Talk:Phage display

message: I read that phage can be eluted with trypsin, but if you do that, and it cuts off the displayed protein, then how can you repeat the panning? Coat protein III which is usually what binds the displayed protein to the phage only occurs in one place with upto five units, and rounds of panning are often completed more than five times..? --Username132 16:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elution using trypsin 

message: I think that it is wrong to say that phage display is a method to study (protein/protein or protein/DNA) interactions. I would say that it is a method for selecting for a particular protein or peptide phenotype while maintaining the link for the genotype. Thus, it also allows for multiple rounds of selection and (possibly error-prone) replication, mimicking evolution in the lab.  One straightforward means of selection is indeed to use the interaction of the protein or peptide with some other protein, or DNA. But it's also possible to select for other features. For example, you can select for protease resistance (with an affinity tag which is or is not cleaved off). This is indeed mentioned at the end of the article (protein engineering), but the wrong definition at the beginning masks that more general meaning of the term.
In that context, one interesting information is missing: Which Phage display systems can be used for which sizes, what's the largest protein to be possibly displayed?  Unfortunately, I don't know the answer (actually that was the reason why I visited the entry).
Frank Küster  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.228.15.199 (talk) 15:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of phage display 

message: Discussion for the material relevant to this topic.
Licenses/Patents/Disclaimers:
Ph.D.™ is a trademark of New England Biolabs, Inc. This product is sold for research use only and not for resale in any form. Commercial use of this product may require a license. For license information under U.S. Patent No. 5,866,363 please contact the Licensing Office, New England Biolabs, Inc., 240 County Road, Ipswich, MA 01938.
Commercialization of sequences covered using this product may require a license from Dyax Corp. under U.S. Patent No. 5,403,484 and associated patent rights. For license information contact the Director of Corporate Development, Dyax Corp., One Kendall Square, Bldg. 600, Cambridge, MA 02139, Fax 617-225-2501.
Good luck to you too.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GPieczenik (talk • contribs) 00:20, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pieczenik patent litigation 

message: The lede and Principle sections of this article contain potential original research or unverified claims. The attention of an expert in this subject is requested as I (and other editors) have been unable to verify the claims. Please use this section to discuss. Thanks, and Happy Editing! --Tgeairn (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: * I think Staticd's and Tgeairn's analysis in the previous section is not very accurate.  USPTO disclosure document 118831 that would give  priority over  (Smith_1985) is  a reliable source. Hence the Smith_1985 publication appears not to be the first description of phage display.  Furthermore Vidal de La Cruz is not mentioned anywhere in Smith_1985.  Hence I am restoring the original lead. Boghog (talk) 04:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

text: * For balance, I have also added a reference to US 5,866,363. Boghog (talk) 10:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

text: * If anyone is curious, a typed version of the hand written USPTO disclosure document 118831 may be found here (see Appendice B).  This document is still not a reliable source.  But even if it were, this document does not contain a clear description of phage display. The only thing that comes close is the statement "can use viral, plasmid, bacterial, parasite, any organism DNA and generate similar matrix" where the matrix is an expressed library of antigens (i.e., peptides).  Hence it appears that Pieczenik had thought of the general concept of display libraries in 1983, but the initial description was very broad covering display libraries generated by essentially any organism.  Furthermore there is no clear description about how this general concept could be reduced to practice using phages.  So to say Pieczenik had developed the idea of phage display in 1983 is a stretch. Boghog (talk) 17:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Boghog, thank you for your clear explanation and your work to improve the article. Very much appreciated! --Tgeairn (talk) 20:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: And thank you Tgeairn for your accurate and detailed analysis and for your efforts to resolve this edit conflict in an amicable way.  Cheers.  Boghog (talk) 20:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert assistance request