You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to LAMP-Seq
Have you guys attempted to use RTx + Bst 2.0 in place of Bst 3.0? Obviously this bumps cost but it could yield a time savings of 50% (at least according to the idealized NEB results). I wonder why RTx alone wasn't attempted since it is an engineered Kod polymerase (and as such should be very fast).
Jonathan Leo Schmid-Burgk
unread,
Apr 9, 2020, 9:44:01 PM4/9/20
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to LAMP-Seq
We have used RTx + Bst 2.0, which works fine. RTx alone would not allow LAMP amplification as far as I can tell. The reason we propose Bst
3.0 for large scale application is simplicity and cost, while reaction time might not be critical