LB vs. TB?
leij at mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Fri Nov 19 11:58:17 EST 1993
In article <2c8tn6INNcn6 at emory.mathcs.emory.edu> medtjm at bimcore.emory.edu writes:
>In article bloksber at thomashaw-at.css.msu.edu, bloksber at pilot.msu.edu (Leonard N. Bloksberg) writes:
>> I have heard claims of doubling plasmid yields by growing bugs up in TB
>> rather than LB. Does anyone have any experience to support or debunk this
>> notion? Since TB is more trouble to make up, and costs a lot more, is it
>> worth it? Media recipes follow. Thanks.
LB and TB formula deleted.
>My lab started playing with TB several months ago. We now
>use it for large scale plasmid preps, but use 2XYT for minipreps.
>We no longer use LB for anything.
>TB is too rich for minipreps by alkaline lysis, the DNA from TB mini-
A technical report in BioTechniques (Lee and Rasheed, Vol. 9:676-679,
1990) is just for this. I have been using TB to culture bacteria and
doing miniprep by that method for almost all kinds of different use of
"purified" plasmid DNA, such as sequencing or isolation of fragment for
labelling or subcloning. The quality of DNA is good in that I usually
get only (vector + insert) bands after enzyme restriction. As such, it's
been long time since my last CsCl gradient purification.
>cultures is contaminated with inhibitors of many restriction
>enzymes...I guess complex carbohydrates but am not really sure.
West Lafayette, IN 47907
More information about the Methods