8 thoughts on “C51 – Thathey

  1. Great presentation Zahra! My question is: Are there any other tests that you could perform besides RT-PCR to confirm these results?

    1. Hi Leshia! Thanks for your question! There are a couple different options to validate our gene expression results. One of them is still PCR based but it’s quantitative, called qRT-PCR. We could also use a Northern blot to directly measure RNA levels or do a Western blot to measure protein levels.

  2. Awesome presentation! You clearly have a great understanding on the experiments that you conducted! A question that I have, that might be very simple for you to answer, is that I am curious about once we know what genes are responsible for DNA damage and repair what can we do with that information?

    1. Hi Jadon! Thank you for the question and your kind words! Once we have identified genes involved in the DNA damage response pathway, we can target those genes in drugs for diseases that are impacted by DNA damage like cancer.

  3. Hi Zahra, great job! I am wondering what the significance of the cDNA contamination that you mentioned in the first figure in your results would be? It doesn’t seem to have made a big impact, is this sort of contamination normal?

    1. Hi Finn! That’s a great question! Having that contamination just means that it makes the interpretation of our results slightly harder. Luckily, we were able to determine the cause of that contamination, where it was some cDNA template added to our Atpv0c6 primers; so we could still trust our results and move forward with our experiments. It’s extremely common to have contamination in PCRs especially in a course like this where a large number of people are using the same reagents.

        1. Good question! Looking at our gel, you can see that the band we think is contamination is at the expected length of the Atpv0c6 + cDNA lane, so that was our best guess since they are at the same length.

Leave a Reply