<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>bomb.bio | Dominik | Activity</title>
	<link>https://bomb.bio/members/dominik-b/activity/</link>
	<atom:link href="https://bomb.bio/members/dominik-b/activity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Activity feed for Dominik.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 20:24:12 +1200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>https://buddypress.org/?v=</generator>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<ttl>30</ttl>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>2</sy:updateFrequency>
	
						<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">ed054e79ee91029341120938e773a686</guid>
				<title>Dominik started the topic Low yield issue with Protocol #4.1 in the forum Clean-up and size exclusion</title>
				<link>https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/low-yield-issue-with-protocol-4-1/</link>
				<pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2021 15:00:21 +1200</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi all,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m trying to do cleanup reactions for my PCR&#8217;s with the protocol. When I go with a ratio of 2, the protocol works fine with any okayish yield of about 60-70% (10 uL PCR product, 10 uL Beads, 5 uL water, 50 uL of binding buffer).</p>
<p>However when I lower the ratio the yield directly drops to ~ 10%. I assume that it is due to the pH of the&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-5350"><a href="https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/low-yield-issue-with-protocol-4-1/" rel="nofollow ugc">Read more</a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">e6381e307634bd7efe5c6ed1d1c001e5</guid>
				<title>Dominik replied to the topic Mechanisms behind the binding of RNA/DNA/TNA in the forum TNA</title>
				<link>https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/mechanisms-behind-the-binding-of-rna-dna-tna/#post-9602</link>
				<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2021 10:06:53 +1200</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tim,</p>
<p>thank you for your prompt and detailed answer, yet there remain some uncertainties, which I hope can be resolved. As far as I&#8217;m concerned, after whichever lysis, the binding of the DNA/RNA/TNA to the silica (beads / column) is the critical step. After I got my NA to bind to the silica I&#8217;m somewhat safe. Therefore I&#8217;m trying to figure out&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-5330"><a href="https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/mechanisms-behind-the-binding-of-rna-dna-tna/#post-9602" rel="nofollow ugc">Read more</a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">a9506465a1ee7474a083e8b06629053c</guid>
				<title>Dominik started the topic Mechanisms behind the binding of RNA/DNA/TNA in the forum TNA</title>
				<link>https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/mechanisms-behind-the-binding-of-rna-dna-tna/</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:35:21 +1200</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi all,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m trying to modify some of your protocols to more closely fit my needs (soil, feeces, whole specimen and so on). I succeeed in doing so for extractions from homogenized insects (TNES + Prot K. Lysis, followed by your cleanup protocol). However I&#8217;m struggling with some of the protocols especially when it comes to TNA. Would you mind&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-5328"><a href="https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/mechanisms-behind-the-binding-of-rna-dna-tna/" rel="nofollow ugc">Read more</a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">ff9dd6e09126302fff131d0151b2aac3</guid>
				<title>Dominik replied to the topic Inconsistency between TNA and RNA protocols in the forum TNA</title>
				<link>https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/inconsistency-between-tna-and-rna-protocols/#post-9583</link>
				<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2021 07:15:43 +1200</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tim,</p>
<p>thanks for the quick reply. For DNA Extraction I usually use 2 washes of 80% EtOH and did not run into trouble with my PCR&#8217;s so I guess this is sufficient. For the TNA extraction I will go with 4 then, I will automatize the whole protocol anyways, then there is basically no difference between 2 and 4 washes except maybe a minute longer runtime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">aef230dbfd053a6ffc180d32645067d2</guid>
				<title>Dominik started the topic Inconsistency between TNA and RNA protocols in the forum TNA</title>
				<link>https://bomb.bio/forums/topic/inconsistency-between-tna-and-rna-protocols/</link>
				<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2021 09:01:33 +1200</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello there,</p>
<p>I was wondering why it is 2 EtOH washes for the TNA protocols followed by 5-10 minutes of drying and 4 (or 2&#215;4) EtOH washes followed by 30 minutes of drying.</p>
<p>What am I missing here?</p>
<p>best Dominik</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">60bf6c1ae77f0495b1d2b56982023fe9</guid>
				<title>Dominik became a registered member</title>
				<link>https://bomb.bio/activity/p/5259/</link>
				<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2021 08:58:44 +1200</pubDate>

				
									<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
				
							</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>