Interference 103,781
A. In my dissertation, I had read the article by
Lysette and when I was summarizing that discussion in my
dissertation, I repeated the analysis results that Lysette
had found and I said that the XCG dinucleotide with C in the
second position and G in the third position was avoided and
very rare in most dicot plant genes.
And my . . . gene was from a dicot plant gene. And
I had also observed that it followed that rule.
Q. And in November of 19, or by November of 1985, had
you also considered the use of polyadenylation signals in
plant genes?
A. Yes. The very short RNA that I saw in the
Northern Blots was a polyadenylated RNA. And I felt that
perhaps it was a short RNA because the polyadenylation
signal that’s present in the BT RNA might have caused it to
be shortened and polyadenylated in the wrong place.
Normally, bacteria don’t polyadenylate their messages,
so they don’t have any force that causes them not to
develop polyadenylation sequences in there.
Q. And did you propose a program for, or a method of
modifying the entire gene to Dr. Adang?
. . . . .
A. Well, we talked about resynthesizing the gene
to improve codon usage. That we could take artificial
sequences of DNA that had been made in the laboratory
and make short regions and completely rebuild the gene.
And we had heard that this was possible, and that
that might be required in order to get a bacterial gene
to work in a plant. We thought that might be required
in this case.
Then, Dr. Murray was asked how long resynthesis of a toxic
protein Bt having improved codon usage would take. Dr. Murray
testified (AR 4155, p. 457, l. 10, - p. 460, l. 6):
-114-
Page: Previous 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007