From s-thyagarajan from uiowa.edu Tue May 6 11:40:17 2008 From: s-thyagarajan from uiowa.edu (Srikantha Thyagarajan) Date: Tue May 6 12:19:15 2008 Subject: [Yeast] coimmunoprecipitation in yeast Message-ID: <8684BEBF-48A5-4BE4-9439-B575B46A9F9A@uiowa.edu> Dear to whom so ever concerned: I appreciate very much if I can get a workable protocol to do small as well scale co-Ip for MASS SPEC ANALYSIS. with warm regards sri From mkeogh from aecom.yu.edu Tue May 6 14:18:09 2008 From: mkeogh from aecom.yu.edu (mkeogh) Date: Tue May 6 17:08:22 2008 Subject: [Yeast] RE. Co-IP Protocols ... Message-ID: RE. Srikantha Thyagarajan - request for S.cerevisiaie Co-IP Protocols .... Take a look at http://mckeogh.googlepages.com/protocols ________________________________________________________ Dr Michael-Christopher Keogh Department of Cell Biology Albert Einstein College of Medicine Chanin Building, Room 415A 1300 Morris Park Avenue Bronx, NY 10461 USA Email. mkeogh@aecom.yu.edu Tel. 1-718-430 8796 Tel (Lab) 1-718-430 2944 Fax. 1-718-430 8574 AIM. mckeogh2004 Skype. michaelckeogh Web. http://mckeogh.googlepages.com ________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080506/19631a01/attachment-0001.html From S.Wang from uws.edu.au Wed May 7 00:14:53 2008 From: S.Wang from uws.edu.au (Shaoyu Wang) Date: Wed May 7 08:57:19 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Funspec References: <200805062209.m46M90Q11297@net.bio.net> Message-ID: Dear All, I have tried to access Funspec recently with no success via this site: http://funspec.med.utoronto.ca . I wonder if the Funspec application has been moved to a new site or not available anymore? If so, are there similar program? Thank you and Best regards. Cindy ________________________________ From: yeast-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu on behalf of yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu Sent: Wed 7/05/2008 8:09 AM To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Subject: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1 Send Yeast mailing list submissions to yeast@net.bio.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to yeast-request@net.bio.net You can reach the person managing the list at yeast-owner@net.bio.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." Today's Topics: 1. coimmunoprecipitation in yeast (Srikantha Thyagarajan) 2. RE. Co-IP Protocols ... (mkeogh) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 11:40:17 -0500 From: Srikantha Thyagarajan Subject: [Yeast] coimmunoprecipitation in yeast To: Message-ID: <8684BEBF-48A5-4BE4-9439-B575B46A9F9A@uiowa.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format=flowed; delsp=yes Dear to whom so ever concerned: I appreciate very much if I can get a workable protocol to do small as well scale co-Ip for MASS SPEC ANALYSIS. with warm regards sri ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 15:18:09 -0400 From: mkeogh Subject: [Yeast] RE. Co-IP Protocols ... To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" RE. Srikantha Thyagarajan - request for S.cerevisiaie Co-IP Protocols .... Take a look at http://mckeogh.googlepages.com/protocols ________________________________________________________ Dr Michael-Christopher Keogh Department of Cell Biology Albert Einstein College of Medicine Chanin Building, Room 415A 1300 Morris Park Avenue Bronx, NY 10461 USA Email. mkeogh@aecom.yu.edu Tel. 1-718-430 8796 Tel (Lab) 1-718-430 2944 Fax. 1-718-430 8574 AIM. mckeogh2004 Skype. michaelckeogh Web. http://mckeogh.googlepages.com ________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080506/19631a01/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Yeast mailing list Yeast@net.bio.net http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1 ************************************ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 6728 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080507/4d1354f6/attachment.bin From pmmagic from gmail.com Wed May 7 09:20:18 2008 From: pmmagic from gmail.com (paul m) Date: Wed May 7 09:32:18 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Lab Tech/ Lab Manger Position: Yeast genetics (Duke University) Message-ID: <991e7bc10805070720v1db93f33tf38d21a08e5cf1f7@mail.gmail.com> Laboratory Technician Yeast Evolutionary Genetics/Genomics Duke University Description ======== The Magwene lab (Department of Biology, Duke University) seeks applicants for a full time laboratory technician/laboratory manager position. The successful applicant will have a strong background in molecular and/or microbiology, good troubleshooting and organizational skills, and the ability to work independently. BA/BS required. Salary commensurate with experience. Contact ======= To apply for this position please email a cover letter, CV/resume and the names and contact information for three references to: paul.magwene@duke.edu For more information see: http://biology.duke.edu/magwenelab/ Paul Magwene Assistant Professor Department of Biology Duke University From gabe.musso from utoronto.ca Wed May 7 09:50:09 2008 From: gabe.musso from utoronto.ca (Gabe Musso) Date: Wed May 7 10:54:36 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Funspec In-Reply-To: References: <200805062209.m46M90Q11297@net.bio.net> Message-ID: <4821C1A1.8080706@utoronto.ca> Hi Cindy, The Funspec application has undergone some remodeling, and can be found (under it's new name 'Yeastspec') at: http://emililab.med.utoronto.ca/yeastspec Just choose from the list whether you would like to run an original or binary search. Sorry about the confusion. Gabe Shaoyu Wang wrote: > Dear All, > > I have tried to access Funspec recently with no success via this site: http://funspec.med.utoronto.ca . I wonder if the Funspec application has been moved to a new site or not available anymore? If so, are there similar program? > > Thank you and Best regards. > > Cindy > > ________________________________ > > From: yeast-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu on behalf of yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu > Sent: Wed 7/05/2008 8:09 AM > To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Subject: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1 > > > > Send Yeast mailing list submissions to > yeast@net.bio.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > yeast-request@net.bio.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > yeast-owner@net.bio.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. coimmunoprecipitation in yeast (Srikantha Thyagarajan) > 2. RE. Co-IP Protocols ... (mkeogh) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 11:40:17 -0500 > From: Srikantha Thyagarajan > Subject: [Yeast] coimmunoprecipitation in yeast > To: > Message-ID: <8684BEBF-48A5-4BE4-9439-B575B46A9F9A@uiowa.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > Dear to whom so ever concerned: > > I appreciate very much if I can get a workable protocol to do small > as well scale co-Ip for MASS SPEC ANALYSIS. > > with warm regards > > sri > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 15:18:09 -0400 > From: mkeogh > Subject: [Yeast] RE. Co-IP Protocols ... > To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > RE. Srikantha Thyagarajan - request for S.cerevisiaie Co-IP > Protocols .... > > Take a look at http://mckeogh.googlepages.com/protocols > > > ________________________________________________________ > > Dr Michael-Christopher Keogh > Department of Cell Biology > Albert Einstein College of Medicine > Chanin Building, Room 415A > 1300 Morris Park Avenue > Bronx, NY 10461 > USA > Email. mkeogh@aecom.yu.edu > Tel. 1-718-430 8796 > Tel (Lab) 1-718-430 2944 > Fax. 1-718-430 8574 > AIM. mckeogh2004 > Skype. michaelckeogh > Web. http://mckeogh.googlepages.com > ________________________________________________________ > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080506/19631a01/attachment.html > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1 > ************************************ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast -- Gabriel Musso, PhD Candidate Genome Biology & Bioinformatics Collaborative Program Department of Molecular Genetics University of Toronto From selvanathansp from mail.nih.gov Wed May 7 11:08:44 2008 From: selvanathansp from mail.nih.gov (NCI NIH) Date: Wed May 7 11:11:58 2008 Subject: [Yeast] S. pombe - poly(A) tail length analysis In-Reply-To: <8684BEBF-48A5-4BE4-9439-B575B46A9F9A@uiowa.edu> Message-ID: Dear Dr. I appreciate very much if I can get a workable protocol for S. pombe - poly (A) tail length analysis....... With warm regards Saravanan -- DR. SARAVANA P. SELVANATHAN POST-DOCTORAL VISITING FELLOW NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE/BRL NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH BLD. 37, ROOM# 5016 9000 ROCKVILLE PIKE, BETHESDA, MD - 20892. TEL. 301-435-2670 Email: selvanathansp@mail.nih.gov From saherbst from biochem.wisc.edu Wed May 7 13:51:16 2008 From: saherbst from biochem.wisc.edu (Samantha Herbst) Date: Wed May 7 14:50:27 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Re: FunSpec In-Reply-To: <200805071704.m47H4RQ24701@net.bio.net> References: <200805071704.m47H4RQ24701@net.bio.net> Message-ID: They had a site outage in January that took a few days or a week to fix. It'll probably be back up and running soon. Samantha Herbst Deparment of Biochemistry UW-Madison > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 15:14:53 +1000 > From: "Shaoyu Wang" > Subject: [Yeast] Funspec > To: > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Dear All, > > I have tried to access Funspec recently with no success via this site: > . I wonder if the Funspec application has been moved to a new site or > not available anymore? If so, are there similar program? > > Thank you and Best regards. > > Cindy > > ________________________________ ********************************* From humberto.delavega from agrivida.com Thu May 8 13:21:56 2008 From: humberto.delavega from agrivida.com (Humberto de la Vega) Date: Thu May 8 14:07:34 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Heat exposure of yeast Message-ID: <8940f45d0805081121m5459441eu6ebd9c5363f9cbf1@mail.gmail.com> Does anybody knows about a thermotolerant S. cerevisiae strain that can be useful at the same time for expression using the Gal promoter. Thanks for your input -- Humberto de la Vega, PhD Agrivida Inc. humberto.delavega@agrivida.com p 781-391-1262 f 781-391-1262 m 617-416-9247 www.agrivida.com This email message and any files transmitted with it are the property of Agrivida, Inc. and contain confidential information intended only for the person(s) to whom this email message is addressed. If you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email and destroy the original message without making a copy. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080508/a9f0384e/attachment.html From jyyoungjimmy from gmail.com Sat May 10 16:43:15 2008 From: jyyoungjimmy from gmail.com (Jim Young) Date: Sat May 10 22:31:51 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Re: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: <200805062209.m46M9EQ11361@net.bio.net> References: <200805062209.m46M9EQ11361@net.bio.net> Message-ID: <57f211620805101443m3d1a0d67g8c157ec2cd966b3a@mail.gmail.com> If you want to go further for IP-western, you can use this product. It cuts Western Blot to just 1 hour and without heavy chain and light chain contamination. See this site: http://www.genscript.com/ip_western_tech.html On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 6:09 PM, wrote: > Send Yeast mailing list submissions to > yeast@net.bio.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > yeast-request@net.bio.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > yeast-owner@net.bio.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. coimmunoprecipitation in yeast (Srikantha Thyagarajan) > 2. RE. Co-IP Protocols ... (mkeogh) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 11:40:17 -0500 > From: Srikantha Thyagarajan > Subject: [Yeast] coimmunoprecipitation in yeast > To: > Message-ID: <8684BEBF-48A5-4BE4-9439-B575B46A9F9A@uiowa.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > Dear to whom so ever concerned: > > I appreciate very much if I can get a workable protocol to > do small > as well scale co-Ip for MASS SPEC ANALYSIS. > > with warm regards > > sri > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 15:18:09 -0400 > From: mkeogh > Subject: [Yeast] RE. Co-IP Protocols ... > To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > RE. Srikantha Thyagarajan - request for S.cerevisiaie Co-IP > Protocols .... > > Take a look at http://mckeogh.googlepages.com/protocols > > > ________________________________________________________ > > Dr Michael-Christopher Keogh > Department of Cell Biology > Albert Einstein College of Medicine > Chanin Building, Room 415A > 1300 Morris Park Avenue > Bronx, NY 10461 > USA > Email. mkeogh@aecom.yu.edu > Tel. 1-718-430 8796 > Tel (Lab) 1-718-430 2944 > Fax. 1-718-430 8574 > AIM. mckeogh2004 > Skype. michaelckeogh > Web. http://mckeogh.googlepages.com > ________________________________________________________ > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080506/19631a01/attachment.html > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 1 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080510/ae30a6b1/attachment.html From mks131 from gmail.com Mon May 12 03:57:46 2008 From: mks131 from gmail.com (Manoj saxena) Date: Mon May 12 13:38:16 2008 Subject: [Yeast] RNA free yeast whole cell extract Message-ID: <78e7890b0805120157t76b187fbk18ed16093384a2a9@mail.gmail.com> Dear all Hi I would be very grateful if any body can suggest me a protocol for preparation of a RNA free extract from yeast cells. Thanks in advance With regards manoj saxena -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080512/dfe03f0a/attachment.html From jkellosa from mappi.helsinki.fi Wed May 14 06:10:19 2008 From: jkellosa from mappi.helsinki.fi (jkellosa@mappi.helsinki.fi) Date: Wed May 14 10:15:10 2008 Subject: [Yeast] (no subject) Message-ID: <1210763419.482ac89b7d908@webmail.helsinki.fi> Dear all, A lab technician who I work with got both pure protein and wanted protein with two contaminating bands, both of which molecular weight is higher than the molecular weight of the wanted protein, from different batches of protein purification. The molecular weights of the contaminating bands are not high enough to account for different oligomerization states of the wanted protein. The two contaminating protein bands hang on really tightly with the wanted protein and we have not been able to get rid of them. I dont know what is the difference between purifications which produce pure protein and the purifications which don't, but I suspect that at least there has been differences at how long the cells have been growing since they were harvested. This leads me to my question that I want to ask from you: Have you ever had problems with contaminating proteins (stable proteins/chaperons hanging along, modifications of the wanted protein ?) when S.cerevisae cells have been in a certain growth phase ? -Juho Kellosalo From andreea from brc.hu Fri May 16 07:41:10 2008 From: andreea from brc.hu (andreea@brc.hu) Date: Fri May 16 08:53:03 2008 Subject: [Yeast] 6-azauracil Message-ID: <20080516144110.abm8wmrcxwg8wo8c@rosi.brc> Dear all, Does anyone know if I can dissolve 6-azauracil in water? I found this information in only one paper. The catalogue suggests to dissolve it in NH4OH. But when I dissolved it in NH4OH and after pouring the plates I noticed that in the media there are small crystals as if it got precipitated and of course my stain did not grow on those plates, but it did on control plates. Any suggestions or ideas are highly appreciated. Thank you! Andreea Andreea Daraba DNA Repair Research Group Institute of Genetics Biological Research Center Hungarian Academy of Science ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. From mkeogh from aecom.yu.edu Sat May 17 14:49:35 2008 From: mkeogh from aecom.yu.edu (mkeogh) Date: Sun May 18 01:21:18 2008 Subject: [Yeast] 6AU plates ... Message-ID: Andreea, See the Media Additives protocol at http://mckeogh.googlepages.com/protocols ... Media Additives: Antibiotics, cell-cycle arrest agents, counter- selection agents, genotoxins, HDAC inhibitors and transcription elongation inhibitors. Use in combination with Media protocol. Michael ... ________________________________________________________ Dr Michael-Christopher Keogh Department of Cell Biology Albert Einstein College of Medicine Chanin Building, Room 415A 1300 Morris Park Avenue Bronx, NY 10461 USA Email. mkeogh@aecom.yu.edu Tel. 1-718-430 8796 Tel (Lab) 1-718-430 2944 Fax. 1-718-430 8574 AIM. mckeogh2004 Skype. michaelckeogh Web. http://mckeogh.googlepages.com ________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080517/f283f886/attachment-0001.html From jyyoungjimmy from gmail.com Sun May 18 20:41:20 2008 From: jyyoungjimmy from gmail.com (Jim Young) Date: Sun May 18 22:19:11 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Re: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: <200805141707.m4EH7qO17661@net.bio.net> References: <200805141707.m4EH7qO17661@net.bio.net> Message-ID: <57f211620805181841h77381d7bid617d29e95e1b1f2@mail.gmail.com> Hi, If you cannot solve the problem finally, a commercial company may helpful to you. http://www.genscript.com/custom_protein_purification_characterization.html On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 1:07 AM, wrote: > Send Yeast mailing list submissions to > yeast@net.bio.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > yeast-request@net.bio.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > yeast-owner@net.bio.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. (no subject) (jkellosa@mappi.helsinki.fi) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 14:10:19 +0300 > From: jkellosa@mappi.helsinki.fi > Subject: [Yeast] (no subject) > To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Message-ID: <1210763419.482ac89b7d908@webmail.helsinki.fi> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Dear all, > > A lab technician who I work with got both pure protein and wanted protein > with two contaminating bands, both of which molecular weight is higher than > the molecular weight of the wanted protein, from different batches of > protein purification. The molecular weights of the contaminating bands are > not high enough to account for different oligomerization states of the > wanted protein. > > The two contaminating protein bands hang on really tightly with the wanted > protein and we have not been able to get rid of them. > > I dont know what is the difference between purifications which produce pure > protein and the purifications which don't, but I suspect that at least > there has been differences at how long the cells have been growing since > they were harvested. > > This leads me to my question that I want to ask from you: > > Have you ever had problems with contaminating proteins (stable > proteins/chaperons hanging along, modifications of the wanted protein ?) > when S.cerevisae cells have been in a certain growth phase ? > > -Juho Kellosalo > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 7 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080519/b6e3753f/attachment.html From hplatero from genome.stanford.edu Wed May 21 17:46:03 2008 From: hplatero from genome.stanford.edu (Harriett Platero) Date: Wed May 21 20:19:45 2008 Subject: [Yeast] RFP library Message-ID: <2AEF8342-55CF-4873-BFD3-A26C7CD6409F@genome.stanford.edu> Yeast members, Maggie Werner-Washburne's lab is trying to locate the RFP_ library which used to be at UCSF or Harvard. If anyone knows the whereabouts of the library please contact: maggieww@unm.edu Thank you From kgeiler from gmail.com Fri May 23 17:50:55 2008 From: kgeiler from gmail.com (Kerry Geiler) Date: Fri May 23 18:17:20 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose Message-ID: <3fa3f1ca0805231550r3af8b9c9s8e68d11550478c17@mail.gmail.com> HI, I have a question about whether yeast grow better in sucrose and raffinose or a combination of both. I am using galactose induction, so I cannot grow my strains in glucose. I have inquired with many nearby labs and some use 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% sucrose, 1% raffinose. However, none of these labs can tell me why they made this decision (it seems to be a part of their lab culture). Does anyone know the differences between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? Do either of these sugars inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? Any information that will inform my decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Kerry Geiler kgeiler@gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080523/6104a363/attachment.html From daniel.bosch from gu.se Fri May 23 19:42:59 2008 From: daniel.bosch from gu.se (Daniel Bosch) Date: Fri May 23 23:59:43 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose In-Reply-To: <3fa3f1ca0805231550r3af8b9c9s8e68d11550478c17@mail.gmail.com> References: <3fa3f1ca0805231550r3af8b9c9s8e68d11550478c17@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <682184.1211589779342.JavaMail.oracle@midtier-vas-5.it.gu.se> Hi Kerry, Both sucrose and raffinose are broken up outside of the cell by the same enzyme, invertase. Sucrose generates glucose and fructose that can be immediately transported into the cell and assimilated. Raffinose leads to fructose and melibiose. The latter is broken up by another enzyme, melibiase, which is not present in all lab strains. As a matter or fact, the degradation of raffinose will yield less amount of fermentable sugars (33%) in lab strains than sucrose (100%) and therefore it can be considered a poorer carbon source. Neither sucrose nor raffinose should lead to a major repression of the GAL genes. Having said this, I don't know why some labs prefer sucrose over raffinose or mixtures of both. An alternative to sugars is the use of respiratory carbon sources, such as glycerol or ethanol. I particular find that cells grow better in a mixture of the two (3% glycerol and 1% ethanol) than on any of them alone. Hope this was helpful, Dani Daniel Bosch Postdoc in Nystr?m's lab Dept. Cell and Molecular Biology University of Gothenburg Sweden __________________________________________________ >From Kerry Geiler Sent Sat 5/24/2008 12:50 AM To yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Cc Subject [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose HI, I have a question about whether yeast grow better in sucrose and raffinose or a combination of both. ?I am using galactose induction, so I cannot grow my strains in glucose. ?I have inquired with many nearby labs and some use 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% sucrose, 1% raffinose. ?However, none of these labs can tell me why they made this decision (it seems to be a part of their lab culture). ?Does anyone know the differences between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? ?Do either of these sugars inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? ?Any information that will inform my decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly appreciated. ?Thanks! Kerry Geiler kgeiler@gmail.com (mailto:kgeiler@gmail.com) __________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Yeast mailing list Yeast@net.bio.net (mailto:Yeast@net.bio.net) http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast (http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080524/fe392c97/attachment.html From ilya.soifer from gmail.com Mon May 26 02:53:11 2008 From: ilya.soifer from gmail.com (Ilya Soifer) Date: Mon May 26 10:09:21 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose In-Reply-To: <682184.1211589779342.JavaMail.oracle@midtier-vas-5.it.gu.se> References: <3fa3f1ca0805231550r3af8b9c9s8e68d11550478c17@mail.gmail.com> <682184.1211589779342.JavaMail.oracle@midtier-vas-5.it.gu.se> Message-ID: <1952757a0805260053h60b91c14x30299960d15dd95c@mail.gmail.com> Dear all, I have a similar question - some labs use autoclaved raffinose and some - filtered raffinose in the media prior to galactose induction. Does anyone have an idea why and which way is preferrable? Thanks a lot, Ilya 2008/5/24 Daniel Bosch : > Hi Kerry, > > Both sucrose and raffinose are broken up outside of the cell by the same > enzyme, invertase. Sucrose generates glucose and fructose that can be > immediately transported into the cell and assimilated. Raffinose leads to > fructose and melibiose. The latter is broken up by another enzyme, > melibiase, which is not present in all lab strains. As a matter or fact, the > degradation of raffinose will yield less amount of fermentable sugars (33%) > in lab strains than sucrose (100%) and therefore it can be considered a > poorer carbon source. Neither sucrose nor raffinose should lead to a major > repression of the GAL genes. > Having said this, I don't know why some labs prefer sucrose over raffinose > or mixtures of both. An alternative to sugars is the use of respiratory > carbon sources, such as glycerol or ethanol. I particular find that cells > grow better in a mixture of the two (3% glycerol and 1% ethanol) than on any > of them alone. > > Hope this was helpful, > > Dani > > > Daniel Bosch > Postdoc in Nystr?m's lab > Dept. Cell and Molecular Biology > University of Gothenburg > Sweden > > > ------------------------------ > From Kerry Geiler > Sent Sat 5/24/2008 12:50 AM > To yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Cc > Subject [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose > > HI, > I have a question about whether yeast grow better in sucrose and raffinose > or a combination of both. I am using galactose induction, so I cannot grow > my strains in glucose. I have inquired with many nearby labs and some use > 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% sucrose, 1% raffinose. > However, none of these labs can tell me why they made this decision (it > seems to be a part of their lab culture). Does anyone know the differences > between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? Do either of these sugars > inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? Any information that will inform my > decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! > > Kerry Geiler > kgeiler@gmail.com > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing listYeast@net.bio.nethttp://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080526/b337daa1/attachment.html From cartera from cmp.ucsf.edu Mon May 26 12:33:41 2008 From: cartera from cmp.ucsf.edu (Andrew Carter) Date: Mon May 26 12:44:45 2008 Subject: [Yeast] RE: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 In-Reply-To: <200805261704.m4QH4gO07777@net.bio.net> Message-ID: <001601c8bf56$a39fca30$0b06e6a9@IBME9D42FB521E> This is an interesting discussion.... I was always told that raffinose tends to break down on autoclaving and that the filtered form was better. I was wondering why if sucrose is broken down into glucose and fructose, why the glucose does not repress the galactose promoter in the same way that glucose in the media does? Best wishes Andrew -----Original Message----- From: yeast-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:yeast-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu Sent: 26 May 2008 10:05 To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Subject: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 Send Yeast mailing list submissions to yeast@net.bio.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to yeast-request@net.bio.net You can reach the person managing the list at yeast-owner@net.bio.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Raffinose versus Sucrose (Ilya Soifer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 10:53:11 +0300 From: "Ilya Soifer" Subject: Re: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Message-ID: <1952757a0805260053h60b91c14x30299960d15dd95c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Dear all, I have a similar question - some labs use autoclaved raffinose and some - filtered raffinose in the media prior to galactose induction. Does anyone have an idea why and which way is preferrable? Thanks a lot, Ilya 2008/5/24 Daniel Bosch : > Hi Kerry, > > Both sucrose and raffinose are broken up outside of the cell by the same > enzyme, invertase. Sucrose generates glucose and fructose that can be > immediately transported into the cell and assimilated. Raffinose leads to > fructose and melibiose. The latter is broken up by another enzyme, > melibiase, which is not present in all lab strains. As a matter or fact, the > degradation of raffinose will yield less amount of fermentable sugars (33%) > in lab strains than sucrose (100%) and therefore it can be considered a > poorer carbon source. Neither sucrose nor raffinose should lead to a major > repression of the GAL genes. > Having said this, I don't know why some labs prefer sucrose over raffinose > or mixtures of both. An alternative to sugars is the use of respiratory > carbon sources, such as glycerol or ethanol. I particular find that cells > grow better in a mixture of the two (3% glycerol and 1% ethanol) than on any > of them alone. > > Hope this was helpful, > > Dani > > > Daniel Bosch > Postdoc in Nystr?m's lab > Dept. Cell and Molecular Biology > University of Gothenburg > Sweden > > > ------------------------------ > From Kerry Geiler > Sent Sat 5/24/2008 12:50 AM > To yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Cc > Subject [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose > > HI, > I have a question about whether yeast grow better in sucrose and raffinose > or a combination of both. I am using galactose induction, so I cannot grow > my strains in glucose. I have inquired with many nearby labs and some use > 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% sucrose, 1% raffinose. > However, none of these labs can tell me why they made this decision (it > seems to be a part of their lab culture). Does anyone know the differences > between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? Do either of these sugars > inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? Any information that will inform my > decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! > > Kerry Geiler > kgeiler@gmail.com > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing listYeast@net.bio.nethttp://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080526/b337daa1/attachm ent-0001.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Yeast mailing list Yeast@net.bio.net http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 ************************************* From daniel.bosch from gu.se Mon May 26 16:49:37 2008 From: daniel.bosch from gu.se (Daniel Bosch) Date: Mon May 26 21:02:20 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Raffinose versus sucrose In-Reply-To: <001601c8bf56$a39fca30$0b06e6a9@IBME9D42FB521E> References: <001601c8bf56$a39fca30$0b06e6a9@IBME9D42FB521E> Message-ID: <16543019.1211838577139.JavaMail.oracle@midtier-lyk-4.it.gu.se> Regarding filtering vs autoclaving, I have always been told to filter the solutions, like Andrew indicates. The degradation of sucrose releases a steady supply of glucose/fructose, this condition is similar to growth in a low sugar concentration. Under these circumstances "glucose repression" is largely absent, including the repression of the GAL regulon. I can speculate that if the breakdown of sucrose were more efficient there would be a stronger glucose repression effect. However, there would be a feedback regulatory loop since SUC2, the gene encoding invertase, is also repressed by high glucose/fructose concentrations. Finally, In the issue of why some labs may use sucrose over raffinose, a simple reason that should not be overlooked is that raffinose is far more expensive that sucrose. Cheers, dani -----Original Message----- >From Andrew Carter Sent Mon 5/26/2008 7:33 PM To yeast@oat.bio.indiana.edu Subject [Yeast] RE: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 This is an interesting discussion.... I was always told that raffinose tends to break down on autoclaving and that the filtered form was better. I was wondering why if sucrose is broken down into glucose and fructose, why the glucose does not repress the galactose promoter in the same way that glucose in the media does? Best wishes Andrew -----Original Message----- From: yeast-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:yeast-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu Sent: 26 May 2008 10:05 To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Subject: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 Send Yeast mailing list submissions to yeast@net.bio.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to yeast-request@net.bio.net You can reach the person managing the list at yeast-owner@net.bio.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Raffinose versus Sucrose (Ilya Soifer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 10:53:11 +0300 From: "Ilya Soifer" Subject: Re: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Message-ID: <1952757a0805260053h60b91c14x30299960d15dd95c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Dear all, I have a similar question - some labs use autoclaved raffinose and some - filtered raffinose in the media prior to galactose induction. Does anyone have an idea why and which way is preferrable? Thanks a lot, Ilya 2008/5/24 Daniel Bosch : > Hi Kerry, > > Both sucrose and raffinose are broken up outside of the cell by the same > enzyme, invertase. Sucrose generates glucose and fructose that can be > immediately transported into the cell and assimilated. Raffinose leads to > fructose and melibiose. The latter is broken up by another enzyme, > melibiase, which is not present in all lab strains. As a matter or fact, the > degradation of raffinose will yield less amount of fermentable sugars (33%) > in lab strains than sucrose (100%) and therefore it can be considered a > poorer carbon source. Neither sucrose nor raffinose should lead to a major > repression of the GAL genes. > Having said this, I don't know why some labs prefer sucrose over raffinose > or mixtures of both. An alternative to sugars is the use of respiratory > carbon sources, such as glycerol or ethanol. I particular find that cells > grow better in a mixture of the two (3% glycerol and 1% ethanol) than on any > of them alone. > > Hope this was helpful, > > Dani > > > Daniel Bosch > Postdoc in Nystr?m's lab > Dept. Cell and Molecular Biology > University of Gothenburg > Sweden > > > ------------------------------ > From Kerry Geiler > Sent Sat 5/24/2008 12:50 AM > To yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Cc > Subject [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose > > HI, > I have a question about whether yeast grow better in sucrose and raffinose > or a combination of both. I am using galactose induction, so I cannot grow > my strains in glucose. I have inquired with many nearby labs and some use > 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% sucrose, 1% raffinose. > However, none of these labs can tell me why they made this decision (it > seems to be a part of their lab culture). Does anyone know the differences > between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? Do either of these sugars > inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? Any information that will inform my > decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! > > Kerry Geiler > kgeiler@gmail.com > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing listYeast@net.bio.nethttp://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080526/b337daa1/attachm ent-0001.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Yeast mailing list Yeast@net.bio.net http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 ************************************* _______________________________________________ Yeast mailing list Yeast@net.bio.net http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast From cinthiait from yahoo.com Tue May 27 11:18:25 2008 From: cinthiait from yahoo.com (Cinzia Pagliuca) Date: Tue May 27 11:28:55 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Acid-washed glass Beads Message-ID: <329149.46166.qm@web51105.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Dear all, I' m triyng to break the yeast cells with a Bead-Beater. Since I use 100-200 ml of Glass Beads (sigma, acid washed Beads), I would like to re-use them. It is possible? Can you suggest how to do it? Many thanks in advice, Cinzia --- On Mon, 5/26/08, yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu wrote: > From: yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu > Subject: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 > To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Date: Monday, May 26, 2008, 7:04 PM > Send Yeast mailing list submissions to > yeast@net.bio.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > or, via email, send a message with subject or body > 'help' to > yeast-request@net.bio.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > yeast-owner@net.bio.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more > specific > than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Raffinose versus Sucrose (Ilya Soifer) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 10:53:11 +0300 > From: "Ilya Soifer" > Subject: Re: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose > To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > Message-ID: > <1952757a0805260053h60b91c14x30299960d15dd95c@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Dear all, > I have a similar question - some labs use autoclaved > raffinose and some - > filtered raffinose in the media prior to galactose > induction. > Does anyone have an idea why and which way is preferrable? > Thanks a lot, > Ilya > > 2008/5/24 Daniel Bosch : > > > Hi Kerry, > > > > Both sucrose and raffinose are broken up outside of > the cell by the same > > enzyme, invertase. Sucrose generates glucose and > fructose that can be > > immediately transported into the cell and assimilated. > Raffinose leads to > > fructose and melibiose. The latter is broken up by > another enzyme, > > melibiase, which is not present in all lab strains. As > a matter or fact, the > > degradation of raffinose will yield less amount of > fermentable sugars (33%) > > in lab strains than sucrose (100%) and therefore it > can be considered a > > poorer carbon source. Neither sucrose nor raffinose > should lead to a major > > repression of the GAL genes. > > Having said this, I don't know why some labs > prefer sucrose over raffinose > > or mixtures of both. An alternative to sugars is the > use of respiratory > > carbon sources, such as glycerol or ethanol. I > particular find that cells > > grow better in a mixture of the two (3% glycerol and > 1% ethanol) than on any > > of them alone. > > > > Hope this was helpful, > > > > Dani > > > > > > Daniel Bosch > > Postdoc in Nystr?m's lab > > Dept. Cell and Molecular Biology > > University of Gothenburg > > Sweden > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > From Kerry Geiler > > Sent Sat 5/24/2008 12:50 AM > > To yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > > Cc > > Subject [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose > > > > HI, > > I have a question about whether yeast grow better in > sucrose and raffinose > > or a combination of both. I am using galactose > induction, so I cannot grow > > my strains in glucose. I have inquired with many > nearby labs and some use > > 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% > sucrose, 1% raffinose. > > However, none of these labs can tell me why they made > this decision (it > > seems to be a part of their lab culture). Does anyone > know the differences > > between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? Do > either of these sugars > > inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? Any > information that will inform my > > decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly > appreciated. Thanks! > > > > Kerry Geiler > > kgeiler@gmail.com > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Yeast mailing > listYeast@net.bio.nethttp://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Yeast mailing list > > Yeast@net.bio.net > > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080526/b337daa1/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast > > End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 > ************************************* From david.mueller from rosalindfranklin.edu Tue May 27 16:27:22 2008 From: david.mueller from rosalindfranklin.edu (David Mueller) Date: Tue May 27 18:15:26 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Acid-washed glass Beads In-Reply-To: <329149.46166.qm@web51105.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Cinzia: We do it all the time - but we are not isolating DNA. WASHING Glass Beads Add beads to a 4 liter beaker with detergent and let sit overnight. Rinse well with house distilled water. Wash with 1M nitric acid overnight. (A 70% solution of Nitric acid is 15.4M.) Rinse with glass distilled water. Dry in oven. Beads should not clump. If they do, they are not clean. Beads can be reused up to 10 times. David Mueller On 5/27/08 11:18 AM, "Cinzia Pagliuca" wrote: > Dear all, > > I' m triyng to break the yeast cells with a Bead-Beater. Since I use 100-200 > ml of Glass Beads (sigma, acid washed Beads), I would like to re-use them. It > is possible? Can you suggest how to do it? > > Many thanks in advice, > Cinzia > > > --- On Mon, 5/26/08, yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu > wrote: > >> From: yeast-request@oat.bio.indiana.edu >> Subject: Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 >> To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu >> Date: Monday, May 26, 2008, 7:04 PM >> Send Yeast mailing list submissions to >> yeast@net.bio.net >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body >> 'help' to >> yeast-request@net.bio.net >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> yeast-owner@net.bio.net >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more >> specific >> than "Re: Contents of Yeast digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Raffinose versus Sucrose (Ilya Soifer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 10:53:11 +0300 >> From: "Ilya Soifer" >> Subject: Re: [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose >> To: yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu >> Message-ID: >> <1952757a0805260053h60b91c14x30299960d15dd95c@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Dear all, >> I have a similar question - some labs use autoclaved >> raffinose and some - >> filtered raffinose in the media prior to galactose >> induction. >> Does anyone have an idea why and which way is preferrable? >> Thanks a lot, >> Ilya >> >> 2008/5/24 Daniel Bosch : >> >>> Hi Kerry, >>> >>> Both sucrose and raffinose are broken up outside of >> the cell by the same >>> enzyme, invertase. Sucrose generates glucose and >> fructose that can be >>> immediately transported into the cell and assimilated. >> Raffinose leads to >>> fructose and melibiose. The latter is broken up by >> another enzyme, >>> melibiase, which is not present in all lab strains. As >> a matter or fact, the >>> degradation of raffinose will yield less amount of >> fermentable sugars (33%) >>> in lab strains than sucrose (100%) and therefore it >> can be considered a >>> poorer carbon source. Neither sucrose nor raffinose >> should lead to a major >>> repression of the GAL genes. >>> Having said this, I don't know why some labs >> prefer sucrose over raffinose >>> or mixtures of both. An alternative to sugars is the >> use of respiratory >>> carbon sources, such as glycerol or ethanol. I >> particular find that cells >>> grow better in a mixture of the two (3% glycerol and >> 1% ethanol) than on any >>> of them alone. >>> >>> Hope this was helpful, >>> >>> Dani >>> >>> >>> Daniel Bosch >>> Postdoc in Nystr?m's lab >>> Dept. Cell and Molecular Biology >>> University of Gothenburg >>> Sweden >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> From Kerry Geiler >>> Sent Sat 5/24/2008 12:50 AM >>> To yeast@magpie.bio.indiana.edu >>> Cc >>> Subject [Yeast] Raffinose versus Sucrose >>> >>> HI, >>> I have a question about whether yeast grow better in >> sucrose and raffinose >>> or a combination of both. I am using galactose >> induction, so I cannot grow >>> my strains in glucose. I have inquired with many >> nearby labs and some use >>> 2% sucrose, some use 2% raffinose, and some use 2% >> sucrose, 1% raffinose. >>> However, none of these labs can tell me why they made >> this decision (it >>> seems to be a part of their lab culture). Does anyone >> know the differences >>> between yeast growth in sucrose vs raffinose? Do >> either of these sugars >>> inhibit metabolism of the other sugar? Any >> information that will inform my >>> decision of which sugar to choose would be greatly >> appreciated. Thanks! >>> >>> Kerry Geiler >>> kgeiler@gmail.com >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Yeast mailing >> listYeast@net.bio.nethttp://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Yeast mailing list >>> Yeast@net.bio.net >>> http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080526/b337daa1/attachment-0 >> 001.html >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Yeast mailing list >> Yeast@net.bio.net >> http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast >> >> End of Yeast Digest, Vol 36, Issue 13 >> ************************************* > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Yeast mailing list > Yeast@net.bio.net > http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/yeast David Mueller Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science 3333 Greenbay Road North Chicago, IL 60064 David.mueller@rosalindfranklin.edu http://web.mac.com/mueller.david/iWeb/LMB/dm.html Tel: 847-578-8606 FAX: 847-578-3240 From lautys from gmail.com Tue May 27 21:52:15 2008 From: lautys from gmail.com (lautys) Date: Wed May 28 00:46:09 2008 Subject: [Yeast] Acid-washed glass Beads (Cinzia Pagliuca) Message-ID: Dear Cinzia Pagliuca, Autoclave and acid-wash all the glass beads again, it should be no problem to reuse it. 1. autoclave (killing) 2. acid-wash (to dissolve and hydrolyze any contaminant, standard protocols can be found easily online) But I would rather buy new bottle, since it's too hassle to clean up those beads. regards, Lau > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 09:18:25 -0700 (PDT) > From: Cinzia Pagliuca > Subject: [Yeast] Acid-washed glass Beads > To: yeast@oat.bio.indiana.edu > Message-ID: <329149.46166.qm@web51105.mail.re2.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Dear all, > > I' m triyng to break the yeast cells with a Bead-Beater. Since I use > 100-200 ml of Glass Beads (sigma, acid washed Beads), I would like to re-use > them. It is possible? Can you suggest how to do it? > > Many thanks in advice, > Cinzia > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/yeast/attachments/20080528/ff6fd8f9/attachment.html From Ann.Mertz from unibas.ch Fri May 30 08:10:50 2008 From: Ann.Mertz from unibas.ch (Ann Mertz) Date: Fri May 30 12:06:16 2008 Subject: [Yeast] pRS324 sequence Message-ID: <20080530151050.ok39twdhqssoooso@webmail.unibas.ch> Dear all, Does anybody have the sequence of pRS324? I only find sequences of pRS424, but none of the pRS300 series. Thanks for your help! Regards, Ann. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. From rosenwaa from georgetown.edu Fri May 30 09:14:51 2008 From: rosenwaa from georgetown.edu (Anne Rosenwald) Date: Fri May 30 12:06:22 2008 Subject: [Yeast] post-doctoral position available - Georgetown University Message-ID: <48400BDB.5010709@georgetown.edu> *Post-doctoral Position Available at Georgetown University* A post-doctoral position is available in Dr. Anne Rosenwald’s laboratory in the Biology Department at Georgetown University beginning immediately. Experience with protein expression and purification is desired. Experience with /Saccharomyces cerevisiae/ is helpful but not absolutely necessary. The possibility exists for gaining teaching experience in consultation with Dr. Rosenwald and other faculty members in the Department. Please send a letter of interest with your C.V. and the names of three references to: Anne G. Rosenwald, Ph.D. Department of Biology Georgetown University 406 Reiss Science Center Box 571229 Washington, DC 20057-1229 Phone (202) 687 5997 Fax (202) 687 5662 Email rosenwaa@georgetown.edu