6 thoughts on “C56 – Chauhan

  1. Great Job! Would you do the same method for the more in depth study? Or would different methods be used to confirm the results of this research?

    1. I would like to perform the same study just to make sure I did not make any mistakes, but I would also like to use different methods to confirm or challenge the results.

  2. You mentioned performing ‘additional experiments’ in order to either confirm or contradict your findings regarding the role of Rfc1 in DNA damage repair (since you also got other results suggesting it could play a role, in contrast to the results from the gels here pictured). What other experiments might you be interested in conducting? What results would you expect from some of these to better determine the role this gene replication factor in DNA repair?

    1. I would be interesting in conducting another qtPCR. I am not sure what I would suspect as the first and only tie a qtPCR was run it gave conflicting results, but I would like to run it again to see if I made an error in the set up or if the results were actually accurate. Based on my original findings I would expect to see no change in gene Expression since we concluded Rfc1 does not play a role in DNA damage repair.

    1. I would like to run another qtPCR. I also would do more research on other methods I could possible use to give more in depth data.

Leave a Reply