Week5

From 2009.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{| style="color:#000000;background-color:#ffffff;" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="3" border="0" bordercolor="#ffffff" width="65%" align="center"
 +
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India|Home]]
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India/Team|The Team]]
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India/Project|The Project]]
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India/Analysis|Analysis]]
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India/Modeling|Modeling]]
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India/Notebook|Notebook]]
 +
!align="center"|[[Team:IIT_Bombay_India/Safety|Safety]]
 +
|}
 +
 +
 +
 +
[[Image:IITB-Home.jpg]]
 +
 +
{| background-color:#ffffff;" cellpadding="1.5" cellspacing="2" border="0" bordercolor="#ffffff" width="90%" align="center"
 +
!align="left"|
 +
 +
|
 +
1.FACS run with different conc. of IPTG (100,250,500 microM/ml) for CFP and YFP-no signal(reason: sample stored after pelleting)
1.FACS run with different conc. of IPTG (100,250,500 microM/ml) for CFP and YFP-no signal(reason: sample stored after pelleting)

Latest revision as of 22:04, 21 October 2009

Home The Team The Project Analysis Modeling Notebook Safety


IITB-Home.jpg

1.FACS run with different conc. of IPTG (100,250,500 microM/ml) for CFP and YFP-no signal(reason: sample stored after pelleting)

2.FACS run with different conc. of IPTG (100,250,500 microM/ml) for CFP and YFP-

signal obtained for YFP with gradation as per IPTG conc.

no signal obtained for CFP

  • CFP culture problem suspected
Retrieved from "http://2009.igem.org/Week5"