Team:EPF Lausanne/Notebook/Bacteria
From 2014.igem.org
Split IFP & GFP - Week 1
2014-07-07Split IFP & GFP - Week 1
1 CPXR extraction
Extraction of CPXR from genome of E. Coli strain K-12 MG1655
1.1 Material and methods
NEB Phusion HF PCR Protocol (see protocol), with corresponding primers (cf primers datasheet) for amplification.
1.2 Results
1.2.1 Data
1.2.2 Interpretation
CPXR expected size : 699 bp
Amplification of CPXR worked as expected.
2 PCR for amplification of iGEM plasmid pSB1C3 and for addition of overlapps to CPXR
Amplification of pSB1C1 backbone from Cambridge biobrick K325219. This backbone contains the RBS, an arabinose-inducible pBAD promoter, iGEM prefix (containing ECORI and xbaI restriction sites) and suffix (contaning SpeI and PstI restriction sites), a chloramphenicol resistance gene, and an origin of replicaiton. Additon of overlapp to CPXR in order to make a Gisbon assembly of the backbone and the CPXR
2.1 Material and methods
NEB Phusion PCR and suitable primers.
2.2 Results
2.2.1 Data
2.2.2 Interpretation
We obtained the expected amplicon, and are now able to make a Gibson assembly to fuse the backbone amplicon and the CPXR.
Split IFP & GFP - Week 2
2014-07-13
1 Gibson assembly and colony PCR of pCPXR
Fusion of pSB1C3 backbone and CPXR
1.1 Material and methods
Gibson assembly kit (see protocol) for the Gibson assembly, and Taq polymerase for colony PCR (see protocol)
1.2 Results
1.2.1 Data
Colonies were obtained and analyzed by colony PCR, using VF2 and VR primers from iGEM
1.2.2 Interpretation
The amplicons have the expected size, meaning the Gibson assmbly worked and that we very likely obtained pCPXR (plasmid with pSB1C3 backbone and CPXR). Sequencing will reveal if the plasmid contain any mutation.
2 Sequencing of pCPXR
Confirmation of pCPXR sequence with Microsynth sequencing services.
2.1 Material and methods
We sent the plasmid with a concentration of 80 ng/μl and with premixed primers VR and VF2
2.2 Results
2.2.1 Data
We obtained the right sequence, excepted one deletion of a cytosine in the ara promoter at the position -41. This deletion appeared to be originally in the backbone pSB1C1 that we amplified from Cambridge biobrick K325219, without consequence on the transcription of the coding sequence.
3 Amplification of IFP1, IFP2 and pCPXR with suitable overlaps to fuse the split at the C or N terminal of CPXR
PCR amplification of fragments to fuse IFP1 and IFP2 at the C or N terminal of CPXR in pCPXR plasmid
3.1 Material and methods
NEB Phusion kit (see protocol) and suitable primers (see list). Template come from Michnick lab IFP PCA.
3.2 Results
3.2.1 Data
3.2.2 Interpretation
IFP1 C didn't work but the other ones have the expected size. We are going to try again IFP1 C in a gradient PCR
4 PCR gradient to obtain IFP1 C fragment
Amplification of IFP1 with overlap in order to insert it in pCPXR at the C terminal of CPXR
4.1 Material and methods
Gradient temperature was performed as the PCR didn’t work the first time. NEB Phusion kit, same procedure as last time
4.2 Results
4.2.1 Data
4.2.2 Interpretation
We finally obtain the amplicon, for each temperature.
CheY CheZ - Week 2
2014-07-13Experiment 1: Transformation
Transform competent cells with plasmids recovered from Michnick’s and Waldor’s labs
1.1 Material and methods
14/07/14
Preparation of SOC: 3 x (20µl of glucose 20mM in 1ml SOB)
Transformation Protocol from iGEM HQ with 1 uL DNA in each Ependorf
Ependorf number |
Content |
Comments |
1, 2 |
pYNZC (34.8 ng/uL) |
Waldor, CamR |
3, 4 |
prLucNrLucC (33 ng/uL) |
Waldor, CamR |
5, 6 |
prLuc (30 ng/uL) |
Waldor, CamR |
7, 8 |
pAG25-L-IFP [1] |
Michnick, AmpR |
9, 10 |
pAG32-L-IFP [2] |
Michnick, AmpR |
11, 12 |
10pg/ul RFP Control (pSB1A3 w/ BBa_J04450) |
AmpR |
Incubation times: 2h shaking at 37°C / 180 rpm and 2h resting on ice.
Plates set for incubation overnight at 37°C
15/07/14
Inoculated cultures in LB Chloramphenicol or Ampicillin (3ml)
Tubes left in the fridge all day
Incubation overnight at 37°C / 180 rpm
16/07/14
OD measurement
1.2 Results
1.2.1 Data
OD: 1. pYZNC A: 2.046
2. pYZNC B: 2.033
3. prLucNrLucC A: failed (overcrowded plate)
4. prLucNrLucC B: 2.072
5. prLuc A: 2.028
6. prLuc B: 2.055
7. pIFP 1 A: 1.950
8. pIFP 1 B: 1.953
9. pIFP 2 A: 1.954
10. pIFP 2 B :1.948
1.2.2 Interpretation
Tube 3 discarded, others used for miniprep and glycerol stock preparation
Experiment 2: Bioluminescence assay
Make a bioluminescence assay with the previously prepared cultures
2.1Material and methods
17.07.14:
Overnight cultures (3ml LB + chloramphenicol) inoculated with cells from a frozen glycerol stock from previously transformed competent cells (pYNZC A & B, prLucNrLucC B, prLuc A & B) were incubated at 37°C with shaking at 180 rpm). OD was measured the following day.
18.07.14:
The cultures were diluted 1:100 in 5mL fresh LB-Chloramphenicol containing 670ul of 100mM L-arabinose and grown for 3h on a rotary shaker to an OD 0.8-0.9. The cultures (500ul of each) were washed twice with phosphate buffered saline (PBS; pH 7), adjusted to an OD 0.4-0.5 (final volume of culture should be 1ml) and aliquoted into a white 96-well plates in triplicates.
Aliquots of native coelenterazine (clz) dissolved in ethanol (10mM) were stored at 80°C. Solution of glucose (30mM in bi-distilled water) were prepared and used at a concentration of 1mM. Prior to the assay, an aliquot of clz was thawed, diluted in PBS to a final concentration of 250uM, and incubated in the dark at room temperature (RT) for 1h. Clz was added to a final concentration of 7.5uM to the PBS-washed cells, which were subsequently incubated in the dark for 30 minutes at RT. The total luminescence of each well was then measured every two minute for a total of 10 min with an integration time of 1 sec using (WHICH MACHINE??). Immediatly thereafter, 10 ul of glucose solution was manually injected into each well and a second luminescence read was initiated as before.
2.2Results
2.2.1Data
2.2.2Interpretation
The measurements were taken too late. The substrate (clz) already started to be depleted. The positive control gave a very strong signal at the beginning, while the negative control gave a small or no signal. The construct itself gave a signal higher than the negative control but much lower than the negative control, meaning that the construct works but isn't optimal. The effect of the addition of glucose after 10 minutes can't be determined precisely. As there was no more clz in the wells after 6-7 minutes, the shut down of the luminescence observed in the construct wasn't necessarily due to glucose addition, as exprected. We cannot conclude on this experiment. We should start again and take measurements faster.
Competent cells
2014-07-2007.07.14-13.07.14
Competent Cells
Protocol : Thermocompetent cells protocol
First try – Not much care, all resulting tubes were thrown away
Second try – Lesser volume, more care to cold, poured liquid nitrogen right into box for freezing.
Results : Tests seem to indicate that our method for transformation was simply not adapted to our competent cell protocol. We do not have the appropriate sterile cold room to produce high efficiency competent cells. Therefore, for biobricks and gibson assemblies, we need to use commercial competent cells. For transformations with plasmid constructs where the concentration is in the scale of 1 ng/ul or more our competent cells are usable.
Split IFP & GFP - Week 3
2014-07-21
1 Gibson assembly and colony PCR for IFP2-pCPXR (at the C and N terminal)
Assembly of IFP2 at the C ter or N ter of CPXR in pCPXR by Gibson assembly. Colony PCR is useful to check if competent cells were transformed by our expected Gibson Assembly product and not by the empty plasmid pCPXR.
We did the GA with PCR product of pCPXR opened with corresponding primers and amplified insert, but we didn’t get rid of the pCPXR DNA template so competent cells may have been transformed with empty vectors thus acquiring chloramphenicol resistance. This is why we obtained so many negative colonies. DPN1 digestion of our PCR product would have removed the plasmids template.
1.1 Material and methods
We used VR ans VF2 sequencing primers.
- pick a colony and pouf pouf in 10ul tubes of water. Directly put the tip in 3ml of LB with chloramphenicol in culture tubes and put at 37°.
- Boil the 10ul tubes of water containing the picked bacteria at 95° for 10 minutes. It will be your « DNA template ».
- Prepare the PCR mix for Taq polymerase, with 1ul of DNA template (NEB Taq protocol)
1.2 Results
1.2.1 Data
We also loaded PCR product of pCPXR "opened" as negative control, in order to compare the size of our GA product and pCPXR and see if it contains the IFP2. Colonies that are thought to contain the insert IFP2 are:
- IFP2 C terminal: 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12
- IFP2 N terminal: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12
1.2.2 Interpretation
By observing the difference of size between the negative control (PCR of pCPXR that doesn’t contain the insert) and the colony PCR fragment, we see that we obtained some colonies containing empty vectors and some that contains very likely IFP2 insert. Further anlyisis and sequencing will confirm it.
2 PCR amplification of IFP2 in the plasmid thought to contain IFP2
Amplification of IFP2 from IFP2-pCPXR plasmid, to confirm that our GA product contains the insert IFP2.
2.1 Material and methods
We used primers previously used to amplify and to add an overlap to IFP2 Cter and Nter respectively. As the « tail » of the primers were now annealing the plasmid, one could think that changing the Annealing temp was necessary but you can keep the same that you used the first time. Unfortunately some of the PCR tubes opend in the PCR machine so we couldn’t analyzed all of the plasmid.
2.2 Results
2.2.1 Data
2.2.2 Interpretation
All of the plasmids analysed contain the insert IFP2 and the size is correct (600 bp). Our GA worked, at least for the colonies that were analyzed on this gel. We are now ready for sequencing
3 Sequencing IFP2-pCPXR plasmid
To check if our GA products, pCPXR fused to IFP2 at its Cter or Nter don’t contain any mutation. We sent sample 9 for IFP2 Nter and sample 10 for C terminal.
3.1 Material and methods
Microsynth Barcode and a plasmid concentartion of 80 ng/ul
3.2 Results
3.2.1 Data
No mutation for IFP2 at the C terminal. One mutation in the RBS of IFP2 at the Nterminal, position -18 a A instead of a T. It shouldn't matter.
4 Colony PCR for IFP1-pCPXR (at the C and N terminal)
Assembly of IFP1 at the C ter or N ter of CPXR in pCPXR by Gibson assembly. Colony PCR is useful to check if competent cells were transformed by our expected Gibson Assembly product and not by the empty plasmid pCPXR.
4.1 Material and methods
(See above for protocol)
WARNING : We should always do a negative control for the colony PCR with Bacteria transformed with the empty vectors, not a PCR of an empty plasmid. Otherwise you cannot make any conclusion if the colony PCR fails or if the Gibson Assembly fails. You can compare the colony PCR quality of an expected product (pCPXR) and colony PCR of your new Gibson Assembly.
4.2 Results
4.2.1 Data
In blue: IFP1 at the C terminal. In red: IFP2 at the N terminal
4.2.2 Interpretation
Colonies that are thought to contain IFP1:
- IFP1 at the C terminal: all
- IFP1 at the N terminal: 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
5 PCR amplification of IFP1 in IFP1-pCPXR plasmid (after mini-prep)
Colony PCR was not really conculsive so we decided to min-prep all the colonies and analyse the obtained plasmids.
5.1 Material and methods
IFP1 amplification of the obtained plasmid was done with primers previously used to add to IFP1 the overlapp (IFP1_Cter and IFP1_Nter). We used Taq polymerase.
5.2 Results
5.2.1 Data
IFP1 amplification from colonies supposed to have the plasmid pCPXR with IFP1 at its Nterminal.
Amplicon expected size is 463 bp, which correspond to our results. Colonie 5 apparently doesn’t have IFP1. “+” means that we amplified IFP1 from the plasmid known to contain this sequence. We also obtained a band at 850 bp for all the colonies that have the IFP1 fragment. Interestingly we also obtained this band in the positive control…
IFP1 amplification from colonies supposed to have the plasmid pCPXR with IFP1 at its Cterminal.
Expected size: 484 bp which correspond to our results.
5.2.2 Interpretation
We very likely contain pIFP1-CPXR and pCPXR-IFP1 and further sequencing will confirm it.
Split IFP & GFP - Week 4
2014-07-27
1 Restriction Analysis of IFP1 Cter and Nter
To check if the plasmid contains IFP1 in our Gibson Assembly product, by digesting the plasmid with NheI and SpeI and see if we obtain the expected sizes.
1.1 Material and methods
- 500 ng of DNA (plasmid)
- 0.5 ul of SpeI and 0.5 ul NheI (should be added at the end)
- 5 ul of cut smart buffer
- Add water to 50 ul
Incubate for one hour at 37°
Load on gel
1.2 Results
1.2.1 Data
Plasmid that have been digested in 2 fragments of size 1169 bp and 2773 bp contains a fragment, which is likely IFP1 (expected size). First gel reveals that all the plasmid supposed to contain IFP1 at the Cterminal of CPXR likely have IFP1. The second gel reveals that all colonies exept the 1st one likely contains IFP1 at the Nterminal. Further sequencing will confirm it.
2 IFP1 Cter and Nter sequencing
To check if the inserts IFP1 Cter and Nter, IFP2 Cter and Nter are present in the Gibson Assembly products (pCPXR fused by the insert below)
2.1 Material and methods
We will use the primer pBad For provided by mycrosynth (standard primer list) which will allow the sequencing from the end of the arabinose promoter. We will use also the VR primer to sequence Reverse from the suffix
- IFP1 Cter : 10 (90 ng/ul)
- IFP1 Nter : 9 (94 ng/ul)
2.2 Results
2.2.1 Data
- 9 IFP1 Nter : No deletion
- 10 IFP1 Cter : one deletion in the linker, doesn’t change the reading frame of IFP1
Expected sequence Our sequence
-
GGG TCC TCC GGA ---- TCC
Glycine Ser Ser Gylcine----Serine
2.2.2 Interpretation
3 Experiment 3: Title
../../.. - ../../..
Name of the experimenter
Purpose of the experiment
3.1 Material and methods
3.2 Results
3.2.1 Data
Conclusion
Split IFP & GFP - Week 5
2014-07-271 PCR of pCPXR-IFP1 and pCPXR-IFP2 to put both fragment in the same vector
To do a new plasmid containing our two fragments of interest, CPXR-IFP1 and CPXR-IFP2 into each configuration (IFP1 at the C or N terminal of CPXR and IFP2 at the C or Nterminal of CPXR) to avoid cotransformation during further experiment.
1.1 Material and methods
Phusion PCR with a temperature gradient as our two first trial failed completely. Gradient temperature was achieved from 60° to 70°, the theorical temperature being arount 70°. pCPXR-IFP2 will be entirely amplified and IFP1-CPXR fragment will be amplified by PCR with suitable overlapping ends for further Gibson assembly reaction.
1.2 Results
1.2.1 Data
Every template has been amplified 7 times, each with a different annealing temperature, respectively from the first amplicons : 70°, 69.5°, 68.4°, 66.4°, 64°, 62°, 60°
1.2.2 Interpretation
Not all the annealing temperature worked but we obtained one amplicon of each IFP1-CPXR, CPXR-IFP1, pCPXR-IFP2 opened, pIFP2-CPXR opened.
2 Gibson assembly to make 4 different constructs containing both IFP1-CPXR and IFP2-CPXR in different configuration and colony PCR
Fusion of the insert IFP1-CPXR (IFP1 at the C or N terminal of CPXR) in the plasmid containing IFP2-CPXR (IFP2 at the C or N terminal of CPXR), to have our four constructs:
GA1: IFP1 at the Cterminal of CPXR and IFP2 at the Cterminal of CPXR
GA2: IFP1 at the Cterminal of CPXR and IFP2 at the Nterminal of CPXR
GA3: IFP1 at the Nterminal of CPXR and IFP2 at the Cterminal of CPXR
GA4: IFP1 at the Nterminal of CPXR and IFP2 at the Nterminal of CPXR
2.1 Material and methods
NEB Gibson assembly kit and NEB Taq polymerase for the colony PCR with primers VR and VF2
2.2 Results
We didn’t obtain any colonies for GA1 and GA3, and only a few for GA2 and GA4. We picked 13 colonies of GA4 and 10 colonies for GA.
2.2.1 Data
- Colony PCR of GA4 with VF2 and VR primers. Expectation is about 4050 with both IFP1-CPXR and IFP2-CPXR, and of about 3000 without one of them.
- Colony PCR of GA2 with VF2 and VR primers. Expectations are the same.
2.2.2 Interpretation
We can’t conclude anything with this ladder, and the difference between our wanted product and one that doesn’t contain both fragment of interest is of 1000 bases so we can’t reaaly see it on the gel. Mini-prep has been done and restriciton analysis will allow us to conclude if the colonies contained the expected product.
3 Restriction enzyme analysis of GA2 and GA4
Digestion of our constructs GA2 (containing IFP1 at the Cter of CPXR and IFP2 at the Nter) and GA4 (containing IFP1 at the Nter and IFP2 at the Nter) with enzymes SpeI and NHeI to see if they contain the expected fragments.
3.1 Material and methods
NEB protocol for restriction enzyme digestion was applied and enzyme SpeI and NheI were used.
3.2 Results
3.2.1 Data
- Restriction analysis of
Expected with the insert: 3273 bp + 2539 bp
With only CPXR-IFP1: 1200 bp + 3273 bp
With only CPXR-IFP2: 1400 bp + 3273 bp
- Restriction analysis of
Conclusion
Arabinose promoter characterization
2014-08-12Experiment 1: Arabinose promoter characterization
1.1 Material and methods
Cells with sfGFP CpxR & CpxR sfGFP constructs were cultured in different concentrations of arabinose to check the functionality of the promoter. The concentration of arabinose per sample is indicated in Table 1.
Sample |
uM Ara |
uL Ara |
ml LB-chl |
tube 96-w |
|
A |
0 |
0 |
5 |
A |
1 |
B |
5 |
0.025 |
5 |
B |
2 |
C |
10 |
0.05 |
5 |
C |
3 |
D |
50 |
0.25 |
4.9998 |
D |
4 |
E |
100 |
0.5 |
4.9995 |
E |
5 |
F |
500 |
2.5 |
4.9975 |
F |
6 |
G |
1000 |
5 |
4.995 |
G |
7 |
H |
5000 |
25 |
4.975 |
H |
8 |
I |
10 000 |
50 |
4.95 |
I |
9 |
J |
50 000 |
250 |
4.75 |
J |
10 |
K |
100 000 |
500 |
4.5 |
K |
11 |
L |
500 000 |
2500 |
2.5 |
L |
12 |
+ |
0 |
0 |
5 |
+ |
|
- |
5000 |
25 |
4.975 |
- |
|
Table 1 - This table shows the concentration of Arabinose in each sample, as well as the quantity of medium and of Arabinose needed to reach it.
The negative control was the medium without cells, and the positive control was a sample of cells expressing sfGFP contitutively.
Procedure
Cells from glycerol stocks were grown in 3 mL LB selective medium (chloramphenicol) during 3h (37 ºC & shaking).
50 uL of cells were resuspended in a total volume of 5 mL of LB-chloramphenicol and Arabinose and incubated 5h at 37 ºC with shaking until an OD of ~1 was reached.
The samples were then washed twice with PBS to a final OD of 0.4 - 0.5.
Table 2 shows the quantity of PBS added to each sample (depending on the OD), as well as the OD after both PBS washes. This information is used to normalize the plate reader results.
tube 96-w |
OD N ter |
PBS N |
OD PBS |
OD C ter |
PBS C |
OD PBS |
tube 96-w |
||
A |
1 |
1.136 |
10.5 |
0.281 |
1.224 |
11 |
0.369 |
A |
1 |
B |
2 |
1.071 |
10 |
0.402 |
1.061 |
10 |
0.384 |
B |
2 |
C |
3 |
1.014 |
10 |
0.360 |
1.082 |
10 |
0.332 |
C |
3 |
D |
4 |
1.098 |
10 |
0.342 |
1.068 |
10 |
0.393 |
D |
4 |
E |
5 |
1.016 |
10 |
0.346 |
1.07 |
10 |
0.338 |
E |
5 |
F |
6 |
1.038 |
10 |
0.349 |
1.06 |
10 |
0.351 |
F |
6 |
G |
7 |
0.912 |
9.5 |
0.336 |
1.06 |
10 |
0.314 |
G |
7 |
H |
8 |
0.686 |
7 |
0.316 |
1.028 |
10 |
0.307 |
H |
8 |
I |
9 |
0.645 |
7 |
0.314 |
0.999 |
10 |
0.305 |
I |
9 |
J |
10 |
0.52 |
6 |
0.305 |
0.918 |
9.5 |
0.281 |
J |
10 |
K |
11 |
0.449 |
5 |
0.281 |
0.822 |
9 |
0.285 |
K |
11 |
L |
12 |
0.315 |
4 |
0.296 |
0.505 |
6 |
0.248 |
L |
12 |
+ |
|
1.117 |
10 |
0.283 |
- |
- |
- |
+ |
|
- |
|
0.005 |
10.5 |
|
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Table 2 - OD measurments of the samples can be seen, as well as the OD after the PBS washes.
Results
1.4.1 Data
https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/0/06/Sfgfpcpxr_gradient.jpg
Figure 1 - Photo of the pelleted samples between PBS wash steps 1 and 2.
As can be seen in the image, there is a gradient of fluorescence intensity.
The results of the plate reader are depicted in Figure 2.
https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/f/f5/Twotermscpxrgfp.jpg
Figure 2 - Graphs of the intensity curves of the samples. Cterm corresponds to CpxR sfGFP (sfGFP attached to CpxR's C temrinus) and Nterm corresponds to sfGFP CpxR.
1.4.2 Interpretation
As can be seen in the graph, the the results of the sfGFP CpxR sample was much better (closer to the expected results) than the one on the CpxR sfGFP, although in general, the curves grow.
It could be seen that adding too much arabinose decreases viability, so we considered that a concentration of 5 mM was the optimum arabinose concentration.