cytogen at chmeds.ac.nz
Tue Oct 13 17:09:36 EST 1992
In article <1992Oct13.100236.90319 at vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>, mic255z at vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au writes:
> Dear Netters,
> I am interested in using a lambda system to do some primary cloning.
> Does anyone have any thoughts on what system is better ie., what are the
> relative merits of lambda-ZAP and lambda-DASH compared with EMBL, GEM
> or gt11 apart from obvious things like unique cloning sites.
> Thanks in advance,
> Helen Jost,
> Department of Microbiology,
> Monash University.
I've used lambda ZAP several times, and it works beautifully; its main advantage
is the "automatic excision" of inserts - ie, you don't have to make a lambda DNA
prep, and subclone the insert, as addition of a helper phage causes copying of
the phagemid portion of lambda ZAP which contains the multiple cloning site and
your insert. The phagemeid is then recovered as amp resistant colonies that
contain a Bluescript "subclone"of your lambda insert. Look at various volumes
of Methods in Enzymology for good comparisons of lambda vectors.
More information about the Methods