11 thoughts on “C57 -Bishop

    1. I did not choose this gene it was assigned to me in lab based on its expression pattern

    1. using provided gene cDNA and online resources of primer 3 plus and Blast! primers were designed. its a bit tedious to describe the whole process but to explain it simply: the cDNA was put into primer 3 plus and a primer was selected and then put into blast! to make sure the chosen primer was unique to the gene I was researching. look up using primer 3 plus and blast! for if you want a more in depth explanation.

    1. the result that surprised me was the lack of any visible expression of my gene in either undamaged or damaged DNA because it was determined that my primers bound to the DNA so i would have expected at least a visible band in the untreated DNA

  1. If not directly involved, do you think it has some indirect involvement that is significant to study further?

    1. I think there may be indirect involvement in which the gene promotes the activation of another gene directly involved in DNA damage repair so it may warrant further study combined with other genes

  2. Could any mistakes have been made that would have confounded the interpretation of the result that this gene is not involved in DNA self-replication? IE could it really have been involved and an experimental error obscured that?

    1. there is always the possibility of experimental error. Given that I only had a total of 16hrs of lab time to preform all this research I was only able to preform one iteration of each experiment and any number of errors from DNA degradation to the formation of primer dimers to simple pipetting errors could have occurred to skew the results. There should definitely be repetition of this experiment to see if these results stand.

  3. Great presentation, I enjoyed listening. I was wondering if there was any information or parts of the lab that you found interesting but were unable to fit into the presentation?

Leave a Reply