Different Dilution factors for the normalizator

  • Thread starter Thread starter sotellme
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dilution Factors
AI Thread Summary
Using different dilution factors for B actin antibodies in Western blots can lead to unreliable normalization of protein expression levels. Antibody binding is not linear, making it ineffective to normalize samples with varying dilutions. It's crucial to standardize techniques throughout experiments to ensure data reliability. Seeking guidance from an experienced colleague or visiting another lab for training is recommended to avoid wasting samples and resources. This discussion highlights the importance of consistent methodology in experimental design, particularly in Western blotting.
sotellme
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
I am looking for some ideas about this one. I use B actin as the normalizator in my western blot. i use different dilution factors of the B actin antibody. For some samples i use 500X and for others i use 1000X. I wonder when i normalize my samples and calculate the relative expression levels for the different protein targets should i take the different dilution factors of the B actin in account or should i pretend that they have the same dilution factor?

Thanks.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
You shouldn't use different dilutions at all. There is no conversion factor you can use, because antibody binding is not linear, so if you've used different dilutions of antibody, that's going to be useless to normalize your samples. Why are you varying your antibody dilutions in the middle of an experiment? If you're changing your technique, nothing is standardized.

Before you run any more experimental samples, sit down with someone who KNOWS this technique and plan out what you need to do and work with them, otherwise you're going to just keep wasting samples and money and will have completely useless data. If nobody in your lab knows how to do this, plenty of people do Westerns all day, every day; visit someone else's lab to learn. It's a lot cheaper to pay the travel expenses to visit another lab than it is to keep throwing away samples by making mistakes anyone who knows the technique could have stopped you from doing in the first place.
 
Dear Moonbear!

You saved my life! :smile: actually this is the idea of my advisor. He told me to use different dilution factors. I need to have a talk with him. Thank you! :approve:
 
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
15K
Replies
11
Views
12K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
5K
Back
Top