The biggest problem in isolating RNA from gram-positive bacteria is the disruption of the cell wall. A lot of protocols employ enzymatic digestion (pretreatment) which may affect gene expression patterns of certain genes. Therefore physical disruption using beads can be a best alternative.
The biggest problem in isolating RNA from gram-positive bacteria is the disruption of the cell wall. A lot of protocols employ enzymatic digestion (pretreatment) which may affect gene expression patterns of certain genes. Therefore physical disruption using beads can be a best alternative.
The biggest problem in isolating RNA from gram-positive bacteria is the disruption of the cell wall. A lot of protocols employ enzymatic digestion (pretreatment) which may affect gene expression patterns of certain genes. Therefore physical disruption using beads can be a best alternative.
The biggest problem in isolating RNA from gram-positive bacteria is the disruption of the cell wall. A lot of protocols employ enzymatic digestion (pretreatment) which may affect gene expression patterns of certain genes. Therefore physical disruption using beads can be a best alternative.
The biggest problem in isolating RNA from gram-positive bacteria is the disruption of the cell wall. A lot of protocols employ enzymatic digestion (pretreatment) which may affect gene expression patterns of certain genes. Therefore physical disruption using beads can be a best alternative.
Hello everyone! I am going to do a live/dead assay for my cells and I saw that I can use both fluorescence and absorbance as my detection method. Is there a difference in the results depending on the method? Is one method preferred over the other in certain situations?
Site-directed mutagenesis (SDM) can be challenging, particularly during detection/confirmation of (SDM) in colonies by sequencing or PCR techniques. This common issue in SDM is heavily relying on designing of mutagenic primer pairs. The best solution is to design the mutagenic primers that have extended 3'-ends/3'-overhang. This would provide the annealing region between the mutagenic primer pair is essentially shorter. and hence ensure a lower annealing temperature for the primer pair along with a higher chance of annealing to the template.
Site-directed mutagenesis (SDM) can be challenging, particularly during detection/confirmation of (SDM) in colonies by sequencing or PCR techniques. This common issue in SDM is heavily relying on designing of mutagenic primer pairs. The best solution is to design the mutagenic primers that have extended 3'-ends/3'-overhang. This would provide the annealing region between the mutagenic primer pair is essentially shorter. and hence ensure a lower annealing temperature for the primer pair along with a higher chance of annealing to the template.
Site-directed mutagenesis (SDM) can be challenging, particularly during detection/confirmation of (SDM) in colonies by sequencing or PCR techniques. This common issue in SDM is heavily relying on designing of mutagenic primer pairs. The best solution is to design the mutagenic primers that have extended 3'-ends/3'-overhang. This would provide the annealing region between the mutagenic primer pair is essentially shorter. and hence ensure a lower annealing temperature for the primer pair along with a higher chance of annealing to the template.
Site-directed mutagenesis (SDM) can be challenging, particularly during detection/confirmation of (SDM) in colonies by sequencing or PCR techniques. This common issue in SDM is heavily relying on designing of mutagenic primer pairs. The best solution is to design the mutagenic primers that have extended 3'-ends/3'-overhang. This would provide the annealing region between the mutagenic primer pair is essentially shorter. and hence ensure a lower annealing temperature for the primer pair along with a higher chance of annealing to the template.
Fill out your contact details and receive price quotes in your Inbox
Outsource experiment