Table 1.

Binding affinities of Ei24N and CanRch1 to IMPs

B-GST protein His-IMP Kd Bmax 
  nM % 
Ei24N IMPβ1 WT 5.1 ± 0.6 100 ± 0.06 
 IMPβ1 IBBm ND 24.0 ± 5.0 (P < 0.001) 
 IMPα2 WT 7.3 ± 1.4 48.0 ± 5.8 (P < 0.001) 
 IMPα2ΔIBB 4.4 ± 2.2 101 ± 12 
CanRch1 IMPβ1 WT 4.5 ± 0.5 100 ± 0.2 
 IMPβ1 IBBm ND 10.0 ± 2.5 (P < 0.001) 
 IMPα2 WT 6.6 ± 3.5 48.4 ± 9.3 (P < 0.05) 
 IMPα2ΔIBB 9.6 ± 2.1 86.2 ± 7.0 
B-GST protein His-IMP Kd Bmax 
  nM % 
Ei24N IMPβ1 WT 5.1 ± 0.6 100 ± 0.06 
 IMPβ1 IBBm ND 24.0 ± 5.0 (P < 0.001) 
 IMPα2 WT 7.3 ± 1.4 48.0 ± 5.8 (P < 0.001) 
 IMPα2ΔIBB 4.4 ± 2.2 101 ± 12 
CanRch1 IMPβ1 WT 4.5 ± 0.5 100 ± 0.2 
 IMPβ1 IBBm ND 10.0 ± 2.5 (P < 0.001) 
 IMPα2 WT 6.6 ± 3.5 48.4 ± 9.3 (P < 0.05) 
 IMPα2ΔIBB 9.6 ± 2.1 86.2 ± 7.0 

Pooled data (n ≥ 3) from AlphaScreen assays performed as per Fig. 3 for the binding affinities (Kd) and maximal binding (Bmax) expressed as a percentage of Bmax relative to IMPβ1 for Ei24N and CanRch1, respectively. Results are for the mean ± SEM, with significant differences in maximal binding relative to IMPβ1 denoted by p-values. Harreman et al. (2003b) showed that binding of the IMPα IBB to IMPβ1 and IMPα2ΔIBB is near identical in terms of Kd.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal