![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © Copyright 2005 by RNA Society Characterization of a native hammerhead ribozyme derived from schistosomes 1Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics and 2Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, 77843, USA 3These authors contributed equally to this work. Reprint requests to: Victoria J. DeRose, Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA; e-mail: vderose/at/tamu.edu; fax: (979) 845-4719. Received May 28, 2004; Accepted November 6, 2004. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract A recent re-examination of the role of the helices surrounding the conserved core of the hammerhead ribozyme has identified putative loop–loop interactions between stems I and II in native hammerhead sequences. These extended hammerhead sequences are more active at low concentrations of divalent cations than are minimal hammerheads. The loop–loop interactions are proposed to stabilize a more active conformation of the conserved core. Here, a kinetic and thermodynamic characterization of an extended hammerhead sequence derived from Schistosoma mansoni is performed. Biphasic kinetics are observed, suggesting the presence of at least two conformers, one cleaving with a fast rate and the other with a slow rate. Replacing loop II with a poly(U) sequence designed to eliminate the interaction between the two loops results in greatly diminished activity, suggesting that the loop–loop interactions do aid in forming a more active conformation. Previous studies with minimal hammerheads have shown deleterious effects of Rp-phosphorothioate substitutions at the cleavage site and 5′ to A9, both of which could be rescued with Cd2+. Here, phosphorothioate modifications at the cleavage site and 5′ to A9 were made in the schistosome-derived sequence. In Mg2+, both phosphorothioate substitutions decreased the overall fraction cleaved without significantly affecting the observed rate of cleavage. The addition of Cd2+ rescued cleavage in both cases, suggesting that these are still putative metal binding sites in this native sequence. Keywords: RNA catalysis, hammerhead, ribozyme, metal ions, RNA ligation INTRODUCTION Since their discovery by Cech and Altman, ribozymes have been dissected to find their minimal active form and to determine their catalytic mechanisms (Doudna and Cech 2002). Of the nucleolytic ribozymes, the hammerhead ribozyme (HHRz) is the smallest member (Takagi et al. 2001; DeRose 2002; Lilley 2003). The HHRz performs a reversible site-specific phosphodiester bond cleavage reaction that results in a 5′-OH and a 2′, 3′-cyclic phosphate. Originally found in several single-stranded circular plant pathogenic RNAs, including the tobacco ringspot virus satellite RNA, the lucerne transient streak virus, and the avocado sun-blotch viroid (Hutchins et al. 1986; Prody et al. 1986; Forster and Symons 1987), HHRzs have also been found in cave crickets (Rojas et al. 2000), salamanders (Zhang and Epstein 1996), and schistosomes (Ferbeyre et al. 1998). Hammerhead and hammerhead-like sequences have also been found in a variety of other genomes (Ferbeyre et al. 2000), and in vitro evolution studies indicate that these highly divergent organisms may have settled on this small ribozyme as the simplest solution to a biochemical problem (Salehi-Ashtiani and Szostak 2001). The minimal HHRz consists of three base-paired stems surrounding a conserved core of nucleotides (Forster and Symons 1987; Uhlenbeck 1987; Haseloff and Gerlach 1988). In early studies, the helical stems of the HHRz were truncated to facilitate in vitro studies resulting in a minimal sequence of fewer than 50 nt (Fig. 1A 1A).
At physiological ionic strengths, divalent metal ions are thought to aid in the folding and possibly the catalytic mechanism of the HHRz (DeRose 2003). In comparison with minimal HHRzs, native HHRz sequences containing putative loop–loop interactions have higher observed rates and lower divalent ion requirements (De la Pena et al. 2003; Khvorova et al. 2003; Canny et al. 2004). The lower divalent ion requirements may be related to the ability of these loop–loop interactions to stabilize a correctly folded ribozyme core. Consistent with this hypothesis, fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) experiments on an extended HHRz from Schistosoma mansoni, a species of digenetic trematodes that parasitize many animal species, suggests that folding occurs in a single step in the micromolar concentration range of Mg2+ (Penedo et al. 2004). To further understand the influence of interacting loops on the characteristics of HHRzs, we have studied the activity and stabilization of constructs derived from S. mansoni (Fig. 1B,C 1B,C; RESULTS An extended hammerhead construct derived from S. mansoni (SL1L2) with a 43-nt enzyme strand and a 20-nt substrate strand was used to explore HHRzs with putative loop–loop interactions between stems I and II (Fig. 1B 1B).
The low fraction cleaved of SL1L2 suggests that hybrid formation might be impeded in this sequence. Indeed, thermal denaturation studies of the SL1L2 substrate strand alone show evidence for a stable structure with a Tm of 51°C and a ΔH of 59.1 kcal/mol (Fig. 3A 3A),
In an attempt to destabilize competing structures and enhance hybrid formation, SL1L2 was altered slightly. Using Mfold predictions, the boxed residues highlighted in purple in the stems were changed, generating the MSL1L2 sequence (Fig. 1C 1C).
These studies indicate that the small changes made to SL1L2 decreased the stability of alternative conformations of the individual strands resulting in an increase in the amount of hybrid formed. Consistent with this, the MSL1L2 hammerhead showed a total fraction cleaved above 0.6 for all concentrations of Mg2+ (Fig. 5A 5A).
Activity studies in other supporting cations all show much faster rates for MSL1L2 over those of the minimal HHRz (Table 1). Activity studies of MSL1L2 in 0.01 mM Mn2+ result in a kobs for the fast population that is 200-fold greater than that observed for the minimal HHRz (Hunsicker and DeRose 2000). The kobs for MSL1L2 in 1 M Na + is similar to that seen for the minimal HHRz in 4 M Li+ (O’Rear et al. 2001). This indicates that MSL1L2 requires lower concentrations of cations for activity supported by either divalent or monovalent ions. MSL1L2 activity was also observed in 0.01 mM Co(NH3)63+ with a kobs of 0.09 min−1 (Table 1), whereas no activity was observed for the minimal HHRz at concentrations of Co(NH3)63+ < 10 mM (Horton and DeRose 2000; Curtis and Bartel 2001). This result suggests that inner sphere cation coordination is not necessary for activity of the extended HHRz sequence. Biphasic kinetic traces indicate the presence of multiple processes. Ligation studies were performed to determine whether the reverse reaction could be contributing to the biphasic kinetics. For MSL1L2 in 5 mM HEPES (pH 7.0), 100 mM Na+, and 1 mM Mg2+, values of Keqint ~ 17 and klig of ~ 0.32 min−1 are determined (Fig. 6 6).
An alternative method to test the influence of ligation on the observed kinetics is to perform a chase experiment. In this experiment, excess unlabeled 3′ or 5′ product strand is added to an ongoing reaction in order to compete with labeled enzyme-bound products, preventing possible religation (Zamel et al. 2004). If the reaction has reached an equilibrium between cleavage and ligation, addition of cold product should result in a burst of new cleavage products. Here, when excess of either cleavage product was added to the MSL1L2 reaction, no additional burst phase was observed (data not shown). This is consistent with the low measured rate of ligation for MSL1L2. Taken together, these data suggest that the reverse reaction is not contributing to the biphasic kinetics and a likely scenario is that MSL1L2 exists in at least two conformations that result in slow and fast cleaving populations. To further test the possibility that two species contribute to the biphasic kinetics, a native gel mobility assay was performed on the MSL1L2 complex (Fig. 7 7).
The importance of loop–loop interactions in the MSL1L2 ribozyme was examined by changing the boxed loop nucleotides in stem II to U residues (Fig. 1C 1C).
In studies of the minimal hammerhead, a decrease in activity in Mg2+ due to phosphorothioate substitution and a subsequent rescue by the addition of Cd2+ has indicated potential metal binding to the Rp oxygen of the cleavage site phosphate and to the Rp oxygen of the phosphate 5′ to A9 (Dahm and Uhlenbeck 1991; Slim and Gait 1991; Wang et al. 1999). These studies have been repeated here with the MSL1L2 HHRz. In each case, activity studies of MSL1L2 sequences with a phosphorothioate either at the cleavage site or 5′ to A9 were performed on a mixture of the Rp and Sp diastereomers. A phosphorothioate modification (PS) at the cleavage site of MSL1L2 results in a total fraction cleaved of ~ 0.45 in 1 mM Mg2+ (Fig. 9 9).
A phosphorothioate substitution 5′ to A9 also results in a decrease in the total fraction cleaved in the presence of Mg2+, giving a kobs of the fast phase of 3.3 min−1, similar to that of the unmodified MSL1L2 (Fig. 10 10).
DISCUSSION For many years, HHRz research has focused on minimal hammerheads that were greatly truncated from native sequences (Uhlenbeck 2003). These HHRzs require millimolar concentrations of divalent cations for maximal activity, which are well above physiological concentrations. In addition, biochemical data on chemically modified HHRzs have often seemed incongruent with crystal structure data, where functional groups seemingly unimportant for activity in the crystal structure greatly reduced the activity observed in biochemical experiments (McKay 1996). A recent study showed that when a minimal HHRz was inserted in the 3′ untranslated region of a reporter gene, inactivation was not observed, suggesting that this minimal HHRz was not active in vivo (Khvorova et al. 2003). However, when the experiments were performed with native HHRzs, gene inactivation did occur. Further in vitro study of these native HHRzs indicated that they were highly active at cellular divalent cation concentrations and that loop–loop interactions were responsible for this increase in activity. Thus, referring back to nature’s original design has refreshed hammerhead research. Here, we explore a native HHRz construct derived from S. mansoni that is reasonably behaved and find high levels of activity at micromolar concentrations of divalent cations. Unlike the minimal HHRz, activity is observed at Mg2+ concentrations as low as 10 μM. At higher Mg2+ concentrations, a burst phase is measured with rates >10-fold over those observed in the minimal HHRzs (Table 1). Minimal HHRzs have notoriously slow kinetics, which has been proposed to be due to problematic conformational equilibria between inactive and active structures (Wang et al. 1999). This problem may be alleviated in the fast-cleaving form of the MSL1L2, bringing its rate closer to those of larger, more structured ribozymes. In the hepatitis delta virus (HDV) ribozyme, for example, the fast folding mutant G11C cleaves with a rate of 3.3 min−1 in 10 mM Mg2+ at pH 7.0 (Nakano et al. 2003), similar to the rate observed here for the fast cleaving phase. Multiple conformations of the MSL1L2 hammerhead appear to be responsible for the observed biphasic kinetics. A native gel mobility study suggests the presence of at least two conformations. Alternative conformations have also been proposed to cause complications in the newt extended HHRz (Marusic et al. 1997). An observed rate of ligation that is much less than that of cleavage as well as a chase experiment indicate that increased ligation is not a significant contributor to the observed biphasic kinetics. However, the Keqint of the minimal hammerhead is almost 10 times larger than that of MSL1L2. An increase in ligation rate has also been observed in cross-linked minimal HHRzs (Stage-Zimmermann and Uhlenbeck 2001; Blount and Uhlenbeck 2002), and a recent crystal structure of a minimal hammerhead with cross-linked stems I and II suggests that switching between ligase and nuclease activity is determined by the helical orientation of stem I relative to stem II (Dunham et al. 2003). This suggests that the loop–loop interactions between stems I and II could stabilize the hammerhead in a near active conformation and ease the switch from cleavage to ligation. FRET studies indicate that the folding of an extended hammerhead occurs in a single step in the presence of micromolar concentrations of Mg2+ (Penedo et al. 2004). In this study, however, as well as in a study by Pardi and coworkers of a similar sequence (Canny et al. 2004), higher concentrations of Mg2+ are found to be needed for maximal cleavage activity. These results parallel findings for the minimal HHRz, indicating functional importance for at least two types of cation interactions can be observed, one of which induces an initial folding step and the other of which enhances catalysis (for review, see DeRose 2003). The increased activity at low concentrations of divalent cations of the MSL1L2 hammerhead over minimal HHRzs appears to result from loop–loop interactions. When these loop–loop interactions are disrupted, a large decrease in activity is observed (Fig. 7 7; In the minimal HHRz, studies of phosphorothioate substitutions at the cleavage site and 5′ to A9 indicated potential metal binding to the pro-R oxygens of the phosphates at these locations (Dahm and Uhlenbeck 1991; Slim and Gait 1991; Wang et al. 1999). Here, initial studies with mixed Rp and Sp phosphorothioate diastereomers at the cleavage site or 5′ to A9 indicate that modification of these sites can also disrupt activity in the native HHRz. As is found in the minimal HHRz, Cd2+ rescues the activity of both phosphorothioates in the native sequence. The A9/G10.1 metal site has been corroborated by spectroscopic methods in the minimal HHRz (Morrissey et al. 1999a,b, 2000; Maderia et al. 2000). The importance of these two putative metal sites appears to be similar in both minimal and native hammerhead constructs. MATERIALS AND METHODS Oligonucleotides RNA sequences in Figure 1B,C were purchased from Dharmacon, purified by denaturing gel electrophoresis on 20%/7 M urea polyacrylamide gels, and electroeluted from the gel slice. Sequences corresponding to P1 and P2 (5′ and 3′-OH) were also purchased from Dharmacon. Eluted transcripts were dialyzed against 5 mM triethanolamine (TEA; pH 7.0), 100 mM Na+, for at least 48 h with several reservoir changes, concentrated (Centricon-3, Millipore), ethanol precipitated, and resuspended into the same buffer to form a stock solution. The substrate strand used in the UV thermal denaturation and negative gel mobility studies had a 2′-O-methyl modification at the cleavage site. Chemicals All reagents used were molecular biology grade or higher. MgCl2 and MnCl2 metal stocks were purchased from Sigma. CdCl2 was purchased from Alfa Aesar. Co(NH3)63+ was purchased from Al-drich Chemical. Measurements of hammerhead ribozyme activity Activities and rate constants for the hammerhead ribozyme were determined using the 43-nt RNA enzyme and 5′-32P-labeled 20-nt substrate strand pictured in Figure 1B,C 1B,C.
where Ft is the fraction cleaved at time t, and Ff is the maximum fraction cleaved. Where Equation 1 was deemed insufficient to describe the data, the biphasic Equation 2 was used:
where Fi and ki correspond to the fraction cleaved and rate constant for population (i). Due to the limitations of a manual quench protocol, k values above ~ 6 min−1 are not reported. Ligation reactions The 5′-32P-labeled P1 strand (5′-CGCGUC-3′) containing the appropriate 2′,3′-cyclic phosphate was generated by ribozyme-mediated cleavage of 5′-32P-labeled substrate strand and purified by gel electrophoresis on a 20%/7 M urea polyacrylamide gel. The RNA was eluted from the gel in 5 mM TEA (pH 7.0), with shaking overnight at 4°C, ethanol precipitated, and resuspended in an appropriate volume of 5 mM TEA (pH 7.0). The concentration was determined by scintillation counting. Strand P2 (5′-CUGUAUUCCACUGC-3′) was ordered from Dharmacon and purified as described above. Single turnover ligation reactions were performed by combining varying concentrations of enzyme strand (1–50 μM), a 20% excess of strand P2, and 1 nM 5′-32P-labeled P1 in 5 mM HEPES (pH 7.0) and 100 mM Na+ in a final volume of 18 μL. The reactions were initiated by the addition of 2 μL of 10 mM MgCl2 to yield a final concentration of 1 mM Mg2+. Samples were taken at various times, quenched with formamide loading buffer, and placed on dry ice. Samples were fractionated on 20%/7 M urea polyacrylamide gels. The fraction of ligated 5′-32P-labeled substrate was measured as a function of time. The maximal fraction ligated was determined for each concentration of enzyme by fitting the observed data to the same double exponential equation used for the cleavage reactions (Equation 2) and totaling the fraction ligated from each phase. The value for klig was determined as was previously described for a minimal hammerhead sequence (Hertel et al. 1994). The internal equilibrium constant can be described as Keqint = [E · P1 · P2]/[E · S]. Assuming that Fmax,lig [E ·S], where Fmax,lig is the maximal fraction ligated, Keqint = 1/Fmax,lig. In this case, Fmax,lig = 0.058 (the average from measurements taken with 15 to 50 μM enzyme), which gives a Keqint of 17.2. As Keqint = kcleavage/klig and at 1 mM Mg2+ kcleavage = 5.5 min−1, a klig of 0.32 min−1 was calculated.Chase experiments were also performed as an additional test on the effect of ligation on the observed cleavage rates. Reactions were allowed to proceed as described above for single-turnover cleavage kinetics until equilibrium was reached, usually for 30–60 min. Unlabeled cleavage product P1 (3′-OH) or P2 was then added in 50-fold excess of the enzyme strand to compete with enzyme-bound product strands, and additional time points were collected to search for a new burst of 5′-labeled cleavage product. UV thermal denaturation studies Substrate strands containing an inhibitory 2′-O-methyl at the cleavage site cytosine were used for thermal denaturation studies. Samples were prepared at final concentrations of 3 μM RNA and heated to 90°C for 90 sec and cooled on ice for 30 min. Bench cooling for 1 h did not change the results of the melt experiments. Melts were performed using a Varian Cary 300 UV-Vis spectrometer. Absorbance was recorded at 260 and 280 nm. The melting temperature (Tm) was determined by taking the first derivative of absorbance with respect to temperature (dA/dT). Data were fit using a nonlinear least squares fitting algorithm to a sequential folding model previously described (Theimer et al. 1998). Tm values at different concentrations of divalent cation were plotted as 1/Tm versus metal concentration and fit to Equation 3 (Laing et al. 1994):
where Tm is the melting temperature at a given metal concentration, Kf and Ku are the metal binding constants for the folded and unfolded forms of the RNA, L is the free metal concentration and m is the number of phosphates participating in a given unfolding event. ΔHo and To are the enthalpy and melting temperature of the transition in the absence of added metal. Native gel mobility assay For observing the mobility of the substrate strand alone 2.5 μM of cold 2′OMe substrate strand plus a trace amount of 5′ end-labeled 2′OMe substrate was renatured in 5 mM HEPES, pH 7.0, and 100 mM NaCl at 90°C for 90 sec and then placed on ice for 30 min before loading onto a nondenaturing gel. To prepare samples used for observing complex formation under the conditions used for kinetics, 3 μM of cold enzyme strand was mixed with 2.5 μM cold 2′OMe substrate plus a trace amount of 5′ end-labeled 2′OMe substrate and renatured as above. For the enzyme-substrate titration, 10-fold excess or greater of cold enzyme (up to 10 μM) was mixed with 1 nM cold 2′OMe substrate plus a trace amount of 5′ end-labeled 2′OMe substrate and annealed as above. After cooling on ice, Mg2+ was added to a final concentration of 1 mM and the samples were allowed to equilibrate at room temperature for 5 min. Glycerol was added to 10% final concentration and the samples were fractionated on a 20% (19:1 acrylamide/bis)/0.5× TBE native gel containing 1 mM Mg2+. The running buffer was 0.5× TBE and it also contained 1 mM Mg2+. The gels were run at 250 V for 8–10 h at 4°C to prevent excessive heating. Gels were dried and visualized using a phosphorimager system (Fuji). Acknowledgments This work was supported by the funding from the NIH (GM58096) and NSF (0111696) to V.J.D. and an NIH Training Grant fellowship to E.M.O. Notes Article and publication are at http://www.rnajournal.org/cgi/doi/10.1261/rna.7950605. REFERENCES
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nature. 2002 Jul 11; 418(6894):222-8.
[Nature. 2002]Nucleic Acids Res. 2001 May 1; 29(9):1815-34.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2001]Chem Biol. 2002 Sep; 9(9):961-9.
[Chem Biol. 2002]Trends Biochem Sci. 2003 Sep; 28(9):495-501.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 2003]Nucleic Acids Res. 1986 May 12; 14(9):3627-40.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1986]Cell. 1987 Jul 3; 50(1):9-16.
[Cell. 1987]Nature. 1987 Aug 13-19; 328(6131):596-600.
[Nature. 1987]Nature. 1988 Aug 18; 334(6183):585-91.
[Nature. 1988]Nature. 1994 Nov 3; 372(6501):68-74.
[Nature. 1994]Cell. 1995 Jun 30; 81(7):991-1002.
[Cell. 1995]Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2003 Jun; 13(3):317-24.
[Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2003]EMBO J. 2003 Oct 15; 22(20):5561-70.
[EMBO J. 2003]Nat Struct Biol. 2003 Sep; 10(9):708-12.
[Nat Struct Biol. 2003]J Am Chem Soc. 2004 Sep 8; 126(35):10848-9.
[J Am Chem Soc. 2004]RNA. 2004 May; 10(5):880-8.
[RNA. 2004]Mol Cell Biol. 1998 Jul; 18(7):3880-8.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1998]J Inorg Biochem. 2000 Jul 1; 80(3-4):271-81.
[J Inorg Biochem. 2000]J Mol Biol. 1999 May 21; 288(5):911-40.
[J Mol Biol. 1999]Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1; 31(13):3406-15.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2003]RNA. 2004 Mar; 10(3):335-43.
[RNA. 2004]J Inorg Biochem. 2000 Jul 1; 80(3-4):271-81.
[J Inorg Biochem. 2000]RNA. 2001 Apr; 7(4):537-45.
[RNA. 2001]Biochemistry. 2000 Sep 19; 39(37):11408-16.
[Biochemistry. 2000]RNA. 2001 Apr; 7(4):546-52.
[RNA. 2001]Biochemistry. 1994 Mar 22; 33(11):3374-85.
[Biochemistry. 1994]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Feb 10; 101(6):1467-72.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]RNA. 2004 May; 10(5):880-8.
[RNA. 2004]J Am Chem Soc. 2004 Sep 8; 126(35):10848-9.
[J Am Chem Soc. 2004]Biochemistry. 1994 Mar 22; 33(11):3374-85.
[Biochemistry. 1994]Biochemistry. 1991 Oct 1; 30(39):9464-9.
[Biochemistry. 1991]Nucleic Acids Res. 1991 Mar 25; 19(6):1183-8.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1991]Biochemistry. 1999 Oct 26; 38(43):14363-78.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Jun 1; 25(11):2189-96.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1997]RNA. 2003 Dec; 9(12):1415-7.
[RNA. 2003]RNA. 1996 May; 2(5):395-403.
[RNA. 1996]Nat Struct Biol. 2003 Sep; 10(9):708-12.
[Nat Struct Biol. 2003]Biochemistry. 1999 Oct 26; 38(43):14363-78.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Biochemistry. 2003 Mar 18; 42(10):2982-94.
[Biochemistry. 2003]Eur J Biochem. 1997 Jul 1; 247(1):396-401.
[Eur J Biochem. 1997]Nat Struct Biol. 2001 Oct; 8(10):863-7.
[Nat Struct Biol. 2001]Biochemistry. 2002 May 28; 41(21):6834-41.
[Biochemistry. 2002]J Mol Biol. 2003 Sep 12; 332(2):327-36.
[J Mol Biol. 2003]RNA. 2004 May; 10(5):880-8.
[RNA. 2004]J Am Chem Soc. 2004 Sep 8; 126(35):10848-9.
[J Am Chem Soc. 2004]Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2003 Jun; 13(3):317-24.
[Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2003]EMBO J. 2003 Oct 15; 22(20):5561-70.
[EMBO J. 2003]Nat Struct Biol. 2003 Sep; 10(9):708-12.
[Nat Struct Biol. 2003]RNA. 2004 May; 10(5):880-8.
[RNA. 2004]J Biol Chem. 1997 May 23; 272(21):13629-39.
[J Biol Chem. 1997]Nat Struct Biol. 1999 Jun; 6(6):544-9.
[Nat Struct Biol. 1999]Biochemistry. 1991 Oct 1; 30(39):9464-9.
[Biochemistry. 1991]Nucleic Acids Res. 1991 Mar 25; 19(6):1183-8.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1991]Biochemistry. 1999 Oct 26; 38(43):14363-78.
[Biochemistry. 1999]Biochemistry. 2000 Oct 10; 39(40):12113-20.
[Biochemistry. 2000]Biochemistry. 1994 Mar 22; 33(11):3374-85.
[Biochemistry. 1994]J Mol Biol. 1998 Jun 12; 279(3):545-64.
[J Mol Biol. 1998]J Mol Biol. 1994 Apr 15; 237(5):577-87.
[J Mol Biol. 1994]J Inorg Biochem. 2000 Jul 1; 80(3-4):271-81.
[J Inorg Biochem. 2000]RNA. 2001 Apr; 7(4):546-52.
[RNA. 2001]RNA. 2001 Apr; 7(4):537-45.
[RNA. 2001]