Figure 4. Effect of CRM1 inhibition on... | Rockefeller University Press

Figure 4.

$Figure 4. Effect of CRM1 inhibition on the distribution of injected U snRNA precursors. (A) The same mixture of 32P-labeled RNAs as in Fig. 2 A was injected into the nuclei of Xenopus oocytes either alone (lanes 1–6) or together with ΔCD (lanes 7–9), ΔN (lanes 10–12), 0.3 µg/oocyte BSAmut (lanes 13–15), BSAmut + ΔCD (lanes 16–18), BSAmut + ΔN (lanes 19–21), 0.3 µg/oocyte BSA-NES (lanes 22–24), BSA-NES + ΔCD (lanes 25–27), or BSA-NES + ΔN (lanes 28–30). RNA was analyzed as in Fig. 2 A. (B and C) The ratio of the Nppt signal against the nuclear fraction total signal of U1ΔSm and U5ΔSm, respectively, was calculated from three independent experiments as in A. The means and standard deviations for BSA-NES alone, BSA-NES + ΔCD, and BSA-NES + ΔN are shown. C, cytoplasmic fraction.$

Effect of CRM1 inhibition on the distribution of injected U snRNA precursors. (A) The same mixture of ³²P-labeled RNAs as in Fig. 2 A was injected into the nuclei of Xenopus oocytes either alone (lanes 1–6) or together with ΔCD (lanes 7–9), ΔN (lanes 10–12), 0.3 µg/oocyte BSAmut (lanes 13–15), BSAmut + ΔCD (lanes 16–18), BSAmut + ΔN (lanes 19–21), 0.3 µg/oocyte BSA-NES (lanes 22–24), BSA-NES + ΔCD (lanes 25–27), or BSA-NES + ΔN (lanes 28–30). RNA was analyzed as in Fig. 2 A. (B and C) The ratio of the Nppt signal against the nuclear fraction total signal of U1ΔSm and U5ΔSm, respectively, was calculated from three independent experiments as in A. The means and standard deviations for BSA-NES alone, BSA-NES + ΔCD, and BSA-NES + ΔN are shown. C, cytoplasmic fraction.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only