Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

- - - - -

problems in transfer

western blot

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 gyma

gyma

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 141 posts
2
Neutral

Posted 13 September 2011 - 07:16 AM

I have never had such a problem before until recently I found I couldnt get efficient transfer after SDS-PAGE. This is what I used to do:
1, soak PVDF in methanol for less than 1 minute and pour transfer buffer in it and shake until everything is ready, usually several minutes.
2, remove the gel and put it also in transfer buffer.
3, prepare semi-dry transfer apparatus, pour some transfer buffer, put 3 filter paper, add more buffer.
4, put PVDF on the paper, then gel, then another 3 paper, transfer buffer and roller to remove bubbles.
5, 10V, 1.5~2h.

I know it might be different from your protocol but this protocol is always ok for me, even for a protein >200kD. Now the problem is, after transfer, most marker bands were still there (I did ECL anyway but the result was no good). It is strange that marker bands with bigger size were almost successfully transferred but smaller ones were not. I also tried different transfer apparatus and no improvement.

another thing needs to be mentioned is that I just made new 10X transfer buffer stock and this problem seemed to occur after that. Here is the recipe which I always use. 10X: Tris base 37.85g, Glycine 180.175g, add water to 1 L. For 1X, I use 50 ml 10X buffer, 100 ml Methanol and 350 ml water.

It seems to be the problem of my transfer buffer but I dont know whether my recipe is ok or I made some mistakes during preparing the buffer. please tell me if you know what's wrong. thank you.

#2 almost a doctor

almost a doctor

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 228 posts
12
Good

Posted 15 September 2011 - 07:29 AM

The concentration of Tris and Glycine seem a bit too high compare to the most standard buffer,  also, did you check the pH of your buffer?  

These are the 2 things I can think of, particularly the pH.

Also, do you check the transfer by staining the membrane?

Edited by almost a doctor, 15 September 2011 - 07:29 AM.


#3 gyma

gyma

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 141 posts
2
Neutral

Posted 15 September 2011 - 11:36 AM

View Postalmost a doctor, on 15 September 2011 - 07:29 AM, said:

The concentration of Tris and Glycine seem a bit too high compare to the most standard buffer,  also, did you check the pH of your buffer?  

These are the 2 things I can think of, particularly the pH.

Also, do you check the transfer by staining the membrane?
thanks for your reply.
I got a little improvement for this problem. I made new buffers of both composition and also used buffers from my labmates to check the transfer. same transfer apparatus but different power supply, 10V, 1.5h. It turned out that all the buffers were fine. I couldnt see remaining bind by naked eye but after CBB staining there are still faint marker bands in the gel, mostly small-size bands. But it was much better. So I think maybe there was problem with the power supply.
however, there is still one thing I am not sure. the remaining marker bands look like a little bit more than before. Is that normal or there should be nothing. I used kaleidoscope marker from Biorad.

I didnt check the pH because it is not mentioned in the recipe. what should it be?

#4 gyma

gyma

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 141 posts
2
Neutral

Posted 02 October 2011 - 06:05 AM

in the case of semidry, buffer without methanol works better.
for large protein transfer, I used buffer containing 0.05% SDS and 5% methanol and it worked well for protein >200kDa. However, it was not reproducible and foam problem is also annoying.





Home - About - Terms of Service - Privacy - Contact Us

©1999-2012 Protocol Online, All rights reserved.