In article <3es5r2$mm3 at neuro.usc.edu>
william at neuro.usc.edu (Fiberman) writes:
| Does anyone know what are the advantages/disadvantages of tris-glycine
| vs. tricine gels for electrophoresis of proteins?
The use of tricine allows resolution of proteins in the < 5,000 Dalton
range better than glycine. Also, the proteins may be recovered for
microsequencing without modification problems.
@article{Schagger1987,
author = "H. {Sch\"{a}gger}
and G. von Jagow",
title = "Tricine-sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
for the separation of proteins in the range from 1 to 100 {kDa}",
journal = "Anal. Biochem.",
volume = "166",
pages = "368-379",
year = "1987"}
*******************************************************************************
* Paul N. Hengen, Ph.D. /--------------------------/*
* National Cancer Institute |Internet: pnh at ncifcrf.gov |*
* Laboratory of Mathematical Biology | Phone: (301) 846-5581 |*
* Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center| FAX: (301) 846-5598 |*
* Frederick, Maryland 21702-1201 USA /--------------------------/*
* - - - Methods FAQ list -> http://www.ncifcrf.gov:2001/~pnh/info.html - - - *
* - - - Anonymous FTP from ftp.ncifcrf.gov as file pub/methods/FAQlist - - - *
*******************************************************************************
