Team:EPF-Lausanne/Notebook/June2011

From 2011.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 166: Line 166:
-
== Tuesday, 21 June 2010 ==
+
== Tuesday, 21 June 2011 ==
With help from Henrike, Douglas checked the mistakes in the K112808 (lysis cassette) sequence. On the entire sequence, only 7 errors occurred in several reactions, and are therefore likely to be actual errors in the DNA. They occur in positions (with regard to the original sequence in the registry):
With help from Henrike, Douglas checked the mistakes in the K112808 (lysis cassette) sequence. On the entire sequence, only 7 errors occurred in several reactions, and are therefore likely to be actual errors in the DNA. They occur in positions (with regard to the original sequence in the registry):
Line 181: Line 181:
In conclusion, there is one codon substitution, and six missing bases that all lie within the junction between two bricks or the non-coding region of a brick. Experimentally, the brick does lyse cells in culture. Therefore, the sequence appears valid.
In conclusion, there is one codon substitution, and six missing bases that all lie within the junction between two bricks or the non-coding region of a brick. Experimentally, the brick does lyse cells in culture. Therefore, the sequence appears valid.
 +
 +
== Monday, 27 June 2011 ==
 +
 +
We practised MITOMI with TetR linear template and random DNA sequence + target DNA sequence. We ferformed ITT (in virto transcription translation) on TetR linear template before adding it to the chip. However, the results are disappointing: we have more DNA binding for the random sequence (1000 RFU) than for the target sequence (500 RFU)...
 +
Perhaps the ITT doesn't yield a functional TetR, or we didn't have the optimal concentration of binding DNA (too much nonspecific interactions?). We'll definitely continue the MITOMI practise to find out.
{{:Team:EPF-Lausanne/Templates/Footer}}
{{:Team:EPF-Lausanne/Templates/Footer}}

Revision as of 06:34, 30 June 2011