2013
DOI: 10.1021/jp404812a
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Independent versus Cooperative Binding in Polyethylenimine–DNA and Poly(l-lysine)–DNA Polyplexes

Abstract: The mechanism of polyethylenimine–DNA and poly(L-lysine)–DNA complex formation at pH 5.2 and 7.4 was studied by a time-resolved spectroscopic method. The formation of a polyplex core was observed to be complete at approximately N/P = 2, at which point nearly all DNA phosphate groups were bound by polymer amine groups. The data were analyzed further both by an independent binding model and by a cooperative model for multivalent ligand binding to multisubunit substrate. At pH 5.2, the polyplex formation was coop… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

4
46
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
(136 reference statements)
4
46
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, Ketola et al showed that the equilibrium constant of 25 kDa branched PEI to plasmid DNA (7164 bp) using time-resolved fluorescence spectroscopy was 7.3×10 hydroxyethyl) piperazine-N′-2-ethanesulfonic acid (HEPES) and 75 mM Sodium chloride (NaCl) (pH 7.4). 14) This value is slightly lower than the value obtained from our previous study under similar ionic and pH conditions (1.0-1. ).…”
contrasting
confidence: 60%
“…Recently, Ketola et al showed that the equilibrium constant of 25 kDa branched PEI to plasmid DNA (7164 bp) using time-resolved fluorescence spectroscopy was 7.3×10 hydroxyethyl) piperazine-N′-2-ethanesulfonic acid (HEPES) and 75 mM Sodium chloride (NaCl) (pH 7.4). 14) This value is slightly lower than the value obtained from our previous study under similar ionic and pH conditions (1.0-1. ).…”
contrasting
confidence: 60%
“…We observed that DNA loading was maximum when only non-degradable, highly charged polymers were used in the middle layers of the formulation, rather than more weakly charged and biodegradable polymers. This loading difference may be due to the differences in binding affinity between the varying cationic polymers and DNA [24, 28]. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the binding affinity [31] between the polymer types of interest vary substantially it may also be beneficial to assess the degradation rate even within the same cell type [14] as this could change the proportion of DNA in an unbound state vs. a polymer-bound state, affecting DNA degradation rate. Furthermore, if the Cy3 density conjugated to pDNA varies, re-calibrating the plasmid conversion would also be necessary.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%