Team:UChicago/Project

From 2014.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 152: Line 152:
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>G619D</td>
<td>G619D</td>
-
<td>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02855.x/full
+
<td><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.02855.x/full">[1]</a>
-
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1544/1177.full.pdf
+
<a href="http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1544/1177.full.pdf">[2]</a>
-
http://jb.asm.org/content/176/17/5393.full.pdf</td>
+
<a href="http://jb.asm.org/content/176/17/5393.full.pdf">[3]</a></td>
<tr>
<tr>
<td>MutM</td>
<td>MutM</td>
Line 162: Line 162:
-combining mutM and MutY seems to increase mutation rate 25-75X compared to either mutator alone (see paper)</td>
-combining mutM and MutY seems to increase mutation rate 25-75X compared to either mutator alone (see paper)</td>
<td>None found</td>
<td>None found</td>
-
<td>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC49637/pdf/pnas01089-0369.pdf</td>
+
<td><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC49637/pdf/pnas01089-0369.pdf">[1]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td><strong>emrR*</strong></td>
<td><strong>emrR*</strong></td>
Line 170: Line 170:
transversions + frameshift (tested +1G)</td>
transversions + frameshift (tested +1G)</td>
<td>NA (overexpression of wild-type gene sufficient)</td>
<td>NA (overexpression of wild-type gene sufficient)</td>
-
<td>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04125.x/full</td>
+
<td><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04125.x/full">[1]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td><strong>Dam*</strong></td>
<td><strong>Dam*</strong></td>
Line 177: Line 177:
<td>Transversions</td>
<td>Transversions</td>
<td>NA (overexpression of wild-type gene sufficient)</td>
<td>NA (overexpression of wild-type gene sufficient)</td>
-
<td>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04125.x/full</td>
+
<td><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04125.x/full">[1]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td>bglY-mutant (bglY-galU region)</td>
<td>bglY-mutant (bglY-galU region)</td>
Line 184: Line 184:
<td>Unknown</td>
<td>Unknown</td>
<td>None found</td>
<td>None found</td>
-
<td>http://www.pnas.org/content/87/1/360.full.pdf</td>
+
<td><a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/87/1/360.full.pdf">[1]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td><strong>MutL*</strong></td>
<td><strong>MutL*</strong></td>
Line 192: Line 192:
<td>Unknown</td>
<td>Unknown</td>
<td>E32K</td>
<td>E32K</td>
-
<td>http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/E2774
+
<td><a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/E2774">[1]</a>
-
http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/13/2498.long
+
<a href="http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/13/2498.long">[2]</a>
-
http://www.jbc.org/content/275/13/9863.full</td>
+
<a href="http://www.jbc.org/content/275/13/9863.full">[3]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td><strong>DinB*</strong></td>
<td><strong>DinB*</strong></td>
Line 204: Line 204:
SImple overexpression is also possibly mutagenic</td>
SImple overexpression is also possibly mutagenic</td>
<td>
<td>
-
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v439/n7073/pdf/nature04318.pdf
+
<a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v439/n7073/pdf/nature04318.pdf">[1]</a>
-
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04125.x/full</td>
+
<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04125.x/full">[2]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td><strong>Umu2D’C*</strong></td>
<td><strong>Umu2D’C*</strong></td>
Line 213: Line 213:
<td>Y11A
<td>Y11A
Simple overexpression is also possibly mutagenic</td>
Simple overexpression is also possibly mutagenic</td>
-
<td>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2715726/</td>
+
<td><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2715726/">[1]</a></td>
</tr><tr>
</tr><tr>
<td><strong>MutH*</strong></td>
<td><strong>MutH*</strong></td>
Line 220: Line 220:
<td>GC to AT, AT to GC, Frameshifts</td>
<td>GC to AT, AT to GC, Frameshifts</td>
<td>MutH: E56A</td>
<td>MutH: E56A</td>
-
<td>http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/~smaloy/MicrobialGenetics/topics/mutations/mutator-genes.html
+
<td><a href="http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/~smaloy/MicrobialGenetics/topics/mutations/mutator-genes.html">[1]</a>
-
http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/01/11/nar.gkr1298.full</td>
+
<a href="http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/01/11/nar.gkr1298.full">[2]</a></td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr>
 +
<td>IS transposable elements</td>
 +
<td>More old-school transposons, generally exert effect by altering expression by insertion in promoter regions
 +
-May also vary the number of IS elements introduced</td>
 +
<td>~10X compared to wild type</td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td><a href="http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3457772&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract">[1]</a></td>
 +
</tr><tr>
 +
<td>Mini transposons</td>
 +
<td>Mini-Mu, Mini D-108, mini-Tn5, mini-Tn7 Could test 1-2 of these.</td>
 +
<td>Variable</td>
 +
<td>Can induce larger-scale chromosome rearrangements</td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td><a href="http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3457772&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract">[1]</a></td>
 +
</tr><tr>
 +
<td><strong>DnaE*</strong></td>
 +
<td>alpha subunit of DNA polymerase 3</td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td>E612K</td>
 +
<td><a href="https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ggs/82/4/82_4_273/_pdf">[1]</a></td>
 +
</tr><tr>
 +
<td><strong>ParC*</strong></td>
 +
<td>subunit of topIV</td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td></td>
 +
<td>Y120H</td>
 +
<td><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2443.1996.d01-226.x/pdf">[1]</a></td>
 +
<tr></tr>
 +
<td><strong>MutY*</strong></td>
 +
<td>G-A mismatch DNA repair</td>
 +
<td>> 10^2</td>
 +
<td>GC to TA Transversions</td>
 +
<td>V45A</td>
 +
<td><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2714593/pdf/1471-2091-10-19.pdf">[1]</a></td>
</tr>
</tr>
</table>
</table>

Revision as of 21:42, 16 October 2014

Project Description

Content

Tell us more about your project. Give us background. Use this as the abstract of your project. Be descriptive but concise (1-2 paragraphs)

References

iGEM teams are encouraged to record references you use during the course of your research. They should be posted somewhere on your wiki so that judges and other visitors can see how you though about your project and what works inspired you.

You can use these subtopics to further explain your project

  1. Overall project summary
  2. Project Details
  3. Materials and Methods
  4. The Experiments
  5. Results
  6. Data analysis
  7. Conclusions

It's important for teams to describe all the creativity that goes into an iGEM project, along with all the great ideas your team will come up with over the course of your work.

It's also important to clearly describe your achievements so that judges will know what you tried to do and where you succeeded. Please write your project page such that what you achieved is easy to distinguish from what you attempted.

Introduction

Directed evolution is a fundamental technique in bioengineering organisms to express proteins of novel function and to mass produce industrially relevant biomolecules. Generally, directed evolution simulates an algorithmic process in which the entire sequence space is searched for an optimal genotype by increasing the natural mutation rate to artificially speed the process of selective evolution. Current methods of in vivo directed evolution typically rely on physical or chemical mutagens to accomplish stochastic genomic or plasmid mutagenesis. However, the extremely high and uncontrolled mutation rate often accumulates deleterious mutations nonspecific to the process of interest. This can result in a toxic effect to the organism, leading to suboptimal evolved levels of production.

A novel directed evolution system, termed feedback-regulated evolution of phenotype (FREP) (citation http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24131951), incorporates a dynamic mutation rate to overcome the existing problems of directed evolution by mimicking the plasticity of the mutation rate in natural evolution. This is achieved through dynamic control of a mutator element that is negatively regulated by the desired end product. In this feedback scheme, as more of the desired biomolecule is produced, the rate of mutation decreases and eventually approaches zero, allowing evolution and maintenance of a high level of production while minimizing the accumulation of toxic, nonspecific mutations.

Additionally, many directed evolution systems that incorporate mutator genes often rely on the strongest known mutator, MutD. However, the use of MutD alone in these systems is problematic because like all other individual mutator genes, it may only catalyze certain types of base pair substitutions reflective of its “mutational bias”, limiting the search of sequence space. Diversifying the mutator genes to eliminate mutational bias should increase the efficiency by which the sequence space can be searched. Ultimately, the addition of multiple mutators should lead to higher overall levels of evolved production. Despite a very few number of past studies to incorporate multiple mutators, these efforts have failed to show an increased efficiency of evolution. They fail to encompass a systematic screen of all mutators identified in literature, which would be required for determination of the ideal combination of mutators. In general, there is a surprising lack of studies on the use of different combinations of mutators in directed evolution.

The 2014 UChicago iGEM team has two main goals. The first goal is to implement and optimize FREP in E. coli by evolving mutants with elevated production of a given biomolecule, specifically evolving tyrosine production as a relatively simple pathway to demonstrate proof of concept. The mutator element will be controlled by the tyrosine-sensitive repressible promoter ParoF, suppressing the mutation rate as the tyrosine production of the cell increases. The mutator gene is linked to a fluorescent reporter gene which allows for convenient screening of desired phenotype, as bacteria with low levels of fluorescence should also have the highest levels of production due to the negative feedback loop. The second goal is to enable a deeper exploration in the search space by combining multiple mutators with different biases to increase the initial mutation rate and speed the accumulation of beneficial mutations. We have identified previously characterized mutator genes that function in a diversity of pathways, including polymerases, proofreading enzymes, methylases and topoisomerases. We will characterize the mutation rates of these mutator genes in their active dominant negative forms individually as well as in various combinations, aiming to determine the ideal combination for directed evolution. We hope to introduce this ideal combination of mutators into the FREP system and demonstrate increased levels of evolved tyrosine production compared to the single mutator. If successful, our project should significantly improve the process of directed evolution of any biomolecule of industrial importance.

Mutator Constructs

In order to work towards our goal of finding the ideal multiple mutator gene combination for FREP, we first researched a variety of genes that when overexpressed, had been previously documented in literature to increase the mutation rate. Because of the manner in which FREP is specifically set up, dynamic control can only be achieved in a gene that increases mutation rate when overexpressed (as opposed to mutators that cause an increase in mutation rate from knockdown or full deletion for instance). Since most of the mutator genes we used had little effect from simple overexpression, we instead relied on mutation dominant negative versions of these genes that are documented to cause high increases in mutation rate when expressed in cells. These mutator genes are involved in a variety of pathways, and include polymerase subunits, DNA repair enzymes, and transposable elements. We also kept in mind the various mutational biases of the various mutators we were interested in. The table below lists all various types of mutators that we researched, as well as the point mutations needed to create the active dominant negative genes when necessary.; bolded mutators with an asterisk (*) are the actual mutators we ended up attempting to PCR from the wild-type E. Coli genome. (citation http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966842X98014243)

Mutators Studied

Mutator gene Mechanism (pathway) Mutation rate (estimate) If available, relative to wild type? Bias Point Mutations (when necessary) References
MutD* mutD (dnaQ) gene product controls the editing capacity of pol III (a proofreading DNA exonuclease) mutD5 mutation leads to a reduction in mismatch repair 10^3-10^4 errors per base pair per cell per generation Editing efficiency: WT 0.059 mutD 0.012 Mutation rate 10^5 higher than WT Affects all bases, effect limited by temperature and richness of medium (works better in less rich media) Mostly transversions MutD51: L73W This looks stronger than the real MutD5, which has a second suppressor mutation (below). We may want to do both though since it’s really not that much more work. MutD52: A164V [1] [2] [3] [4]
MutT Nucleoside triphosphatase Works by reducing the 8-oxo-dGTP level in the cell through hydrolysis to 8-oxo-dGMP 10^3-10^4 errors per base pair per cell per generation AT to CG Transversions mutT excludes A-G mismatches where the adenine resides on the template DNA strand. None found Link to various journal articles
MutS* Primarily recognizes base mismatch sites, works with MutL, MutH to repair mismatch sites (MutS-1, at least). Seems to detect changes in adjacent base pairs truncated form of the DNA mismatch repair protein 2.5 ± 2.0 × 10^–6 (?) G619D [1] [2] [3]
MutM removes 8-oxoG residues from DNA by DNA glycosylase activity > 10^2 GC to TA Transversions -combining mutM and MutY seems to increase mutation rate 25-75X compared to either mutator alone (see paper) None found [1]
emrR* involved in multidrug resistance, transcription regulator 2.8 * 10^-4 //// 2.8 * 20^4 AT->GC preferred transversions + frameshift (tested +1G) NA (overexpression of wild-type gene sufficient) [1]
Dam* involved in methylating DNA 6.4 * 10^-4 /// 6.4 * 10^4 Transversions NA (overexpression of wild-type gene sufficient) [1]
bglY-mutant (bglY-galU region) deletions, recessive, negative supercoiling? 2 to 10^2 Unknown None found [1]
MutL* Along with MutS and MutH, initiates repair cascade by recognizing base mismatches/indels of up to 4 bp (dam-directed mismatch repair) 2.75*10^-8 bp/generation 138 X wild type Unknown E32K [1] [2] [3]
DinB* Error-prone DNA polymerase DinB, mutagenesis error-prone polymerase IV NA increase in frameshift and base substitution F13V SImple overexpression is also possibly mutagenic [1] [2]
Umu2D’C* DNA checkpoint effector, encodes pol V NA hypersensitivity to UV light damage in mutants Y11A Simple overexpression is also possibly mutagenic [1]
MutH* Mismatch repair,nvolved in the same pathway as MutS and MutH 10^2-10^3 GC to AT, AT to GC, Frameshifts MutH: E56A [1] [2]
IS transposable elements More old-school transposons, generally exert effect by altering expression by insertion in promoter regions -May also vary the number of IS elements introduced ~10X compared to wild type [1]
Mini transposons Mini-Mu, Mini D-108, mini-Tn5, mini-Tn7 Could test 1-2 of these. Variable Can induce larger-scale chromosome rearrangements [1]
DnaE* alpha subunit of DNA polymerase 3 E612K [1]
ParC* subunit of topIV Y120H [1]
MutY* G-A mismatch DNA repair > 10^2 GC to TA Transversions V45A [1]