IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

RT-PCR vs Northern

Simon Dawson mbzspd at granby.nott.ac.uk
Tue Dec 5 03:11:45 EST 1995


Stephen R. Lasky wrote:
> 
> In article <49l20s$bq at mark.ucdavis.edu>, ez008413 at bullwinkle.ucdavis.edu
> (Gabriel Romero) wrote:
> 
> > I'm about to start gene expression studies at the transcription level but

[Deleted]

> RT-PCR is much more sensitive, faster, requires less RNA, and is easy to
> do.  It is, however, more difficult to quantitate.  You also need to be
> able to design good primers (which is usually not too much of a problem).
> 
> SRLasky
> 

[Deleted]

  I would agree that RT-PCR is more sensitive and requires less RNA, but I'm not 
sure it's harder to quantitate. If you want a reasonably accurate quantitation I 
would recommend RT-PCR (or RNase Protection)....if all you need is a yes/no 
answer to whether it's expressed I would try Northerns first....but if your 
message isn't very abundant, you might need to use RT-PCR eventually anyway.

        Simon.

-- 

Dr. Simon Dawson       TEL:+44 (0)115 9249924 ex. 44789
Dept. of Biochemistry  FAX:+44 (0)115 9422225
Queens Medical Centre  Email:Simon.Dawson at .nott.ac.uk
Clifton Boulevard      http://www.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk/~mbzspd/Simon.html
Nottingham
U.K.                   "Back off man, I'm a scientist!" - Bill Murray.



More information about the Methods mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net