| ²é¿´: 978 | »Ø¸´: 5 | ||
| µ±Ç°Ö»ÏÔʾÂú×ãÖ¸¶¨Ìõ¼þµÄ»ØÌû£¬µã»÷ÕâÀï²é¿´±¾»°ÌâµÄËùÓлØÌû | ||
lixwei2012ľ³æ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
Postgraduate
|
[ÇóÖú]
Ϊʲôͼ1ʹÓÃÁ½ÖÖÖØ×éø£¨Á½´úµÃµ½ÍêÈ«KOµÄСÊ󣩣¬Í¼¶þµÄKO²ßÂÔֻʹÓÃÒ»ÖÖ£¨Ò»´ú0£¿
|
|
|
Why does Fig 1 use two reconbinases in two generaiton to knockout mouse whereas the strategy of Fig 2 only use 1 cre to Knockout? Obviously, the technique of Fig 2 is easier and quicker compared with that of Fig 1. But is there any drawback in Fig 2, or in fact, Fig 1 is easier and quicker than Fig 1 in the time of obtaining completely conditional KO mouse. Does the approach to making conditional KO mouse provided by Fig 1 have any edges compared with Fig 2? Ϊʲôͼ1ʹÓÃÁ½ÖÖÖØ×éø£¨Á½´úµÃµ½ÍêÈ«KOµÄСÊ󣩣¬Í¼¶þµÄKO²ßÂÔֻʹÓÃÒ»ÖÖ£¨Ò»´ú£©£¬Í¼1ÓÐʲôºÃ´¦£¿ |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
Ïë»»¹¤×÷¡£´ó¶àÊý¸ßУ¶¼ÊÇ ÆÀÖ°³ÆÊ± ÈÏ¿É5ÄêÄÚÔÚÔµ¥Î»È¡µÃµÄ³É¹ûÂð£¿
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
ÉϺ£¹¤³Ì¼¼Êõ´óѧÕÅÅàÀÚ½ÌÊÚÍŶÓÕÐÊÕ²©Ê¿Éú
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
Çó¸ö²©µ¼¿´¿´
ÒѾÓÐ14È˻ظ´
ÉϺ£¹¤³Ì¼¼Êõ´óѧ¡¾¼¤¹âÖÇÄÜÖÆÔì¡¿¿ÎÌâ×éÕÐÊÕ˶ʿ
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
ÇóÖúԺʿÃÇ£¬Õâ¸öÈçºÎºÏ³Éѽ
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
ÁÙ¸ÛʵÑéÊÒÓëÉϿƴóÁªÅ಩ʿÕÐÉú1Ãû
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
ÐèÒªºÏ³É515-64-0£¬50g£¬Äܽӵ¥µÄÁôÑÔ
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
×Ô¼ö¶Á²©
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
дÁËһƪ¡°Ïà±ä´¢Äܼ¼ÊõÔÚÀä¿âÖÐÓ¦Óá±µÄÂÛÎÄ£¬ÂÛÎÄÄÚÈÝÒÔʵÑéΪÖ÷£¬Í¶Ê²Ã´ÆÚ¿¯ºÏÊÊ£¿
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
´ø×ʽø×éÇ󲩵¼ÊÕÁô
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´

Ç®ÌÁÓ×÷ë
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 2 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 2442.5
- É¢½ð: 2683
- ºì»¨: 4
- Ìû×Ó: 1410
- ÔÚÏß: 428.9Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1465615
- ×¢²á: 2011-10-28
- רҵ: ϸ°ûÐźÅתµ¼
6Â¥2018-02-05 09:34:34
³¤_Çà
ľ³æ (ÖªÃû×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 2319.7
- É¢½ð: 498
- ºì»¨: 73
- ɳ·¢: 2
- Ìû×Ó: 9774
- ÔÚÏß: 3204.7Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 4235117
- ×¢²á: 2015-11-21
- רҵ: ×ÔÈ»ÓïÑÔÀí½âÓë»úÆ÷·Òë
2Â¥2017-11-02 05:02:46
ÉÙÄêÈòÍÁ
гæ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 1019.5
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 66
- ÔÚÏß: 20.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 2762391
- ×¢²á: 2013-10-29
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ϸ°ûÐźÅתµ¼
3Â¥2017-12-24 17:09:30
mac194
Ìú³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- ²©Ñ§EPI: 68
- Ó¦Öú: 128 (¸ßÖÐÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 21401.3
- ºì»¨: 101
- Ìû×Ó: 3332
- ÔÚÏß: 3370.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 2488597
- ×¢²á: 2013-05-30
- רҵ: ¸ß·Ö×Ó²ÄÁϵļӹ¤Óë³ÉÐÍ
4Â¥2017-12-24 18:01:03







»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥