TABLE 1.
Ability of MCAT1 mutant oligonucleotides to compete for binding of LMC1Ba
Name | Sequence | LMC1B binding |
---|---|---|
MCAT1 | tgCAAGTGTTGCATTCCTCTCTG | +++ |
MCAT/SV40 | tgCCTGACACACATTCCTCAGCT | + |
MCAT1-Emt | tgCGACCCTTGCATTCCTCTCTG | ++ |
MCAT1mt | tgCAAGTGTTGCCCCACTCTCTG | ++ |
mt1 | tgGGAGTGTTGCATTCCTCTCTG | ++ |
mt2 | tgCAGTTGTTGCATTCCTCTCTG | ++ |
mt3 | tgCAAGGTTTGCATTCCTCTCTG | + |
mt4 | tgCAAGTGGGGCATTCCTCTCTG | +/− |
mt5 | tgCAAGTGTTTGATTCCTCTCTG | − |
mt6 | tgCAAGTGTTGCGGTCCTCTCTG | + |
mt7 | tgCAAGTGTTGCATGGCTCTCTG | ++ |
mt8 | tgCAAGTGTTGCATTCGGCTCTG | ++ |
mt9 | tgCAAGTGTTGCATTCCTGGCTG | ++ |
mt10 | tgCAAGTGTTGCATTCCTCTGGG | ++ |
MCAT2 | tgCGCCGGGCACATTCCTGCTGC | − |
Summary of results of competition analysis performed as shown in Fig. 1. +++, oligonucleotide competition as efficient as that of MCAT1 element; ++, efficient competition; +, weak competition; +/−, very weak competition; −, no competition. Cohesive termini are denoted by lowercase type (33). Mutated bases are underlined, and the core MCAT motifs are indicated by boldface type.