“…Rates of transcription of chimeric rbc L 59 end:GUS and atpB 59 end:GUS genes relative to the endogenous Chlamydomonas chloroplast genes rbc L and atpB+ Phosphate-starved cells were allowed to incorporate [ 32 P]-orthophosphate for 10 min and 20 min in the dark+ Total RNA was isolated and hybridized for 72 h to probes specific for the GUS, atpB, rbc L, and pUC18 sequences (see Materials and Methods) spotted on a nylon membrane in a slot-blot apparatus (Hoefer Scientific Instruments, San Francisco, California)+ Signals were visualized by exposure of the membranes to X-ray film for approximately 48 h and quantified using Kodak 1D image analysis software+ Numbers above the autoradiograms denote the positions of mutated nucleotides in the rbc L or atpB 59 UTRs (see Fig+ 1)+ Ratios given to the right of the autoradiograms were calculated relative to the rates of phosphate incorporation into transcripts of the endogenous rbc L (upper panel) and atpB (lower panel) genes (set to 1+00) that serve as internal standards+ Relative rates of transcription of rbc L 59 end:GUS genes are only 20 to 30% of the rate of transcription of the endogenous rbc L gene because the rbc L 59 ends fused to the GUS coding region lack a transcriptional enhancer that is located in the coding region of the endogenous rbc L gene (Klein et al+, 1994)+ Separate sequence elements in the rbc L 59 UTR mediate longevity and light /dark stability of transcripts It has been reported (Salvador et al+, 1993b) that transcripts of chimeric rbc L 59 end:GUS genes containing the rbc L promoter and 59 UTR are rapidly degraded in Chlamydomonas chloroplast transformants upon illumination of the cells+ The light-induced decay was shown to be conferred to rbc L 59 UTR:GUS transcripts by the rbc L 59 UTR sequence (Salvador et al+, 1993b)+ The in vivo mutational analyses of the rbc L 59 UTR described above were done in cultures of Chlamydomonas grown in 12-h light/12-h dark cycles and cells for isolation of total RNA and for determination of rates of transcription were collected at the end of the dark period (see Materials and Methods)+ It seemed possible that the rbc L 59 UTR sequence element (positions ϩ38 to ϩ47; Fig+ 1) found in this study to be required for stability of chimeric rbc L 59 UTR:GUS transcripts is also involved in light/dark regulation of transcript stability+ To test this notion, GUS transcript levels were determined in the dark and in the light in chloroplast transformants harboring mutated rbc L 59 end:GUS genes (mutations at positions ϩ39, ϩ40, ϩ42, ϩ45, and ϩ46 in the rbc L 59 UTR; Fig+ 4)+ GUS transcripts that were already destabilized by a mutation in the sequence element of the rbc L 59 UTR and that accumulated in the dark to very low levels in Chlamydomonas chloroplast transformants (Fig+ 2), still showed the typical light/dark regulation of abundance (Fig+ 4)+ This suggests that the light/dark-regulated mechanism of transcript (de-) stabilization is distinct from the RNA decay mechanism functioning in turnover of rbc L chloroplast transcripts in the dark, the former probably involving sequences in the rbc L 59 UTR that are different from the element defined in this study (Singh et al+, 2001)+…”