On 24 April 2013 12:55, Vladimir Gainullin <gainul...@gmail.com> wrote:

> DpnI digest?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:39 AM, DK <d...@no.email.thankstospam.net> wrote:
>
> > Wonder if anyone has good explanation as to how this is occuring:
> >
> > Once in a while, looking at sequences of mutant clones obtained by
> > "QuikChange", we'd see a simulateneous presence of both parent
> > and mutated genotype.
> >
> > I always discounted it on "cryptic double clone" or simple screw ups.
> > The frequency was never something to really pay attention to.
> >
> > Until this last time. I've screened clones by colony PCR, picked
> > positives, sequenced two clones. In BOTH clones, it is definitely
> > a mix. A simple mix up can be confidently excluded in this case
> > (re-tested, double checked going back to the original colony PCR
> > templates, etc, etc).
> >
> > Re-transform isolated pure clones without a problem but it's got me
> > thinking about the mechanism. Why would two different plasmids
> > end up in the same cell and persist together all the way through
> > a large clone and an overnight culture grown from it? And, how
> > to control/limit this occurence? With two clones having the same
> > wierd problem, this looks like something systematic that's worth
> > understanding in order to avoid...
> >
> > Technical details in case they matter: the mutagenesis was done
> > for two sites simulatenously - one was just a point mutation and
> > another was 60 bp insertion over deletion of the 66 bp. Both were
> > done with primer against the single strand, a la "QuikChange Multi".
> > It's only the long mutation that's a mixture - point mutation is
> > homogeneous. The % of double mutants by cPCR was low, 3/18.
> > This was the first time I used chemical cells for QuickChange,
> > having done exclusively electroporation before - wonder if that
> > can make a difference too.
> >
> > Any opinions?
> >
>

The possibility of concatamers? I understand that they are possible is
various situations of cloning.

Pow

>  > DK
> > _______________________________________________
> > Methods mailing list
> > Methods@net.bio.net
> > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/methods
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Methods mailing list
> Methods@net.bio.net
> http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/methods
>
_______________________________________________
Methods mailing list
Methods@net.bio.net
http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/methods

Reply via email to