Choosing the strain and the delivery method before the construct: why competent cells for protein expression are chosen for protease deficiency, codon supply and tight repression rather than for transformation efficiency, where transformation competent cells for cloning are a different product with the opposite priorities and where the cloning vector vs expression vector distinction follows the same logic, what an electroporator and an electroporation instrument buy over chemical transformation and what they cost in cuvettes and arcing, how a transfection reagent for suspension cells and a protein transfection reagent differ from an adherent nucleic acid formulation, where a piggybac transposon gives stable integration without a virus, what pcr workstations and pcr automation contribute to contamination control rather than to throughput, and why the strain choice explains more failed expressions than the vector does

Choosing strain and delivery

1. Separate cloning strains from expression strains. Cloning strains maximise uptake and plasmid stability. Expression strains minimise proteolysis and leaky expression. Their properties are close to opposite and the catalogue names do not always make that obvious.
2. Choose repression for a toxic product. Where the product harms the host, leaky expression before induction selects for cells that have lost the construct. Strains and vectors offering tighter repression are the remedy, not lower induction.
3. Match delivery to the cell, not to the protocol. Chemical transformation suits laboratory strains, electroporation suits difficult ones and high efficiency needs, and suspension mammalian cells need formulations designed for them.
4. Control arcing and cuvette hygiene. Electroporation fails on salt carryover and reused cuvettes. Desalting the DNA and using fresh cuvettes removes most of the failures blamed on the instrument.
5. Use transposon systems where a virus is unnecessary. Transposon based integration gives stable expression without viral containment requirements, which simplifies approvals and handling for many applications.
6. Design the workspace against amplicon carryover. A dedicated setup enclosure with ultraviolet decontamination and a strict direction of travel controls contamination far better than any reagent. Automation helps by removing manual transfers, not by being fast.

The strain is a design decision

Codon usage, protease complement, repression tightness and disulphide forming capacity in the cytoplasm all differ between strains, and each solves a specific expression problem. Choosing by habit means solving none of them.

Screen two or three strains in parallel for a difficult protein. It is a week that regularly replaces a quarter of vector redesign.

Contamination is designed out, not cleaned up

Amplified product is the contaminant, and it travels on gloves, pipettes and air. Separate areas or separate times for reagent preparation, template addition and post amplification work, with dedicated equipment, is the control.

A laboratory that has had an event and cannot say where it came from has a layout problem. Buying new reagents will not fix it.

Common questions

Why is my protein degraded?

Frequently the strain. Expression strains deficient in major proteases exist for this reason, and switching strain is faster and cheaper than adding more inhibitors to the lysis buffer.

Why do my transformants lose the plasmid?

Leaky expression of a product the host does not tolerate. Tighter repression, a lower copy vector or a lower growth temperature before induction usually recovers it.

When is electroporation worth the equipment?

For difficult strains, library scale transformations where efficiency is the constraint, and primary or suspension cells. For routine cloning into laboratory strains, chemical transformation is simpler.

Browse by service class

• Compare Gene synthesis on advertised prices