Biology Is a smeared band on a Western Blot a valid result?

Thread starter Sunwoo Bae
Start date Dec 26, 2023
Tags

Protein

AI Thread Summary

A smeared band on a Western Blot can indicate issues with protein purification or sample quality, potentially compromising the validity of the results. In this case, MDCK-siNGT and MDCK-siB4Gal4 showed reduced keratin sulfate, while MDCK-RCA did not produce any, raising questions about the reliability of the findings. Similar observations in other studies suggest that smeared bands are not uncommon, but they may not provide conclusive evidence. Researchers should consider the implications of smear patterns on data interpretation. Overall, while smeared bands can occur, they often warrant further investigation to ensure result validity.

Dec 26, 2023

Sunwoo Bae

Homework Statement: I am trying to analyze a western blot result of expression of Keratin Sulfate in variety of cells.

Relevant Equations: none

From this result, the conclusion is that MDCK-siNGT and MDCK-siB4Gal4 resulted in less keratin sulfate, while MDCK-RCA did not produce keratin sulfate at all. Looking at the gel, the band look very smeared, as if nothing was purified prior to blotting. I have noticed a similar looking gel in other articles as well, but is this a valid result?

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...

View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

View full post »