HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mantrim@NDE.UNL.EDU (michael antrim)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: FISH BEHAVIOR STUDY REQUEST HELP
Summary: Hello, I am a senior high school student currently involved in a
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:19:32 GMT
Distribution: bionet
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln

I would like any suggestions, information that may be pertinent to my 
experiment--either relating to background on fish schooling behavior or my 
experimental design.

Please contact by e-mail thru my teacher on internet--address is mantrim

Thank you ,
Jessica Heieck

Keywords: SCHOOLING FISH,BEHAVIOR
From: a52041@sakura.kudpc.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Michael CHENG)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Purity of DNA (Ratio of OD = 1.8-2.0) ?
Date: 12 Jan 93 06:11:03 GMT
Organization: Data Processing Center, Kyoto University, Kyoto Japan.
Originator: a52041@sakura.kudpc.kyoto-u.ac.jp


  Hi! I need help with a question that one of the student asked me during lab
today:
  Why is a preparation of DNA considered to be pure if OD260/OD280 => 1.8?
  Actually, I've never thought of it myself so I went around asking my labmates.
Well, nobody really knows the answer. Then I heard that there's possibly a
theoretical formula that sets the above value range.
  If this is true, I would appreciate it if someone out there can point me to
the reference.
  Thanks in advance.

Michael CHENG
Dept. of Biological Chemistry
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Kyoyo University
Japan
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
From: danj@welchgate.welch.jhu.edu (Dan Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Sequence of the mouse DHFR gene
Keywords: Mouse DHFR nucleotide seq
Organization: Johns Hopkins Univ. Welch Medical Library
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:20:08 GMT

In article <eric.725999234@bcserv> eric@bcserv.wustl.edu (Hugo (Eric)) writes:
>Dear Bionetters,
>     I am seeking the nucleotide sequence for the cDNA encoding
>the mouse dihydrofolate reductase gene product.  A Genbank search
>turned up only promotor regions of the mouse gene.  I am particularly
>interested in the sequence of the cDNA described in:
>Murray, et al.  1983.  Mol. Cell Bio. 3(1):32-43.

The Genbank locus names for the 6 exons of mouse dihydrofolate reductase are

MUSFOL1, MUSFOL2, MUSFOL3, MUSFOL4, MUSFOL5, MUSFOL6.  I didn't find a
mouse dhfr published by Murray but did find a Escherichia coli dihydrofolate 
reductase gene (ECODHFRA) which was associated with Murray. 

Best of luck,

Dan Jacobson

danj@welchgate.welch.jhu.edu
From: ashok@biochemistry.cwru.edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Glycogen for DNA Precipitation
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:33:02 GMT
Organization: CWRU School of Medicine
Distribution: bionet
NNTP-Posting-Host: axa12-slip.dialin.cwru.edu

In article <9301072225.AA18226@net.bio.net> KNECHT@UCONNVM.UCONN.EDU (Dave Knecht) writes:

>I remember reading somewhere of people using glycogen as a carrier for precipit
>ation of DNA.  Can someone enlighten me as to a concentration to use, purity re
>quired and any pluses or minuses of this procedure that you have encountered? J
>Dave

I feel awful about saying this, but I just buy this stuff called Molecular 
Biology Grade glycogen from Boehringer Mannheim.  I don't know the 
concentration, but add 1 ul of it to precipitations of any volume.  It works, 
and hasn't negatively interfered in any noticible may with any subsequent 
steps such as restriction digestion, ligation, or in vitro transcription with 
T7 RNA pol.

Ashok

----------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Ashok Aiyar 
                      Department of Biochemistry
                       CWRU School of Medicine
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: awalley@molbiol.ox.ac.uk
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Glycogen for DNA Precipitation
Date: 8 Jan 93 16:28:16 GMT
Distribution: bionet
Organization: Oxford University Molecular Biology Data Centre
Nntp-Posting-User: awalley

In article <ashok.203.726453182@biochemistry.cwru.edu>, ashok@biochemistry.cwru.edu (Ashok Aiyar) writes:
> In article <9301072225.AA18226@net.bio.net> KNECHT@UCONNVM.UCONN.EDU (Dave Knecht) writes:
> 
>>I remember reading somewhere of people using glycogen as a carrier for precipit
>>ation of DNA.  Can someone enlighten me as to a concentration to use, purity re
>>quired and any pluses or minuses of this procedure that you have encountered? J
>>Dave
> 
> I feel awful about saying this, but I just buy this stuff called Molecular 
> Biology Grade glycogen from Boehringer Mannheim.  I don't know the 
> concentration, but add 1 ul of it to precipitations of any volume.  It works, 
> and hasn't negatively interfered in any noticible may with any subsequent 
> steps such as restriction digestion, ligation, or in vitro transcription with 
> T7 RNA pol.

We also use it very successfully to maximise our yields with the three 
consecutive DNA precipitations required using the chemical mismatch technique.

A.J. Walley,
Institute of Molecular Medicine,
Oxford, England
From: cytogen@chmeds.ac.nz (Martin Kennedy)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Glycogen for DNA Precipitation
Date: 9 Jan 93 10:03:14 +1200
Distribution: bionet

In article <9301072225.AA18226@net.bio.net>, KNECHT@UCONNVM.UCONN.EDU (Dave Knecht) writes:
> I remember reading somewhere of people using glycogen as a carrier for precipit
> ation of DNA.  Can someone enlighten me as to a concentration to use, purity re
> quired and any pluses or minuses of this procedure that you have encountered? J
> Dave
-- 
I use glycogen routinely as a carrier, and add it to DNA precipitations just as
you would add tRNA or LPA.  I tend to add about 5-10ug when precipitating small
amounts of DNA with either isopropanol or ethanol.  It works fine, doesn't
interfere with anything as far as I can tell (sequencing, cloning,
transfections etc) and isn't visible on gels.  I use Boehringer Molecular
Biology grade (Cat no 901-393) diluted in water to 1ug/ul, stored at -20 and it
lasts years, through multiple freeze thaw cycles.


Cheers,

Martin

Martin A Kennedy (E-mail = cytogen@chmeds.ac.nz)
Cytogenetic and Molecular Oncology Unit
Christchurch School of Medicine
Christchurch, New Zealand
From: levenson@duke.cs.duke.edu (Richard Levenson)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: RNA (for PCR) from paraffin-embed. tissue?
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:53:29 GMT
Organization: Duke University Computer Science Dept.; Durham, N.C.

A friend of mine asked me to find out if there is a good method
for extracting RNA from paraffin-embedded tissue (breast cancer and nl.
breast) to make cDNA for PCR analysis.

Thanks for your help.  Please either post to the group or mail
directly to me at levenson@cs.duke.edu.

Cheers
From: ballagi@bio.embnet.se
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: re: inosine in PCR primers
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:03:07 +0100
Organization: Embnet node in Sweden, Biomedical Center, University of Uppsala, Sweden



  Hi Stefan,

  I used inosine in PCR primers, and I find such primers are better, then
primers with redundancy. (Stronger individual bands, no by-products.) 
A 28 base long primer having 6 inosine was working too, but I think is better
not to use more then 4-6, depending on the lenght of the primer. To much
inosine can create hairspin.               
  An other approach is to introduce T instead of inosine in the positions you
want to have as "joker". T-T; C-T; G-C missmatches has no effect on
amplification, at least according to KWOK et al. (NAR Vol:18, No. 4 pp 999).
  I tried in one case and it was true. 
   I hope it helps 

        Andreas Ballagi
       Uppsala, Sweden
From: Sebastian.Bunka@vu-wien.ac.at (Sebastian Bunka)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: antibody-binding inhibition assay
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:43:06 GMT
Distribution: bionet
Organization: Vet.Med.Uni Wien
Original-To: methods@uk.ac.daresbury
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).

>From: aarment@desire.wright.edu
>Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
>Subject: Antibody-binding inhibition assays???
>Message-ID: <1992Jan23.194203.1508@desire.wright.edu>
>Date: 24 Jan 92 00:42:03 GMT
>Organization: Wright State University
>Lines: 14


>        I am looking for references for antibody-binding inhibition
>assays, but have been unable to find any in general immunology
>books.  Could some kind
>netsoul point me in the right direction.  I want to develop an
>assay that will prevent a particular enzymatic reaction by antibody-
>binding.

dear netter,

there is a very useful book from JE Butler, Iowa city entitled
"Immunochemistry of solid-phase immunoassay" CRC Press 91, ISBN 0-
8493-5394-7 and i think you will find the topics (and references)
you're interested in in the chapter competetive, noncompetetive ....
ELISAs; to my opinion one of the standard books for all people
interested in ELISAs.

happy new year
SWB
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dr. Sebastian Bunka      Email: Sebastian.Bunka@vu-wien.ac.at     |
|Inst.f.Bakteriologie                                              |
|Vet.Med.Uni Wien         Phone: +43-1-71155/261                   |
|Linke Bahngasse 11       Fax:   +43-1-71155/286                   |
|A-1030 Wien                                                       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: djt2@po.CWRU.Edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Plastic to which DNA sticks?
Date: 11 Jan 1993 19:13:49 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: djt2@po.CWRU.Edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, pouliot@GENETHON.GENETHON.FR (Yannick Pouliot) says:

>Hello fellow Netters.
>
>I'm writing for a colleague (Frederic Lorenzo):
>
>Does anybody remember the name and supplier of this plastic to which
>DNA can bind?  This would be for doing an ELISA-type assay using a
>digoxigenin-labelled probe.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Yannick Pouliot 
>Genethon.
>

I don't know of the "plastic" you speak of, though it seems possible.

You might consider using "filters", perhaps nitrocellulose locked into a
96 well dot blot manifold, then removing the filter afterwards to wash it.
Nylon could work well too.

I seem to recall a company offering a 96 well plate with nitrocellulose 
in the bottom, too.  Sorry, can't recall the details.

dennis
From: djt2@po.CWRU.Edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: RNA (for PCR) from paraffin-embed. tissue?
Date: 8 Jan 1993 15:55:25 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: djt2@po.CWRU.Edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, levenson@duke.cs.duke.edu (Richard Levenson) says:

>A friend of mine asked me to find out if there is a good method
>for extracting RNA from paraffin-embedded tissue (breast cancer and nl.
>breast) to make cDNA for PCR analysis.
>
>Thanks for your help.  Please either post to the group or mail
>directly to me at levenson@cs.duke.edu.
>
>Cheers
>

A friend of mine has published a method:

Redline, R, et al.  Detection of enteroviral infection in paraffin-embedded
tissue by the RNA PCR reaction technique Am. J. Clin Pathology 96 Nr 5 pp
568-571, (1991).


I'm also sure there are many others.  You might be better off doing a
Medline search with keywords like PCR, RNA and Paraffin.

good luck

dennis
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
From: eddy@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Sean Eddy)
Subject: Re: Purity of DNA (Ratio of OD = 1.8-2.0) ?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 12 Jan 93 10:54:29 GMT

a52041@sakura.kudpc.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Michael CHENG) writes:
>  Hi! I need help with a question that one of the student asked me during lab
>today:
>  Why is a preparation of DNA considered to be pure if OD260/OD280 => 1.8?
>  Actually, I've never thought of it myself so I went around asking my labmates.
>Well, nobody really knows the answer. Then I heard that there's possibly a
>theoretical formula that sets the above value range.

Nucleic acid absorbs with a maximum at about 260 nm.  Protein, because
of absorbance by tyrosine and tryptophan residues, shows a maximum at
about 280 nm. (I believe phenol, another common contaminant, also
shows a peak at around 280 nm.)  Protein (or phenol) contamination
reduces the 260/280 ratio.

Reference: Cantor and Schimmel, _Biophysical Chemistry_, vol II;
but any biophysical chemistry text should do.

- Sean Eddy
- sre@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk
From: naffara@crc.ac.uk (Dr. N.A. Affara)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: what do you need to publish?
Date: 7 Jan 93 14:46:21 GMT
Organization: MRC Human Genome Resource Centre

This may seem a strange question to ask...

If I have the sequence of a new gene and have mapped it to a specific 
chromosome, is there anything else I need or is that enough for a paper?

(Note I am not Dr Affara and I don't work at the MRC or whatever it says in the
heading, I am a technician who doesn't agree with his boss...)

Phil
(E-mail naffara@uk.ac.crc)

-- 
Kryten (When Cat says why don't we raise the defensive shields?) "A superlative
suggestion sir,with only two drawbacks: one,we don't have any defensive shields
and two,we don't have any defensive shields.I know that,technically,that's only
one drawback,but it was such a big one I thought I'd mention it twice".
From: pnj@stein.u.washington.edu (JnP)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: automatic DNA sequencing
Date: 5 Jan 1993 06:22:32 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu

Thanks!            

-Fred
From: afc@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Dispersion of Agarose
Date: 11 Jan 93 09:15:33 -0500
Distribution: bionet

In article <01GTD30FXAKG0000FE@irri.cgnet.com>, RSCOTT@IRRI.CGNET.COM writes:
> I can't help cursing myself whenever I prepare agarose gels and
> the suspension happens to overboil inside the microwave. At
> certain equally irksome times (especially with bigger preparations)
> the gel remained undispersed while considerable volume has already
> been lost during heating. I always cover the boiling flask
> with a beaker but this didn't do so much to prevent excessive 
> evaporation. I discovered a trick (perhaps I just rediscovered it on
> my own) to avoid these pitfalls. I tried presoaking the gel overnight 
> at the eve of my gel run. Wholla! The agarose dispersed quicker in the 
> buffer. Dispersion took only about half the normal boiling time. By the 
> time vigorous boiling commences the agarose particles were substantially
> dissolved. Volume loss is therefore minimized. Presoaking allows 
> the gel to swell and be hydrated. Alternatively, one can equilibrate
> the gel suspension in a 55-650C bath (ca. 30 min) prior to boiling.
> The same result is achieved. I think it's not much trouble having to
> prepare the suspension well in advance and stand it for a while
> especially if the gel consistency can be maintained for different
> preparations of equal concentration.
> 
> R. P. Scott
> Pathology Division
> IRRI
> Manila, Philippines
> E-Mail: rscott@irri.cgnet.com

One caveat:  If you are using a buffer such as tris acetate, this might be 
an excellent way to grow microorganisms.  That could lead to all sorts of
unpleasant and hard to replicate results.

A good suggestion if you are running tris borate gels.

Andrew Cockburn
USDA
From: fgarbrec@POST.ITS.MCW.EDU (GARBRECHT)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: western blotting IEF gels
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:24:40 GMT
Distribution: bionet

I am interested in blotting protein mixtures onto nitrocellulose
which have been separated by IEF.  The problem is that, as the proteins
come to their isoelectric point in the IEF gel, they have a net zero
charge and therefore won't migrate onto the nitrocellulose in the
electroblotting step.  It occurs to be that there might be a couple
of solutions: 1) to incubate the IEF gel in SDS containing buffer to
allow the proteins to get a nice negatively charged coating of SDS
or 2) to do capillary blotting instead of electroblotting (which I
don't want to do.

Has anybody tried this or have any suggestions?  Thanks alot

Fred Garbrecht
Medical College of Wisconsin
fgarbrec@post.its.mcw.edu
From: rmkdhhp@ucl.ac.uk (Dr Huaizheng Peng)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: whole genome amplification
Date: 12 Jan 93 11:56:17 GMT
Distribution: bionet


Hi, friends
Does anyone there happen to get some information about whole genome amplification
by PCR?
Cheers.

Peng HZ
UCH, London
From: ballagi@bio.embnet.se
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: direct oligolabeling with Alk.Phosph?
Date: 8 Jan 93 11:47:09 GMT
Organization: Embnet node in Sweden, Biomedical Center, University of Uppsala, Sweden



  Dear Netters,

   We are runing lot of PCR here to detect virus in animals. After
amplification, the PCR products are hybridized with biotinylated 
oligoprobe and detected by Streptavidin-Alkaline Phosphatase.
   Is anybody out there having experience about oligo, directly labeled with
Alkaline Phosphatase?
   I appreciate any information concerning:
  , which companies has costum service for such labeling ? (I know only British
Bio-technology Products Ltd.)
  , how stabil is the enzyme on oligo ? (According to B-B yoy can keep it in
solution for at least 1 year at 4oC)

    Thanks in advance

         Andreas Ballagi (National Veterinary Institute, Uppsala, Sweden)
         ballagi@bio.embnet.se; fax: +46-18-17 45 17
From: wmelchior@ntet.nctr.fda.gov
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Purity of DNA (Ratio of OD = 1.8-2.0) ?
Date: 12 Jan 93 08:24:45 -0600
Organization: NATIONAL CENTER FOR TOXICOLOGICAL RESEARCH

In article <1993Jan12.061103.2973@kudpc.kyoto-u.ac.jp>, 
a52041@sakura.kudpc.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Michael CHENG) writes in part:
> 
>   Why is a preparation of DNA considered to be pure if OD260/OD280 => 1.8?
...
> I heard that there's possibly a theoretical formula that sets the above 
> value range.

I don't know about a "theoretical formula".  I suspect it just comes from an 
empirical study of the spectra of different types of molecules.

Protein tends to have a higher absorbance at 280 nm (due mainly to 
tyrosine and tryptophane) than at 260.  This means that the A260/A280 of 
proteins is LOWER than that of DNA.  RNA, on the other hand, has a higher 
absorbance at 260 than DNA, leading to LOWER values of A260/A280 and 
A260/A230.  (So too HIGH a value for A260/A280 also indicates a problem.) 
Phenol, a common contaminant, absorbs more at 280 than at 260, leading to a
decreased A260/A280. 

Note that the spectrum of DNA depends not only on its helical state, but 
also on its base composition.  The most complete reference I'm aware of is 
old but worth looking at:  G. Felsenfeld & S.Z. Hirschman, J. Mol. Biol. 
(1965) 13, 407-427.

There must be something more recent on RNA (help, anyone?), but I still 
refer to a figure in an article by E. Chargaff in vol 1 of _The Nucleic 
Acids_ by Chargaff and Davidson, Academic Press, 1955, from which I 
estimate A260/A280 = 2.09 and A260/A230 = 2.76; this would, of course, 
also depend on conformation and base composition.

(If you add measurements at 230 nm to your studies, be aware that such 
measurements are much more prone to errors due to contamination from a 
variety of sources, and to scattered light problems with less expensive 
spectrophometers.  For double-stranded DNA with 42% GC, Felsenfeld and
Hirschman give A260/A230 = 2.38.) 
________________________________________________________________________________
The opinions stated are mine, not those of NCTR or its sponsoring organizations.

Bill Melchior                                ||     OMNISCIENCE
National Center for Toxicological Research   ||    Knowing what
Jefferson, AR  72079                         ||    thou knowest not
(501) 543-7206                               ||    is in a sense
                                             ||    omniscience.
WMELCHIOR@NTET.NCTR.FDA.GOV                  ||       from Grooks, Piet Hein
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
From: don@helix.nih.gov (donald seto)
Subject: luciferase vector   
Organization: National Institutes of Health, Bethesda
Distribution: bionet
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:10:19 GMT

hi,

anybody know of a good vector that has a tk promoter, and is
suitible for testing enhancers?

thanks.

don 

--
don@helix.nih.gov
301-402-0580   Bldg10/Rm8D14    NIDDK/NIH       Bethesda, MD  20892
From: rfrench@unl.edu (roy french)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: Re: Purity of DNA (Ratio of OD = 1.8-2.0) ?
Date: 12 Jan 1993 15:16:19 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln	
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: unlinfo.unl.edu

eddy@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Sean Eddy) writes:

>a52041@sakura.kudpc.kyoto-u.ac.jp (Michael CHENG) writes:
>>  Hi! I need help with a question that one of the student asked me during lab
>>today:
>>  Why is a preparation of DNA considered to be pure if OD260/OD280 => 1.8?
>>  Actually, I've never thought of it myself so I went around asking my labmates.
>>Well, nobody really knows the answer. Then I heard that there's possibly a
>>theoretical formula that sets the above value range.

>Nucleic acid absorbs with a maximum at about 260 nm.  Protein, because
>of absorbance by tyrosine and tryptophan residues, shows a maximum at
>about 280 nm. (I believe phenol, another common contaminant, also
>shows a peak at around 280 nm.)  Protein (or phenol) contamination
>reduces the 260/280 ratio.

>Reference: Cantor and Schimmel, _Biophysical Chemistry_, vol II;
>but any biophysical chemistry text should do.

>- Sean Eddy
>- sre@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk


I've always thought that OD260/OD280 ratios were rather 
useless.  For one thing, the molar extinction coefficients 
of proteins are pretty low.  It takes a lot of protein to 
greatly lower the 260/280 ratio so that 260/280 values 
in the 1.8 to 2.0 range can give you an overly optimistic 
estimate of the purity of your nucleic acid extract.  In 
extracts from plants, there can be other contaminating 
pigments which wreak havoc with the 260/280 number

Also, average DNA & RNA (pH 7) have an absorption 
maxima at 260nm, as does AMP, TMP, and UMP.  GMP 
has a maxima at 252 and CMP at 271 (so does phenol!).  
The spectra of C's G's, T's and U's change with pH as 
well.  In typical nucleic acids the absorption from C's and 
G's average out to 260 but with synthetic oligos you can 
get what seem to be rather strange spectra, depending 
on the relative numbers of G's and C's.  Thus a 260/280 
ratio can be totally meaningless for oligos.


Roy French
USDA, ARS, Lincoln, NE
rfrench@unl.edu
From: jdboer@SOL.UVIC.CA
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
Subject: mutS and recA protein
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:15:04 GMT
Distribution: bionet

Hello,

I am trying to find some information about the MutS and RecA proteins.
Specifically such things as DNA binding parameters, effects of buffer, temp,
etc in in vitro assays, mode of action, etc. A quick survey of the
literature did not yield to many useful things. Is anyone aware of some
relevant articles, reviews or otherwise good source of information?

Thanks in advance

Johan de Boer
jdboer@sol.uvic.ca
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts