I had gone through some readings that GelRedTM is a DNA dye which is non toxic compared conventional EtBr staining.I would like to know how much more expensive GelRed is ? What is the excitation wavelength for GelRed ? What are the main advantages over EtBr ? What are the drawbacks ?
My opinion (and I would prefer not to be responsible for it ;)) is that EtBr is wrongly accused of being a mythical super villain. Yes it does create havoc in an in vitro test, yes it does intercalate abundatly into DNA, but bioavailability is quite bad actually. Not too good in passing through the membranes, really bad in passing through the skin (if you use DMSO stock than it does get through the skin somewhat better). Most of the alternatives are cyanine dyes, which are very questionably "safer" options.
There are a number of alternatives to EtBr now marketed. We use NANCY-520 http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/cell-biology/detection/learning-center/nancy-520.html
They are marketed as safer (lower mutagenticy in Ames test) and usually have similar excitation/emission spectrum to EtBr (can't comment on GelRed specifically). However I figure if they bind DNA in a gel they will bind DNA in a person lowere apprent mutagenicity or not.....
My opinion (and I would prefer not to be responsible for it ;)) is that EtBr is wrongly accused of being a mythical super villain. Yes it does create havoc in an in vitro test, yes it does intercalate abundatly into DNA, but bioavailability is quite bad actually. Not too good in passing through the membranes, really bad in passing through the skin (if you use DMSO stock than it does get through the skin somewhat better). Most of the alternatives are cyanine dyes, which are very questionably "safer" options.
Thanks John and Ivo for clearing my doubt.According to both I think EtBr can be used without any replacement if my concern is only about the mutagenicity problem..
Yes, my point is: if you abide by standard safety measures, it is as safe as all the alternatives. Pricewise it is usualy much cheaper than new generation of dyes.
Hi Noble,
Both EtBr and GelRed™ are capable of binding to nucleic acids. However, the chemical structures of GelRed™ are engineered such that the dyes are incapable of crossing cell membranes and entering living cells. The denying of its chance to be in contact with genomic DNA in living cells reduce genotoxicity. Only the nucleic acids isolated out of the cells can have a chance to bind to the dye. They claim that the Ames test confirmed that GelRed™ is nonmutagenic.
http://biotium.com/technology/gelred-gelgreen-nucleic-acid-gel-stains/
You may see the pricing for GelRed and associated products at this link on the Biotium website:
http://biotium.com/product-tag/gelred/
GelRed is more expensive than ethidium bromide but something to consider when doing a cost comparison is some labs may be able to save on hazardous waste disposal costs (as well as the time and hassle of decontaminating electrophoresis buffers) by switching from EtBr to GelRed. GelRed is classified as non-hazardous under California Code of Regulations Title 22. However, users should check with their local regulations before disposing of GelRed down the drain or in the regular trash.
Regarding Ivo's comment - GelRed, unlike other replacements for EtBr, is NOT a cyanine dye.
http://biotium.com/product-tag/gelred/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Molecular Biology
- Biomolecules
- Nucleic Acids
- DNA