Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K1758330"
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
Lead promoter repressor under the control of konstitutive promoter (K608002)
 
Lead promoter repressor under the control of konstitutive promoter (K608002)
  
−
<!-- Add more about the biology of this part here
+
<!-- Add more about the biology of this part here-->
 +
 
 +
 
 
===Usage and Biology===
 
===Usage and Biology===
 +
<html>
 +
For our biosensor we use parts of the chromosomal lead operon of Cupriavidus metallidurans. Naturally the operon for lead resistance contains pbrT, which encodes a Pb(II) uptake protein, pbrA, which encodes a P-type Pb(II) efflux ATPase, pbrB, which encodes a predicted integral membrane protein and pbrC, which encodes a predicted prolipoprotein signal peptidase. The expression of the operon is regulated by the repressor pbrR. As a MerR like regulator, its stimulates the transcription of the operon in the presence of Pb2+ (Borremans et al., 2001). Our sensor system combines pbrRunder the control of a constitutive promoter and the pbrA promoter for the lead depending expression of sfGFP.
 +
</html>
 +
 +
  
 +
===Sequence and Features===
 
<!-- -->
 
<!-- -->
−
<span class='h3bb'>Sequence and Features</span>
+
 
 
<partinfo>BBa_K1758330 SequenceAndFeatures</partinfo>
 
<partinfo>BBa_K1758330 SequenceAndFeatures</partinfo>
 +
 +
  
  
Line 17: Line 27:
 
<!-- -->
 
<!-- -->
  
 +
===Results===
 +
<html>
  
−
h2><i><i>in vivo</i> characterization </i></h2></br>
+
<h2><i>in vivo</i> characterization </i></h2></br>
−
<p>In addition to the other heavy metal sensors, we constructed a sensor for lead detection. It consists of the repressor PbrR which binds at the operator box downstream of the <i>pbrAP </i>promoter. The binding of the repressor is reversible in the presence of Pb<sup>2+ </sup>Ions. Those ions can weakened the repressors binding and hence, all genes downstream of the <i>pbrAP</i> promoter can be expressed. Like the former sensors this one encloses a sfGFP for detection via fluorescence. So if no lead is present in the media, the repressor binds to the operator box and the <i>pbrAP</i> promoter is blocked meaning that the transcription of <i>sfGFP</i> is prevented. No fluorescence signal is the results. By supplementation of lead, the repressor is separated from the operator box and the genes downstream of the promoter can be expressed.  </p>
+
<p>In addition to the other heavy metal sensors, we constructed a sensor for lead detection. It consists of the repressor PbrR which binds at the operator box downstream of the <i>pbrAP </i>promoter. The binding of the repressor is reversible in the presence of Pb<sup>2+</sup> Ions. Those ions can weakened the repressors binding and hence, all genes downstream of the <i>pbrAP</i> promoter can be expressed. Like the former sensors this one encloses a sfGFP for detection via fluorescence. So if no lead is present in the media, the repressor binds to the operator box and the <i>pbrAP</i> promoter is blocked meaning that the transcription of <i>sfGFP</i> is prevented. No fluorescence signal is the results. By supplementation of lead, the repressor is separated from the operator box and the genes downstream of the promoter can be expressed.  </p>
  
−
<p>The <i>pbrAP </i>promoter, the operator box and the PbrR repressor are parts of the chromosomal lead operon of Cupriavidus metallidurans (figure 2). This was cloned and transformed into <i>E.coli </i>KRX. This operon includes now the promoter <i>pbrAP </i>(<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332 </a>)), which is regulated by the repressor PbrR. The PbrR belongs to the MerR family, of metal-sensing regulatory proteins, and is Pb2+-inducible. Our sensor system comprises <i>pbrR</i> (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758330" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758330 </a>) BBa_K1758330 ), which is under the control of a constitutive Promoter and <i>pbrAP</i> and a 5’ untranslated region, which controls the transcription of a sfGFP and increases the fluorescence. Fluorescence implemented by sfGFP protein is the measured output signal (figure 3 and figure 4).  </p>
+
<p>The <i>pbrAP </i>promoter, the operator box and the PbrR repressor are parts of the chromosomal lead operon of <i>Cupriavidus metallidurans</i> (figure 1). This was cloned and transformed into <i>E.coli</i> KRX. This operon includes now the promoter <i>pbrAP</i> (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332 </a>)), which is regulated by the repressor PbrR. The PbrR belongs to the MerR family, of metal-sensing regulatory proteins, and is Pb2+-inducible. Our sensor system comprises <i>pbrR</i> (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758330" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758330 </a>) BBa_K1758330 ), which is under the control of a constitutive Promoter and <i>pbrAP</i> and a 5’ untranslated region, which controls the transcription of a sfGFP and increases the fluorescence. Fluorescence implemented by sfGFP protein is the measured output signal (figure 2 and figure 3).  </p>
  
−
  <figure style="width: 600px">
+
  <figure>
−
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/a3/Bielefeld-CebiTec_in_vivo_Lead.jpeg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="The concept of our <i>in vivo</i> lead sensor (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332</a>), which consists of the repressor under the control of a constitutive promoter (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758330" target="_blank"> BBa_K17583230</a>) and the operator and promoter sequence of the lead inducible promoter. An untranslated region in front of the sfGFP, which is used for detection, enhances its expression  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332</a>)."><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/a3/Bielefeld-CebiTec_in_vivo_Lead.jpeg" alt="genetical approach"></a>
+
<a><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/a3/Bielefeld-CebiTec_in_vivo_Lead.jpeg" alt="genetical approach" width="80%"></a>
−
<figcaption>Figure 2: Figure 2: The concept of our in vivo lead sensor  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332</a>)which consists of the repressor under the control of a constitutive promoter  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758330" target="_blank"> BBa_K17583230</a>) and the operator and promoter sequence of the lead inducible promoter. An untranslated region in front of the sfGFP, which is used for detection, enhances its expression  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332</a>).</figcaption>
+
<figcaption>Figure 1: The concept of our in vivo lead sensor  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332</a>)which consists of the repressor under the control of a constitutive promoter  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758330" target="_blank"> BBa_K17583230</a>) and the operator and promoter sequence of the lead inducible promoter. An untranslated region in front of the sfGFP, which is used for detection, enhances its expression  (<a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1758332" target="_blank"> BBa_K1758332</a>).</figcaption>
 
</figure>
 
</figure>
  
 
     <div class="row">
 
     <div class="row">
−
<div class="col-md-6 text-center" style="margin-bottom: 50px"> <figure style="width: 600px">
+
<figure>
−
<a href="http://https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/d5/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_Biolector_lead.jpg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="Figure 3: Time course of the induction of a lead biosensor with sfGFP for different lead concentrations <i>in vivo</i>. The data are measured with BioLector and normalized to the OD<sub>600</sub>. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates.  "><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/d5/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_Biolector_lead.jpg" alt="Adjusting the detection limit"></a>
+
<a><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/d5/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_Biolector_lead.jpg" width="80%"></a>
−
<figcaption>Figure 3: Time course of the induction of a lead biosensor with sfGFP for different lead concentrations <i>in vivo</i>. The data are measured with BioLector and normalized to the OD<sub>600</sub>. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates. </figcaption>
+
<figcaption>Figure 2: Time course of the induction of a lead biosensor with sfGFP for different lead concentrations <i>in vivo</i>. The data are measured with BioLector and normalized to the OD<sub>600</sub>. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates. </figcaption>
 
</figure>
 
</figure>
 +
 +
 
</div>
 
</div>
−
<div class="col-md-6 text-center" style="margin-bottom: 50px"><figure style="width: 600px">
+
<figure>
−
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/aa/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_Biolector_lead_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="Figure 4: Fluorescence levels at three different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 60 minutes, 150 minutes and 650 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates. "><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/aa/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_Biolector_lead_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" alt="Adjusting the detection limit"></a>
+
<a><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/aa/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_Biolector_lead_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" width="80%"></a>
−
<figcaption>Figure 4: Fluorescence levels at three different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 60 minutes, 150 minutes and 650 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates. </figcaption>
+
<figcaption>Figure 3: Fluorescence levels at three different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 60 minutes, 150 minutes and 650 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates. </figcaption>
 
</figure>
 
</figure>
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
−
<p>We tested our lead sensor with sfGFP as reporter gene to verify the functionality of the system. Subsequently, we tested different lead concentrations. The kinetic of our sensors response to different lead concentrations is shown in figure 3. The first 40 hours show a strong increase in fluorescence. After that the increase in fluorescence reaches a plateau. For better visualization the kinetics of figure 3 are represented as bars in figure 4. A fluorescence level difference for 60 min, 150 min and 650 min is represented.</p>
+
<p>The kinetic of our sensors response to different lead concentrations is shown in figure 2. The first 40 hours show a strong increase in fluorescence. After that the increase in fluorescence reaches a plateau. For better visualization the kinetics of figure 2 are represented as bars in figure 3. A fluorescence level difference for 60 min, 150 min and 650 min is represented.</p>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<p> The results of the lead sensor show no significant differences between the different concentrations (figure 3). This might be due to the <i>pbrAP’s</i> weak promoter strength in <i>E. coli.</i> Further reasons are most likely in the weak repressor binding to its operator.  So, we suggest for the usage of this sensor, it has to be optimized. Moreover we were lacking time for further in vivo characterizations and different experimental setups. Hence, we did not use this sensor in further experiments regarding Cell-free-Protein-synthesis (CFPS). In the future a characterization in the CFPS systems would be desirable.  </p>
 +
<br><br/>
 +
 
 +
<b>References</b>
 +
<p>Borremans B., Hobman J. L., Provoost A., Brown N. L., van der Lelie D. (2001), Cloning and Functional Analysis of the pbr Lead Resistance Determinant of Ralstoniametallidurans CH34, J. Bacteriol., 183, 5651 – 5658</p>
 +
 
 +
 
  
  
−
<p> The results of the lead sensor show no significant differences between the different concentrations (figure 3). This might be due to the <i>pbrAP’s</i> weak promoter strength in <i>E. coli.</i> Further reasons are most likely in the weak repressor binding to its operator.  So, we suggest for the usage of this sensor, it has to be optimized. Moreover we were lacking time for further in vivo characterizations and different experimental setups. Hence, we did not use this sensor in further experiments regarding Cell-free-Protein-synthesis (CFPS). . In the future a characterization in the CFPS systems would be desirable.  </p>
+
</html>

Latest revision as of 19:23, 20 September 2015

Lead repressor under control of constitutive promoter and strong RBS

Lead promoter repressor under the control of konstitutive promoter (K608002)


Usage and Biology

For our biosensor we use parts of the chromosomal lead operon of Cupriavidus metallidurans. Naturally the operon for lead resistance contains pbrT, which encodes a Pb(II) uptake protein, pbrA, which encodes a P-type Pb(II) efflux ATPase, pbrB, which encodes a predicted integral membrane protein and pbrC, which encodes a predicted prolipoprotein signal peptidase. The expression of the operon is regulated by the repressor pbrR. As a MerR like regulator, its stimulates the transcription of the operon in the presence of Pb2+ (Borremans et al., 2001). Our sensor system combines pbrRunder the control of a constitutive promoter and the pbrA promoter for the lead depending expression of sfGFP.


Sequence and Features


Assembly Compatibility:
  • 10
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
  • 12
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]
    Illegal NheI site found at 465
    Illegal NheI site found at 488
  • 21
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
  • 23
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
  • 25
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
  • 1000
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]



Results

in vivo characterization


In addition to the other heavy metal sensors, we constructed a sensor for lead detection. It consists of the repressor PbrR which binds at the operator box downstream of the pbrAP promoter. The binding of the repressor is reversible in the presence of Pb2+ Ions. Those ions can weakened the repressors binding and hence, all genes downstream of the pbrAP promoter can be expressed. Like the former sensors this one encloses a sfGFP for detection via fluorescence. So if no lead is present in the media, the repressor binds to the operator box and the pbrAP promoter is blocked meaning that the transcription of sfGFP is prevented. No fluorescence signal is the results. By supplementation of lead, the repressor is separated from the operator box and the genes downstream of the promoter can be expressed.

The pbrAP promoter, the operator box and the PbrR repressor are parts of the chromosomal lead operon of Cupriavidus metallidurans (figure 1). This was cloned and transformed into E.coli KRX. This operon includes now the promoter pbrAP ( BBa_K1758332 )), which is regulated by the repressor PbrR. The PbrR belongs to the MerR family, of metal-sensing regulatory proteins, and is Pb2+-inducible. Our sensor system comprises pbrR ( BBa_K1758330 ) BBa_K1758330 ), which is under the control of a constitutive Promoter and pbrAP and a 5’ untranslated region, which controls the transcription of a sfGFP and increases the fluorescence. Fluorescence implemented by sfGFP protein is the measured output signal (figure 2 and figure 3).

genetical approach
Figure 1: The concept of our in vivo lead sensor ( BBa_K1758332)which consists of the repressor under the control of a constitutive promoter ( BBa_K17583230) and the operator and promoter sequence of the lead inducible promoter. An untranslated region in front of the sfGFP, which is used for detection, enhances its expression ( BBa_K1758332).
Figure 2: Time course of the induction of a lead biosensor with sfGFP for different lead concentrations in vivo. The data are measured with BioLector and normalized to the OD600. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates.
Figure 3: Fluorescence levels at three different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 60 minutes, 150 minutes and 650 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of two biological replicates.

The kinetic of our sensors response to different lead concentrations is shown in figure 2. The first 40 hours show a strong increase in fluorescence. After that the increase in fluorescence reaches a plateau. For better visualization the kinetics of figure 2 are represented as bars in figure 3. A fluorescence level difference for 60 min, 150 min and 650 min is represented.

The results of the lead sensor show no significant differences between the different concentrations (figure 3). This might be due to the pbrAP’s weak promoter strength in E. coli. Further reasons are most likely in the weak repressor binding to its operator. So, we suggest for the usage of this sensor, it has to be optimized. Moreover we were lacking time for further in vivo characterizations and different experimental setups. Hence, we did not use this sensor in further experiments regarding Cell-free-Protein-synthesis (CFPS). In the future a characterization in the CFPS systems would be desirable.



References

Borremans B., Hobman J. L., Provoost A., Brown N. L., van der Lelie D. (2001), Cloning and Functional Analysis of the pbr Lead Resistance Determinant of Ralstoniametallidurans CH34, J. Bacteriol., 183, 5651 – 5658