"
Team:METU Turkey/Results Discussion/pKK versus pTriEx
From 2010.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
(New page: <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en" dir="ltr"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> <title>Home</title> <meta nam...) |
|||
| Line 356: | Line 356: | ||
</ul><!--topnav ends--> | </ul><!--topnav ends--> | ||
</div><!--tab_nav ends--> | </div><!--tab_nav ends--> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <br>In this expriment, for the first time we want to try CooA pKK vector in BL21. The vector was sent by Aono and he advised us to express it in JM109. But we have failed to express it. So we tried it in BL21. We have no result with JM109 and a little expression in BL21. Therefore; we gave up from expressing pKK vector in BL21. And JM109 grows slowly,also we never see any band in JM109 crude lysate in many unpublished data. Therefore; we lysated all bacteria with same OD600. But result wasn't changed. | ||
Revision as of 20:43, 27 October 2010
In this expriment, for the first time we want to try CooA pKK vector in BL21. The vector was sent by Aono and he advised us to express it in JM109. But we have failed to express it. So we tried it in BL21. We have no result with JM109 and a little expression in BL21. Therefore; we gave up from expressing pKK vector in BL21. And JM109 grows slowly,also we never see any band in JM109 crude lysate in many unpublished data. Therefore; we lysated all bacteria with same OD600. But result wasn't changed.
