Skip to main content
edited body
Source Link
WYSIWYG
  • 35.6k
  • 9
  • 68
  • 157

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these (anyand many more) parameters. Moreover, the "efficiency" also depends on what experiment you are trying.

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these (any many more) parameters. Moreover, the "efficiency" also depends on what experiment you are trying.

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these (and many more) parameters. Moreover, the "efficiency" also depends on what experiment you are trying.

added 97 characters in body
Source Link
WYSIWYG
  • 35.6k
  • 9
  • 68
  • 157

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these (any many more) parameters. Moreover, the "efficiency" also depends on what experiment you are trying.

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these parameters.

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these (any many more) parameters. Moreover, the "efficiency" also depends on what experiment you are trying.

Source Link
WYSIWYG
  • 35.6k
  • 9
  • 68
  • 157

DNA shuffling would be more efficient if you already have a big repertoire of variants (which have a lot of point differences among them; see Cohen, 2001). When you do not have that, then introducing point mutations using error prone PCR would be better.

A detailed mathematical framework to compare these two methods, is not available. However there are many mutation models and there is at least one model for DNA shuffling too (Sun F., 1999).

Basically, for a point mutation experiment the number of mutants will depend on the error rate of polymerase. In a DNA shuffling experiment you are just creating random combination from existing variants. So, which one is more efficient depends on these parameters.