The fact that the Hype-C expression decreases lead me to think it could be a repressor of a repair gene that keeps the gene from functioning when not needed. We would need to investigate what the actual product of the gene is and how it interacts in the presence of different repair tools.
I believe it was likely human error. It seems convenient that we have the exact opposite result for every sample on the gel. I believe it was just mislabeled tubes being loaded into lanes that we thought were correct.
You say “we know it plays some role but we don’t know what role it plays.” What are the potential roles and how can you determine what role it plays?
The fact that the Hype-C expression decreases lead me to think it could be a repressor of a repair gene that keeps the gene from functioning when not needed. We would need to investigate what the actual product of the gene is and how it interacts in the presence of different repair tools.
Do you know or have a guess to why you had inconclusive results? Was it something in the testing method or just human error?
I believe it was likely human error. It seems convenient that we have the exact opposite result for every sample on the gel. I believe it was just mislabeled tubes being loaded into lanes that we thought were correct.
Is there a reason you did not redo your figure 3 gel already or was it a matter of running out of time?
Yes, we had to re-run the gel for figure three due to degraded GoTaq before and just didnt have the time to run it again.
Do you have an idea as to why your gDNA was degraded?
We do not this was an issue for our entire lab period throughout the lab. Potentially a poor sample was given to the class or poor storage techniques.
What would have could been changed in the methodology of your experimentation that would have provided a more conclusive results?