Team:Yale/Project
From 2014.igem.org
Line 207: | Line 207: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
<div class = "well"> | <div class = "well"> | ||
- | <ol type="1"><li><strong>Background: Genomically | + | <ol type="1"><li><strong>Background: Genomically Recoded E. coli</strong><p> |
Whole-genome recoding was reported for the first time in 2011 by a team including our advisor, Professor Farren Isaacs, when it described replacing all TAG codons in E. coli by TAA. <sup>9</sup> Both TAG and TAA are stop codons (amber and ochre), but their transcripts are bound by different release factors (RF1 binds UAG and UAA, whereas RF2 binds UAA and UGA), not only making this recoding nonlethal but also allowing the deletion of RF1 (ΔprfA) from the recoded strain, given RF2’s response to both remaining stop codons. <p> | Whole-genome recoding was reported for the first time in 2011 by a team including our advisor, Professor Farren Isaacs, when it described replacing all TAG codons in E. coli by TAA. <sup>9</sup> Both TAG and TAA are stop codons (amber and ochre), but their transcripts are bound by different release factors (RF1 binds UAG and UAA, whereas RF2 binds UAA and UGA), not only making this recoding nonlethal but also allowing the deletion of RF1 (ΔprfA) from the recoded strain, given RF2’s response to both remaining stop codons. <p> | ||
This genome-wide recoding was enabled by lambda-Red recombineering<sup>10</sup> and multiplex automated genome engineering. <sup>11</sup> λ-Red recombineering uses the lambda prophage’s protein Beta to mediate the homologous recombination of an exogenous single-stranded oligonucleotide, delivered into the cell by electroporation, with the host genome, by annealing that oligonucleotide to single-stranded genomic DNA exposed on the lagging strand of the replication fork. <sup>12</sup> A 30-bp region of homology at either end of a sequence is sufficient to drive recombination of the entire strand, including mismatched regions, and mismatches thus incorporated are passed to progeny at high efficiency (up to 30%) in strains lacking methyl-directed mismatch repair (ΔmutS).<sup>13</sup> <p> | This genome-wide recoding was enabled by lambda-Red recombineering<sup>10</sup> and multiplex automated genome engineering. <sup>11</sup> λ-Red recombineering uses the lambda prophage’s protein Beta to mediate the homologous recombination of an exogenous single-stranded oligonucleotide, delivered into the cell by electroporation, with the host genome, by annealing that oligonucleotide to single-stranded genomic DNA exposed on the lagging strand of the replication fork. <sup>12</sup> A 30-bp region of homology at either end of a sequence is sufficient to drive recombination of the entire strand, including mismatched regions, and mismatches thus incorporated are passed to progeny at high efficiency (up to 30%) in strains lacking methyl-directed mismatch repair (ΔmutS).<sup>13</sup> <p> | ||
Multiplex automated genome engineering (MAGE) using lambda-Red recombineering can then make many directed mutations across the host genome, as was necessary to replace all 314 TAG codons in the strain EcNR2 (E. coli MG1655 ΔmutS::cat Δ(ybhB-bioAB)::[λcI857 Δ(cro-ea59)::tetR-bla]).<sup>9</sup> To allow recombineering, the lambda prophage was introduced into the host genome by P1 transduction. Because the probability of each target sequence being mutated in a given cycle is at most 30%, attempting to introduce all 314 mutations using a single pool of 314 mutagenic oligonucleotides would much sooner generate any of ~2314 other partially recoded strains before the fully recoded strain, and running enough MAGE cycles to obtain that strain would allow time for spontaneous point mutations to accumulate unchecked by the knocked-out mismatch repair system. To construct the strain we will use, then, 32 separate strains were generated, each with a different recoded sector, and those sectors were assembled by hierarchical conjugation. The recoded strain was validated by sequencing, and its RF1 was deleted to free the TAG codon for reassignment to an orthogonal translation system.<sup>14</sup> <p><lu> | Multiplex automated genome engineering (MAGE) using lambda-Red recombineering can then make many directed mutations across the host genome, as was necessary to replace all 314 TAG codons in the strain EcNR2 (E. coli MG1655 ΔmutS::cat Δ(ybhB-bioAB)::[λcI857 Δ(cro-ea59)::tetR-bla]).<sup>9</sup> To allow recombineering, the lambda prophage was introduced into the host genome by P1 transduction. Because the probability of each target sequence being mutated in a given cycle is at most 30%, attempting to introduce all 314 mutations using a single pool of 314 mutagenic oligonucleotides would much sooner generate any of ~2314 other partially recoded strains before the fully recoded strain, and running enough MAGE cycles to obtain that strain would allow time for spontaneous point mutations to accumulate unchecked by the knocked-out mismatch repair system. To construct the strain we will use, then, 32 separate strains were generated, each with a different recoded sector, and those sectors were assembled by hierarchical conjugation. The recoded strain was validated by sequencing, and its RF1 was deleted to free the TAG codon for reassignment to an orthogonal translation system.<sup>14</sup> <p><lu> | ||
- | <li><strong>Background: Orthogonal | + | <li><strong>Background: Orthogonal Translation Systems</strong><p> |
An amino acid can be assigned to a particular codon by a two-part translation system: a tRNA with its anticodon loop complementary to the codon, and an aminoacyl synthetase (hereafter called a synthetase) able to charge this tRNA with the amino acid. This system is orthogonal to endogenous translation systems if and only if this synthetase aminoacylates only this tRNA and endogenous synthetases cannot aminoacylate this tRNA. Usually, an unnatural amino acid thus assigned should also be sufficiently dissimilar from naturally encoded amino acids that endogenous synthetases would not charge endogenous tRNAs with the unnatural amino acid, to avoid partially reassigning other codons and disrupting cell function.<sup>15</sup> <p> | An amino acid can be assigned to a particular codon by a two-part translation system: a tRNA with its anticodon loop complementary to the codon, and an aminoacyl synthetase (hereafter called a synthetase) able to charge this tRNA with the amino acid. This system is orthogonal to endogenous translation systems if and only if this synthetase aminoacylates only this tRNA and endogenous synthetases cannot aminoacylate this tRNA. Usually, an unnatural amino acid thus assigned should also be sufficiently dissimilar from naturally encoded amino acids that endogenous synthetases would not charge endogenous tRNAs with the unnatural amino acid, to avoid partially reassigning other codons and disrupting cell function.<sup>15</sup> <p> | ||
Many synthetases include a nonconserved loop specific to their associated tRNA’s anticodon, preventing them from binding a tRNA reassigned to CUA, but the archaeum Methanococcus jannaschii’s tyrosyl-tRNA synthetase and its associated tRNA translation system still bind after the anticodon is mutated, and are an amber suppressor when transformed into E. coli.<sup>16</sup> This MjtRNAs was still aminoacylated by endogenous synthetases, so its specificity for its synthetase was improved by random mutation at eleven positions not directly interacting with its synthetase, followed by negative selection against nonspecific acylation and positive selection for specific acylation. <sup>17</sup> | Many synthetases include a nonconserved loop specific to their associated tRNA’s anticodon, preventing them from binding a tRNA reassigned to CUA, but the archaeum Methanococcus jannaschii’s tyrosyl-tRNA synthetase and its associated tRNA translation system still bind after the anticodon is mutated, and are an amber suppressor when transformed into E. coli.<sup>16</sup> This MjtRNAs was still aminoacylated by endogenous synthetases, so its specificity for its synthetase was improved by random mutation at eleven positions not directly interacting with its synthetase, followed by negative selection against nonspecific acylation and positive selection for specific acylation. <sup>17</sup> | ||
Line 228: | Line 228: | ||
<center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/e/ed/T7_Diagram_For_Wiki.png"></center> | <center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/e/ed/T7_Diagram_For_Wiki.png"></center> | ||
<center> | <center> | ||
- | <i><strong>Figure X.</strong> This diagram illustrates the T7 riboregulation system developed to ensure low basal levels of protein expression.<sup>19</sup> </i></center><p> | + | <i><strong>Figure X.</strong> This diagram illustrates the T7 riboregulation system developed to ensure low basal levels of protein expression.<sup>19</sup> </i></center><p><p><br> |
<li><strong>Why Mussel Adhesion Proteins?</strong> | <li><strong>Why Mussel Adhesion Proteins?</strong> | ||
<p>The ability for mussels to survive the harsh conditions of the intertidal zone is directly related to their capability to bind to both organic and inorganic surfaces that they come in contact with. As a result, these mussels have evolved to secrete “adhesion proteins” that enable formation of powerful bonds in an otherwise deleterious aqueous environment. The quantity known as “work of adhesion (W<sub>A</sub>)” amongst interfaces in an aqueous environment is significantly less favorable due to the water-surface interactions that must be outcompeted by the adhesive if binding is to occur.<sup>10</sup> Therefore, these mussel adhesion proteins offer a promising avenue towards enhanced bioadhesives that retain functionality in aqueous environments. </p> | <p>The ability for mussels to survive the harsh conditions of the intertidal zone is directly related to their capability to bind to both organic and inorganic surfaces that they come in contact with. As a result, these mussels have evolved to secrete “adhesion proteins” that enable formation of powerful bonds in an otherwise deleterious aqueous environment. The quantity known as “work of adhesion (W<sub>A</sub>)” amongst interfaces in an aqueous environment is significantly less favorable due to the water-surface interactions that must be outcompeted by the adhesive if binding is to occur.<sup>10</sup> Therefore, these mussel adhesion proteins offer a promising avenue towards enhanced bioadhesives that retain functionality in aqueous environments. </p> |
Revision as of 00:55, 18 October 2014
ampersand: an anti-microbial peptide coating |
|||||||||||
The ProblemA biofilm is a community of bacteria attached to a surface that exhibit high resistance to antibiotics and human immunity. Biofilm formation poses a serious threat to the medical and shipping industries in the following ways:
| |||||||||||
Our SolutionTo address this issue, we aimed to develop an anti-microbial adhesive peptide composed of two components. We envision these domains can be modulated to suit a variety of functional adhesive applications:
|
|||||||||||
Project Goals
|
|||||||||||
How it Works
|
|||||||||||
Materials and Methods | |||||||||||
Results
| |||||||||||
References
|