Advertisement

The Physics of DNA Electrophoresis

  • Tom Duke
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSB, volume 263)

Abstract

An area that has seen much fruitful collaboration between biologists and physicists in recent years is the development of the gel electrophoresis technique for separating DNA fragments. To some extent, the success achieved is due to the artificial nature of the system, which makes it more immediately amenable to theoretical treatment than most of the naturally occurring systems discussed in this Workshop, where the degree of complexity is far greater. The process involved here is straightforward and essentially physical - charged DNA molecules are forced to migrate through a gel by the application of an electric field - but it is of immense importance to biologists, as the efficient separation of different fragments is an inevitable requirement for the manipulation of DNA performed in molecular genetics, cancer research and, more recently, the human genome project. The physics turns out to be rather interesting, with a rich variety of dynamical behaviour displaying some unusual and unexpected features. More generally, gel electrophoresis is a good example of a driven diffusive system, many types of which are currently under investigation.

Keywords

Field Direction Pulse Time Electric Force Field Switch Reorientation Time 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. C. Schwartz and C. R. Cantor, Cell 37, 67 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. G. de Gennes, J. Chem. Phys. 55, 572 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O. J. Lumpkin, P. Dejardin and B. H. Zimm, Biopolymers 24, 1573 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Noolandi, J. Rousseau, G. W. Slater, C. Turmel and M. Lalande, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2428 (1987).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Holzwarth, C. B. McKee, S. Steiger and G. Crater, Nucl. Acids Res. 23, 10031 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. C. Schwartz and M. Koval, Nature 338, 520 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. A. J. Duke, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2877 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. A. J. Duke, J. Chem. Phys., in press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Rubinstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 1946 (1987).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. F. Carle, M. Frank and M. V. Olson, Science 232, 65 (1986).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. L. Viovy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 855 (1988).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. L. Viovy, Electrophoresis 10, 429 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. M. Deutsch, Science 240, 922 (1988).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Olivera de la Cruz, D. Gersappe and E. O. Schaffer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2324 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Duke
    • 1
  1. 1.Cavendish LaboratoryCambridgeEngland

Personalised recommendations