Awesome talk! You say that RFC1 was chosen because it was up-regulated at the same time as Rad51, which is a damage control gene. Are you saying that these genes are correlated? Can you explain this a bit more simply?
Yes! By looking for genes which are upregulated at the same time as Rad51, a known DNA damage repair gene, we can find genes that are potentially also involved in DNA damage repair. While Rad51 doesn’t necessarily interact with these other genes, the similar patterns of expression point to possible similar functions.
Sure! For our first experiment, we were just checking to make sure that the designed primers amplified the correct section of the gene, a 193 base pair-long section, which we found they did. With these primers, we moved onto experiment 2, where we were looking for an increase in expression after DNA damage (AKA a brighter band). We found that the HU+ band was brighter than the untreated band, indicating that more RFC1 mRNA was being expressed after DNA damage. We know that DNA damage occurred because Rad51 expression, our positive control, also increased. This means that DNA damage prompted more RFC1 mRNA to be made, suggesting that the cell wants RFC1 for damage repair. The rate of its expression increased at a rate similar to Rad51, which we know is involved in DNA repair, further pointing towards RFC1’s possible involvement. I hope this helps!
Not necessarily! We still don’t know RFC1’s exact function or role in DNA damage repair, just that it has one. It is also probable that RFC1 and Rad51 perform different functions in the DNA damage repair pathway, so it would be hard to compare them to each other.
RFC1 is a subunit of Replication Factor C, which is a clamp loader in eukaryotic DNA replication, but the function of subunit 1 specifically is unknown. Our experiment indicates that it is somehow involved with DNA damage repair, but we don’t know much beyond that!
curesymposium.org 
Awesome talk! You say that RFC1 was chosen because it was up-regulated at the same time as Rad51, which is a damage control gene. Are you saying that these genes are correlated? Can you explain this a bit more simply?
LikeLike
Yes! By looking for genes which are upregulated at the same time as Rad51, a known DNA damage repair gene, we can find genes that are potentially also involved in DNA damage repair. While Rad51 doesn’t necessarily interact with these other genes, the similar patterns of expression point to possible similar functions.
LikeLike
Could you further explain what the results meant?
LikeLike
Sure! For our first experiment, we were just checking to make sure that the designed primers amplified the correct section of the gene, a 193 base pair-long section, which we found they did. With these primers, we moved onto experiment 2, where we were looking for an increase in expression after DNA damage (AKA a brighter band). We found that the HU+ band was brighter than the untreated band, indicating that more RFC1 mRNA was being expressed after DNA damage. We know that DNA damage occurred because Rad51 expression, our positive control, also increased. This means that DNA damage prompted more RFC1 mRNA to be made, suggesting that the cell wants RFC1 for damage repair. The rate of its expression increased at a rate similar to Rad51, which we know is involved in DNA repair, further pointing towards RFC1’s possible involvement. I hope this helps!
LikeLike
Would RFC1 be better to use than Rad51 as a damage control gene?
LikeLike
Not necessarily! We still don’t know RFC1’s exact function or role in DNA damage repair, just that it has one. It is also probable that RFC1 and Rad51 perform different functions in the DNA damage repair pathway, so it would be hard to compare them to each other.
LikeLike
What does RFC1 do?
LikeLike
RFC1 is a subunit of Replication Factor C, which is a clamp loader in eukaryotic DNA replication, but the function of subunit 1 specifically is unknown. Our experiment indicates that it is somehow involved with DNA damage repair, but we don’t know much beyond that!
LikeLike