Antisense and sensibilities

Jfloring at aol.com Jfloring at aol.com
Tue Jan 2 18:39:28 EST 1996


Dear netters,  
There's been a bit of discussion about the definition of the sense vs.
antisense strands of DNA.  I, for one, am more confused than ever, and the
howe vs laskey debate hasn't helped one iota:   For an example of this
NONsense,  see: "Subj:  (Lasky not making) SENSE VS ANTISENSE"

I agree that the terms "template" and "non-template" are more explicit
(although they lack the punch of their predecessors). However, it seems to me
that there's one use of the sense/antisense terminology that will not go
away.  There are therapies, theories, and companies based on the idea that
you can use ANTISENSE strategies to wipe out expression of the offending (or
interesting, or expensive) gene in selected tissues.  How does that term
affect the names of the other components?
Here are the players:  I have not named them because I'd like to hear what
you think makes sense (makes SENSE?....now I'M doing it.....).  
What would you name these?
1. The DNA strand that codes for the ANTISENSE RNA.
2. The DNA strand that codes for the normal (SENSE RNA)
3.  The complementary strand of #1
4.  The complementary strand of #2 
Cheers,  Jeanne



More information about the Methods mailing list