Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K1603001"
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<partinfo>BBa_K1603001 short</partinfo> | <partinfo>BBa_K1603001 short</partinfo> | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | == Summary == | |
| − | == | + | |
| − | + | The high expression pTEF1 promoter connected to pSUC2 promoter. Can be used for induced high expression of any coding part in ''Saccharomyces cerevisiae'' at low ATP levels. Improves the function of [https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K563004 pTEF1] by adding repression at high levels of ATP and induction at low levels of ATP. The pSUC2 promoter is a truncated version of the Biobrick [https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K950003 pSUC2] | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | == Experimental documentation == | |
| − | + | ||
| − | === | + | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
<p>Expression of ''mRFP'' (monomeric Red Fluorescent Protein) was used to analyze expression levels. To evaluate the effect of connecting pTEF1 to pSUC, two different versions were made: pTEF1-pSUC2-''mRFP'' and pSUC2-''mRFP''. Both constructs were integrated into the genome of ''S.cerevisiae'' CEN.PK2. The fluorescence of the clone with integrated pTEF1-pSUC2-''mRFP'' (TEFSUC) and the clone with pSUC2-''mRFP'' (SUC) was compared with wild type CEN.PK2 (WT). | <p>Expression of ''mRFP'' (monomeric Red Fluorescent Protein) was used to analyze expression levels. To evaluate the effect of connecting pTEF1 to pSUC, two different versions were made: pTEF1-pSUC2-''mRFP'' and pSUC2-''mRFP''. Both constructs were integrated into the genome of ''S.cerevisiae'' CEN.PK2. The fluorescence of the clone with integrated pTEF1-pSUC2-''mRFP'' (TEFSUC) and the clone with pSUC2-''mRFP'' (SUC) was compared with wild type CEN.PK2 (WT). | ||
| Line 59: | Line 51: | ||
<p>This indicates that the concept of serially connecting promoters could work, but further evaluation could include measuring of fluorescent levels to determine quantitative differences in expression.</p> | <p>This indicates that the concept of serially connecting promoters could work, but further evaluation could include measuring of fluorescent levels to determine quantitative differences in expression.</p> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <!-- Add more about the biology of this part here | ||
| + | ===Usage and Biology=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | <!-- --> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <span class='h3bb'>Sequence and Features</span> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <partinfo>BBa_K1603001 SequenceAndFeatures</partinfo> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <!-- Uncomment this to enable Functional Parameter display | ||
| + | ===Functional Parameters=== | ||
| + | <partinfo>BBa_K1603001 parameters</partinfo> | ||
| + | <!-- --> | ||
Latest revision as of 13:05, 26 September 2015
pTEF1-pSUC2
Summary
The high expression pTEF1 promoter connected to pSUC2 promoter. Can be used for induced high expression of any coding part in Saccharomyces cerevisiae at low ATP levels. Improves the function of pTEF1 by adding repression at high levels of ATP and induction at low levels of ATP. The pSUC2 promoter is a truncated version of the Biobrick pSUC2
Experimental documentation
Expression of mRFP (monomeric Red Fluorescent Protein) was used to analyze expression levels. To evaluate the effect of connecting pTEF1 to pSUC, two different versions were made: pTEF1-pSUC2-mRFP and pSUC2-mRFP. Both constructs were integrated into the genome of S.cerevisiae CEN.PK2. The fluorescence of the clone with integrated pTEF1-pSUC2-mRFP (TEFSUC) and the clone with pSUC2-mRFP (SUC) was compared with wild type CEN.PK2 (WT). The first sample of TEFSUC, SUC and WT was cultivated for 2 hours in YPD. The results from fluorescent microscopy are shown in figure 1-4.
Figure 1. Positive control. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 2. TEFSUC sample 1 cultivated for 2 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 3. SUC sample 1 cultivated for 2 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 4. WT sample 1 cultivated for 2 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
2 hours of cultivation in YPD (after overnight preculture) showed no visible RFP fluorescence. A reason for this could be that 2 hours is not enough to give a significant drop in energy levels to relieve the repression of pSUC2.
A new sample of TEFSUC, SUC and WT was cultivated for 6 hours in YPD. The results from fluorescent microscopy are shown in figure 5-8.
Figure 5. Positive control. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 6. TEFSUC sample 2 cultivated for 6 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 7. SUC sample 2 cultivated for 6 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 8. WT sample 2 cultivated for 6 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Now there is a clear difference between TEFSUC and SUC. TEFSUC gives several highly fluorescent cells while SUC only shows slightly higher fluorescent compared to WT. This indicates that the repression of pSUC2 is reduced which allows expression of mRFP through the high expression promoter pTEF1.
Another fluorescence measurement was performed on the same sample after 23 hours of cultivation. The results from fluorescent microscopy are shown in figure 9-12.
Figure 9. Positive control. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 10. TEFSUC sample 2 cultivated for 23 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 11. SUC sample 2 cultivated for 23 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
Figure 12. WT sample 2 cultivated for 23 hours. Left: overlay channels (bright field, RFP and GFP). Right: RFP channel.
This indicates that the concept of serially connecting promoters could work, but further evaluation could include measuring of fluorescent levels to determine quantitative differences in expression.
Sequence and Features
- 10COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
- 12COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]
- 21COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
- 23COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
- 25COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
- 1000INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]Illegal BsaI.rc site found at 167