Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Mar 5.
Published in final edited form as: Cell Rep. 2020 Dec 8;33(10):108476. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108476

Figure 2. The Influence of SERBP1 on Initiation on the HalV IRES.

Figure 2.

(A) Translation in RRL driven by HalV 5′ UTR and IGR IRESs, depending on addition of 40S and 60S subunits with or without their preincubation with mRNA.

(B) Protein composition of 80S ribosomes reconstituted from individual purified 40S and 60S subunits, and native 80S ribosomes purified from RRL, assayed by SDS-PAGE followed by SYPRO staining.

(C) The influence of SERBP1 with/without eEF2 on ribosomal binding of the HalV IGR IRES, assayed by toe-printing. The positions of the A site codon and ribosomal complexes are indicated. Separation of lanes by white lines indicates that they were juxtaposed from the same gel.

(D) Comparison of the binding of the HalV IGR IRES to reconstituted and native 80S ribosomes, assayed by toe-printing. The positions of the A site codon and ribosomal complexes are indicated. (C and D) Lanes C, T, A, and G depict HalV sequence.

(E) The influence of SERBP1 with/without eEF2 on ribosomal binding of CrPV IGR IRES, assayed by toe-printing. The positions of toe-prints corresponding to IRES/80S complexes are indicated.