Correction: Inheritance of Chloroplast DNA in Chlamydomonas ReinhardtiiSource: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,Vol. 77, No. 12, [Part 2: Biological Sciences] (Dec., 1980), pp. 7510-7511Published by: National Academy of SciencesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/9799 .

Accessed: 02/05/2014 06:44

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

National Academy of Sciences is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.17 on Fri, 2 May 2014 06:44:00 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7510 Corrections

Correction. In the article "Recognition of chemical carcino- gen-modified DNA by a DNA-binding protein" by Francesco Moranelli and Michael W. Lieberman, which appeared in the June 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3201-3205), a printer's error occurred in Table 1 on p. 3203. In the first line of the 2 X ss[3H]DNA column, the number in parentheses should be 2.3 rather than 32.3.

Correction. In the article "Cloning and mapping of BamHI endonuclease fragments of DNA from the transforming B95-8 strain of Epstein-Barr virus" by J. Skare and J. L. Strominger, which appeared in the July 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3860-3864), one small fragment of Epstein-Barr virus was not present in the collection of clones presented. The missing clone has now been found. It contains BamHI a, a I.0-megadalton fragment, and it hybridizes to the HindIII J fragment between BamHI 0 and M. This means that the fragments originally designated a, b, and c are really b, c, and d. We also have now succeeded in obtaining normal yields of the BamHI C clone by inoculating liquid cultures with larger numbers of plasmid-containing bacteria from ampicillin plates and growing them without chloramphenicol.

Cross 1 Cross 2

M iL Tetrad - p M ? Tetrad J F FIG. 3. Electrophoretic patterns of purified chloroplast DNAs digestec

2: sr-u-2-23 mt+ X ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-l d-u-2 mt-. Cross 3: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 P, paternal parent; Tetrad (or Octet), meiotic progeny. Only bands 13-2'

7510 Corrections

Correction. In the article "Recognition of chemical carcino- gen-modified DNA by a DNA-binding protein" by Francesco Moranelli and Michael W. Lieberman, which appeared in the June 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3201-3205), a printer's error occurred in Table 1 on p. 3203. In the first line of the 2 X ss[3H]DNA column, the number in parentheses should be 2.3 rather than 32.3.

Correction. In the article "Cloning and mapping of BamHI endonuclease fragments of DNA from the transforming B95-8 strain of Epstein-Barr virus" by J. Skare and J. L. Strominger, which appeared in the July 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3860-3864), one small fragment of Epstein-Barr virus was not present in the collection of clones presented. The missing clone has now been found. It contains BamHI a, a I.0-megadalton fragment, and it hybridizes to the HindIII J fragment between BamHI 0 and M. This means that the fragments originally designated a, b, and c are really b, c, and d. We also have now succeeded in obtaining normal yields of the BamHI C clone by inoculating liquid cultures with larger numbers of plasmid-containing bacteria from ampicillin plates and growing them without chloramphenicol.

Cross 1 Cross 2

M iL Tetrad - p M ? Tetrad J F FIG. 3. Electrophoretic patterns of purified chloroplast DNAs digestec

2: sr-u-2-23 mt+ X ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-l d-u-2 mt-. Cross 3: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 P, paternal parent; Tetrad (or Octet), meiotic progeny. Only bands 13-2'

7510 Corrections

Correction. In the article "Recognition of chemical carcino- gen-modified DNA by a DNA-binding protein" by Francesco Moranelli and Michael W. Lieberman, which appeared in the June 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3201-3205), a printer's error occurred in Table 1 on p. 3203. In the first line of the 2 X ss[3H]DNA column, the number in parentheses should be 2.3 rather than 32.3.

Correction. In the article "Cloning and mapping of BamHI endonuclease fragments of DNA from the transforming B95-8 strain of Epstein-Barr virus" by J. Skare and J. L. Strominger, which appeared in the July 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3860-3864), one small fragment of Epstein-Barr virus was not present in the collection of clones presented. The missing clone has now been found. It contains BamHI a, a I.0-megadalton fragment, and it hybridizes to the HindIII J fragment between BamHI 0 and M. This means that the fragments originally designated a, b, and c are really b, c, and d. We also have now succeeded in obtaining normal yields of the BamHI C clone by inoculating liquid cultures with larger numbers of plasmid-containing bacteria from ampicillin plates and growing them without chloramphenicol.

Cross 1 Cross 2

M iL Tetrad - p M ? Tetrad J F FIG. 3. Electrophoretic patterns of purified chloroplast DNAs digestec

2: sr-u-2-23 mt+ X ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-l d-u-2 mt-. Cross 3: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 P, paternal parent; Tetrad (or Octet), meiotic progeny. Only bands 13-2'

7510 Corrections

Correction. In the article "Recognition of chemical carcino- gen-modified DNA by a DNA-binding protein" by Francesco Moranelli and Michael W. Lieberman, which appeared in the June 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3201-3205), a printer's error occurred in Table 1 on p. 3203. In the first line of the 2 X ss[3H]DNA column, the number in parentheses should be 2.3 rather than 32.3.

Correction. In the article "Cloning and mapping of BamHI endonuclease fragments of DNA from the transforming B95-8 strain of Epstein-Barr virus" by J. Skare and J. L. Strominger, which appeared in the July 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 3860-3864), one small fragment of Epstein-Barr virus was not present in the collection of clones presented. The missing clone has now been found. It contains BamHI a, a I.0-megadalton fragment, and it hybridizes to the HindIII J fragment between BamHI 0 and M. This means that the fragments originally designated a, b, and c are really b, c, and d. We also have now succeeded in obtaining normal yields of the BamHI C clone by inoculating liquid cultures with larger numbers of plasmid-containing bacteria from ampicillin plates and growing them without chloramphenicol.

Cross 1 Cross 2

M iL Tetrad - p M ? Tetrad J F FIG. 3. Electrophoretic patterns of purified chloroplast DNAs digestec

2: sr-u-2-23 mt+ X ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-l d-u-2 mt-. Cross 3: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 P, paternal parent; Tetrad (or Octet), meiotic progeny. Only bands 13-2'

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77 (1980)

Correction. In the article "Elongation of primed DNA tem- plates by eukaryotic DNA polymerases" by Joh-E Ikeda, Mathew Longiaru, Marshall S. Horwitz, and Jerard Hurwitz, which appeared in the October 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 5827-5831), two entries in Table 2 are in error. Under "Additions" the last two lines should read "Cytosol + Pol 3* (0.046 unit)" and "Cytosol + Pol y (0.041 unit)."

Correction. In the article "Inheritance of chloroplast DNA in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii" by David M. Grant, Nicholas W. Gillham, and John E. Boynton, which appeared in the Oc- tober 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 6067-6071), Figs. 1 and 3 were reproduced poorly. They are printed again here. Fig. 3 is below, and Fig. 1 is on the following page.

?_________________ .-Cross 3

: :,, 14, 15

16

NM ? Octet p with Msp I. Cross 1: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 d-u-2 mt+ X er-u-37 mt -. Cross l-u-2 mt+ X sr-u-2-23 mt -. For all three crosses: M, maternal parent; of each gel are shown.

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77 (1980)

Correction. In the article "Elongation of primed DNA tem- plates by eukaryotic DNA polymerases" by Joh-E Ikeda, Mathew Longiaru, Marshall S. Horwitz, and Jerard Hurwitz, which appeared in the October 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 5827-5831), two entries in Table 2 are in error. Under "Additions" the last two lines should read "Cytosol + Pol 3* (0.046 unit)" and "Cytosol + Pol y (0.041 unit)."

Correction. In the article "Inheritance of chloroplast DNA in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii" by David M. Grant, Nicholas W. Gillham, and John E. Boynton, which appeared in the Oc- tober 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 6067-6071), Figs. 1 and 3 were reproduced poorly. They are printed again here. Fig. 3 is below, and Fig. 1 is on the following page.

?_________________ .-Cross 3

: :,, 14, 15

16

NM ? Octet p with Msp I. Cross 1: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 d-u-2 mt+ X er-u-37 mt -. Cross l-u-2 mt+ X sr-u-2-23 mt -. For all three crosses: M, maternal parent; of each gel are shown.

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77 (1980)

Correction. In the article "Elongation of primed DNA tem- plates by eukaryotic DNA polymerases" by Joh-E Ikeda, Mathew Longiaru, Marshall S. Horwitz, and Jerard Hurwitz, which appeared in the October 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 5827-5831), two entries in Table 2 are in error. Under "Additions" the last two lines should read "Cytosol + Pol 3* (0.046 unit)" and "Cytosol + Pol y (0.041 unit)."

Correction. In the article "Inheritance of chloroplast DNA in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii" by David M. Grant, Nicholas W. Gillham, and John E. Boynton, which appeared in the Oc- tober 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 6067-6071), Figs. 1 and 3 were reproduced poorly. They are printed again here. Fig. 3 is below, and Fig. 1 is on the following page.

?_________________ .-Cross 3

: :,, 14, 15

16

NM ? Octet p with Msp I. Cross 1: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 d-u-2 mt+ X er-u-37 mt -. Cross l-u-2 mt+ X sr-u-2-23 mt -. For all three crosses: M, maternal parent; of each gel are shown.

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77 (1980)

Correction. In the article "Elongation of primed DNA tem- plates by eukaryotic DNA polymerases" by Joh-E Ikeda, Mathew Longiaru, Marshall S. Horwitz, and Jerard Hurwitz, which appeared in the October 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 5827-5831), two entries in Table 2 are in error. Under "Additions" the last two lines should read "Cytosol + Pol 3* (0.046 unit)" and "Cytosol + Pol y (0.041 unit)."

Correction. In the article "Inheritance of chloroplast DNA in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii" by David M. Grant, Nicholas W. Gillham, and John E. Boynton, which appeared in the Oc- tober 1980 issue of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (77, 6067-6071), Figs. 1 and 3 were reproduced poorly. They are printed again here. Fig. 3 is below, and Fig. 1 is on the following page.

?_________________ .-Cross 3

: :,, 14, 15

16

NM ? Octet p with Msp I. Cross 1: ac-u-g-2-3 d-u-1 d-u-2 mt+ X er-u-37 mt -. Cross l-u-2 mt+ X sr-u-2-23 mt -. For all three crosses: M, maternal parent; of each gel are shown.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.17 on Fri, 2 May 2014 06:44:00 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Corrections

2 2 ~~~3

4

5 5

mit

6

7

81.~~~~ l34 BI 5 8 6 6

7

c 2nuc 90

10o 11,12 13 E2

12

13 14,15

B2

16 17

nuc 18 7

19

8 20 nuc

21 22

23,24

14,15 25 26

27

9

10

28

29

30

31 32 E 3

1 2 3 3 34

366 37

a b c

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77 (1980) 7511

6

2 B3 3

c t n3 is8 4.

9 5

B6 C> and mir 10 iohnra DAthslmit

133

a . D 10

11,12

~13 605~1

8,9

10 3

18 19 20,21

eltFIG. 1. Electrophoretic patterns of purified tnchloroplast DNAs digested with BamHI (a,a'), Bgl II (b,b'), EcoRI (c,c'), and Msp I (d,d'). In each pair cw-15 is at the right and ac-u-g-2-3 is at the left. The fragments have been numbered sequentially in de-

I creasing order of molecular weight according to the convention of Nathans and Smith (18). Bands labeled B, E, and mit are mitochondrial DNA; those labeled nuc are nuclear ribosomal DNA (rDNA) (16, 19). The shorter gel segments (a'-d') show in greater detail the deleted and wild-type fragment patterns. Arrows mark the fragments with altered mobility in the mu- tant chloroplast DNA digests. In the case of the Msp I digest, the deletion in Msp 2 can only be seen in d'. Bands below fragment 21 in the Msp I digest are not labeled because variable contamination by mito- chondrial DNA and rDNA along with limited resolu- tion in that region of the gel combine to make accurate

numbering impossible. In contrast to Rochaix's (19) gel pattern, fragments Eco 10 and Eco 11 are clearly

d new chloroplast DNA fragment (Bgl 13) of molecular weight approximately 0.3 X 106 (not shown).

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.17 on Fri, 2 May 2014 06:44:00 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions