Retrovirus with LTR-polyA-LTR = garbage?
nkuperw at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 5 09:36:34 EST 2002
wolfsc at ibms.sinica.edu.tw ("Wolfgang Schechinger") wrote in message news:<3C85266E.8311.2B22F2 at localhost>...
> Dear all,
> Luk Vandenberghe who recently replied to my retrovirus problem questions this
> NG just pointed me to a possible problem when having a retroviral construct
> like this:
> The presence of polyA between the LTRs could lead to premature termination of
> transcription and thus not yield (at least not high titers of) active
> retrovirus. Sounds obvious.
> When transfecting such a construct into packaging cells, then I would be able
> to detect protein expression there, but not get high titer virus.
> In consequence when using lacZ as reporter in such a construct, I also would
> detect less "transfected" packaging cells due to less self-infection (in
> comparison to a construct that doesn't have the polyA feature).
> Comments and references are extremely welcome.
Question...is the polyA a trac of polyA or the cis-element signalling
for polyA'tion to occur? My feeling is that a strech of A's will not
affect the proper processing of the RNA and subsequent virus
formation, but a cis-element will pretty much muck up virus
More information about the Methods