Mindanao Microbial Culture Collection

22/07/2026

Imagine a world where common infections can no longer be treated. This could become reality as bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites develop resistance to antimicrobial medicines. 𝗔𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗰𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 (𝗔𝗠𝗥) makes infections harder to treat, increasing the risk of severe illness, disability, and death.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗪𝗲 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗲?
• Over 4.7 million deaths were associated with bacterial AMR in 2021.
• 1 in 6 laboratory-confirmed bacterial infections were antibiotic-resistant in 2023.
• By 2050, AMR could cause 10 million deaths annually and threaten US$100 trillion in global economic output.
• Modern healthcare- including surgery, chemotherapy, organ transplantation, and neonatal care- depends on effective antibiotics.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗗𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗔𝗠𝗥?
• Misuse and overuse of antibiotics
• Self-medication and inappropriate prescribing
• Poor infection prevention and control
• Incomplete antibiotic courses
• Limited diagnostics, vaccines, and new antibiotics

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗯𝘂𝗴𝘀
Superbugs are microorganisms resistant to multiple antibiotics, such as:
⁃ MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus)
⁃ VRE (Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus)
⁃ ESBL-producing Enterobacterales
⁃ Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE)
⁃ Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa
⁃ Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗖𝗮𝗻 𝗪𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗠𝗥?
• Use antibiotics only when necessary and as prescribed.
• Base treatment on culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) whenever possible.
• Complete the full course of antibiotics.
• Strengthen infection prevention, vaccination, and antimicrobial stewardship.
• Improve access to diagnostics, surveillance, and research for new antimicrobials.

21/07/2026

Biological Safety Cabinets (BSCs) are ventilated laboratory enclosures designed to protect personnel, the environment, and biological materials from exposure to infectious aerosols. They achieve this through carefully controlled airflow and High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filtration, which removes 𝗮𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝟵𝟵.𝟵𝟳% 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝟬.𝟯 µ𝗺. BSCs are classified into Class I, Class II, and Class III, with each class providing a different level of protection and intended for specific laboratory applications.

𝗖𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀 𝗜 𝗕𝗦𝗖𝘀 provide protection for laboratory personnel and the environment, but do not protect the biological specimen from contamination. Air is drawn into the cabinet, preventing aerosols from escaping, and is then HEPA-filtered before being exhausted. These cabinets are commonly used for low- to moderate-risk microbiological work (typically BSL-1 and BSL-2) where product sterility is not essential.

𝗖𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀 𝗜𝗜 𝗕𝗦𝗖𝘀 are the most widely used cabinets in clinical, research, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology laboratories because they protect personnel, the product, and the environment simultaneously. They use a combination of inward airflow, vertical HEPA-filtered laminar downflow, and HEPA-filtered exhaust.
Class II cabinets are further divided into 𝗧𝘆𝗽𝗲𝘀 𝗔𝟭, 𝗔𝟮, 𝗕𝟭, 𝗕𝟮, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝟭, each differing in airflow patterns and suitability for handling volatile chemicals or radionuclides.
Among these, Type A2 is the most common, featuring a minimum inflow velocity of 100 feet/min (0.51 m/s) and limited compatibility with trace amounts of volatile chemicals when properly ducted.

𝗖𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀 𝗜𝗜𝗜 𝗕𝗦𝗖𝘀 provide the highest level of biological containment and are designed for work with highly infectious agents, including those handled in BSL-3 and BSL-4 laboratories. These gas-tight, negative-pressure cabinets are completely sealed, and all manipulations are performed through attached heavy-duty gloves. Both incoming and outgoing air pass through HEPA filtration, with exhaust air often undergoing double HEPA filtration or incineration before release. Class III cabinets are reserved for work involving dangerous pathogens that pose a high risk of aerosol transmission, ensuring maximum protection for personnel, the environment, and the material being handled.

17/07/2026

𝗧𝗔𝗘 𝘃𝘀 𝗧𝗕𝗘:
𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝘂𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗸𝗲𝗲𝗽𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴

Imagine you're running the same DNA sample on two agarose gels. The gel concentration is identical. The voltage is the same. Yet one gel finishes sooner, while the other maintains stable conditions for much longer.

The difference isn't the DNA—it's the buffer.

Both TAE and TBE contain Tris to maintain pH and EDTA to protect DNA from nuclease activity. The only thing that changes is the buffering ion:

• TAE = Tris–Acetate–EDTA
• TBE = Tris–Borate–EDTA

Surprisingly, this single substitution changes almost everything.

🔻 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗧𝗕𝗘 𝗸𝗲𝗲𝗽 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿?

As electrophoresis runs, electrolysis continuously produces H⁺ and OH⁻ ions that try to push the pH away from its optimum.

Here's where borate shines: 𝗕𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗹𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝗲𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀, 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗼𝗯𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺. This allows the Tris–borate pair to neutralize far more H⁺ and OH⁻ ions before becoming exhausted.

That's why TBE keeps its pH stable during long electrophoresis runs, while TAE gradually runs out of buffering power.

🔻 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗗𝗡𝗔 𝗿𝘂𝗻 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗻 𝗧𝗔𝗘?

As DNA travels through the gel, it doesn't move through empty space—it constantly interacts with the surrounding buffer.

Acetate mostly stays out of DNA's way, allowing fragments to migrate freely. 𝗕𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲, 𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿, 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗴𝗮𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗗𝗡𝗔. This creates a small amount of drag, slowing DNA migration just enough to improve the separation of similarly sized fragments.

🔻 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗱𝗼 𝗺𝗼𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗯𝗶𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿 𝗧𝗔𝗘 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗴𝗲𝗹 𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻?

Suppose you've found the DNA band you wanted and now need to recover it for PCR, cloning, ligation, or sequencing. With TAE, acetate is easily removed during purification and rarely affects downstream reactions. But with TBE, 𝗦𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗺𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝗵𝗶𝗯𝗶𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝘇𝘆𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝘀 𝗗𝗡𝗔 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝘆𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗗𝗡𝗔 𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘀𝗲, making subsequent experiments less efficient.

𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗮 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲: 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗧𝗕𝗘 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘇𝗲 𝗗𝗡𝗔. 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗧𝗔𝗘 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗗𝗡𝗔.

10/07/2026

after 24 hours incubation.

06/07/2026

Common media types 😄😍

laboratory microbiologist medical [ biology biotech lab labs technician technologist mlt mls bacterien bakteri gramnegative medicalmicrobiology medicallaboratory clinicallaboratory streak phd ] infection disease antibiotics antimicrobial public health awereness know knowledge fact virus virology

25/05/2026

𝗣𝗖𝗥 𝗔𝗡𝗡𝗘𝗔𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗧𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗨𝗥𝗘 𝗔𝗗𝗝𝗨𝗦𝗧𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧

The 𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 is one of the most critical parameters in PCR because it determines how specifically primers bind to the target DNA. Even a small change (±1–2°C) can significantly affect amplification quality.

🔹𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲?

It is the temperature at which primers hybridize (bind) to the template DNA, typically set slightly below the primer 𝗧𝗺 (melting temperature).

General rule: Annealing temp ≈ Tm − 3 to 5°C

🔹 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗣𝗖𝗥

Low annealing temperature:
• weak specificity
• non-specific binding
• multiple bands on gel
• primer-dimer formation

Reason: primers can bind to partially matching sequences.

High annealing temperature:
• high specificity
• reduced binding efficiency
• low yield or no amplification

Reason: primers fail to bind efficiently.

🔹 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗹𝘆

If you see multiple bands → Increase annealing temperature (by 1–2°C)
This improves specificity and reduces off-target binding.

If you get no or weak bands → Decrease annealing temperature (by 1–2°C)
This helps primers bind more easily.

If primer-dimers appear → Increase temperature slightly or redesign primers

🔹𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗣𝗖𝗥 (𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵)

Instead of guessing, gradient PCR tests a range of temperatures (e.g., 50–65°C) in a single run.

Outcome:
• identify optimal temperature
• best single sharp band
• highest yield with specificity

🔹𝗙𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗹𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽

• primer length (longer → higher Tm)
• GC content (higher GC → higher Tm)
• salt concentration
• mismatches in primer

𝗔𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗯𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆—𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝗻-𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰 𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗼𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿.

20/05/2026

Flaming your inoculating loop 🧫🔬
❌ Incorrect: Only heating the loop tip. This leaves the wire unsterilized and risks contamination.
✔️ Correct: Pass the entire loop and wire through the Bunsen burner flame (at a 20° angle) or insert it fully into a micro-incinerator until red-hot.
💡 Modern Labs Note: If your lab has transitioned away from open flames, make sure to use disposable plastic loops properly without reusing, or ensure full insertion depth when using an infrared micro-incinerator to achieve the same total sterilization.
Don’t forget to let reusable loops cool before touching your culture! 🧪

11/05/2026

Happy Birthday, Ma'am Lory! 🥳

Happy Birthday to PRISM's Financial Analyst, 𝗠𝗮'𝗮𝗺 𝗟𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗹𝘆𝗻 𝗣. 𝗔𝗺𝗯𝗼𝘀, 𝗟𝗣𝗧 🎉

We extend our warmest greetings as we celebrate your special day today! From handling multiple paperwork to carefully managing and calculating budgets, you are always the person we rely on whenever things become challenging or confusing. We sincerely appreciate you being part of the MMCC team. Your work has greatly contributed to the smooth implementation and success of the project.

Your dedication, patience, and willingness to help do not go unnoticed, and we are truly grateful for all your support and guidance.

On your special day, we wish you good health, happiness, and continued success. May your birthday be filled with joy and appreciation. 🥳✨

06/05/2026

𝘌𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘪 on MacConkey Agar (MCA) 🧫

30/04/2026

𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗗 𝗖𝗢𝗣𝗖 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗺𝘀 𝗘𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗠𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴
🗓️𝗔𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗹 𝟮𝟮, 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲

A huge congratulations to the MSU-IIT Department of Biological Sciences (DBS) for the successful CHED COPC Evaluation and Monitoring of its graduate programs, led by the program coordinators Dr. Mylah V. Tabelin (PhD Biology Program Coordinator) and Prof. Mark Anthony I. Jose (MS Biology Program Coordinator).

PRISM Biology laboratories, including the Center for Microbial Genomics and Proteomics Innovation (CMGPI), were visited by CHED evaluators Engr. Rey M. Lagrada, Dr. Reynaldo L. Garcia, Dr. John Donnie A. Ramos, and Mr. John Paul Dela Cruz.

This milestone reflects the department’s continued dedication to quality graduate education, research excellence, and institutional development. 🔬