | 69.3 | 67.0 | |
| 5′UTR‐eGFP | 0.0 | 57.6 | 57.6 |
| 0.7 | 25.8 | 55.6 | |
| 3.5 | 17.0 | 56.8 | |
| 7.0 | 9.1 | 58.2 | |
The data were the mean of two independent experiments.
GFP mRNA expression determined by real‐time PCR
| Vector | Dosage (µg) | Ct value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dz‐104 | Dz‐104 (mt) | ||
| eGFP‐N1 | 0.0 | 11.64 | 11.64 |
| 0.7 | 13.03 | 11.53 | |
| 3.5 | 11.94 | 9.59 | |
| 7.0 | 11.60 | 11.77 | |
| 5′UTR‐GFP | 0.0 | 16.66 | 16.66 |
| 0.7 | 19.64 | 13.84 | |
| 3.5 | 22.67 | 16.01 | |
| 7.0 | 23.80 | 16.64 |
Data were an average of two independent experiments.