Team:ULB-Brussels/Project/WetLab
From 2014.igem.org
m |
|||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
<p>Alkaline phosphatase (phoA) is a periplasmic enzyme whose activity is easily detectable, even at low level, on chromogenic substrate (XP-medium (5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate)). It is usually used to study protein secretion, but we will use it as a molecular marker for the activity of the 2A peptide. If phoA is correctly synthetized and exported in the periplasm, the substrate acquires a characteristic blue color. (Hoffman and Wright 1985; van Geest and Lolkema 2000) | <p>Alkaline phosphatase (phoA) is a periplasmic enzyme whose activity is easily detectable, even at low level, on chromogenic substrate (XP-medium (5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate)). It is usually used to study protein secretion, but we will use it as a molecular marker for the activity of the 2A peptide. If phoA is correctly synthetized and exported in the periplasm, the substrate acquires a characteristic blue color. (Hoffman and Wright 1985; van Geest and Lolkema 2000) | ||
<p>In order to assess the efficacity of the 2A peptid, we need to design a plasmid containing 2 molecular markers (the red fluorescent protein (RFP) and phoA separated by a 2A peptide (RFP::2A::phoA). After cloning this plasmid in bacteria lacking the phoA gene in their genome (those bacteria were obtained from E.coli Keio Knockout collection) and after growth on chromogenic and selective XP-medium, we should be able to observe 4 types of results: <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ | <p>In order to assess the efficacity of the 2A peptid, we need to design a plasmid containing 2 molecular markers (the red fluorescent protein (RFP) and phoA separated by a 2A peptide (RFP::2A::phoA). After cloning this plasmid in bacteria lacking the phoA gene in their genome (those bacteria were obtained from E.coli Keio Knockout collection) and after growth on chromogenic and selective XP-medium, we should be able to observe 4 types of results: <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ | ||
- | 1. Colourless colonies and medium <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ | + | 1. Colourless colonies and blue medium <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ |
- | 2. | + | 2. Colourless colonies and colourless medium <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ |
- | 3. | + | 3. Red colonies and blue medium <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ |
- | 4. Red colonies and | + | 4. Red colonies and colourless medium.</p> |
<p>The only interesting case is the third because the PI is functional and the rapporteur protein is active. However, some checks must be made. In fact, two different control groups will be needed for this experiment.</p> | <p>The only interesting case is the third because the PI is functional and the rapporteur protein is active. However, some checks must be made. In fact, two different control groups will be needed for this experiment.</p> | ||
The first control will be colonies expressing the construction RFP::phoA, which should confirm that phoA are not active when 2A is not functional. Therefore, we can observe blue medium only when there is cleavage of the peptide 2A.</p> | The first control will be colonies expressing the construction RFP::phoA, which should confirm that phoA are not active when 2A is not functional. Therefore, we can observe blue medium only when there is cleavage of the peptide 2A.</p> | ||
Line 83: | Line 83: | ||
2. Colourless colonies <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ | 2. Colourless colonies <br>$\hspace{0.25cm}$ | ||
3. No colonies.</p> | 3. No colonies.</p> | ||
- | <p>In the | + | <p>In the 1$^{st}$ case, the 2A peptide would not have allowed the translation of the downstream protein (ccdB) but the upstream protein (RFP) would be correctly translated. In 2$^{nd}$ case, the translational cleavage would do not have occured, resulting in the fusion of RFP and ccdB and in their respective inhibition. In the 3$^{rd}$ case, the translational cleavage would have occurred and ccdB would have been correctly translated, resulting in the cell death. |
<p>The control group of this experiment is a plate of bacteria possessing a RFP::ccdB recombinant plasmid. It is necessary to verify that the toxin is no functional when the protein is fusionned with RFP. The protein become functional only after the cleavage of the 2A peptide allowing a negative selection.</p> | <p>The control group of this experiment is a plate of bacteria possessing a RFP::ccdB recombinant plasmid. It is necessary to verify that the toxin is no functional when the protein is fusionned with RFP. The protein become functional only after the cleavage of the 2A peptide allowing a negative selection.</p> | ||
Line 102: | Line 102: | ||
<p>It will be done by the construction of a insert linking the P2A to two molecular markers: GFP and RFP (GFP::P2A::RFP). After ligation, electroporation and growth on selective medium, we will thus be able to measure by spectrophotometry the GFP/RFP ratio as well as the production rate of both proteins, which should be a good indicator of those same data in Mighty Coli.</p> | <p>It will be done by the construction of a insert linking the P2A to two molecular markers: GFP and RFP (GFP::P2A::RFP). After ligation, electroporation and growth on selective medium, we will thus be able to measure by spectrophotometry the GFP/RFP ratio as well as the production rate of both proteins, which should be a good indicator of those same data in Mighty Coli.</p> | ||
- | <h2> B. Characterization of the Mighty coli system in S. cerevisiae </h2> | + | <h2> B. Characterization of the Mighty coli system in S.cerevisiae </h2> |
<h3> 1. Analysis of the improvement in the quantity of the product</h3> | <h3> 1. Analysis of the improvement in the quantity of the product</h3> | ||
Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
<!-- Needs to complete the Biobricks page ! --> | <!-- Needs to complete the Biobricks page ! --> | ||
<p>In order to complete our project, we will need to build 11 recombinant plasmids (6 in $\EColi$, 5 in $\SCere$). Each chassis consists in an independent project, which should enable us to complete at least one of them at the end of the summer. </p> | <p>In order to complete our project, we will need to build 11 recombinant plasmids (6 in $\EColi$, 5 in $\SCere$). Each chassis consists in an independent project, which should enable us to complete at least one of them at the end of the summer. </p> | ||
+ | |||
<!-- Table 1 to end --> | <!-- Table 1 to end --> | ||
+ | <center> | ||
+ | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/7/78/ULB-Brussels_Construction-summary.jpg"> | ||
+ | </center> | ||
+ | <section style="margin: -25px"></section> | ||
+ | <section style="margin: 25px"> | ||
+ | <br/><font size="1"><b>Figure 1 </b>$:\hspace{0.16cm}$ Constructions summary.</font> | ||
+ | |||
<p>At the end of our project, we should have sent at least 7 biobricks, and maybe more if the screening of the different 2A peptides is positive. </p> | <p>At the end of our project, we should have sent at least 7 biobricks, and maybe more if the screening of the different 2A peptides is positive. </p> | ||
+ | |||
<!-- + Table 2 - same size --> | <!-- + Table 2 - same size --> | ||
+ | <center> | ||
+ | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/3/36/ULB-Brussels_Biobrick-summary.jpg"> | ||
+ | </center> | ||
+ | <section style="margin: -25px"></section> | ||
+ | <section style="margin: 25px"> | ||
+ | <br/><font size="1"><b>Figure 1 </b>$:\hspace{0.16cm}$ Biobricks summary.</font> | ||
</section> | </section> |
Revision as of 20:06, 10 October 2014
$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \newcommand{\MyColi}{{\small Mighty\hspace{0.12cm}Coli}} \newcommand{\Stabi}{\small Stabi}$ $\newcommand{\EColi}{\small E.coli} \newcommand{\SCere}{\small S.cerevisae}\\[0cm] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \newcommand{\PI}{\small PI}$ $\newcommand{\Igo}{\Large\mathcal{I}} \newcommand{\Tgo}{\Large\mathcal{T}} \newcommand{\Ogo}{\Large\mathcal{O}} ~$
|
---|