Aaaahhhh! My subcloning refuses to work!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

BNSN

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
603
Reaction score
0
So, I'm trying to subclone some DNA for a trafficking protein, and this thing just won't subclone! When I make my MiniPrep of my clones, I get random DNA -- beta amyloid, something the BLAST search on the NIH site called "finger protein", AMPA receptor DNA, and every other DNA imaginable. Except for the DNA I want!

I'm an undergraduate, and I really am trying to make a positive contribution to the lab I work in. I've been there for 6 months, and they treat me super well, so I feel I owe them some hard work.

What have you guys done in the past to make your subcloning more successful? Any techniques you tried? Any hints?

Thanks.
 
you would need to be a little more specific to troubleshoot your problem. which vectors are you using to clone? check the enzymes you are using to cut out your fragments - perhaps they are compatible with one another (or even blunt ended?) Is your ligation kit good? Do you run out your ligation product to see if it the right size? Your bacterial stocks may be contaminated. Your antibiotic may be dead or incorrect. Heck, your sequencing primers could be wrong. And on, and on, and on....
dont mention the gene you are studying - you don't want to get scooped by a lurker on SDN!
 
Pray. Seriously, sub-cloning can be a bastard. The previous poster is right - there are many steps that need to be considered for troubleshooting. Since many people have experience in cloning, your best bet would be to take your data to a post-doc in yours or another lab in the building and get some help - a fresh perspective can be life-saving.
 
It's a bit interesting that you're getting multiple different gene inserts. Are you somehow using a cDNA library/genome PCR? If you simply restriction digest and ligate it in, then you'll get multiple different DNA inserts, especially because usually there are smaller DNA that compete better for the template than your gene of interest.

My suggestion: use gel extraction to purify your gene insert. While I know that some people use column preps to purify their gene insert, in my experience, you'll get a very small purification; gel extractions are far superior. If you still get different gene inserts using gel extractions, then you should sequence your gel extraction product to verify that your PCR is working correctly.

If you give a bit more info, I'm sure that we at SDN can help you. But I do suggest you talk to the postdocs/profs; usually they're very understanding and remember the good old days when PCR just came out... 🙂

As a final note, I spent a semester trying to clone something that was ~70% AT; it really didn't PCR up well, couldn't use site-directed mutagenesis or TOPO clone. Sometimes, things just don't work....
 
So, I'm trying to subclone some DNA for a trafficking protein, and this thing just won't subclone! When I make my MiniPrep of my clones, I get random DNA -- beta amyloid, something the BLAST search on the NIH site called "finger protein", AMPA receptor DNA, and every other DNA imaginable. Except for the DNA I want!

I'm an undergraduate, and I really am trying to make a positive contribution to the lab I work in. I've been there for 6 months, and they treat me super well, so I feel I owe them some hard work.

What have you guys done in the past to make your subcloning more successful? Any techniques you tried? Any hints?

Thanks.

You've already received some good advice above, so here are a few more tidbits..When subcloning, you have to isolate your PCR product (eventual insert) as much as possible. The idea of gel extraction above is quite helpful, assuming your product conforms to your kit's limits. And even if you are confident you are working with just one PCR product, do multiple restriction digests (they are cheap compared to ligation and so on) to confirm it. If degenerate products are the problem, order longer, more specific primers. Perhaps adjust the PCR temp. range to yield only the expected product. Subcloning is a pain, but after a few months of troubleshooting, you will be able to go from PCR to final clone in a week 🙂

And don't worry that you haven't contributed as an undergrad after 6 months. Most MS/PhD students don't do anything "meaningful" in their first year on the bench. Usually you just stumble around the lab hoping not to piss off the postdocs or ruin expensive reagents. Be patient, MolBio cannot be rushed!

Have fun!
 
As a final note, I spent a semester trying to clone something that was ~70% AT; it really didn't PCR up wel, couldn't use site-directed mutagenesis or TOPO clone. Sometimes, things just don't work....

yeah I'm dealing with mammalian introns right now and they are a pain to PCR/clone because they're basically all AT - grrrr....
 
1) How are you amplifying your DNA? Are you PCRing out of cDNA? If so, are you certain your primers are good and specific? (I.e., when you run your product on a gel do you get one sharp band of the right size?)

2) Echo that the point about gel purification is good (although if you are PCRing out of cDNA I assume you are checking your product on the gel anyway, in which case you might as well gel purify as it's as easy as column by that point, yes?).

If you're already doing all that and it hasn't worked, you probably have bad restriction enzymes (incomplete digestion, compatible ends, star activity, degraded ends, or whatever). In that case, I recommend...

3) T vector! T vector! T vector!

Seriously, this little thingy is a godsend. It's an extra cloning step but it could save you weeks in the long run (make haste slowly and all that).

Basically it is a little vector sold by ProMega where the multiple cloning site sits in the middle of a gene conferring beta-gal activity. It's got little A overhangs so you can clone a Taq product in without any enzymes. For some reason anything I've cloned has always gone much more easily into the T vector than anything else (maybe because it's small, maybe because it's been pre-dephosphorylated - whatever, dunno).

You plate on IPTG/X-gal-coated plates. If you just ligate the ends of the T vector together, you get beta-gal(+) transformants (so blue colonies). If you've stuck your product in there, you interrupt the beta-gal gene and your transformants lose the activity (so white colonies). As long as you pick white colonies to prep, you're golden. You can prep one colony and be 99% sure you'll get your insert (although I usually prep 3 to be safe, + 1 blue one for a control on the gel - but I've never seen a white colony that wasn't what I wanted).

Now you know exactly which colonies contain an insert (and if you've gel purified, you're pretty certain it's the right thing). You can prep your DNA from one of the white colonies, cut it back out of the T vector (using the restriction sites present in the vector, which are all for pretty reliable enzymes) and stick into the vector you want. Now it's pretty foolproof, as you know you have the right insert and you are using reliable enzymes.

I know this seems like kind of a waste of time but it has saved my butt a bunch of times, and every time I did it I felt stupid that I hadn't just done it before wasting a couple of weeks trying to make the direct subcloning work out.
 
3) T vector! T vector! T vector!

Oh yes, these things are a godsend for cloning! Be sure to check out the TOPO TA kit from Invitrogen as well..Just be sure of what your doing, cause these reactions run ~20$ each..This will save you lots of time though, since you don't have to optimize your PCR. Just clean it and clone it, and screen the colonies for the right sized product. These kits do have size limits, usually ~5kbp or so. The nice thing is these vectors are high-copy number, so you will get really concentrated DNA after restriction digest. By the way, if the vector doesn't have the restriction sites you need, just re-order the primers with the site added to the ends (don't forget the overhang nucleotides).

Good luck and have fun! 🙂
 
Thank you all for your replies. A frustrated undergraduate appreciates them. I actually send 20 MiniPreps dowm for sequencing today -- hopefully I'll get good news!

you would need to be a little more specific to troubleshoot your problem. which vectors are you using to clone? check the enzymes you are using to cut out your fragments - perhaps they are compatible with one another (or even blunt ended?) Is your ligation kit good? Do you run out your ligation product to see if it the right size? Your bacterial stocks may be contaminated. Your antibiotic may be dead or incorrect. Heck, your sequencing primers could be wrong. And on, and on, and on....
So, basically, I could be screwing everything up😉

It's not unlikely that I am...I'll look into these possibilities. Thanks.

Seriously, sub-cloning can be a bastard.
You got that right!

The previous poster is right - there are many steps that need to be considered for troubleshooting. Since many people have experience in cloning, your best bet would be to take your data to a post-doc in yours or another lab in the building and get some help - a fresh perspective can be life-saving.

I actually work under a post-doc, and he shows me the ropes. I sent in 20 MiniPreps today -- hopefully we'll get something.

Are you somehow using a cDNA library/genome PCR? If you simply restriction digest and ligate it in, then you'll get multiple different DNA inserts, especially because usually there are smaller DNA that compete better for the template than your gene of interest.

That's exactly what we do. We run a PCR with a cDNA library. Then we run it on a gel, cut out the bands we like, do a Wedgie Prep, clone, and then make a MiniPrep.

My suggestion: use gel extraction to purify your gene insert. While I know that some people use column preps to purify their gene insert, in my experience, you'll get a very small purification; gel extractions are far superior. If you still get different gene inserts using gel extractions, then you should sequence your gel extraction product to verify that your PCR is working correctly.

I don't understand. How do you use gel extraction? At what step in the process does what you're talking about come in?

I have a limited understanding of the process. In my mind, these are the steps:

-PCR
-Run Gel + Cut out bands
-Purify Bands (Wedgie Prep)
-Clone
-MiniPrep

And, then, once you clone successfully,
-MaxiPrep

it really didn't PCR up well, couldn't use site-directed mutagenesis or TOPO clone. Sometimes, things just don't work...
This HAS to work. It is a part of a large project, but it is an important part.

Perhaps adjust the PCR temp. range to yield only the expected product.
We did that for another subcloning we've trying to get to work, and it did the trick. We've actually already tried multiple temp ranges. Didn't do a thing.

How are you amplifying your DNA? Are you PCRing out of cDNA? If so, are you certain your primers are good and specific? (I.e., when you run your product on a gel do you get one sharp band of the right size?)
Yes, we PCR out of a cDNA library. And, no, we do not get one sharp band. Our gels are actually really poor.

Echo that the point about gel purification is good (although if you are PCRing out of cDNA I assume you are checking your product on the gel anyway, in which case you might as well gel purify as it's as easy as column by that point, yes?).

Well, as I said above, I don't understand this point. I mean, after we do our PCR and run it on a gel, we purify it from there. Is that what you're referring to?

T vector! T vector! T vector!
I am very excited about this!

http://www.promega.com/vectors/t_vectors.htm#b01

Which one do you use? pGem-T or pTarget?

I think I will talk to my postdoc about this.

I MAY CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING TO THE LAB! YAY!
 
I don't understand. How do you use gel extraction? At what step in the process does what you're talking about come in?
I have a limited understanding of the process. In my mind, these are the steps:

-PCR
-Run Gel + Cut out bands
-Purify Bands (Wedgie Prep)
-Clone
-MiniPrep
Sounds like you're already gel extracting (Wedgie Prep). I don't know what a Wedgie Prep is (mostly used Qiagen gel prep kits) but the point is you are running your product on a gel, cutting out only the band you want, and purifying from there. The other option is, if you are certain your PCR reaction is optimal (high yield and no side products), you can directly purify, cut, and clone - it saves you half an hour to run the gel but is really suboptimal.

We did that for another subcloning we've trying to get to work, and it did the trick. We've actually already tried multiple temp ranges. Didn't do a thing.
Are you using a program to predict your ideal annealing temp, or are you mucking about blindly? It's much faster and cheaper to run a simulation in silico than in PCR maquinam. We used a program called MacVector that did a great job (anytime I checked the prediction using a temperature gradient, it invariably predicted the best temp for optimizing yield vs side products); but if you don't have MacVector there are some tools available on the Web. I just found

http://www.promega.com/biomath/calc11.htm

by Googling "calculate annealing temperature" but you should check around and see what else is out there. Btw sometimes a degree or two difference in the annealing temp makes a huge difference in the product yield, so if you try a number of temps that are all 2 degrees apart you may miss your optimal point. That's another reason why you need a prediction program. Even if it isn't the world's best prediction program, it will give you a general idea, and then you can try 10 reactions that are all 0.2 degrees apart.

Yes, we PCR out of a cDNA library. And, no, we do not get one sharp band. Our gels are actually really poor.
Whoa there li'l buddy, you need to optimize your PCR before you do anything else. That's why your subcloning isn't working. The reason you're cloning beta-amyloid and whatever else is because that's what you're amplifying, along with six thousand other genes probably.

Where's your postdoc? What's his deal? Anyways, there is a ton of literature on how to optimize PCRs. Your lab must have a book on basic biochem techniques; check it for ways to optimize PCRs. Frankly though, I've never found the little tricks like adding DMSO or whatever to be very useful; it's really mostly about the specificity of your primers, the purity of your sample, and your annealing temperature (in that order).

Sounds to me like your problem is probably your primers. You need very specific primers to amplify out of cDNA, as you have lots of other very similar sequences in your starting sample. To amplify from cDNA your primers should be at least 18 bp long (not counting add-ons like restriction sites). If there are too many nonspecific products despite temperature optimization, make your primers longer.

Another good way to improve specificity is to use a touchdown PCR. That is, start with a really high annealing temperature, such that you get very few reactions (but the ones you get are very likely to be specific). Then decrease the annealing temp by 0.5 - 1 degree per cycle. On the last cycle you'll have a really low annealing temp (thus low specificity) but it won't really matter, because the vast majority of the templates in your tube will be the right thing already (amplified in prior, low-yield, highly specific cycles). I usually bridge the optimal annealing temp predicted by MacVector (e.g., if optimal is 55 degrees, I will start at 63 and go down to 48 over 30 cycles). The manual for your PCR machine should tell you how to program this.

I am very excited about this!
http://www.promega.com/vectors/t_vectors.htm#b01
Which one do you use? pGem-T or pTarget?
We used pGem; I haven't used pTarget. But your link says it's a mammalian expression vector - you don't need that, you're not going to express it anywhere. All you want is a minimal vector with the beta-gal gene, which is the pGem-T.

But first fix your PCR. If you are amplifying junk, you are ligating junk, regardless of what vector you stick it in. GIGO. No T-vector is going to help you with that.
 
I actually send 20 MiniPreps dowm for sequencing today -- hopefully I'll get good news!
One more thing. How come you are using sequencing to screen your MiniPreps? Is it free or really cheap for some reason? Or is there a specific reason you need to screen by sequencing?

If not, it is way more efficient (both money and time) to screen by restriction digest. Just find an enzyme that cuts 1x or 2x in the insert and 1x in the vector. You don't have to clean the DNA the way you would for sequencing; just cut the dirty MiniPrep DNA, you will have your answer in an hour.
 
One more thing. How come you are using sequencing to screen your MiniPreps? Is it free or really cheap for some reason? Or is there a specific reason you need to screen by sequencing?

If not, it is way more efficient (both money and time) to screen by restriction digest. Just find an enzyme that cuts 1x or 2x in the insert and 1x in the vector. You don't have to clean the DNA the way you would for sequencing; just cut the dirty MiniPrep DNA, you will have your answer in an hour.

Hahah..... I think we all remember our youthful days as undergrads. If we never got things to work, no one would really care. But sequencing 20 minipreps? That'll get your head chopped off around here!

BNSN, you need to make sure your primers are specific. You could be trying to amplify repetitive sequence, and end up amplifying everything and anything.

First, use the UCSC web browser to locate the DNA region you want to amplify. Take about 400 bp of sequence. VERY IMPORTANT- you MUST screen out repetitive sequences. you can do this from the UCSC browser itself- click to mask repetitive sequences as "N". You can also use other software to do this- such as repeatmasker.

Second, you must BLAST your sequence against the genome (BLASTn). Make sure there are no other locations that are similar to your sequence.

THEN you may finally design primers. Primer3 is a good program (look it up). GC content is important- get at least 40%. If you can't find adequate primers, expand your region a little bit. Get at least 2/3 primer sets.

Finally you can do PCR. Make sure you only get a single band before you send anything for sequencing. If it's really a single band, you won't even have to gel purify- just send the PCR product. If you don't see a single band no matter how hard you try, you are basically screwed and you will waste tons of time and money. If you get 2 bands, gel purify and send them both. If you get more than 2, well, chances are it's totally crap.

Have fun!
 
Hahah..... I think we all remember our youthful days as undergrads. If we never got things to work, no one would really care. But sequencing 20 minipreps? That'll get your head chopped off around here!

BNSN, you need to make sure your primers are specific. You could be trying to amplify repetitive sequence, and end up amplifying everything and anything.

First, use the UCSC web browser to locate the DNA region you want to amplify. Take about 400 bp of sequence. VERY IMPORTANT- you MUST screen out repetitive sequences. you can do this from the UCSC browser itself- click to mask repetitive sequences as "N". You can also use other software to do this- such as repeatmasker.

Second, you must BLAST your sequence against the genome (BLASTn). Make sure there are no other locations that are similar to your sequence.

THEN you may finally design primers. Primer3 is a good program (look it up). GC content is important- get at least 40%. If you can't find adequate primers, expand your region a little bit. Get at least 2/3 primer sets.

Finally you can do PCR. Make sure you only get a single band before you send anything for sequencing. If it's really a single band, you won't even have to gel purify- just send the PCR product. If you don't see a single band no matter how hard you try, you are basically screwed and you will waste tons of time and money. If you get 2 bands, gel purify and send them both. If you get more than 2, well, chances are it's totally crap.

Have fun!


i would also recommend an additional step: use the In Silico PCR test from UCSC to see if your primers will give the right product
http://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgPcr?command=start
 
Whoa there li'l buddy, you need to optimize your PCR before you do anything else. That's why your subcloning isn't working.

Haha, you were right. After the 20 MiniPreps I sent in turned out negative for our DNA, my postdoc looked back at the primers. He then told me today that the primers he designed were faulty -- when he was running simulations on the computer a while back, he failed to take into account that the upper and lower primers were binding to multiple places (the top primer was binding to three places, lower primer to 4). So all the PCR's, gels, MiniPreps I did were on samples that had basically none of the DNA we were interested in!

We designed new primers today and sent them in. We will get them next week, and hopefully I will get it to work this time!

The positive thing about this experience was that I ran so many PCR's, gels, etc that I can do subcloning protocols -- all the way from PCRing to MiniPreps -- now with ease.

He told me that I wasn't doing anything wrong because what was happening was exactly what you would expect if primers were unspecific -- amplification of random genes.

BNSN, you need to make sure your primers are specific. You could be trying to amplify repetitive sequence, and end up amplifying everything and anything.

First, use the UCSC web browser to locate the DNA region you want to amplify. Take about 400 bp of sequence. VERY IMPORTANT- you MUST screen out repetitive sequences. you can do this from the UCSC browser itself- click to mask repetitive sequences as "N". You can also use other software to do this- such as repeatmasker.

Second, you must BLAST your sequence against the genome (BLASTn). Make sure there are no other locations that are similar to your sequence.

THEN you may finally design primers. Primer3 is a good program (look it up). GC content is important- get at least 40%. If you can't find adequate primers, expand your region a little bit. Get at least 2/3 primer sets.

Haha. That's EXACTLY what I did today. My postdoc and I sat down for three hours and ran Blast searches, used Primer3 and PrimerDesign, and ran PCR simulations.

We sent in an order for 1 upper primer and 2 lower primers. The upper primer has exact binding and one of the lower primers also has exact binding. The other lower primer has two binding sites, but its melting temp is closer to our upper primer than is the other lower primer.

So, thank you all for your replies. I appreciate it very much.
 
One more thing. How come you are using sequencing to screen your MiniPreps? Is it free or really cheap for some reason? Or is there a specific reason you need to screen by sequencing?

If not, it is way more efficient (both money and time) to screen by restriction digest. Just find an enzyme that cuts 1x or 2x in the insert and 1x in the vector. You don't have to clean the DNA the way you would for sequencing; just cut the dirty MiniPrep DNA, you will have your answer in an hour.

Hmm, I didn't know that. I guess we use sequencing because we're too lazy to do it ourselves.

Anyways, it costs $8 a sample to sequence -- is that expensive or cheap? I have no frame of reference. So, the last set of MiniPreps I sent in cost $160 to sequence.

PS: By the time I apply to MSTP programs, I will have had 2 years and 3 months of continuous research in the same lab. An average of 25 hours in the lab a week. This is essentially my only meaningful extracurricular activity -- I will probably have 1 paper as second author and probably close to 6 posters/talks. Is this OK? Am I doing the right thing? One of the faculty members in the lab, an MD/PhD, told me that I was on the right track and that he would write me a LOR if I kept up my current quality of work, but I wanted other opinions. Do MSTP programs really care if I have a lot of clinical exposure?
 
The short answer is yes, you're on the right track, and no, they don't really care if you have clinical exposure.

The long answer is that you have a ton of research experience, which is great. The second author paper and the posters/talks look good too, but the general consensus on here is what really matters is how well you can articulate your research and how much praise does your PI heap upon you for your work in the lab. As for clinical experience, it really just depends on the school. At some schools you will have to interview individually with the MD committee, and even though they usually know you are MD/PhD, they will probably still require a sufficient explanation of why you want to be a clinician. It may be difficult to provide that explanation without ANY clinical experience. I personally would recommend that you take up a light clinical activity, say 2-4hrs/wk for a few months. It will give you fodder for applications, essays and interviews, and perhaps more importantly convince you that the MD degree will be worth your while.

While your research will help your application, your GPA and MCAT will need to be at least good in order to get you in the door at most schools. The general consensus on here is that they don't have to be stellar, but most top MSTP's will want to see a 3.5+ and an MCAT in the 30's to get you consideration. There will be exceptions, of course, but to be safe, shoot for that range of numbers or better.

(Sorry if you already know all this; I just wanted to be thorough.)



Hmm, I didn't know that. I guess we use sequencing because we're too lazy to do it ourselves.

Anyways, it costs $8 a sample to sequence -- is that expensive or cheap? I have no frame of reference. So, the last set of MiniPreps I sent in cost $160 to sequence.

PS: By the time I apply to MSTP programs, I will have had 2 years and 3 months of continuous research in the same lab. An average of 25 hours in the lab a week. This is essentially my only meaningful extracurricular activity -- I will probably have 1 paper as second author and probably close to 6 posters/talks. Is this OK? Am I doing the right thing? One of the faculty members in the lab, an MD/PhD, told me that I was on the right track and that he would write me a LOR if I kept up my current quality of work, but I wanted other opinions. Do MSTP programs really care if I have a lot of clinical exposure?
 
Top