USTC/OperatorPosition
From 2007.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
m |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | + | Different locations of an operator plays a role in determining the intensity of repression in vivo[[USTC/OperatorPosition#References|[1]]].Both operators with strong and weak repression are required to the gates. Therefore, we systematically tested the influence of location factor on the promoter activity. | |
[[Image:USTC_RelativePromoterActivity.png|thumb|600px|center|'''Figure 1''' Left: the influence on the promoter’s activity when a single operator is at a different position upstream of the consensus sequence. | [[Image:USTC_RelativePromoterActivity.png|thumb|600px|center|'''Figure 1''' Left: the influence on the promoter’s activity when a single operator is at a different position upstream of the consensus sequence. | ||
Right: the influence on the promoter’s activity when a single operator is at a different position downstream of the consensus sequence. | Right: the influence on the promoter’s activity when a single operator is at a different position downstream of the consensus sequence. | ||
Revision as of 12:27, 26 October 2007
Different locations of an operator plays a role in determining the intensity of repression in vivo[1].Both operators with strong and weak repression are required to the gates. Therefore, we systematically tested the influence of location factor on the promoter activity.
References
1. Elledge, S. J. & Davis, R. W. (1989), 'Position and density effects on repression by stationary and mobile DNA-binding proteins.', Genes Dev 3(2), 185--197.
