Team:LCG-UNAM-Mexico:Journals:Uriel
From 2009.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
(→September 39, 2009) |
(→September 39, 2009) |
||
Line 660: | Line 660: | ||
for plasmid extraction. | for plasmid extraction. | ||
- | == September | + | == September 30, 2009 == |
An 1% Agarose gel was run to check concentrations for restriction assays and by this be able to know if we have | An 1% Agarose gel was run to check concentrations for restriction assays and by this be able to know if we have | ||
Line 677: | Line 677: | ||
[[Image:12oct09-iptg-cox+ogr+ter-final.jpg|200px]] | [[Image:12oct09-iptg-cox+ogr+ter-final.jpg|200px]] | ||
+ | The insert looks shifted upwards but a little amount so we didn't achieve to ligate the iptg to cox+ogr+ter | ||
+ | this is strange because the plasmid maintained its size so the promoter is not there. | ||
+ | |||
+ | I've checked the plasmid size an it is 2079 bp so the plasmid doesn't have the promoter. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Going back further when I digested for the first time plasmid 12 I did it with SpeI/PstI to allow | ||
+ | promoter to be at the beginning of the construction. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The insert cox+ogr+ter was digested XbaI/PstI so I think the unique alternative is that promoter ipteg wasn't | ||
+ | in the plasmid. | ||
|} | |} | ||
<!--Do not remove the first and last lines in this page!-->{{Template:LCG_bottom_Netscape}} | <!--Do not remove the first and last lines in this page!-->{{Template:LCG_bottom_Netscape}} |
Revision as of 04:25, 21 October 2009