More and more confused about making SENSE
Ferland Louis H.
ferlandl at ERE.UMontreal.CA
Sat Jan 6 03:55:49 EST 1996
On 5 Jan 1996, Erik A. Williams wrote:
> Date: 5 Jan 1996 11:36:01 -0800
> From: Erik A. Williams <eaw at ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
> To: methods at net.bio.net
> Subject: More and more confused about making SENSE
> 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
> 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).
In which textbook? It is not how *I* learned it. I agree that it does make
sense (same bad pun), but so does the other possibility, as I posted
earlier. The bottom line (not strand, OOPS! another bad pun) is
CONFUSION. About the Lasky comment, I think this was HIS bailout.
Dr. Louis H. Ferland
Centre de Recherche, Hotel-Dieu de Montreal
Dept de Nutrition, Universite de Montreal
Phone: (514) 843-2757 FAX: (514) 843-2719
More information about the Methods