Cargando…

DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis

DNA–protein interactions are essential for several molecular and cellular mechanisms, such as transcription, transcriptional regulation, DNA modifications, among others. For many decades scientists tried to unravel how DNA links to proteins, forming complex and vital interactions. However, the high...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ferraz, Ricardo André Campos, Lopes, Ana Lúcia Gonçalves, da Silva, Jessy Ariana Faria, Moreira, Diana Filipa Viana, Ferreira, Maria João Nogueira, de Almeida Coimbra, Sílvia Vieira
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8299673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34301293
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00780-z
_version_ 1783726314150166528
author Ferraz, Ricardo André Campos
Lopes, Ana Lúcia Gonçalves
da Silva, Jessy Ariana Faria
Moreira, Diana Filipa Viana
Ferreira, Maria João Nogueira
de Almeida Coimbra, Sílvia Vieira
author_facet Ferraz, Ricardo André Campos
Lopes, Ana Lúcia Gonçalves
da Silva, Jessy Ariana Faria
Moreira, Diana Filipa Viana
Ferreira, Maria João Nogueira
de Almeida Coimbra, Sílvia Vieira
author_sort Ferraz, Ricardo André Campos
collection PubMed
description DNA–protein interactions are essential for several molecular and cellular mechanisms, such as transcription, transcriptional regulation, DNA modifications, among others. For many decades scientists tried to unravel how DNA links to proteins, forming complex and vital interactions. However, the high number of techniques developed for the study of these interactions made the choice of the appropriate technique a difficult task. This review intends to provide a historical context and compile the methods that describe DNA–protein interactions according to the purpose of each approach, summarise the respective advantages and disadvantages and give some examples of recent uses for each technique. The final aim of this work is to help in deciding which technique to perform according to the objectives and capacities of each research team. Considering the DNA–binding proteins characterisation, filter binding assay and EMSA are easy in vitro methods that rapidly identify nucleic acid-protein binding interactions. To find DNA-binding sites, DNA-footprinting is indeed an easier, faster and reliable approach, however, techniques involving base analogues and base-site selection are more precise. Concerning binding kinetics and affinities, filter binding assay and EMSA are useful and easy methods, although SPR and spectroscopy techniques are more sensitive. Finally, relatively to genome-wide studies, ChIP–seq is the desired method, given the coverage and resolution of the technique. In conclusion, although some experiments are easier and faster than others, when designing a DNA–protein interaction study several concerns should be taken and different techniques may need to be considered, since different methods confer different precisions and accuracies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8299673
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82996732021-07-28 DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis Ferraz, Ricardo André Campos Lopes, Ana Lúcia Gonçalves da Silva, Jessy Ariana Faria Moreira, Diana Filipa Viana Ferreira, Maria João Nogueira de Almeida Coimbra, Sílvia Vieira Plant Methods Review DNA–protein interactions are essential for several molecular and cellular mechanisms, such as transcription, transcriptional regulation, DNA modifications, among others. For many decades scientists tried to unravel how DNA links to proteins, forming complex and vital interactions. However, the high number of techniques developed for the study of these interactions made the choice of the appropriate technique a difficult task. This review intends to provide a historical context and compile the methods that describe DNA–protein interactions according to the purpose of each approach, summarise the respective advantages and disadvantages and give some examples of recent uses for each technique. The final aim of this work is to help in deciding which technique to perform according to the objectives and capacities of each research team. Considering the DNA–binding proteins characterisation, filter binding assay and EMSA are easy in vitro methods that rapidly identify nucleic acid-protein binding interactions. To find DNA-binding sites, DNA-footprinting is indeed an easier, faster and reliable approach, however, techniques involving base analogues and base-site selection are more precise. Concerning binding kinetics and affinities, filter binding assay and EMSA are useful and easy methods, although SPR and spectroscopy techniques are more sensitive. Finally, relatively to genome-wide studies, ChIP–seq is the desired method, given the coverage and resolution of the technique. In conclusion, although some experiments are easier and faster than others, when designing a DNA–protein interaction study several concerns should be taken and different techniques may need to be considered, since different methods confer different precisions and accuracies. BioMed Central 2021-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8299673/ /pubmed/34301293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00780-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Ferraz, Ricardo André Campos
Lopes, Ana Lúcia Gonçalves
da Silva, Jessy Ariana Faria
Moreira, Diana Filipa Viana
Ferreira, Maria João Nogueira
de Almeida Coimbra, Sílvia Vieira
DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
title DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
title_full DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
title_fullStr DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
title_full_unstemmed DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
title_short DNA–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
title_sort dna–protein interaction studies: a historical and comparative analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8299673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34301293
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00780-z
work_keys_str_mv AT ferrazricardoandrecampos dnaproteininteractionstudiesahistoricalandcomparativeanalysis
AT lopesanaluciagoncalves dnaproteininteractionstudiesahistoricalandcomparativeanalysis
AT dasilvajessyarianafaria dnaproteininteractionstudiesahistoricalandcomparativeanalysis
AT moreiradianafilipaviana dnaproteininteractionstudiesahistoricalandcomparativeanalysis
AT ferreiramariajoaonogueira dnaproteininteractionstudiesahistoricalandcomparativeanalysis
AT dealmeidacoimbrasilviavieira dnaproteininteractionstudiesahistoricalandcomparativeanalysis