Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Two uracil-DNA glycosylase (ung) mutation selection procedures based upon the ability of uracil glycosylase to degrade the chromosomes of organisms containing uracil-DNA were devised to obtain a collection of well-defined ung alleles. In an enrichment procedure, lysogens were selected from Escherichia coli cultures infected with lambda pKanr phage containing uracil in their DNA. (These uracil-DNA phage were prepared by growth on host cells deficient in both dUTPase and uracil-DNA glycosylase.) The lysogenic Kanr population was enriched for uracil glycosylase-deficient mutants by a factor of 10(4). In a phage suicide selection procedure, lambda pung+ phage were unable to form plaques on dut ung cells containing uracil-DNA in their chromosomes, and all of the progeny were lambda pung-. Deletion, insertion (ung::Mu and ung::Tn10), nonsense, and missense mutants were isolated by using these procedures. Extracts of three insertion mutants contained no detectable enzyme activity. All of the other mutant isolates had less than 1% of the normal uracil glycosylase specific activity. The previously studied ung-1 allele, which was derived by N-methyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine mutagenesis, produced about 0.02% of the normal amount of uracil glycosylase activity. No significant phenotypic differences between ung-1 and ung::Tn10 alleles were observed. Variations of the lysogen selection procedure may be helpful for isolating other DNA glycosylase mutations in E. coli and other organisms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bruce K. Duncan (1985) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: