This is my last week in the lab in Sydney. On Monday I practiced a technique called allelic discrimination. As with the luciferase assay I described before this technique depends upon a special machine which both provides the data and analyzes the results. We examined a series of DNA samples from people who serve as controls for the study of schizophrenia that is the major focus of this lab. The technique is based on another technique called PCR (polymerase chain reaction) by which you can take a small sample of DNA and make many reliable copies. I’m fairly confident you understand the facility of this technique in forensics. Using this technique, DNA from a tiny blood sample found at a crime scene can be amplified (so there’s enough to test) and then compared with the DNA of a possible suspect. I think you’ve probably also learned that humans have two copies of each gene (one per chromosome). In a simple example often used in basic genetics classes there are two alleles (forms) of the gene for an enzyme that when non-functional leads to a person lacking any pigmentation in his/her skin, a condition known as albinism. What we were looking at was much simpler, a difference of one nucleotide (a C vs. a T) at a specific site within the gene for the estrogen receptor (ER alpha) that I have written about before. When one nucleotide is different it is called a SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism). Within a DNA sample from any person, there will only be two copies of this sequence; so there are three possible genotypes CC, CT/TC or TT. These two copies of that SNP are not enough DNA to compare; we can’t “see” it with any technique or technology. The DNA is amplified using PCR. The region we’re interested in is selectively copied because we provide primers, pieces of DNA that will match the two ends of the sequence bracketing the SNP. In PCR the DNA sample is heated so the two parts of the double helix will come apart and become single stranded. Then the temperature is lowered to allow the primers to attach and the heat stable DNA polymerase makes copies. There are multiple cycles so that many copies can be made. The primer DNA provided by the scientist (me) is complementary to the DNA near the region of interest so it will match up with that part of the DNA in the sample. Now here’s the discrimination part. We also provide probes; one that is complementary to one allele and another that is complementary to the other allele within the bracket of the primers. Each of these probes has another component at each of its ends; one colored and another that keeps the color from being “seen” by the machine, this is called a quencher. Let’s say the probe for C has a red tag and the probe for T has a blue tag. OK, if the genomic DNA matches exactly (is complementary along its entire length) with the probe, then the DNA copying enzyme running along the genomic DNA making a copy will bump into the probe and chew it up (digest is a more scientific term) thus freeing the colored tag from its quencher. If the match is not exact, no chewing, quencher stays with the colored tag, no color. OK so if the genomic DNA has C at the SNP spot, the red-carrrying probe will match and the red marker will be seen by the machine. Alternately if the genomic DNA has T, by the same mechanism the machine will see blue. We put the same primers, probes, enzymes in all the wells of our sample plate. We then put different DNA samples in each well. Each well contains only 5 microliters of fluid = 0.005 ml = 0.000005 L! Think of the size of a 2L bottle of soft drinks divided many many times. I worked with 20 samples. We then program the software of the machine to read our plate, put the plate in and start the process. First PCR copies each DNA sample many many times. During the copying red tags will be released if C is present in the SNP site and blue tags if T is present and red and blue tags if one chromosome has C and the other has T. Then the machine reads the amount of red and blue in each sample well and reports the results. In my sample there were five CC, eight CT and seven TT for a genotype frequency of 25%:40%:35% and an allelic frequency of 45% C and 55% T. The entire experiment took about two hours including just over one hour of the machine working without my doing anything.
Such a machine is likely beyond the financial resources of a small college like Keuka. It is used here not only by the members of Cyndi Shannon-Weickert’s lab but also by other researchers studying the brain at the Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute. My challenge is to conceive of ways that Keuka students can study some of the same concepts with simpler technology. We can (and already do) perform PCR. I need to learn how to take those products and discriminate between them using a slightly less high tech methodology. And then constructively add new experiences to what is already part of the natural science curriculum.
Yesterday (Wednesday) Cyndi made some time to work with me “at the bench.” We each took a plasmid (I wrote about plasmids previously) with a human gene insert, I had the human glutocorticoid receptor, and treated it with a selected restriction enzyme to linearize it. It was incubated in a water bath overnight. Today we will “run” our pieces of DNA out on a gel. This morning I learned how to make agarose gel solution (using a microwave) and to pour a gel for electrophoresis. The most challenging part of this is putting tape around the frame just so before pouring the liquid gel so that it doesn’t leak. The idea is that we’ll put samples of our DNA into little wells in the solidified, jello-like matrix of agarose and then electrophoresis will allow us to determine the different weights/lengths of the pieces of DNA we’ve produced. This is actually a very straightforward and common technique, performed by students in biochem or molecular bio labs. But, I’ve never done it before! Oh and the first gel we tried to make leaked all over the lab bench! So I got the practice of starting again, alone and I have made a “perfect” (at least it solidified without leaking) gel by carefully considering the taping technique. I’ll report more in my next message.
It has been very interesting spending the last five weeks in a working research lab. There are four post-docs, two technicians, an undergraduate student, a lab supervisor and an executive assistant as well as Cyndi who is the principle investigator (as well as many other titles and responsibilities). I want to remind you that Cyndi is a Keuka graduate from the mid 1980s with majors in both biology and psychology. She was well-prepared at Keuka and with determination and desire furthered her education and rose high in her profession. From my other messages you can tell that I’ve been working with everything from sectioned tissue to tissue culture to cortisol to DNA. When we’ve worked with the microscope, I’ve had experience to contribute. We’ve also read and discussed articles at journal clubs at least once a week. I’ve learned a great deal about neurobiology and I’ve been able to contribute my broader knowledge of cell, developmental and molecular biology in a number of non-neuronal systems. The work here also includes the behavioral aspects of neurobiology. Cyndi is responsible for seeing the big picture and charting the direction of research as she and her colleagues strive to understand what “goes wrong” in schizophrenia and how it might be prevented or more effectively treated. I have been stimulated and challenged to both expand and focus my thinking as I strive to understand and to provide a semi-outsider’s insight. Everyone has been very friendly and welcoming; generous with their time and encouragement. This is the way they interact with each other and they have welcomed me into the group. We have worked and laughed and learned together. (As they say here) brilliant!
Recent Comments