User:Morgan L. Paull/Notebook/C.Dog V1.0 - T7 Promoter/2011/08/08: Difference between revisions

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 33: Line 33:
* R19
* R19
* R7
* R7
So I will not use the data from constructs 7, 14, 18, or 19.




Revision as of 13:24, 9 August 2011

C.Dog T7 Promoter Project <html><img src="/images/9/94/Report.png" border="0" /></html> Main project page
<html><img src="/images/c/c3/Resultset_previous.png" border="0" /></html>Previous entry<html>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</html>Next entry<html><img src="/images/5/5c/Resultset_next.png" border="0" /></html>

Doing confirmation sequence checking

  • G7 looks good
  • R18 looks good except that RFP might have some mutations in it
  • R13 looks good
  • R6 looks good
  • G19 looks good
  • R23 looks good
  • G14 looks good.
  • G18 has a point deletion in the first part of the makoff bicistronic design. Combined with the fact that the flow cytometer data seems to suggest that it has very low fluorescence, I would say that I believe it actually has this deletion, and that it has made the construct largely ineffective.
  • R15 looks ok
  • R12 looks ok
  • G13 looks like it might have a mutation in GFP, but probably not.
  • G23 looks ok
  • R20 looks very good
  • G6 looks very good
  • G12 looks good
  • R14 looks as though it has two makoff RBS part 1's ligated into an RFP backbone, with a T7 promoter. After the second RBS part 1, makoff 14 is present, but R14 is probably no good.
  • R19 doesn't seem to have the first part of the makoff RBS, but it does have the T7 promoter, makoff RBS 19, and RFP.
  • R7 might have a point deletion in the makoff 7 RBS, and it's RFP looks strange and mutated, neither GFP nor RFP.
  • G20 looks good
  • G15 looks good

Problems with:

  • G18
  • R14
  • R19
  • R7

So I will not use the data from constructs 7, 14, 18, or 19.



Retrieved from "https://openwetware.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=User:Morgan_L._Paull/Notebook/C.Dog_V1.0_-_T7_Promoter/2011/08/08&oldid=528765"