"
Team:Uppsala
From 2014.igem.org
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
<div id="right_content_invert"> | <div id="right_content_invert"> | ||
| - | <h2>Killing Result</h2> | + | <h2 class="border_h2">Killing Result</h2> |
<p>bla bla <br> | <p>bla bla <br> | ||
| Line 92: | Line 92: | ||
<div id="right_content"> | <div id="right_content"> | ||
| - | <h2>Sensing Result</h2> | + | <h2 class="border_h2">Sensing Result</h2> |
<p>bla bla <br> | <p>bla bla <br> | ||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
<div id="right_content_invert"> | <div id="right_content_invert"> | ||
| - | <h2>Targeting Result</h2> | + | <h2 class="border_h2">Targeting Result</h2> |
<p>The perpose of the targeting system is to ensure that our Bactissile will be as close to the pathogen as possible upon producing the killing bacteriocin. We chose to achieve this by controlling the Bactissiles chemotaxis through the protein CheZ. The targeting module is connected to the sensing module, which induces a lower production of CheZ when the Bactissile is closer to the pathogen, causing the Bactissile to stop. This way, we hoped to be able to control chemotaxis. | <p>The perpose of the targeting system is to ensure that our Bactissile will be as close to the pathogen as possible upon producing the killing bacteriocin. We chose to achieve this by controlling the Bactissiles chemotaxis through the protein CheZ. The targeting module is connected to the sensing module, which induces a lower production of CheZ when the Bactissile is closer to the pathogen, causing the Bactissile to stop. This way, we hoped to be able to control chemotaxis. | ||
Revision as of 19:46, 12 October 2014
Home
Bactissiles: The future of microbial combat
Destabilized ecosystems and disturbed gut floras are both consequences of treatments that lack selectivity. More efficient and precise methods are needed. This year we, the Uppsala iGEM team, tries to widen the view and find new possibilities with engineered bacteria. By developing a system that homes towards a target and secretes an affectant, we can ensure a specific outcome. Such a system could have applications in a number of different fields, though we have chosen to put this into practice in a pinpointing pathogen-killing approach. In our prototype system, introduced in E. coli , we hijack the quorum sensing system of the gut pathogen Yersinia enterocolitica . Our bacteria will be able to sense the presence of the pathogen, accumulate in its vicinity and emit a target-specific bacteriocin, leaving the remaining gut flora intact. The era of mass destruction is over. Welcome the missile bacteria, the Bactissile! .
Assembly Plan
Main Result
Killing Result
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
Sensing Result
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
bla bla
Targeting Result
The perpose of the targeting system is to ensure that our Bactissile will be as close to the pathogen as possible upon producing the killing bacteriocin. We chose to achieve this by controlling the Bactissiles chemotaxis through the protein CheZ. The targeting module is connected to the sensing module, which induces a lower production of CheZ when the Bactissile is closer to the pathogen, causing the Bactissile to stop. This way, we hoped to be able to control chemotaxis.
After successfully assembling a promoter, an rbs and cheZ, we did manage to restore chemotaxis in one test by inserting this construct in a cheZ knock-out. However, since this only happened in one isolated instance, this is not evidence enough to prove the success of our construct, however it does indicate that through more rigorous and consisted testing more reliable results could be obtained. We therefore consider to have proved that our system could work, although at this moment we don’t have any definitive proof.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
