Characterization of RNA Aptamer Binding by the Wilms' Tumor Suppressor Protein WT1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interaction of the zinc finger protein WT1 with RNA aptamers has been investigated using a quantitative binding assay, and the results have been compared to those from a previous study of the DNA binding properties of this protein. A recombinant peptide containing the four zinc fingers of WT1 (WT1-ZFP) binds to representatives of three specific families of RNA aptamers with apparent dissociation constants ranging from 13.8 +/- 1.1 to 87.4 +/- 10.4 nM, somewhat higher than the dissociation constant of 4.12 +/- 0.4 nM for binding to DNA. An isoform that contains an insertion of three amino acids between the third and fourth zinc fingers (WT1[+KTS]-ZFP) also binds to these RNAs with slightly reduced affinity (the apparent dissociation constants ranging from 22.8 to 69.8 nM) but does not bind to DNA. The equilibrium binding of WT1-ZFP to the highest-affinity RNA molecule was compared to the equilibrium binding to a consensus DNA molecule as a function of temperature, pH, monovalent salt concentration, and divalent salt concentration. The interaction of WT1-ZFP with both nucleic acids is an entropy-driven process. Binding of WT1-ZFP to RNA has a pH optimum that is narrower than that observed for binding to DNA. Binding of WT1-ZFP to DNA is optimal at 5 mM MgCl(2), while the highest affinity for RNA was observed in the absence of MgCl(2). Binding of WT1 to both nucleic acid ligands is sensitive to increasing monovalent salt concentration, with a greater effect observed for DNA than for RNA. Point mutations in the zinc fingers associated with Denys-Drash syndrome have dramatically different effects on the interaction of WT1-ZFP with DNA, but a consistent and modest effect on the interaction with RNA. The role of RNA sequence and secondary structure in the binding of WT1-ZFP was probed by site-directed mutagenesis. Results indicate that a hairpin loop is a critical structural feature required for protein binding, and that some consensus nucleotides can be substituted provided proper base pairing of the stem of the hairpin loop is maintained.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".