Fig. 2: Design and optimization of three types of MITA based on different secondary structures. | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Design and optimization of three types of MITA based on different secondary structures.

From: Rational design of microRNA-responsive switch for programmable translational control in mammalian cells

Fig. 2

a Schematic illustration of Toehold-like design. b Schematic illustration of Stem-loop design. c Schematic illustration of 3-arm-junction design. d IRES-mediated tagBFP translation of TL design in response to artificial miR-FF4 mimics (TLx, x denotes the number of base-pairing in the stem). e IRES-mediated tagBFP translation of SL design in response to artificial miR-FF4 mimics (SLx, x denotes the number of mismatches in the stem). f IRES-mediated tagBFP translation of AJ design in response to artificial miR-FF4 mimics (AJx, x denotes the number of mismatches in the 3-arm-junction). HEK293 cell line was used for the transfection experiments. Data are presented as mean values with error bars representing the standard deviation of three independent biological replicates (n = 3 in each group). miRBS, miRNA binding sites. Ago, argonaute. MITA, miRNA-responsive IRES translation activator. TL, toehold-like design of MITA. SL, Stem-loop design of MITA. AJ, 3-arm-junction design MITA. Schematic illustration figures were created with BioRender.com with publication licenses. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page