MSP problem
#1
Posted 25 February 2009 - 10:31 AM
I have two samples from two patients and one gene to look for. In one, The primers are working perfectly. But in other, not.
What might be the reason? My DNA quality is very good for both of my samples. Bisulfite should work properly too. Controls are working perfectly. i cant find out the reason. Can it be like this , if there is difference between "C" residues which are methylated , suppose in sample 1 , C at 12 is methylated, but in other C at 5 is methylated. so my primers are not working with 2 nd one.
is it possible that in two individuals with same disease, in same CpG island, the methylated residue is different?
Anybody has any experience?
#2
Posted 25 February 2009 - 07:44 PM
#3
Posted 26 February 2009 - 07:35 AM
I used also 100ng/ PCR reax. I can try with more and My samples are ok as i got result for another gene in both of my samples.
We are also planning to move to sequencing, So did you try PCR followed by sequencing without cloning. In this case, we will do sequencing by capillary sequencer. If you have, how do you analyse results, i mean which software you use and how much complex the result will be?
And what are the problems you faced in Cloning followed by sequencing or in Sequencing directly?
emacalate, on Feb 25 2009, 08:44 PM, said:
#4
Posted 01 March 2009 - 02:26 PM
Best of luck!
Dave
#5
Posted 02 March 2009 - 07:22 AM
Do you use Meth Primer to generate BSP primers? Is it giving good outcome for most of your genes?
And by "CpG positons" did you mean CpG islands? So if your primer is amplifying 2 or more CpG islands , in that case you are measuring C and T peak heights at every CpG island? correct me if i am wrong?
Davo, on Mar 1 2009, 03:26 PM, said:
Best of luck!
Dave
Edited by epigenetics, 02 March 2009 - 07:23 AM.
#6
Posted 03 March 2009 - 04:50 PM
In terms of direct sequencing most of it worked well, but some genes would not sequence, despite the PCR working well. Cloning would get you around this problem if your sequencing primer was located on the plasmid rather than the amplicon. I put the problem down the chemistry of the reaction and inappropriate sequence of the primer.
I measured every CpG site within the amplicon, but not the entire CpG island as the island was usually larger than my PCR fragment. The CpG sites around the transcriptional start site are most important in my opinion
#7
Posted 04 March 2009 - 01:12 PM
Davo, on Mar 3 2009, 05:50 PM, said:
In terms of direct sequencing most of it worked well, but some genes would not sequence, despite the PCR working well. Cloning would get you around this problem if your sequencing primer was located on the plasmid rather than the amplicon. I put the problem down the chemistry of the reaction and inappropriate sequence of the primer.
I measured every CpG site within the amplicon, but not the entire CpG island as the island was usually larger than my PCR fragment. The CpG sites around the transcriptional start site are most important in my opinion
#8
Posted 06 March 2009 - 05:18 AM
epigenetics, on Mar 4 2009, 10:12 PM, said:
Davo, on Mar 3 2009, 05:50 PM, said:
In terms of direct sequencing most of it worked well, but some genes would not sequence, despite the PCR working well. Cloning would get you around this problem if your sequencing primer was located on the plasmid rather than the amplicon. I put the problem down the chemistry of the reaction and inappropriate sequence of the primer.
I measured every CpG site within the amplicon, but not the entire CpG island as the island was usually larger than my PCR fragment. The CpG sites around the transcriptional start site are most important in my opinion
MSP primers are completely reliant on binding efficiency to give reliable results, maybe the patient has a SNP? But I would drop MSP for ABI. Just as easy and gives and more reliable data than MSP. MSP is quite shitty, no really.














