Talk:Polyacrylamide gel

This isn't an edit, but a (strong) suggestion. Including a recipe that involves the use of toxic materials on a public website is probably a huge legal issue. The toxicity of acrylamide should appear high up in the article, not as a caveat at the bottom. Even after polymerization some monomeric acrylamide may exist. I strongly recommend removing the recipe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.152.0.82 (talk) 22:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Edits I cleaned it up a bit, but i do not know what resolving gels are... maybe some help along those lines Vesiv 02:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

There are only two redlinks in the article, I don't think it really affects the quality of the page, and both would be ideal Wikipedia articles, IMO. Likeitsmyjob 23:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Removal of "What is polyacrylamide gel?"
This section doesn't focus on what polyacrylamide gel is, but rather explains for us what electrophoresis is, which is nice, but this isn't what the article is about. If folks want to know about that if they don't already, they can click on the conveniently placed electrophoresis link in the (current) first section. Jesse 13:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

"Resolving gel" is not an appropriate subheading for polyacrylamide gel, because resolving gels are only generally used in SDS-PAGE of proteins, which is only a subset of PAGE, where the gel has both a resolving and stacking gel. DNA and RNA PAGE, for example, almost always uses a homogeneous gel system.

I think an entry that focused on Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis (PAGE) would have an introduction of the main techniques (DNA & RNA PAGE, SDS-PAGE, 2-D electrophoresis) then a section detailing polymerization of acrylamide and bis and various methods available (APS & TEMED, UV & riboflavin etc). Perhaps a section on pre-cast acrylamide gels and gradient gels, and lastly, a sections on alternative cross-linkers might be good and a basic introduction to electrophoresis buffers. Wisebridge 14:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Wisebridge

"Standard" gel size and volume
The article currently reads:
 * "Standard gel size is 3"x5"x0.2", and accounting for a small amount of leakage that generally occurs, each takes roughly 8mL of resolving and 2 mL of stacking gel" (the quote is then followed by a recipe for 10 ml)

In my opinion, the size and the volume required doesn't add up: 3" x 5" x 0.2" = 7.5cm x 12.5cm x 0.5 cm = 46.9 ml. (Much more than the 10 ml specified). Even if the author meant 2 mm instead of 0.2" (which is rather thick!), there still wouldn't be enough gel. If we assume the recipe author actually meant cm instead of inches in all cases, we have the sizes of many commercial systems (i.e. from Invitrogen), and a volume of 3 ml. Do people think we should change the inch-mark (") to cm? I mean, 3" by 5" (7.5cm by 12.5cm) could also be a probable size -- in our lab the standard PAGE size is 16cm by 17cm (however we do employ gels of many sizes, ranging from 3 by 4 cm to half a metre...). But judging by the recipe volume, my guess is that the size should have been stated to be 3cm x 5cm x 2mm... --Rasmusscholer (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)