The correct ladder was used this time, which enabled us to determine which bands belonged to which of the proteins we were probing. 5% BSA blocking resulted in stronger bands than Odyssey blocking. Each gave some nonspecific bands. As expected, all cells appeared to be expressing GAPDH, though the levels of GAPDH were barely detectable for the Ramos samples because of low starting protein concentration (see BCA assay). Based on the combined results from the Odyssey and BSA blocking, both Ramos and HEK293 appear to express Syk at detectable levels. As expected, Syk-TEVp was expressed at higher levels in samples with higher doxycycline concentrations. Based on a qualitative visual analysis of the bands, endogenous Syk expression appears to Future considerations: - Continue to use BSA blocking. It appears to give better signal than Odyssey blocking.
- Consider using less anti-GFP. The signal is really bright relative to the Syk and GAPDH signals.
- Load more protein. Grow cell populations in larger wells (to get more cells per well) to get higher protein concentrations. This should give brighter bands.
- "Phantom" bands appeared in lanes adjacent to the ladders. Why? How can we prevent this from happening in the future?
- Is 2000nM dox actually saturating the TRE promoter?
Protein | Size (kDa) |
---|
Syk | 72.08 | Syk-(15aa)-TEVp | 100.5 | GAPDH | 37 | YFP | 27 |
Image Removed
wrong ladder used - highest band = 40kd gel not run long enough to distinguish larger proteins loading control bands didn't show up - possibly because the blocking buffer we used contained casein (protein in milk) and abcam warned that using milk as a blocking buffer greatly reduced signal from anti-gapdh syk bands didn't show up - possibly because we ran the gel under non-reducing conditions |