JBC PeproTech; Our Business is Cytokines!

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Seidman, M. M.
Right arrow Articles by Cole, R. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Seidman, M. M.
Right arrow Articles by Cole, R. D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

JBC, Vol. 252, Issue 8, 2630-2639, Apr, 1977

Chromatin fractionation related to cell type and chromosome condensation but perhaps not to transcriptional activity

M. M. Seidman and R. D. Cole

A chromatin fractionation procedure has been developed that involves the shearing of swollen chromatin and the separation of chromatin fragments by sucrose gradient centrifugation. When chromatin from rapidly growing HeLa cells was fractionated, four partially resolved peaks were obtained. Partial characterization of the chromatin fractions indicated that each contained similar lengths of DNA formed in a complex with histones in nucleosomes. The most likely difference between the fractions is the degree of intra-or interstrand association of the fibers of nucleosomes. Chromatins from chicken erythrocytes and mitotic chromosomes were analyzed by the procedure. These chromatins yielded gradient profiles that were distinctly different from each other and from interphase chromatin. These results suggested that the fractionation procedure reflected at least some of the differences in the structure of chromatin known to exist in vivo. The association of pulse-labeled RNA with a particular chromatin fraction is frequently used to support claims of successful separation of transcriptionally active chromatin from inactive chromatin. Since our data show that the slowly sedimenting fractions preferentially bind RNA whose synthesis was clearly not in progress at the start of the fractionation, this criterion is suspect. The presence of equal amounts of satellite DNA in all fractions of mouse L-cell chromatin indicated that the method did not fractionate on the basis of the in vivo transcriptional activity.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 1977 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.