Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K3470009"
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | + | <partinfo>BBa_K3470009 short</partinfo> | |
+ | ==Circuit== | ||
+ | '''Constitutive Promoter - RBS – MerP - RBS - MerT - RBS - MerE - RBS - Double Terminator''' | ||
− | + | ==Usage and Biology== | |
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
+ | MerP is the periplasmic component of the mer transport system which helps in the uptake of mercury inside the cell. It binds to a single Hg (II) ion using its two conserved cysteine residues, which define its metal-binding motif. It removes any attached ligands before passing the Hg (II) on to MerT transmembrane protein. It is the most abundantly synthesized protein in the mer operon due to its role in the scavenging of Hg (II) in the periplasm. (Steele, R. A., & Opella, S. J.1997). | ||
+ | MerT is a transmembrane protein that receives mercury from MerP, at its first transmembrane helix, and transports it into the cytoplasm of the bacterial cell. (T. Barkay et al., 2003). MerE is a transmembrane component of the mer transport system which helps in the uptake of mercury inside the cell. It helps in the transport of organo-mercury compounds. (Sone et al., 2013) | ||
+ | ==Proposed experimentation== | ||
+ | To determine the final transport design, three circuits consisting of a combination of genes among MerP, MerC, MerT and MerE have been proposed. The circuit showing the most effective results must be chosen as the bio-brick for the transport system for our first plasmid. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Circuits we test for the final transport design system: | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p> 1. '''MerP-MerT-MerC-MerE''' </p> | ||
+ | <p> 2. '''MerC-MerE''' </p> | ||
+ | <p> 3. '''MerP - MerT – MerE''' </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | To test the efficiency and characterize each of the 4 parts separately, experiments must be carried out with each of the parts making use of 2 test circuits and 2 controls. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Circuits:''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p> 1. The final transport design system </p> | ||
+ | <p> 2. Constitutive Promoter- RBS – (The part to be tested, i.e. MerP, MerC, MerT or MerE) -RBS-Double Terminator </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Controls:''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p> 1. Final circuit design without the part to be tested </p> | ||
+ | <p> 2. Wild type Escherichia coli DH5alpha </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | E. coli cells inoculated with methylmercury chloride must be grown for the required amount of time according to the results of the preliminary experiment respectively for the 2 circuits to be tested and 2 controls. The cell suspension must be centrifuged and the mercury concentration in the supernatant for each set should be determined with gas chromatography. Plots of concentration vs time for each of the sets must analyzed to understand the efficiency of the parts in transporting methylmercury. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | '''Expected result:''' | ||
+ | |||
+ | The most efficient transport system is the final transport circuit design. | ||
+ | |||
+ | If there are two transport system circuits are of similar efficiency, the one with the least expected genetic burden (smaller length) must be selected. The expected result should show the efficiency of MerP, MerT, MerE, MerC all together in transporting methylmercury, which should be higher than the natural transport (without mer operon transporters). | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Sequence and Features== | ||
+ | |||
+ | <partinfo>BBa_K3470009 SequenceAndFeatures</partinfo> | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==References== | ||
− | |||
Barkay, T., Miller, S. M., & Summers, A. O. (2003). Bacterial mercury resistance from atoms to ecosystems. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 27(2–3), 355–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00046-9 | Barkay, T., Miller, S. M., & Summers, A. O. (2003). Bacterial mercury resistance from atoms to ecosystems. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 27(2–3), 355–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00046-9 | ||
+ | |||
Rossy, E., Sénèque, O., Lascoux, D., Lemaire, D., Crouzy, S., Delangle, P., & Covès, J. (2004). Is the cytoplasmic loop of MerT, the mercuric ion transport protein, involved in mercury transfer to the mercuric reductase? FEBS Letters, 575(1–3), 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2004.08.041 | Rossy, E., Sénèque, O., Lascoux, D., Lemaire, D., Crouzy, S., Delangle, P., & Covès, J. (2004). Is the cytoplasmic loop of MerT, the mercuric ion transport protein, involved in mercury transfer to the mercuric reductase? FEBS Letters, 575(1–3), 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2004.08.041 | ||
+ | |||
Sone, Y., Nakamura, R., Pan-Hou, H., Itoh, T., & Kiyono, M. (2013). Role of MerC, MerE, MerF, MerT, and/or MerP in resistance to mercurials and the transport of mercurials in escherichia coli. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 36(11), 1835–1841. https://doi.org/10.1248/bpb.b13-00554 | Sone, Y., Nakamura, R., Pan-Hou, H., Itoh, T., & Kiyono, M. (2013). Role of MerC, MerE, MerF, MerT, and/or MerP in resistance to mercurials and the transport of mercurials in escherichia coli. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 36(11), 1835–1841. https://doi.org/10.1248/bpb.b13-00554 | ||
+ | |||
Steele, R. A., & Opella, S. J. (1997). Structures of the reduced and mercury- bound forms of merP, the periplasmic protein from the bacterial mercury detoxification system. Biochemistry, 36(23), 6885–6895. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi9631632 | Steele, R. A., & Opella, S. J. (1997). Structures of the reduced and mercury- bound forms of merP, the periplasmic protein from the bacterial mercury detoxification system. Biochemistry, 36(23), 6885–6895. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi9631632 |
Latest revision as of 13:51, 23 October 2020
Methylmercury Transport system design-3( Without MerR)
Contents
Circuit
Constitutive Promoter - RBS – MerP - RBS - MerT - RBS - MerE - RBS - Double Terminator
Usage and Biology
MerP is the periplasmic component of the mer transport system which helps in the uptake of mercury inside the cell. It binds to a single Hg (II) ion using its two conserved cysteine residues, which define its metal-binding motif. It removes any attached ligands before passing the Hg (II) on to MerT transmembrane protein. It is the most abundantly synthesized protein in the mer operon due to its role in the scavenging of Hg (II) in the periplasm. (Steele, R. A., & Opella, S. J.1997).
MerT is a transmembrane protein that receives mercury from MerP, at its first transmembrane helix, and transports it into the cytoplasm of the bacterial cell. (T. Barkay et al., 2003). MerE is a transmembrane component of the mer transport system which helps in the uptake of mercury inside the cell. It helps in the transport of organo-mercury compounds. (Sone et al., 2013)
Proposed experimentation
To determine the final transport design, three circuits consisting of a combination of genes among MerP, MerC, MerT and MerE have been proposed. The circuit showing the most effective results must be chosen as the bio-brick for the transport system for our first plasmid.
Circuits we test for the final transport design system:
1. MerP-MerT-MerC-MerE
2. MerC-MerE
3. MerP - MerT – MerE
To test the efficiency and characterize each of the 4 parts separately, experiments must be carried out with each of the parts making use of 2 test circuits and 2 controls.
Circuits:
1. The final transport design system
2. Constitutive Promoter- RBS – (The part to be tested, i.e. MerP, MerC, MerT or MerE) -RBS-Double Terminator
Controls:
1. Final circuit design without the part to be tested
2. Wild type Escherichia coli DH5alpha
E. coli cells inoculated with methylmercury chloride must be grown for the required amount of time according to the results of the preliminary experiment respectively for the 2 circuits to be tested and 2 controls. The cell suspension must be centrifuged and the mercury concentration in the supernatant for each set should be determined with gas chromatography. Plots of concentration vs time for each of the sets must analyzed to understand the efficiency of the parts in transporting methylmercury.
Expected result:
The most efficient transport system is the final transport circuit design.
If there are two transport system circuits are of similar efficiency, the one with the least expected genetic burden (smaller length) must be selected. The expected result should show the efficiency of MerP, MerT, MerE, MerC all together in transporting methylmercury, which should be higher than the natural transport (without mer operon transporters).
Sequence and Features
- 10COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
- 12INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]Illegal NheI site found at 7
Illegal NheI site found at 30
Illegal NheI site found at 408 - 21COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
- 23COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
- 25COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
- 1000INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]Illegal SapI site found at 393
References
Barkay, T., Miller, S. M., & Summers, A. O. (2003). Bacterial mercury resistance from atoms to ecosystems. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 27(2–3), 355–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00046-9
Rossy, E., Sénèque, O., Lascoux, D., Lemaire, D., Crouzy, S., Delangle, P., & Covès, J. (2004). Is the cytoplasmic loop of MerT, the mercuric ion transport protein, involved in mercury transfer to the mercuric reductase? FEBS Letters, 575(1–3), 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2004.08.041
Sone, Y., Nakamura, R., Pan-Hou, H., Itoh, T., & Kiyono, M. (2013). Role of MerC, MerE, MerF, MerT, and/or MerP in resistance to mercurials and the transport of mercurials in escherichia coli. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 36(11), 1835–1841. https://doi.org/10.1248/bpb.b13-00554
Steele, R. A., & Opella, S. J. (1997). Structures of the reduced and mercury- bound forms of merP, the periplasmic protein from the bacterial mercury detoxification system. Biochemistry, 36(23), 6885–6895. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi9631632