Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Feb 8.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Chem Soc. 2012 Jan 27;134(5):2644–2652. doi: 10.1021/ja2093647

Table 2.

Interhelical Distances

data seta inter-R5 distance (Å)
DEER measuredb EPR-based modelc crystal structured
HT vs HL (76; 95) 28 26.4 27.6
(79; 95) 38 37.5 38.0
(88; 95) 34 30.3 29.7
(26; 76) 28e 30.7 23.7
(26; 79) 35e 31.6 30.1
(26; 88) 37 37.2 10.7
HT vs HR (26; 37) 39 38.6 44.8
(33; 95) 32e 30.4 40.8
(37; 95) 40 43.4 45.5
(66; 95) 30e 25.9 22.8
HR vs HL (33; 76) 39 41.0 23.5
(33; 79) 44 43.0 38.1
(37; 76) 48 50.8 36.4
(37; 79) 49 47.4 52.6
(37; 88) 40 39.3 50.2
(66; 76) 35 38.8 18.8
(66; 79) 41 39.1 35.6
RMSDdeer - 2.43 10.2
a

Each designated by corresponding labeling site numbers.

b

Most probable distances listed. Estimated errors are less than 7% based on repeated measurements.

c

Inter-NOX distances (see Materials and Methods) in the best-fit model shown in Figure 3A.

d

NASNOX predicted average inter-R5 distances obtained from the pRNA tetramer crystal structure.43

e

Major population listed.