Table 3.
Expt no.a | Strain | PBPs deleted | No. of FACS iterations | Suppressor isolatedb |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | CS315 | 4, 5, 7 | 15 | + (ALM10) |
2 | CS315 | 4, 5, 7 | 4 | + (LCM1) |
3 | CS315 | 4, 5, 7 | 6 | + |
4 | CS315 | 4, 5, 7 | 5 | + |
5 | CS446 | 4, 5, 6, 7 | 4 | + (LCM2) |
6 | CS448 | 4, 5, 7, AmpH | 7 | − |
7 | CS449 | 4, 5, 7, AmpC | 4 | + (LCM3) |
8 | CS456 | 1A, 4, 5, 7 | 6 | − |
9 | CS534 | 4, 5, 7, AmpC, AmpH | 9 | − |
10 | CS545 | 1A, 4, 5, 6, 7 | 9 | − |
11 | CS703 | 1A, 4, 5, 6, 7, AmpC, AmpH | 4 | − |
12 | CS703 | 1A, 4, 5, 6, 7, AmpC, AmpH | 15 | − |
Each experiment is independent experiment. The least restrictive sorting gate was used in experiment 1. All other experiments were performed with the more circumscribed and more efficient sorting gates described in the text.
+, shape suppressors were generated; −, shape suppressors were not generated. Strain names for suppressor mutants discussed in the text are given in parentheses.