Minimizing variables among hairpin-based RNAi vectors reveals the potency of shRNAs

(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds. If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)

Click on image to view larger version.

FIGURE 2.
FIGURE 2.

Disparate strand biasing confounds shRNA and artificial miRNA comparisons. (A) Small transcript Northern blot performed at 48 h post-transfection of HD2.1 RNAi expression plasmids in HEK293 cells shows improved yield of processed antisense RNA (AS) from CMV-driven artificial miRNA variants 1 and 2 (miV1, miV2) relative to the U6-driven first-generation shHD2.1 and a mock-treated sample (–). Pre- designates the precursor stem–loop. (B) Q-PCR analysis for endogenous HD mRNA levels performed 48 h after transfection of HD2.1 RNAi expression plasmids into HEK293 cells. Results were normalized to GAPDH mRNA levels and are shown as mean±SEM relative to mock-treated samples (n =3, * = P < 0.05). (C) Strand biasing of U6-driven HD2.1 RNAi vectors. Strand biasing was assessed by measuring luciferase activity from reporters containing either sense (intended; binds RNAi antisense) or antisense (unintended; binds RNAi sense) target sequences in the 3′ UTR (Fig. 1C). RNAi reporter and RNAi expression plasmids were cotransfected into HEK293 cells, and Dual-Glo Luciferase assays were performed at 24 h. Results are shown as mean±SEM (n = 4) relative to mock-treated controls and demonstrate that shHD2.1 preferentially loads the unintended siRNA strand while miHD2.1 more often loads the intended strand.

This Article

  1. RNA 14: 1834-1844