Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Mol Microbiol. 2009 Oct 19;74(5):1114–1127. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2009.06921.x

Table 3.

Competition between Pol I, Pol II and Pol IV DNA polymerases.a

lac G·C→T·A (per 108)

Strain lac orientation
(strand)
polA+ polAexo polAexo effect
A. mutL strains
dnaE+ R(lagging) 3.3 ± 0.9 9.1 ± 2.8 2.7
dnaE+ ΔdinB R(lagging) 4.0 ± 1.2 11.5 ± 1.3 2.9
dnaE+ ΔpolB R(lagging) 3.0 ± 1.2 10.5 ± 2.7 3.5
dnaE+ ΔdinB ΔpolB R(lagging) 4.6 ± 1.8 12.4 ± 2.7 2.7

B. mutL+ strains
dnaE486 R(lagging) 4.2 ± 1.7 5.9 ± 2.2 1.4
dnaE486 ΔdinB R(lagging) 2.7 ± 1.3 3.1 ± 1.4 1.1
dnaE486 ΔpolB R(lagging) 8.4 ± 2.5 6.3 ± 3.9 0.8
dnaE486 ΔdinB ΔpolB R(lagging) 0.8 ± 0.6 1.3 ± 0.7 1.6
a

The experiments were performed with the lac G·C→T·A allele in the R(lagging) orientation. The mutL strains were mutL::Tn10. Mutant frequencies were determined as described in Experimental procedures. Each entry is based on the median value for 10 independent cultures grown at 37°C (dnaE+) or 34°C (dnaE486). No statistically significant effects are observed for the ΔpolB, ΔdinB, or ΔpolB ΔdinB strains in the polA+ dnaE+ series (both mutL+ and mutL) (P > 0.05). The corresponding differences in the polA+ dnaE486 series are significant (P < 0.05).

Statistically significant polAexo mutator effects are indicated in bold.