“…A GUS activity analysis was performed with two independent single-copy 3Ј integrants from each nor-1::GUS reporter construct grown on YES solid medium as described in Materials and Methods. Representative colonies are shown as follows: in panel A, isolate 1 carrying the wild-type 332-bp promoter fragment (332), deletion mutants 76 and 64, isolate 1 carrying the 332-bp fragment with an AflR1 substitution mutation (AflRm-1), and the control strain NR-1 (C) (no plasmid integrated into the genome); in panel B, isolates 1 and 2 carrying the wild-type 332-bp promoter fragment (332-1 and 332-2), isolates 1 and 2 carrying the 332-bp fragment with a TATA substitution mutation (TATAm-1 and TATAm-2), and the same control strain (C) as in panel A; and in panel C, isolates 1 and 2 carrying the wild-type 332-bp promoter fragment (332-1 and 332-2), deletion mutants 298, 268, 238, and 210, isolate 1 carrying the 332-bp fragment with a NorL substitution mutation (NorLm-1), and the same control strain (C) as in panel A. relative ability of the nor-1 promoter to respond to exogenous cAMP was not affected in either NorLm-1 or NorLm-2, which was consistent with the observation that the cAMP response is mediated by CRE-1 (27). Thus, while a functional NorL site is not sufficient for nor-1 transcriptional activation, it is necessary for maximum nor-1 transcriptional activation under a variety of growth conditions.…”