Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K2205002"
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
The deGFP reporter gene is an important component of synthetic biology, and the expression level of this gene can indicate many interesting characteristics of an experiment, such as sensitivity, leakage, etc. DeGFP synthesis rate differs for the same element in different chassis. <br> | The deGFP reporter gene is an important component of synthetic biology, and the expression level of this gene can indicate many interesting characteristics of an experiment, such as sensitivity, leakage, etc. DeGFP synthesis rate differs for the same element in different chassis. <br> | ||
| − | ZJUT-China 2021 found this part in the Parts, but the synthesis rate of deGFP in the | + | <strong>ZJUT-China 2021</strong> found this part in the Parts, but the synthesis rate of deGFP in the Cell-Free system was lower than that in a cell-based system. <br> |
| − | As a result, according to promoters and RBS suitable for Cell-Free systems reported in literature, through experiments and modeling, | + | As a result, according to promoters and RBS suitable for Cell-Free systems reported in literature, through experiments and modeling, ZJUT-China 2021 found <strong>the combination of promoter and RBS</strong> that best expresses deGFP, and we registered it as <a href="https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K3885311">BBa_K3885311</a> . <br> |
<p style="font-size: 16px;"> | <p style="font-size: 16px;"> | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
</strong> | </strong> | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
| − | We improved the component in two methods, one was to replace the promoter, the other was to replace RBS.<br> | + | We improved the component in two methods, one was to<strong> replace the promoter</strong>, the other was to<strong> replace RBS</strong>.<br> |
<p style="font-size: 14px;"> | <p style="font-size: 14px;"> | ||
<strong> | <strong> | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
We changed the promoter and measured the synthesis rate of deGFP with the different concentration of the plasmid(Figure 1).<br> | We changed the promoter and measured the synthesis rate of deGFP with the different concentration of the plasmid(Figure 1).<br> | ||
| − | The figure indicates that the intensity of promoter is P70a>P70b>P70c. The relative strength of UTR spans nearly two orders of magnitude.<br> | + | The figure indicates that <strong>the intensity of promoter is P70a>P70b>P70c</strong>. The relative strength of UTR spans nearly two orders of magnitude.<br> |
<p style="font-size: 14px;"> | <p style="font-size: 14px;"> | ||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
We changed the RBS and measured the synthesis rate of deGFP with different concentration of the plasmid(Figure 3).<br> | We changed the RBS and measured the synthesis rate of deGFP with different concentration of the plasmid(Figure 3).<br> | ||
| − | The figure indicates that the intensity of UTR is UTR1>UTR2>UTR3. The relative strength of UTR spans nearly two orders of magnitude.<br> | + | The figure indicates that<strong> the intensity of UTR is UTR1>UTR2>UTR3</strong>. The relative strength of UTR spans nearly two orders of magnitude.<br> |
| Line 120: | Line 120: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
| − | Finally, the kinetic curves of 9 different combinations of P70 and UTR were analyzed for 3 hours at a plasmid concentration of 5nM (Figure 5. A). <br> | + | Finally, the kinetic curves of<strong> 9 different combinations of P70 and UTR </strong>were analyzed for 3 hours at a plasmid concentration of 5nM (Figure 5. A). <br> |
| − | The figure above indicates that P70a-UTR1-deGFP is the best combination for deGFP expression in Cell-Free systems.<br> | + | The figure above indicates that<strong> P70a-UTR1-deGFP </strong>is the best combination for deGFP expression in Cell-Free systems.<br> |
| − | Among the 9 combinations, we tested the reaction endpoint of the plasmid J23100-deGFP and | + | Among the 9 combinations, we tested <strong> the reaction endpoint of the plasmid J23100-deGFP and P70a-UTR1-deGFP</strong> , and it was found that the improved part had a fluorescence intensity that was four times higher than the original part (Figure 5. B). |
</html> | </html> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:29, 21 October 2021
J23100-deGFP
deGFP is a variant of Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP). It was initially designed by Shin and Noireaux (2010) for expression in cell-free protein synthesis systems and is more efficiently translated than other variants.
CFPS Expression of deGFP
CFPS Expression of J23100-deGFP and J23100-sfGFP Constructs: Time course for increase in fluorescence intensity of CFPS systems expressing GFP constructs over time. Each data point is an average of triplicate results, and error bars show +/- standard error. CFPS system with no DNA (Red) was used as the negative control.
In vivo Qualitative Comparison
FACS Data - Collected by Exeter iGEM 2017 for Newcastle iGEM 2017
<img src="
" width="600px"/>
Figure 5: Single cell data for E. coli cells expressing deGFP (collected by Exeter iGEM). Columns 1-6: cells expressing deGFP. Columns 7 and 8: wild type Top10 cells. Red parts of the bar are non-fluorescent cells, green parts are fluorescent cells.
Improvement by iGEM ZJUT-China 2021
Aim
The deGFP reporter gene is an important component of synthetic biology, and the expression level of this gene can indicate many interesting characteristics of an experiment, such as sensitivity, leakage, etc. DeGFP synthesis rate differs for the same element in different chassis.ZJUT-China 2021 found this part in the Parts, but the synthesis rate of deGFP in the Cell-Free system was lower than that in a cell-based system.
As a result, according to promoters and RBS suitable for Cell-Free systems reported in literature, through experiments and modeling, ZJUT-China 2021 found the combination of promoter and RBS that best expresses deGFP, and we registered it as BBa_K3885311 .
Improve
We improved the component in two methods, one was to replace the promoter, the other was to replace RBS.1.Change Promoter
Figure 1.
Figure 2. Rates of deGFP synthesis in the Cell-Free system, compared with model predictions, for reactions containing one of 3 plasmids, including the combinations of promoters P70a, P70b and P70c with UTRs UTR1, UTR2 and UTR3, at various different plasmid concentrations.
We changed the promoter and measured the synthesis rate of deGFP with the different concentration of the plasmid(Figure 1).
The figure indicates that the intensity of promoter is P70a>P70b>P70c. The relative strength of UTR spans nearly two orders of magnitude.
2.Change RBS
Figure 3.
Figure 4. Rates of deGFP synthesis in the Cell-Free system, compared with model predictions, for reactions containing different UTRs with the same promoter, at various different plasmid concentrations.
We changed the RBS and measured the synthesis rate of deGFP with different concentration of the plasmid(Figure 3).
The figure indicates that the intensity of UTR is UTR1>UTR2>UTR3. The relative strength of UTR spans nearly two orders of magnitude.
Result
Figure 5. Kinetics of different combinations of P70 and UTR plasmids (5nM).
Finally, the kinetic curves of 9 different combinations of P70 and UTR were analyzed for 3 hours at a plasmid concentration of 5nM (Figure 5. A).
The figure above indicates that P70a-UTR1-deGFP is the best combination for deGFP expression in Cell-Free systems.
Among the 9 combinations, we tested the reaction endpoint of the plasmid J23100-deGFP and P70a-UTR1-deGFP , and it was found that the improved part had a fluorescence intensity that was four times higher than the original part (Figure 5. B).
Sequence and Features
Assembly Compatibility:
- 10COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
- 12INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]Illegal NheI site found at 7
Illegal NheI site found at 30 - 21COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
- 23COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
- 25COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
- 1000COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]