Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Nucleic Acids Research logoLink to Nucleic Acids Research
. 1982 Nov 25;10(22):7181–7196. doi: 10.1093/nar/10.22.7181

Immobilization of denatured DNA to macroporous supports: II. Steric and kinetic parameters of heterogeneous hybridization reactions.

H Bünemann
PMCID: PMC326997  PMID: 6185922

Abstract

The accessibility of immobilized DNA has been shown to depend more crucially on the method of immobilization than on the type of support used for fixation. When sonicated denatured DNA is coupled via diazotization or via cyanogen bromide reaction to solid Sephadex G-25 and Cellex 410 or to macroporous Sephacryl S-500 and Sepharose C1-6B its accessibility varies from 100 to 24 percent. Generally the loss of accessibility is linked to a depression of the melting temperature of DNA helices formed on the support. This correlation shows a characteristic course for a particular coupling method. DNA coupled under denaturing conditions may become totally inaccessible when only 3 percent of its bases are involved in the covalent linkage. Kinetic experiments with sonicated E.coli DNA have shown that the rate constants for renaturation or hybridization reactions are very similar for DNA immobilized by different methods to solid or macroporous supports. Generally the second order rate constant for a heterogeneous reaction (between mobile and immobilized DNA) is about one order of magnitude smaller than that of the analogous homogeneous reaction (in solution).

Full text

PDF
7181

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Arndt-Jovin D. J., Jovin T. M., Bähr W., Frischauf A. M., Marquardt M. Covalent attachment of DNA to agarose. Improved synthesis and use in affinity chromatography. Eur J Biochem. 1975 Jun;54(2):411–418. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1975.tb04151.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chang C. T., Hain T. C., Hutton J. R., Wetmur J. G. Effects of microscopic and macroscopic viscosity on the rate of renaturation of DNA. Biopolymers. 1974;13(9):1847–1858. doi: 10.1002/bip.1974.360130915. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Hutton J. R., Wetmur J. G. Effect of chemical modification on the rate of renaturation of deoxyribonucleic acid. Deaminated and glyoxalated deoxyribonucleic acid. Biochemistry. 1973 Jan 30;12(3):558–563. doi: 10.1021/bi00727a032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Melchior W. B., Jr, Von Hippel P. H. Alteration of the relative stability of dA-dT and dG-dC base pairs in DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1973 Feb;70(2):298–302. doi: 10.1073/pnas.70.2.298. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Noyes B. E., Stark G. R. Nucleic acid hybridization using DNA covalently coupled to cellulose. Cell. 1975 Jul;5(3):301–310. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(75)90105-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Orosz J. M., Wetmur J. G. DNA melting temperatures and renaturation rates in concentrated alkylammonium salt solutions. Biopolymers. 1977 Jun;16(6):1183–1199. doi: 10.1002/bip.1977.360160603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Seed B. Diazotizable arylamine cellulose papers for the coupling and hybridization of nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res. 1982 Mar 11;10(5):1799–1810. doi: 10.1093/nar/10.5.1799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Siddell S. G. RNA hybridization to DNA coupled with cyanogen-bromide-activated sephadex. The purification of polyoma messenger RNA. Eur J Biochem. 1978 Dec;92(2):621–629. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1978.tb12785.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Wetmur J. G., Davidson N. Kinetics of renaturation of DNA. J Mol Biol. 1968 Feb 14;31(3):349–370. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(68)90414-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Nucleic Acids Research are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES