jerryshelly1

There is no conversion between types. The types are defined base on there molecular composition, resulting in different functions.  Each muscle in your body can either be composed solely of one type (sartorius muscle) or they can contain a combination of the two.  Every Homo sapien is born with a relatively consistant number of muscle fibers.  Depending on your demographic and centuries of evolution, you may have more of either type of muscle.

They are not hybrids.  They are subsets.  Think of the analogy of epithelial cells.  Each subset is different and needs to be classified as such.  

Is this alright?

Boron and Boulpaep, Medical Physiology

Yes.  Their are definetely different muscle types.  We can successfully classify them as type I or II because each one is mechanically and functionally different.  For instance, Type I are classified as slow twitch muscle fibers. This is because they are used for long duration contractions.  They are vascular and have the capacity to produce the required energy for contraction at that particular site.  You can also classify them on a molecular basis.  Type I contains Troponin I, the protein that binds calcium and causes a shift in the tropomyosin filament.  Type II is the opposite.  It is highly anaerobic, used for explosive movement and contains Troponin II.  Their are many other differences between type I and II, but you get the idea.

The further classification into type IIa, IIb, etc... is also necessary.  These types have specific functions that do not totally conform to "just type II," requiring them to be a subset.  If this does not make sense, think about epithelial cells.  The distinct between the types of epithelial cell is minimal, but a distinction must be made due to their function and overall structure.  These two concepts are very analogous.

I suggest this book.  http://www.amazon.co...0721632564. It will clarify all of your questions.  If you do not want to buy it, I believe I saw this book on a pirate ship...

Edit: Dead Link

Looks beautiful.  Good luck

Even though a video may be helpful... Do you not know of any seniors or other researchers on your campus who know the procedure?  It would be best to watch someone do and have them watch you do it.  Your results should be true from the very start.  If you begin with improper data, it will only make matters worse downstream.

Are their other isoforms, pseudogenes?  I like my qPCR products to give one sharp precise band.  I would try redesigning my primers or adjust the cycling conditions.  You could probably get those bands to disappear.  Do not use 18S rRNA as a control.  Find a more valid control for publication.

Edit:  If you are using software to measure the relative density of each band, it may be alright.  You could get a rough estimate, but I would personally try altering your methods first.