Skip to main content
. 2015 Oct 8;2:385–391. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2015.09.005

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Comparison between normal induced protein and protein induced in presence of 3% ethanol: (A) MEX67 protein: Lane 1, Molecular weight markers (kDa). Lane 2, MEX67 un-induced control. Lane 3, MEX67 induced in presence of 3% ethanol (+). Lane 4, MEX67 induced in absence of 3% ethanol (−). (B) RPB5 protein: Lane 1, Molecular weight markers (kDa). Lane 2, RPB5 un-induced control. Lane 3, RPB5 induced in presence of 3% ethanol (+). Lane 4, RPB5 induced in absence of 3% ethanol (−). (C) RPB8 protein: Lane 1, Molecular weight markers (kDa). Lane 2, RPB8 un-induced control. Lane 3, RPB8 induced in absence of 3% ethanol (−). Lane 4, RPB8 induced in presence of 3% ethanol (+). Protein samples were separated by 12% SDS-PAGE and stained with Coomassie brilliant blue (CBB).