## RF and DNA fragment

**Moderators:** honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

### RF and DNA fragment

If I am given the RF let say .7, and there is an equation (use any example of equation, you like) for the threadline in the graph. Then the RF is on the y axis. The log 10 base pair is on the x axis.

How do I find the lenght of a DNA fragment? This is confusing. How do I do this?

How do I find the lenght of a DNA fragment? This is confusing. How do I do this?

Easy... if you first have a reference curve (set of DNA fragments with known molecular weight and their RF) You just plot them on your graph, make sure that your fragment is in the range of the marker (It is not really recommended to extrapolate a curve beyond the extreme reference points) and you just read the X vale for your given Y et voila

Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without

any proof. (Ashley Montague)

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without

any proof. (Ashley Montague)

Yes, but this assignment does not give me the molecularweight. It is only a graph, and it give me:

RF

Log10 Base Pair

the equation of the tread line

If I have the RF value and the y=.89834x-.3984

Then how would I find the length of the base pair? I do not understnad. Make it simple for me. Is the molecularweight the basepair?

Yes MW and Bp are synonimous here.

And if you have all that you just have to solve the equation for y=0.7 and you got log10(Bp), so by calculating 10^[log10(Bp)] you end up with your result.

And if you have all that you just have to solve the equation for y=0.7 and you got log10(Bp), so by calculating 10^[log10(Bp)] you end up with your result.

Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without

any proof. (Ashley Montague)

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without

any proof. (Ashley Montague)

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests