Difference between revisions of "Part:BBa K1185004:Design"

(Design Notes)
 
Line 100: Line 100:
 
The results from both sequencing run proved to show similar mutations were found on this backbone, most of the mutations occurred in the sacA integration regions. These results explained the reason why this pSac-Cm derived integration backbone for ‘’B.subtilis’’ were not working.
 
The results from both sequencing run proved to show similar mutations were found on this backbone, most of the mutations occurred in the sacA integration regions. These results explained the reason why this pSac-Cm derived integration backbone for ‘’B.subtilis’’ were not working.
  
To get round this problem, we align the sequence of this BioBrick to the Integration vector pSac-Cm sequence from the (Middleton, R., Hofmeister, A. New shuttle vectors for ectopic insertion of genes into Bacillus subtilis. Plasmid Volume 51, Issue 3, May 2004, Pages 238–245). The results showed that the sequence that the Groningen team 2012 put up on the registry was correct. This suggests that the plasmid that they have submitted and the sequence they provided did not match. By using the correct sequence to generate this integration plasmid we will be able to make this part functional not just in ‘’E. coli’’ but also ‘’B. subtilis.
+
To get round this problem, we have uploaded a new sequence of this pSac-Cm derived integration plasmid. The sequence that we uploaded contain the correct preffix and suffix and also all the correct ''sacA'' sequences for integration in ''B. subtilis''. We have successfully made this backbone not only compatible with ''E. coli'' but also ''B.subtilis''.
 
+
 
+
 
+
  
 
===Source===
 
===Source===

Latest revision as of 07:31, 4 October 2013

Integration vector for Bacillus subtilis derived from pSac-Cm


Assembly Compatibility:
  • 10
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[10]
    Illegal prefix found at 1
    Illegal suffix found at 5190
  • 12
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[12]
    Plasmid lacks a prefix.
    Plasmid lacks a suffix.
    Illegal EcoRI site found at 1
    Illegal SpeI site found at 5191
    Illegal PstI site found at 5205
    Illegal NotI site found at 7
    Illegal NotI site found at 5198
  • 21
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[21]
    Plasmid lacks a prefix.
    Plasmid lacks a suffix.
    Illegal EcoRI site found at 1
    Illegal BamHI site found at 163
  • 23
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[23]
    Illegal prefix found at 1
    Illegal suffix found at 5191
  • 25
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[25]
    Illegal prefix found at 1
    Plasmid lacks a suffix.
    Illegal XbaI site found at 16
    Illegal SpeI site found at 5191
    Illegal PstI site found at 5205
    Illegal NgoMIV site found at 4107
  • 1000
    INCOMPATIBLE WITH RFC[1000]
    Plasmid lacks a prefix.
    Plasmid lacks a suffix.
    Illegal BsaI site found at 2034
    Illegal SapI.rc site found at 3116


Design Notes

We found that that the integration plasmid that groningen send to the registry were unable to integrate in B. subtilis. This is due to the high number of mutations in the sacA integration region.This BioBrick was designed to be used as an integration backbone for the ‘’B. subtilis’’ by integrating at the ‘’sacA’’ region of the endogenous chromosome via double crossover.

The Groningen iGEM 2012 team has showed that this BioBrick can be replicated in ‘’E. coli’’, however have not showed any results/characterisation that this backbone can integrate correctly in ‘’B. subtilis’’.

We transformed this backbone into ‘’B. subtilis’’ but as can be seen in Figure 1, no colonies were found on the ‘’B. subtilis’’ str. 168 + pSac-Cm derived integration plasmid, however the positive control ‘’B. subtilis’’ str.168 + pGFPrrnB (integrates at amyE) did work, which suggested that this backbone was not integrated.


Pulpit rock
Plate 1: B. Subtilis str. 168 transformed with pGFPrrnB.
Pulpit rock
Plate 2: B.subtilis str. 168 transformed with H20(negative control).
Pulpit rock
Plate 3: B. subtilis str. 168 with pSac + Cm derived plasmid.
Figure 1. Plates of B. Subtilis str. 168 transformed with the pSac+Cm derived plasmid, pGFPrrnB (positive control) and water (negative control).

We repeated the transformations using higher concentration of plasmids 5ug, 10ug, and 15ug and plated them onto the LB + 5ug/ml Chloramphenicol plates. The results Figure 2, shows that there were colonies growing on the 10ug and 15ug plates.

Pulpit rock
B. subtilis str. 168 with 5ug pSac + Cm derived plasmid.
Pulpit rock
B. subtilis str. 168 with 10ug pSac + Cm derived plasmid.
Pulpit rock
B. subtilis str. 168 with 15ug pSac + Cm derived plasmid.
Pulpit rock
B.subtilis str. 168 transformed with H20(negative control)
Pulpit rock
B. Subtilis str. 168 transformed with pGFPrrnB.
Figure 1. Plates of B. Subtilis str. 168 transformed with 5,10 and 15ug pSac+Cm derived plasmid, pGFPrrnB (positive control) and water (negative control).

To test for integration, we used the Phenol red Sucrose test; the media where the transformants from the 10ug and 15ug plates were inoculated showed the same results as the control (‘’B. subtilis’’ + pGFPrrnB) with pH ranging between 4.6 – 5.2 suggesting that they could utilized sucrose as their carbon source and produced the acid by products, Figure 3.

BareCillus Gro pH.jpg

Figure 3. Display the pH of each samples following the Phenol Red Sucrose test on overnight grown culture in LB + 1% Sucrose media.

We then sequenced the backbone and found out that there were 49 mutations which include SNV, deletions and insertions.Table 1 display the mutations found on the sequence.

BareCillus Gro mutations.jpg Table 1. Shows all the mutations found in the BBa_K818000 backbone.


Table 2. Shows list of mutations found in the BBa_K818000 backbone, including the position, region and type of mutations after analysing the initial sequencing and the sequencing of highly mutated regions. BareCillus Gro sumseq.jpg Table 2. Shows list of mutations found in the BBa_K818000 backbone, including the position, region and type of mutations after analysing the initial sequencing and the sequencing of highly mutated regions.


The results from both sequencing run proved to show similar mutations were found on this backbone, most of the mutations occurred in the sacA integration regions. These results explained the reason why this pSac-Cm derived integration backbone for ‘’B.subtilis’’ were not working.

To get round this problem, we have uploaded a new sequence of this pSac-Cm derived integration plasmid. The sequence that we uploaded contain the correct preffix and suffix and also all the correct sacA sequences for integration in B. subtilis. We have successfully made this backbone not only compatible with E. coli but also B.subtilis.

Source

Groningen iGEM 2012 team

References

Middleton, R., Hofmeister, A. New shuttle vectors for ectopic insertion of genes into Bacillus subtilis. Plasmid Volume 51, Issue 3, May 2004, Pages 238–245

Becker E, Herrera NC, Gunderson FQ, Derman AI, Dance AL, Sims J, Larsen RA, Pogliano J. DNA segregation by the bacterial actin AlfA during Bacillus subtilis growth and development. EMBO J. 2006 Dec 13;25(24):5919-31. Epub 2006 Nov 30.