DNA gel extraction

Taek H. You tyou at postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu
Sat Aug 17 14:04:44 EST 1996


In article <DwAAz9.K6M.B.midge at bath.ac.uk> bspwrb at bath.ac.uk (W R BENNETT) writes:
>Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
>Path:
>magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!purdue!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ul
>tranet.com!homer.alpha.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet
>2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!uknet!strath-cs!dcl-cs!bat
>h.ac.uk!b
>spwrb
>From: bspwrb at bath.ac.uk (W R BENNETT)
>Subject: Re: DNA gel extraction
>Organization: School of Biological Sciences, University of Bath, UK
>Message-ID: <DwAAz9.K6M.B.midge at bath.ac.uk>
>References: <4ulg9s$q7h at mark.ucdavis.edu> <3213A2DE.70CC at lac.jci.tju.edu>
>Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 13:33:09 GMT
>Lines: 17


>ehwang at ucdavis.edu wrote:

>> 
>> I frequently use a gel extraction method where I poke a hole at the
>> bottom of a .5 ml tume and plug some whatman with T.E. to spin a gel
>> through to extract DNA.  Does anyone know where this technique came
>> from?  Original publication would be nice.
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>Is this any different or better than using glass wool to plug the eppendorf 
>tube?

>Curious,

>Bill Bennett
>W.R.BENNETT at bath.ac.uk

I tried both. In my hand, 3M filter paper is easier and faster. Both are good 
convinient methods, though.
Any one can try both side by side since it takes only a few minutes. Then, 
decide which one is better or easier.
I think it's the milage on individual in my opinion.



More information about the Methods mailing list