Returned mail: User unknown (fwd)

Philip OBrien obrien at CSUVAX1.MURDOCH.EDU.AU
Tue Jun 14 07:00:35 EST 1994



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 1994 19:58:00 +0800 (WST)
From: Philip OBrien <obrien at csuvax1>
To: methodsandreagents at net.bio.net
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown (fwd)



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 94 19:54:55 +0800
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON at csuvax1>
To: postmaster at csuvax1, obrien at csuvax1
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 methods-and at csuvax1... User unknown

   ----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: by csuvax1.murdoch.edu.au (5.65/1.34)
	id AA24084; Tue, 14 Jun 94 19:54:55 +0800
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 1994 19:45:50 +0800 (WST)
From: Philip OBrien <obrien at csuvax1>
Subject: DEGENERATE PCR
To: methods-and at csuvax1
Message-Id: <Pine.3.87.9406141950.A23910-0100000 at csuvax1>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Dear netters
In order to clone pectic enzyme genes from fungi we have identified 
conserved regions within the genes (from amino acid sequences)and want to 
make PCR primers from these regions.  However we have to cope with 
2-4fold degeneracy at each codon (there are 6 codons/conserved region).  
Although we can make the primers how does this level of degeneracy affect 
the efficiency of PCR?  Are we likely to get to many non specific 
products?  I would be interested to hear from anyone with experience of 
this method.

Phil O'Brien
BES, Murdoch University,
Murdoch WA 6150 AUSTRALIA
email: obrien at csuvax1.murdoch.edu.au







More information about the Methods mailing list