Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K1041000:Experience"

Revision as of 10:51, 2 October 2013

This experience page is provided so that any user may enter their experience using this part.
Please enter how you used this part and how it worked out.

Team NRP-UEA_Norwich 2013

Team NRP-UEA_Norwich 2013 added an NdeI restriction site at the start of the RFP coding region of BBa_J04450 using mutagenesis. This was to allow either the promoter region or RFP gene to be excised and exchanged for a different promoter or gene and provide restriction sites for further cloning such as part Bba_K1041002.

An experiment was designed to compare the intensity of red produced by RFP using part Bba_K104100 to that produced by Bba_J04450. Both parts were transformed into E. Coli cells and spread on agar plates containing Chlorophenicol. A culture from each plate was used to inoculate a 10ml LB solution each and left to incubate overnight at 37C. After 24 hours of growth both cultures contained no red colour, so the cultures were left to incubate longer. After 48 hours of growth the culture containing cells with part Bba_J04450 had a deep red colour but the culture with Bba_K104100 still had no colour. Further experiments are needed to establish why our part produces a clear red colour on an agar plate but not in solution.

Characterisation

This involved comparisons with the original Bba_J04450 biobrick by performing transformations, restriction digests and BLAST analysis. We also had our biobrick sequenced.

Transformation

Parts BBa_K1041000 and BBa_J04450 were transformed into Alpha-Select competent E.Coli cells and plated onto LB Agar plates which contained the antibiotic ampicillin. Both plates have colonies that appear red under natural light Fig.1. Therefore the addition of a NdeI site has not effected the ability for the RFP gene to be transcribed.

Fig 1: Plates containing (left) BBa_K1041000 and (right) BBa_J04450 visualized under non-UV lightbox

Restriction Digests

Parts Bba_K1041000 and Bba_J04450 were analysed by restriction digests and run on agarose gels. Both biobricks were cut with NdeI, Fig 2 and PvuII Fig 3.

Fig 2:Analysis of Restriction enzyme digest with NdeI. Lanes 1 and 2 contain uncut Bba_K1041000 and Bba_K1041000 digested with NdeI. Lanes 3 and 4 contain uncut Bba_J04450 and Bba_J04450 digested with NdeI respectively.

Fig 3:Analysis of Restriction enzyme digest with PvuII. Lanes 2 and 3 contain uncut BBa_J04450 and BBa_J04450 digested with PvuII respectively. Lane 5 contains Bba_K1041000 with PvuII.

Sequencing

The biobrick was sent off to a company for sequencing, Fig 3,4,5.The data we recieved back showed the DNA is of good quality.

Fig. 3:K1041000 sequencing data part 1

Fig. 4:K1041000 sequencing data part 2

Fig. 5:K1041000 sequencing data part 3

BLAST Analysis

The data we recieved back from the sequencing company was aligned using BLAST with the expected DNA sequence Fig 6,7

Fig. 6: Forward primer K1041000 sequencing data aligned with the expected DNA sequence

Fig. 7: Reverse primer K1041000 sequencing data aligned with expected DNA sequence

User Reviews

UNIQ9aab3ff3c1db27cf-partinfo-00000000-QINU UNIQ9aab3ff3c1db27cf-partinfo-00000001-QINU

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ===Characterisation===
-of this biobrick involved comparisons with the original Bba_J04450 biobrick by performing transformations, restriction digests and BLAST analysis. We also had our biobrick sequenced.
+This involved comparisons with the original Bba_J04450 biobrick by performing transformations, restriction digests and BLAST analysis. We also had our biobrick sequenced.
 ===Transformation===