Scientists use bacteria as a sort of "workhorse" for cloning (though yeast can also be used!). It's easier to let the bacteria do all the work in vivo than to do it in vitro. Once the gene to be cloned is inserted into a plasmid, all one has to do is transform a culture of E.coli with the plasmid, and plate them on a petri dish. The bacteria will multiply, making millions upon millions of copies of the gene literally overnight. In the morning, you have billions of clones of your gene.
To do the same thing in a test tube would be much more technically challenging (and expensive!). You would need to add all the enzymes and co-factors, as well as make sure the conditions in the test tube (pH, etc) were right. There would be plenty of room for mistakes. Instead of doing it with techniques that have been around for a few decades, why not let Nature do it with the technique it has perfected over billions of years?
As for "eDNA"; its not a term I'm familiar with. A Google search also showed no useful results. Are you sure you didn't mean cDNA?What is the difference between DNA cloning and BACTERIA cloning?
DNA is like for an ex. if you take a piece of someones hair or if you take shots to see if someone is a family member.
IDK
No comments:
Post a Comment