Skip to main content
. 2019 Jun 30;26(4):327–339. doi: 10.1093/dnares/dsz012

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Comparison of the SynMyco RR efficiency versus the native regulatory regions of pMTnGm transposon. (A) Scheme of the key modules of (i) pMTnGm-SynMyco+SynMyco RR-Venus+SynMycoRR-mCherry transposon, (ii) pMTnGm-SynMyco+SynMycoRR-Venus+Gm RR-mCherry transposon and (iii) pMTnGm-SynMyco+SynMyco-Venus+TnpRR-mCherry transposon. The abbreviations that appear in the figure are: Tnp for transposase coding gene, Amp for ampicillin resistance coding gene, IR for inverted repeats, ColE1 ori for ColE1 origin of replication, GmR for gentamicin resistance coding gene, Venus for Venus protein coding gene and mCherry as mCherry protein coding gene. (B) Bar plot representing the ratio obtained in M. pneumoniae for mCherry/Venus fluorescence using transposons represented in panel A. While Venus reporter is always under control of SynMyco RR, the mCherry gene is controlled by SynMyco RR in the left bar, Gm RR in the central bar and Tnp RR in the right bar. On top of each bar is represented the average ratio of mCherry/Venus fluorescence obtained for each of the constructs in three replicates. One-tailed t-test p-values are indicated with one asterisk (*) when P < 0.05 for the ratio of mCherry/Venus under the control of SynMyco RR versus either Gm RR or Tnp RR. Similar bar plots are shown in (C) for M. gallisepticum, (D) for M. feriruminatoris and (E) for M. agalactiae.