IGEM:Brown/2007/Sensor/AHL tests on Amplifier: Difference between revisions
From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
(New page: Here are Imperial's results for the part. http://openwetware.org/wiki/IGEM:Imperial/Results/J37015 Imperial's results say that '''the amplifier works'''. ''''In LB''', it resulted in a...) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
'''In M9''', AHL addition increased by 100%, from 2000 to 4000 RFU. The baseline value of 2000 was from the T9002 AHL biosensor. | '''In M9''', AHL addition increased by 100%, from 2000 to 4000 RFU. The baseline value of 2000 was from the T9002 AHL biosensor. | ||
'''Do we need amplification at all? Amplification of several magnitudes would be significant, but just doubling the RFU doesn't seem that hot. On the other hand, do we | '''Do we need amplification at all? Amplification of several magnitudes would be significant, but just doubling the RFU doesn't seem that hot. On the other hand, do we need a better amplifier?''' | ||
Revision as of 20:30, 21 June 2007
Here are Imperial's results for the part.
http://openwetware.org/wiki/IGEM:Imperial/Results/J37015
Imperial's results say that the amplifier works.
'In LB, it resulted in an increase from 9k RFU to 13k RFU. This is an increase of about 50% fluorescence, over the baseline value from T9002, the AHL biosensor.
In M9, AHL addition increased by 100%, from 2000 to 4000 RFU. The baseline value of 2000 was from the T9002 AHL biosensor.
Do we need amplification at all? Amplification of several magnitudes would be significant, but just doubling the RFU doesn't seem that hot. On the other hand, do we need a better amplifier?
