Team:Toulouse/Result/experimental-results

From 2014.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 80: Line 80:
<p class="title1">Chemotaxis
<p class="title1">Chemotaxis
 +
</p>
 +
<p class="texte">For this module, we had to try several tests to prove the existence of chemotaxis in Bacillus subtilis wild type strain and SubtiTree bacterium towards N-Acetylglucosamine.
 +
</p>
 +
 +
<p class="title2">1. Plug in Pond system
 +
</p>
 +
<p class="texte">Coming soon! <!--Florie-->
 +
</p>
 +
 +
<p class="title2">2. Capillary test between two tubes also called the tubes test
 +
</p>
 +
<p class="texte">After the experiment of the plug in pond, we decided to construct a system by welding two Eppendorf tubes with a capillary thanks to an electric burner.
 +
<table align="center">
 +
<tr><td align=center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/f/fb/Chemotaxis_-_eppendorf.png"></tr></td>
 +
<tr><td align=center>Figure 1 : Photography of the first tubes system</tr></td>
 +
</table><br>
 +
We tested this system with a fuchsin dye and water and we were able to observe the diffusion of fuchsin towards water. However this construction had a leakage next to the weld seam that we could not stop.
 +
Thus, the Toulouse iGEM Team asked the help from the glass blower, Patrick Chekroun. He designed two systems composed of two tubes linked by a capillary.
 +
<table align="center">
 +
<tr><td align=center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/2/2b/Chemotaxis_-_tubes.png"></tr></td>
 +
<tr><td align=center>Figure 2 : Scheme of the tubes system</tr></td>
 +
</table><br>
 +
As we did previously, we tested this new system with fuchsin. This experiment was made with WT Bacillus subtilis  and N-Acetylglucosamine.
 +
<br><br>
 +
<i>NB: We could not see the diffusion from one tube to the other. We made the hypothesis that it was not visible by sight because of by the small diameter of the capillary.
 +
</i><br>
 +
<br>
 +
The following strategy was used to avoid disturbance due to pressure and liquid movement through the capillary:<br>
 +
- The first step was the addition of Wash Buffer until the capillary was full to avoid the presence of air bubbles which could lead to diffusion problems.<br>
 +
- Then, the tube 2 was plugged with the thumb while another person was adding the bacteria solution of WT Bacillus subtilis  in the tube 1. <br>
 +
- The tube 1 was also plugged and only after the thumb could be removed of the tube 2. <br>
 +
- In the same way, the N-Acetylglucosamine was added in the tube 2. <br>
 +
- The same process was made with a xylose positive control.<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<i>NB: According to the article Chemotaxis towards sugars by Bacillus subtilis, (George W. Ordal et al., 1979), glucose and xylose have the same attractant power. We prefer a positive control instead of a negative because we were not sure that this system was efficient.</i><br>
 +
<br>
 +
- The system was kept straight for 2hours. Every 40 minutes, we took a sample of each tube and spread it on an agar plate (dilution 1/1,000).
 +
<table align="center">
 +
<tr><td align=center><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/1/1b/Chemotaxis_-_tubes_photo.png"></tr></td>
 +
<tr><td align=center>Figure 3 : Photography of the tubes system</tr></td>
 +
</table><br>
 +
Unfortunately, the dilution was too high to detect any chemotaxis movement and the time was too short. We did not find any information in the literature.<br>
 +
As we did not have the time to optimize this protocol we preferred using the protocol of the Imperial college iGEM team 2011: the tips capillary test.<br>
 +
</p>
 +
 +
<p class="title2">3. Tips capillary test
 +
</p>
 +
<p class="title3">First tips capillary test
 +
</p>
 +
<p class="texte">
 +
 +
 +
 +
</p>
</p>

Revision as of 21:00, 9 October 2014