mouse anti phospho stat3 tyr705 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology)
Structured Review

Mouse Anti Phospho Stat3 Tyr705, supplied by Santa Cruz Biotechnology, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1066 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/stat3+expression+construct/pmc06389286-9-2-9?v=Santa+Cruz+Biotechnology
Average 96 stars, based on 1066 article reviews
Images
1) Product Images from "MicroRNA-122 supports robust innate immunity in hepatocytes by targeting the RTKs/STAT3 signaling pathway"
Article Title: MicroRNA-122 supports robust innate immunity in hepatocytes by targeting the RTKs/STAT3 signaling pathway
Journal: eLife
doi: 10.7554/eLife.41159
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Structure of the two lentiviral transfer vectors used for the expression of miR-122 hairpins (upper) and a Tet3G trans-activator (lower). ( B ) qRT-PCR analysis of miR-122 levels in HepG2, Huh7, miR-122-Tet-On cells with (G2/122-ON) or without (G2/122-OFF) doxycycline treatment (1000 ng/ml, 72 hr). ( C ) Comparison of the effect of transient and stable miR-122 overexpression on p-STAT3. qRT-PCR data are from one experiment that was representative of two independent experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates).
Techniques Used: Expressing, Quantitative RT-PCR, Comparison, Over Expression
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Analysis of p-STAT1 expression in HepG2 cells first transfected with mimics (NC or miR-122) for 2 days and then treated with IFN-β or IL-29 for 5–60 min. ( B ) qRT-PCR analysis of the five SOCS genes in HepG2 cells first treated with mimics for 2 days, and then transfected with JFH1 RNA for 24 hr. ( C ) qRT-PCR analysis of STAT3 mRNA in HepG2 cells, treated as in panel B. ( D ) Analysis of total and phosphorylated STAT3 in HepG2 cells treated with three independent siRNAs (si-1, si-2 and si-3) at a final concentration of 20 nM. ( E ) Analysis of p-STAT1 and MDA5 in HepG2 cells transfected with STAT3 siRNA and then treated with JFH1 RNA or poly(I:C). ( F ) Analysis of the dose-dependent effects of cryptotanshinone (CTS) and S3I-201 on p-STAT3. HepG2 cells were treated with either CST or S3I-201 at the indicated concentrations for 24 hr. qRT-PCR data are from one experiment that was representative of two ( B ) or three ( C ) independent experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates).
Techniques Used: Expressing, Transfection, Quantitative RT-PCR, Concentration Assay
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Luciferase activity of a STAT3-responsible promoter construct in HepG2 cells co-transfected with mimics (NC or miR-122) for 2 days, and then transfected with SGR-JFH1 RNA for the indicated time. ( B ) Western blot analysis of total and phosphorylated STAT3 (p-STAT3, Tyr705) in HepG2 cells first transfected with mimics (NC or miR-122) for 2 days, and then treated with JFH1 RNA or poly(I:C). ( C ) Analysis of STAT3 protein in HepG2 cells treated with mimics (NC or miR-122) or siRNAs (NC or STAT3). ( D, E ) Analysis of the mRNAs ( D ) and proteins ( E ) of IFNs in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs (NC or STAT3) and then JFH1 RNA. Cells treated with miR-122 or NC mimics were used as controls in panel D. ( F ) Analysis of IFN mRNAs in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and then with poly(I:C). ( G, H ) Analysis of p-STAT1 protein and IFN mRNAs in HepG2 cells treated with either S3I-201 or cryptotanshinone (CST) for 24 hr, and then transfected with poly(I:C). Luciferase data are from three experiments (mean +SD). ELISA data are from two experiments (mean +SD). qRT-PCR data are from one experiment that was representative of three experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001. 10.7554/eLife.41159.021 Figure 3—source data 1. qRT-PCR analysis of the five SOCS genes in HepG2 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.022 Figure 3—source data 2. Luciferase activity of a STAT3-responsible promoter construct in HepG2 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.023 Figure 3—source data 3. qRT-PCR analysis of STAT3 mRNA in HepG2 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.024 Figure 3—source data 4. qRT-PCR analysis of IFN mRNAs in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and then treated with JFH1. 10.7554/eLife.41159.025 Figure 3—source data 5. ELISA analysis of IFN proteins in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and then treated with JFH1. 10.7554/eLife.41159.026 Figure 3—source data 6. qRT-PCR analysis of IFN mRNAs in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and then treated with poly(I:C). 10.7554/eLife.41159.027 Figure 3—source data 7. qRT-PCR analysis of IFN mRNAs in HepG2 cells treated with either S3I-201 or cryptotanshinone (CST). 10.7554/eLife.41159.028 Figure 3—source data 8. qRT-PCR analysis of IFN mRNAs in Huh7 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.029 Figure 3—source data 9. qRT-PCR analysis of IFN mRNAs in Hep3B cells.
Techniques Used: Luciferase, Activity Assay, Construct, Transfection, Western Blot, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Quantitative RT-PCR
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Western blot analysis of p-STAT1, p-STAT3 and IRF1 in Huh7 cells first transfected with mimics, siRNAs or inhibitors (for 2 days), and then treated with poly(I:C) for the indicated durations. T1, miR-NC (20nM); T2, miR-122 (20nM); T3, si-NC (20nM); T4, si-STAT3 (20nM); T5, NC inhibitor (40nM); T6, miR-122 inhibitor (40nM). ( B ) qRT-PCR analysis of IFN mRNA Huh7 cells, treated as in panel A. ( C ) Western blot analysis of p-STAT3 expression in cells transfected with mimics (NC or miR-122) for 2 days. ( D ) Analysis of the indicated proteins or IFN mRNAs in Hep3B cells, treated as in panels A and B. qRT-PCR data are one experiment that was representative of three independent experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates).
Techniques Used: Western Blot, Transfection, Quantitative RT-PCR, Expressing
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) qRT-PCR analysis of IRF1, IRF3, NFKB1 and RELA in HepG2 cells first treated with mimics or siRNAs, and then transfected with or without JFH1 RNA for 24 hr. ( B ) Analysis of IRF1 and IRF3 protein expression in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and then JFH1 RNA. ( C ) qRT-PCR analysis of IRF1 and IFNs in HepG2 cells transfected with vectors expressing IRF1 or RFP (after 2 days). ( D ) Analysis of p-STAT1 and MDA5 in HepG2 cells transfected with IRF1 or RFP plasmids for 2 days, and then treated with poly(I:C) for 3–24 hr. ( E ) Analysis of p-STAT1 and MDA5 in HepG2 cells transfected with the indicated doses of IRF1 plasmids (0.05–1 μg/well in a 24-well-plate) for 2 days. ( F ) Analysis of IRF1, p-STAT1 and MDA5 in HepG2 cells transfected with plasmids expressing 7 HA-tagged transcription factors (after 2 days). HA-GFP was used as a negative control. ( G ) Analysis of IRF1 and p-STAT1 in HepG2 cells first transfected with STAT3 siRNA for 2 days, and then treated with IFN-β or IL-29 for 5–360 min. qRT-PCR data are from one experiment that was representative of three experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates). *p<0.05, **p<0.01 and ***p<0.001. 10.7554/eLife.41159.031 Figure 4—source data 1. qRT-PCR analysis of transcription factors in HepG2 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.032 Figure 4—source data 2. qRT-PCR analysis of IRF1 and IFN in HepG2 cells transfected with IRF1 plasmid.
Techniques Used: Quantitative RT-PCR, Transfection, Expressing, Negative Control, Plasmid Preparation
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Schematic representation of STAT3-binding clusters (BS1–BS7) on the human IRF1 gene. The DNA fragments selected for reporter constructs (P1–P11) are also shown. ( B ) ChIP-PCR assays show the binding of STAT3, p-STAT3 and RELA on the selected gene fragments of IRF1 in HepG2 cells. BS1′–BS7′ are short fragments (160–200 bp) corresponding to the BS1–BS7 clusters (290–410 bp), respectively. ( C ) Luciferase activity of different IRF1 promoter or enhancer constructs (P1–P11) in HepG2 cells treated with or without poly(I:C) (for 24 hr). The relative luciferase activities are the ratio of Firefly/Renilla luciferase normalized to the pGL3-basic vector (basic) without poly(I:C) stimulation. ( D ) Luciferase activity of P1, P7 and P4 constructs in HepG2 cells co-transfected with 20 nM STAT3 or control siRNAs for 2 days, and then treated with or without poly(I:C) for 24 hr. The fold changes of P1, P4 and P7 were normalized to the activity of the pGL3-control vector. ( E ) Luciferase activity of P1, P7 and P4 constructs in 293FT cells co-transfected with STAT3 or RFP plasmids (after 2 days). ( F ) The sequences of the STAT3 binding sites in wildtype (P1, P4) and mutant (P1-M, P4-M) constructs. ( G, H ) Luciferase activity of reporter constructs in HepG2 cells ( G ) or in 293FT cells ( H ) treated as in panels C, D and E, respectively. ( I ) ChIP-PCR assays show the binding of STAT3 to the wildtype or mutant reporter constructs in HepG2 cells. The forward primers that were used are the same as those used in panel B (BS1′ and BS4′), but GLprimer2 was used as the reverse primer. ( J ) Luciferase activity of reporter constructs in 293FT cells co-transfected with plasmids expressing the indicated proteins (after 2 days). Luciferase data are from two ( C ) or three ( D, E, G, H and J ) experiments (mean + SD). *p<0.05, **p<0.01 and ***p<0.001. 10.7554/eLife.41159.035 Figure 5—source data 1. Luciferase activity of different IRF1 promoter or enhancer constructs in HepG2 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.036 Figure 5—source data 2. Luciferase activity of constructs in HepG2 cells co-transfected with STAT3 or control siRNAs. 10.7554/eLife.41159.037 Figure 5—source data 3. Luciferase activity of constructs in 293FT cells co-transfected with STAT3 or RFP plasmids. 10.7554/eLife.41159.038 Figure 5—source data 4. Luciferase activity of mutant constructs in HepG2 cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.039 Figure 5—source data 5. Luciferase activity of mutant constructs in 293FT cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.040 Figure 5—source data 6. ChIP-qPCR assays of BS1′ and BS4′ fragments bound by STAT3. 10.7554/eLife.41159.041 Figure 5—source data 7. Luciferase activity of constructs in 293FT cells co-transfected with the indicated plasmids.
Techniques Used: Binding Assay, Construct, Luciferase, Activity Assay, Plasmid Preparation, Transfection, Control, Mutagenesis, Expressing, ChIP-qPCR
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Screenshot (UCSC genome browser, GRCh37/hg19) showing STAT3-binding clusters from the ENCODE ChIP-seq data. Three conserved STAT-binding sites (in blue boxes) are predicted by the ‘TFBS Conserved’ tract. ( B ) Illustration of the locations of primers on the reporter constructs. ( C ) The sequences and locations of the STAT3- and NFκB-binding motifs within the P1 construct. The sequence and location of the PCR primers used for ChIP (referred to as BS1′) are shown in blue. ( D ) The sequences and locations of the STAT3-, NFκB- and IRF1-binding motifs within the P4 construct. Non-canonical NFκB-binding sites were predicted by AliBaba2.1. ( E ) ChIP-qPCR assays of BS1′ and BS4′ fragments bound by STAT3. HepG2 cells were transfected with the indicated siRNAs (20 nM) for 48 hr, and then harvested for ChIP using a STAT3 antibody or normal rabbit IgG. The amount of ChIP DNAs was first normalized to that of input DNAs and then further normalized to that of IgG groups. Data are from one experiment that was representative of three experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates).
Techniques Used: Binding Assay, ChIP-sequencing, Construct, Sequencing, ChIP-qPCR, Transfection
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Strategy for identifying genes that mediated miR-122 regulation of STAT3. ( B ) qRT-PCR analysis of the 20 genes in HepG2 cells transfected with miR-122 or NC mimics (50 nM). The genes are ranked by the repression ratio. ( C ) Analysis of p-STAT1, p-STAT3 and total STAT3 protein in HepG2 cells first treated with the indicated siRNAs (20 nM) for 2 days, and then transfected with poly(I:C) for 24 hr. ( D ) qRT-PCR analysis of IFNs in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and poly(I:C), as in panel C. ( E–G ) Analysis of total and phosphorylated STAT3 in HepG2 ( E ), Huh7 ( F ) and 293FT ( G ) cells transfected with plasmids expressing HA- or Flag (FL)-tagged proteins. HA-JAK1 and FL-EGFR plasmids were employed as positive controls. HA-GFP was used as a negative control. qRT-PCR data are from one experiment that was representative of three experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates). 10.7554/eLife.41159.046 Figure 6—source data 1. qRT-PCR analysis of miR-122 levels in HepG2, Huh7, and miR-122-Tet-On cells. 10.7554/eLife.41159.047 Figure 6—source data 2. RT-PCR analysis of the 20 genes in HepG2 cells transfected with miR-122 or NC mimics. 10.7554/eLife.41159.048 Figure 6—source data 3. qRT-PCR analysis of the effectiveness of siRNAs. 10.7554/eLife.41159.049 Figure 6—source data 4. qRT-PCR analysis of IFNs in HepG2 cells treated with siRNAs and poly(I:C).
Techniques Used: Quantitative RT-PCR, Transfection, Expressing, Negative Control, Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction
Figure Legend Snippet: ( A ) Luciferase activity of wildtype (WT) and mutant (Mut) reporter constructs in 293FT cells co-transfected with pcDNA6.2-miR-122 (P-miR-122) or pcDNA6.2-miR-neg (P-miR-neg) plasmids. The relative luciferase activities are the ratio of Renilla/Firefly luciferase normalized to that in P-miR-neg groups. The repression ratios (WT/Mut) of each site are shown and sites that significantly (p<0.05) repressed by miR-122 are shown in red. ( B ) qRT-PCR analysis of the 20 genes in normal human liver, HepG2 and Huh7. The expression of each gene was normalized to its level in normal liver. ( C ) Analysis of total and phosphorylated STAT3 in HepG2 cells transfected with indicated siRNAs (50 nM) for 2 days. ( D ) Analysis of MERTK, FGFR1 and IGF1R expression in HepG2 cells treated with miR-122 mimics or specific siRNAs (for 2 days). ( E ) Illustration of the mechanism by which miR-122 regulates STAT3 phosphorylation and the IFN response. Phosphorylated STAT3 can inhibit IRF1 transcriptional activation and thus represses the induction of IFNs upon viral infection. In normal hepatocytes, miR-122 strongly limits the phosphorylation of STAT3 by targeting three RTKs and other STAT3 activators, enabling a robust IFN response upon infection. qRT-PCR data are from one experiment that was representative of three experiments (mean ± SEM of technical triplicates). Luciferase data are from three experiments (mean +SD). 10.7554/eLife.41159.053 Figure 7—source data 1. Luciferase activity of reporter constructs in 293FT cells co-transfected with miR-122 or negative control plasmids. 10.7554/eLife.41159.054 Figure 7—source data 2. qRT-PCR analysis of the 20 genes in normal human liver, HepG2 and Huh7. 10.7554/eLife.41159.055 Figure 7—source data 3. qRT-PCR analysis of the effects of STAT3 knockdown on the expression of 20 genes in HepG2 cells.
Techniques Used: Luciferase, Activity Assay, Mutagenesis, Construct, Transfection, Quantitative RT-PCR, Expressing, Phospho-proteomics, Activation Assay, Infection, Negative Control, Knockdown
Figure Legend Snippet:
Techniques Used: Recombinant, Construct
Figure Legend Snippet:
Techniques Used:


