Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K2549034"

(→‎It works as we designed)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
<!-- Add more about the biology of this part here -->
 
<!-- Add more about the biology of this part here -->
 
===Biology===
 
===Biology===
 +
=====Our characterization=====
 +
[[File:model.png|none|440px|thumb|'''Flow cytometry results of different transcription factors interaction with multiple binding sites.''' RFI: output from the Combiner after activation was divided by the value before activation. A degradable EGFP (d2EGFP) is produced downstream the promoter of the Combiner to indicate the output strength. ZF21.16 fused with VP64 was the transcriptional activator. There was no transcriptional repressor in the experiment. More details please visit http://2018.igem.org/Team:Fudan/Results and http://2018.igem.org/Team:Fudan/Measurement .]]
 +
 +
Worked as designed, copy numbers of responsive elements have an impact on tuning output. By increasing the copy number of transcriptional activator responsive elements upstream of the promoter, its ability to overcome the transcriptional suppression increases, whose responsive elements were placed downstream of the promoter and only two copies were used.
 +
 +
[[File:NIMLPY.png|none|370px|thumb|'''NIMPLY gate constructed with the Combiner using either 8*ZF21.16-minCMV-2*ZF43.8 or 8*ZF43.8-minCMV-2*ZF21.16.''' A degradable EGFP (d2EGFP) is produced downstream the promoter of the Combiner to indicate the output strength. DBD, DNA binding domain which is zinc finger in our assay. AD or SD, activating- or silencing-form transcriptional domain. RE, responsive elements. MFI, median fluorescence intensity. RFI, relative fluorescence intensity (comparing before and after activation).]]
 +
 +
Next, we show that when transcriptional activator (ZF-VP64) and repressor (ZF-KRAB) both were present, the expression level of d2EGFP was significantly turned down but still higher than neither one was present. This result indicates that the repressor with its responsive elements placed downstream of the promoter plays the predominant role in regulating transcription. We switched ZF in the experiment and observed a similar result, suggesting it was not due to specific DNA sequences within zinc finger binding domains.
 +
  
 
=====Synthetic promotor operators regulated by artificial zinc finger-based transcription factors=====
 
=====Synthetic promotor operators regulated by artificial zinc finger-based transcription factors=====
Line 18: Line 27:
  
 
[[File:ZF3.jpg|none|240px|thumb|Khalil AS et al stated:''Tuning up output strength by increasing ZF operator number in synthetic promoter (sTF43-8).'']]
 
[[File:ZF3.jpg|none|240px|thumb|Khalil AS et al stated:''Tuning up output strength by increasing ZF operator number in synthetic promoter (sTF43-8).'']]
−
 
−
===Characterization===
 
−
=====It works as we designed =====
 
−
 
−
[[File:model.png|none|480px|thumb|'''Fig.1 Flow cytometry results of different transcription factors interaction with multiple binding sites. A degradable EGFP (d2EGFP) is linked downstream the promoter to indicate the expression level of it. RFI, relative fluorescence intensity.''']]
 
−
 
−
Thus it is verified by experiment that promoter operator numbers can have an impact on tuning output. By changing the copy number of transcriptional activator binding sites, others can tune the maximum activation level as they desire.
 
−
 
−
[[File:NIMLPY.png|none|540px|thumb|'''Fig.2 NIMPLY gate constructed using 8*ZF21.16-minCMV-2*ZF43.8 or 8*ZF43.8-minCMV-2*ZF21.16. A degradable EGFP (d2EGFP) is linked downstream the promoter to indicate the expression level of it. DBD, DNA binding domain which is zinc finger in our assay. AD or SD, activating- or silencing-form transcriptional domain. RE, responsive elements. MFI, median fluorescence intensity. RFI, relative fluorescence intensity.''']]
 
−
 
−
It is shown that when transcriptional activator exists and repressor doesn't exist, d2EGFP performs a high-level expression. When the two co-exist, the expression level of d2EGFP is significantly turned down but still higher than circumstances the two don't exist or only the repressor exists. This result indicates that the repressor takes the predominant position when coexisting with the activator.
 
 
   
 
   
 
<!-- Uncomment this to enable Functional Parameter display  
 
<!-- Uncomment this to enable Functional Parameter display  

Revision as of 20:19, 17 October 2018

8*ZF21.16-minCMV-2*ZF43.8

This part is one of the response elements of our amplifier, also executing the combiner function. 8*ZF21.16 binding sites and 2*ZF43.8 binding sites (Part:BBa_K2549051) can bind to different zinc finger-based transcription activator ZF21.16-VP64 (Part:BBa_K2549023) and zinc finger-based repressor ZF43.8-KRAB (Part:BBa_K2446041), respectively, with high orthogonality. Minimal CMV (Part:BBa_K2549049) is a promotor providing very low basal expression and high maximal expression after induction. This part was designed to construct our NIMPLY logic gate and test our multiple binding sites amplifier model[1].

Sequence and Features


Assembly Compatibility:
  • 10
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
  • 12
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]
  • 21
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
  • 23
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
  • 25
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
  • 1000
    COMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]


Biology

Our characterization
Flow cytometry results of different transcription factors interaction with multiple binding sites. RFI: output from the Combiner after activation was divided by the value before activation. A degradable EGFP (d2EGFP) is produced downstream the promoter of the Combiner to indicate the output strength. ZF21.16 fused with VP64 was the transcriptional activator. There was no transcriptional repressor in the experiment. More details please visit http://2018.igem.org/Team:Fudan/Results and http://2018.igem.org/Team:Fudan/Measurement .

Worked as designed, copy numbers of responsive elements have an impact on tuning output. By increasing the copy number of transcriptional activator responsive elements upstream of the promoter, its ability to overcome the transcriptional suppression increases, whose responsive elements were placed downstream of the promoter and only two copies were used.

NIMPLY gate constructed with the Combiner using either 8*ZF21.16-minCMV-2*ZF43.8 or 8*ZF43.8-minCMV-2*ZF21.16. A degradable EGFP (d2EGFP) is produced downstream the promoter of the Combiner to indicate the output strength. DBD, DNA binding domain which is zinc finger in our assay. AD or SD, activating- or silencing-form transcriptional domain. RE, responsive elements. MFI, median fluorescence intensity. RFI, relative fluorescence intensity (comparing before and after activation).

Next, we show that when transcriptional activator (ZF-VP64) and repressor (ZF-KRAB) both were present, the expression level of d2EGFP was significantly turned down but still higher than neither one was present. This result indicates that the repressor with its responsive elements placed downstream of the promoter plays the predominant role in regulating transcription. We switched ZF in the experiment and observed a similar result, suggesting it was not due to specific DNA sequences within zinc finger binding domains.


Synthetic promotor operators regulated by artificial zinc finger-based transcription factors

Khalil AS et al have reported several synthetic promotor operators which can interact with artificial zinc finger-based transcription factors with high specificity and high orthogonality[2].

Khalil AS et al stated:sTFs constructed from OPEN-engineered ZFs are orthogonal to one another. sTF43-8 activated noncognate Promoter21-16 due to the fortuitous creation of a sequence that is significantly similar to the binding sequence of 43-8, when the downstream BamHI restriction site is considered.
Khalil AS et al stated:Tuning up output strength by increasing ZF operator number in synthetic promoter (sTF43-8).


References

  1. ↑ http://2018.igem.org/Team:Fudan/Model#Transcriptional_Amplifer
  2. ↑ A synthetic biology framework for programming eukaryotic transcription functions. Khalil AS, Lu TK, Bashor CJ, ..., Joung JK, Collins JJ. Cell, 2012 Aug;150(3):647-58 PMID: 22863014; DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.05.045