More and more confused about making SENSE

Erik A. Williams eaw at ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU
Fri Jan 5 14:36:01 EST 1996


Hey Netters,

I've been trying to follow the SENSE/ANTISENSE thread, and thought I 
understood it at one point, but thanks to Dr. Lasky's very confusing 
explanations, I'm really confused now.  Can someone else besides Dr. 
Lasky try to explain this to me?

My understanding has alsways been consistent with what Mick Jones writes:

>5'-AAGCTTCTACTGAGT-3'  DNA strand 1
>3'-TTCGAAGATGACTCA-5'  DNA strand 2
>         |
>         |
>         V
>5'-AAGCUUCUACUGAGU-3'  RNA strand 3
>
>In my book the following nomenclature seems okay;
>
>Strand 1 = SENSE strand (because it is the same sequence as the 
>transcribed RNA [strand 3])
>Strand 2 = ANTISENSE strand (this strand can bind to in vivo transcribed 
>RNA, form a duplex and inhibit gene expression, i.e. Antisense therapy).
>
>In the old days Strand 2 was called the CODING strand because it was the DNA
>strand that was the
>template used to make the transcribed RNA (strand 3), and hence strand 1 was
>NON-CODING.

which seems to be in disagreement with what Dr. Lasky writes, although I 
may be reading him wrong.  This is how I learned it, and to me this is
what makes sense (sorry, bad pun).

Erik



More information about the Methods mailing list