Difference between revisions of "Team:Glasgow/AzureA"

 
(25 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 115: Line 115:
 
                 margin-top:15vh;
 
                 margin-top:15vh;
 
                 border-radius: 10%;
 
                 border-radius: 10%;
                 margin-left:7.5vw;
+
                 margin-left:3.5vw;
 
                 float:left;
 
                 float:left;
 
                 text-align:center;
 
                 text-align:center;
Line 125: Line 125:
 
                 margin-top: 4vh;
 
                 margin-top: 4vh;
 
                 color:deepskyblue;
 
                 color:deepskyblue;
 +
                font-size:15px;
 
             }
 
             }
 
              
 
              
Line 261: Line 262:
 
                 margin-top:15vh;
 
                 margin-top:15vh;
 
                 border-radius: 10%;
 
                 border-radius: 10%;
                 margin-left:7.5vw;
+
                 margin-left:0vw;
 
                 float:left;
 
                 float:left;
 
                 text-align:center;
 
                 text-align:center;
Line 519: Line 520:
 
         <table>
 
         <table>
 
             <tr><td class="overview">Summary</td></tr>
 
             <tr><td class="overview">Summary</td></tr>
             <tr><td class="sensor">Overview</td></tr>
+
             <tr><td class="sensor">Background</td></tr>
             <tr><td class="survivability">Sensor</td></tr>
+
             <tr><td class="survivability">The costs of staining DNA</td></tr>
             <tr><td class="results">Survivability</td></tr>
+
             <tr><td class="results">2x Stock Protocol of Azure A stain</td></tr>
             <tr><td class="conclusion">Conclusion</td></tr>       
+
             <tr><td class="conclusion">Staining Protocol</td></tr>
 +
            <tr><td class="a">Gel extraction using Azure A</td></tr>       
 +
            <tr><td class="b">Azure A/Ethidium Bromide gel comparison</td></tr>
 +
            <tr><td class="d">Conclusions</td></tr>
 +
            <tr><td class="c">Safety and considerations of Azure A</td></tr>             
 
             <tr><td class="top">Top</td></tr>     
 
             <tr><td class="top">Top</td></tr>     
 
         </table>
 
         </table>
Line 533: Line 538:
 
              
 
              
 
             <p class="mainText">
 
             <p class="mainText">
Aims:
+
<center>
<ul>
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/0/0d/2015-Glasgow-Azure1.jpeg"  style="max-width:500px;">
<li>To characterise the three components of a UV-A sensor system: UirS, UirR, PlsiR.</li>
+
<figcaption>Figure 1: The Glasgow 2015 iGEM Azure A staining equipment
<li>To investigate E. coli survival rates in UV-A and sunlight.</li>
+
</figcaption>
</ul>
+
</center>
 +
Azure A (Dimethylthionine) is a blue dye of the Thiazin family which can be used to visually stain DNA down to quantities of 20ng. Azure A staining requires no expensive equipment or controlled disposal techniques like the common DNA stain Ethidium Bromide. Glasgow’s 2015 iGEM team utilised Azure A staining for the vast majority of the Agarose gel DNA purification/extractions we performed. We aim to promote Azure A staining in order to expand the participation of community and high school labs in iGEM and molecular biology, where they would not be able to meet the expense of equipment or disposal of Ethidium bromide for DNA visualisation.
 +
 
 +
<div class="scrollSensor"></div></p>
 
</br>
 
</br>
Results:
 
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
   
 +
    <h2>Background</h2>
 +
   
 +
            <p class="mainText">
 +
Azure A is produced when Methylene blue, another Thiazin stain, is oxidised. Methylene blue is less sensitive for staining DNA than its oxidation products, while Azure A demonstrates reduced background gel staining and a reduced required staining time (NCBE, 2003b). The Thiazin family is thought to stain nucleic acids through ionic interactions with the phosphate groups of the sugar-phosphate backbone (NCBE, 2003a); but weak intercalative interactions with DNA have also been described (Paul and Kumar, 2013).
 
</br>
 
</br>
Parts:
+
<center>
<ul>
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/b/bc/2015-Glasgow-azure1.png" height="60%" width="60%"/>
<li>Essential:
+
<figcaption>Figure 2: Chemical structures of four of the Thiazin family of dyes, including Azure A and Methylene blue.
 +
</figcaption>
 +
</center>
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K1725400 (PlsiR)
 
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K1725410 (UirS)
+
Thiazin dyes are combined with Eosin to make Giemsa stain, a ubiquitous diagnostic stain for intracellular protozoan parasites such as Malaria and Trichomonas. Giemsa stain is also utilised to visualise chromosomal configurations by the so-called “G-Banding” of karyograms, which were the early methods of detecting chromosomal deletions and translocations (Sumner, 1980).
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K172541#(UirS with RBS)
+
The Azure A compound used herein was Azure A chloride; supplied as a dark green powdered solid available from several chemical supply vendors. The Azure A used by Glasgow Team was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich <a href="http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/sigma/a6270.">(A6270)</a>
</br>
+
 
• K1725420 (UirR)
+
</br>
+
• K1725421 (UirR with RBS)
+
  
</li>
+
<div style="visibility:hidden; height:0;width:0;" class="scrollSurvivability"></div> </p>
<li>Others:
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K1725401 (PlsiR.I13500)
 
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K1725402 (PlsiR.E5501)
+
        <h2>The costs of staining DNA</h2>
 +
   
 +
            <p class="mainText">
 +
Sigma-Aldrich sells 10ml of Ethidium bromide (EtBr) solution at a concentration of 10mg/ml for £45/$56 (E1510) (Sigma-Aldrich, 2015). We used a solution of 15ul (10mg/ml) EtBr per 0.5L of TAE running buffer for post-run staining, which works out to ~6666 0.5L stains per bottle of Ethidium. Traditional DNA staining with Ethidium bromide appears to be low-cost when only the expense of buying the stain is considered; with a cost per gel of £0.0067. However the cost to a lab is greater than simply the stock stain; Ethidium stained DNA requires visualisation on a UV-transilluminator, and the model of UV transilluminator available to us comes from a range which begins at £600/$900 (VWR, 2015). UV illumination requires an enclosed space where other people and sensitive items will not be damaged by irradiation. Additionally, imaging an Ethidium stained gel requires specialist camera filters to prevent camera sensor damage by the UV radiation, or the use of an enclosed illumination and photographing apparatus such as the BioRad Gel Doc™ XR system. Disposal of Ethidium bromide stained gels is also costly; EtBr has been found to be a potent mutagen in <i>in vitro</i> testing, thus disposal and handling is treated very seriously. The EtBr disposal policy of the University of Glasgow states that EtBr waste should be disposed of into biohazard marked containers, which must be uplifted by a 3rd party waste disposal service.
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K1725422 (J23101.B0032.UirR)
 
 
</br>
 
</br>
• K1725423 (J23110.B0032.UirR)
+
10g of Azure A chloride powder costs ~£36/$60. 500ml of 1x stain was reused by Glasgow up to 2x per day, for two weeks, equalling somewhere in the region of 28 gels per 500ml of 1x. 10g of Azure A chloride will produce 25L of 1x stain, or 50 500ml batches. This calculates to an estimated 1,400 gels per 10g of Azure A; or £0.026/$0.042 per gel. At face value this is more expensive per gel than EtBr, but Azure A does not require specialist disposal services, the lightbox which is helpful for visualising bands for gel extraction can vary in price but will not likely reach the price of a UV transilluminator, with a Top of the Range professional white light box for photography purposes costing ~£282/$440 (Calumet: https://www.calphoto.co.uk/product/Calumet-Light-Box-A3-/710-407X) with cheaper alternatives available. Imaging an Azure A gel can be done on any lab or office scanner, if the gel is placed between two sheets of acetate, rather than requiring specialist UV illumination and capture equipment.
</br>
+
• K1725424 (J23114.B0032.UirR)
+
</br>
+
• K1725425 (J23116.B0032.UirR)
+
</br>
+
• K1725426 (J23101.B0032.UirR.B0015)
+
</br>
+
• K1725427 (J23110.B0032.UirR.B0015)
+
</br>
+
• K1725428 (J23114.B0032.UirR.B0015)
+
</br>
+
• K1725429 (J23116.B0032.UirR.B0015)
+
</br>
+
• K1725430 (J23101.B0032.UirR.B0015.PlsiR.I13500)
+
</br>
+
• K1725431 (J23110.B0032.UirR.B0015.PlsiR.I13500)
+
</br>
+
• K1725432 (J23114.B0032.UirR.B0015.PlsiR.I13500)
+
</br>
+
• K1725433 (J23116.B0032.UirR.B0015.PlsiR.I13500)
+
</br>
+
</li>
+
</ul>
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
<center>
 +
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/8b/AzureA-destaining-process_fullsize.jpg">
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/5/5a/AzureA-destaining-process_600w.jpg"  style="max-height:600px;"></a>
 +
<figcaption>
 +
Figure 3: Sequential destains of one Azure A stained 1% Agarose gel, following the protocol provided below, imaged between two sheets of Acetate on a office scanner. Click for full size.
 +
</figcaption>
 +
</center>
  
  
 
+
<div class="scrollResults"></div></p>
 
+
 
+
<div class="scrollSensor"></div></p>
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
            <h2>Protocol for producing a 2x stock solution of Azure A stain</h2>
 
</br>
 
</br>
   
+
We maintained a 2x stock solution in line with the recommendation of the NCBE guidance from which we first learned of Azure A staining (NCBE, 2003b).
    <h2>Overview</h2>
+
   
+
            <p class="mainText">
+
In order to prevent cells permanently shifting their metabolism towards one that favours light production, we decided to repress the bioluminescence genes (our optimised lux operon) in the presence of sunlight. The chosen system recognizes the presence of unidirectional UV-A light and comes from the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC6803. The system has not been previously characterized before in iGEM. Three components are required to produce a response to UV-A: UirS (UV intensity response Sensor), UirR (UV intensity response Regulator), and PlsiR (promoter of the light and stress integrating response Regulator). For the system to be fully online K322122 is required. This BioBrick is responsible for the synthesis of phycocyanobillin, a chromophore normally found in cyanobacteria that is necessary for the functioning of nearly all light-sensing proteins.
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
We obtained UirS and UirR from genomic Synechocystis DNA via PCR. Our primers included the BioBrick prefix and suffix as well as a ribosome-binding site (B0032). Due to non-BioBrick compatible restriction sites in the UirS gene PCR mutagenesis was carried out with the use of the TOPO TA plasmid vector. The UirR gene contained no such sites and was therefore inserted directly into the pSB1C3 plasmid. PlsiR also lacked such restriction sites and was therefore inserted into pSB1C3.
+
To produce 1L of 2x Azure A (0.08% Azure A/40% Ethanol):
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
<UL>
 +
<LI>Dissolve 0.8g Azure A chloride solid in 1L 40% Ethanol
 +
<li style="margin-left: 50px;">Store in a glass screw capped bottle out of direct sunlight, or alternatively wrap the bottle in aluminium foil. Azure A will bleach over time in sunlight and lose effectiveness.</li>
 +
<br>
 +
<LI>Prior to use, a 1x (0.04% Azure A/20% Ethanol) solution should be prepared by diluting the 2x stock 1:1 with distilled or deionised water to a desired final volume.
 +
<li style="margin-left: 50px;">1x stock should also be stored in a glass screw capped bottle out of direct sunlight.</li>
 +
</UL>
 +
 
</br>
 
</br>
Due to possible toxicity of the UirS gene, our proposed construct contains UirR and PlsiR with an appropriate coding gene in the high copy number pSB1C3, while UirS, alongside with the phycocyanobillin synthesis operon, was put in the low copy number plasmid pSB3K3. We have decided not to put a terminator between UirS and K322122 because the promoter of K322122 is stronger than that of UirS.
+
Approximately 500ml of 1x stain was found to be suitable for staining of gels used in our experiments, however this may vary depending on gel and staining tray size.  
 +
 
 +
<div class="scrollConclusion"></div>
 +
      </br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/c/c5/2015-Glasgow-UVA1.png" height="60%" width="60%"/>
 
  
 
+
            <h2>Protocol for staining with 1x Azure A</h2>
<div style="visibility:hidden; height:0;width:0;" class="scrollSurvivability"></div> </p>
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
        <h2> Sensor</h2>
+
<p class="mainText">
   
+
In this protocol Azure A is used as a post-electrophoresis gel stain. The effect of putting it in the running buffer is unknown, other than it will definitely stain the gel-kit blue.
            <p class="mainText">
+
 
Originally, the system containing UirS, UirR, and PlsiR accounts for a negative phototactic response to unidirectional UV-A light. The proposed mechanism puts UirS, a transmembrane protein of the CBCR family, as the molecule that perceives UV light. It is suggested that through a physical interaction between UirS and UirR and possibly a phosphotransfer from UirS to UirR, UirR is released from the transmembrane protein. The released UirR can now bind to DNA and UirR, which is similar to other activators of stress responses, was found to be a transcriptional activator of lsiR after binding to its promoter PlsiR .
+
<UL>
 +
<LI>First, transfer the gel to a tray or container.
 +
<li style="margin-left: 50px;">Glasgow team used a large clear plastic Tupperware box with a lid. A lidded container prevents accidental overflow of the stain</li>
 +
<li style="margin-left: 50px;">Azure A can stain plastics so any tray used for Azure A should not be utilised for other uses unless it has been thoroughly cleaned with 100% Ethanol.</li>
 +
<br>
 +
<li>Pour enough 1x Azure A solution into the container to cover the gel, without overfilling it.
 +
<li>Shake the container for 10-15 minutes, either by a low setting on a benchtop shaker, or by hand (fun)
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<li>1x stain was shown to be usable for several weeks before making up a new batch, without any demonstrable contamination issues or reduction in effectiveness.  
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
<br>
 +
<li>After a 10-15min stain, DNA bands of high concentration may already be visible at this stage, but we recommend at least one round of destaining for improved visualisation.
 +
<li>To destain, cover the gel in the used running buffer from the gel-kit, or distilled/deionised water. Shake for 10-15 mins. The destaining solution should be
 +
discarded into a sink drain along with running water.
 +
<li style="margin-left: 50px;">Repeated rounds of destaining will improve visualisation bands of weak concentration, as demonstrated in <b>Figure 3</b> above.
 +
<li>Band visualisation is improved by viewing the gel on a white lightbox, either inside a clear plastic staining container, or atop of a sheet of acetate to prevent staining.
 +
 +
</p>
 +
      <div class="scrollA"></div>
 +
      </br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
We suggest a system where UV-light triggers the expression of a repressor that acts on the production of bioluminescence genes to alleviate the burden they may cause on the cells’ metabolism if constantly expressed. During the night, the bioluminescence genes are expressed, and produce a green-blue light. As it becomes day, UV-A causes the release and activation of UirR. UirR binds to PlsiR to turn expression of the repressor PhlF. PhlF binds to PPhlF to turn off expression of LuxCDABE, so there is no bioluminescence. As it becomes night again, UirR is no longer bound to PlsiR so expression of PhlF is turned off. As PPhlF is no longer repressed, expression of LuxCDABE is turned and bioluminescence is produced again.
+
            <h2>Gel extraction using Azure A</h2>
 +
<p class="mainText">
 +
Gel extraction after staining with Azure A follows the same protocol as an Ethidium bromide gel extraction, without the need to use a UV transilluminator and associated face protection.
 +
</br></br>
 +
As the Glasgow team used a clear plastic Tupperware box to stain our gels, we often proceeded to place them straight on top of our benchtop lightbox after destaining and perform the gel extraction there, without having to manipulate the gel onto another surface.
 +
</br></br>
 +
<center>
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/5/57/29th_June_16.10.JPG"  style="max-width:500px;">
 
</br>
 
</br>
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/0/06/2015-Glasgow-UVA2.png" height="60%" width="60%"/>
+
<figcaption>
 +
Figure 4: A typical Azure A gel following extractions with a scalpel
 +
</figcaption>
 +
</center>
 +
</br></br>
 +
The scalpel blade should be cleaned between sequential fragment extractions from the gel to prevent contamination.
 +
</br></br>
 +
DNA extracted from gels following electrophoresis was purified using a QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit by QIAGEN. The only difference caused by use of Azure A was a change of colour not normally seen in use of the kit; after addition of yellow Buffer QG for the fragment melting stage the colour changes to green, due to the interaction of the blue and yellow dyes in the gel fragment and QG respectively.
 +
</br></br>
 +
N.B. This is not the same erroneous colour change that is warned about in the protocol due to issues with pH.
 +
<center>
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/a6/2015-08-28_11.29.50.jpg" style="max-width:500px;">
 
</br>
 
</br>
</br>
+
<figcaption>
We have confirmed through the use of a laser scanner that PlsiR is not active when UirS and UirR are absent. PlsiR was ligated to GFP with two ribosome binding sites of different strength and no fluorescence was observed (the parts we used for this experiment were K1725401 and K1725402) (Chart 1). Moreover, cells that possess UirR but lack UirS also did not show levels of fluorescence above the expected for E. coli. Therefore, UirR is not sufficient to drive the activation of PlsiR.
+
Figure 6: The inconsequential colour change observed after addition of Buffer QG from the QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit.
</br>
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/d7/2015-Glasgow-UVA3.png" height="60%" width="60%"/>
+
</br>
+
<figcaption>Chart 1. Relative Fluorescence (Compared to Last Taken Measurement of Constitutively Expressed GFP Control) over Absorbance in DH5α cells. DH5α cells containing the PlsiR promoter with GFP fluoresce no more than the original laboratory strain or cells that have GFP without a promoter.
+
 
</figcaption>
 
</figcaption>
 +
</center>
  
 +
</p>
 +
      <div class="scrollB"></div>
 +
      </br>
 +
</br>
  
<div class="scrollResults"></div></p>
+
<h2>Comparison of Azure A staining to Ethidium Bromide staining</h2>
 +
<p class="mainText">
 +
We attempted to demonstrate the DNA staining sensitivity of Azure A and Ethidium bromide through a repeatable, directly comparable experimental protocol.
 +
</br></br>
 +
iGEM transformation efficiency control DNA (J04450 (RFP) in pSB1C3) was transformed into chemically competent DH5a cells, and then a resulting transformant colony was inoculated into a 10ml overnight culture. Plasmid DNA was isolated from 4.5ml of an overnight culture following the standard QIAGEN “QIAprep Spin Miniprep Kit” protocol.From the resulting J04450.pSB1C3 miniprep a 1/100 dilution was created and  OD260 was measured in a spectrophotometer to determine the DNA concentration. DNA concentration of the miniprep DNA was calculated to be ~285ng/ul from the spectrophotometer reading.
 +
</br></br>
 +
Restriction digests were set up with EcoRI-HF enzyme and an “uncut”control Serial dilutions of the cut and uncut DNAwere made  in order to get a range of known DNA concentrations to load onto two gels;
 +
</br></br>
 +
1. Stained with Ethidium bromide and imaged in a Bio-rad Gel Doc XR imager,
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
2. Stained with Azure A (destained repeatedly over 2 hours) and imaged on a standard office scanner between two sheets of acetate.
 +
</br></br>
 +
The results (Fig 7 & 8 below) show that Ethidium bromide could resolve bands of DNA as low as 2ng, whereas with Azure A band with ~17ng of DNA was the lowest resolvable on an office scanner after 3 hours of destaining.
 +
<center>
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/f/f6/AzureAvsEtBr_AzureA.jpg" style="max-width:500px;">
 
</br>
 
</br>
            <h2> Survivability </h2>
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/80/AzureAvsEtBr_EtBr.jpg" style="max-width:500px;">
<div class="box">
+
<h5>Introduction</h5>
+
<div class="text">
+
The fact that UV exposure can be lethal to E.coli is well documented.  After deciding to use a UV sensor to activate our system, it became obvious that we would have to examine the effects of exposing E.coli to the amount of UV needed to activate the sensor over time. To do this we generated a number of survival curves. (Please note, these experiments were not repeated enough to generate statistically significant results.) The graphs have been included as an indication of the thought process that went into guiding the experiments. Given more time we would have repeated these experiments many more times. Genotypes of the strains used can be found <a href = "http://blog.addgene.org/plasmids-101-common-lab-e-coli-strains">here</a> for MG6115 TOP10 and DH5α and <a href = "http://genesdev.cshlp.org/content/14/23/2976/T1.expansion.html">here</a> for DS941.
+
</div>
+
</div>
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
<div class="box">
+
<figcaption>
<h5>Initial aims</h5>
+
Figures 7 & 8: 1% Agarose gels loaded with an identical dilution series of prepared DNA of known concentration; one gel stained with Azure A and one gel stained with Ethidium bromide (For EtBr staining method see: Protocols)
<div class="text">
+
</figcaption>
Initially we wanted to explore what happened over a relatively small period of exposure, as our assumption was that we would see substantial reduction in a fixed number of E.coli,  even over a relatively small time period. We also wanted to see how the different strains (DH5α ,TOP10) being used would respond compared to each other.
+
</center>
 +
</br></br>
 +
      <div class="scrollD"></div>
 +
      </br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
Since both DH5α and TOP10 are recA negative, and are therefore incapable of certain major kinds of DNA repair, we predicted that these strains would be more acutely affected than DS941 and MG6155.  
+
 
</div>
+
<h2>Conclusions</h2>
</div>
+
 
 +
<p class="mainText">Azure A is an easy to use, visible light DNA stain which does not require expensive equipment or biohazard disposal techniques. For routine DNA manipulation techniques such as gel extractions from high copy number plasmids like pSB1C3, Azure A staining is an effective alternative to Ethidium bromide without the need for UV light visualisation.
 +
<br>
 +
Glasgow 2015 iGEM team hopes to promote the use of Azure A in order to extend the reach of iGEM, synthetic biology, and molecular biology in general, further into settings where the need for Ethidium bromide and the associated costs may prevent participation, such as high schools and community labs.</p>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
</p>
 +
      <div class="scrollC"></div>
 +
      </br>  
 
</br>
 
</br>
<div class="box">
+
 
<h5>Method</h5>
+
<h2>Safety and considerations of Azure A</h2>
<div class="text">
+
<p class="mainText">
1ml 10x serial dilutions were made up to 10-6 from a 5ml overnight of each strain. 10µl spots of each dilution were then spotted onto LB agar plates.
+
Azure A Chloride's Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) is available from the supplier; it is not deemed to be hazardous.
These plates were then exposed to 50µmoles/m2/s of UVA at room temperature in illumination cabinets. Time points were then taken by removing plates from the illumination cabinet.
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
After illumination, plates were incubated at 37°C, under the assumption that every single viable cell will form a colony. The length of incubation is irrelevant, provided that every cell is given enough time to form a visible colony. This also forms the basis of our counting system, where a colony is assumed to have come from a single cell. We also make the assumption that cell division at the temperature and time we were running the experiment was negligible/nonexistent.
+
Azure A solution can be disposed of down a conventional sink.  
 
</br>
 
</br>
After incubation, the colonies on each spot/dilution were counted. The number of colonies from the lowest visible dilution (some dilutions formed a lawn of growth) were then multiplied by the dilution factor to approximate how many cells would be in 10µl of undiluted culture.
+
Azure A stained Agarose gels can be disposed of in standard laboratory waste.
 
</br>
 
</br>
</div>
+
Standard laboratory safety measures for handling a dye; such as gloves, goggles, lab coat, should be followed when using Azure A.
</div>
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
<div class="box">
+
Flames should not be used near to preparation of Azure A/Ethanol solution due to flammability.
<h5>Results</h5>
+
<div class="text">
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/7/7d/2015-Glasgow-sur1.png" height="70%" width="70%"/>
+
<figcaption>Figure 1  mean estimated  cell count per 10ul of a 5ml overnight in lb broth over time of exposure to 50 µmoles/m2/s of  UVA  time points taken at 010 20 30 60 120 . time points connected  by straight line </figcaption>
+
 
</br>
 
</br>
We seemed to be seeing a decrease by 30 mins  and between 60 and 120 at least in the recA positive strains the decrease between 0-30 is much steeper in the reca negative strains  (fig1).  
+
Azure A solutions will stain clothing and surfaces if spilled.  
 
</br>
 
</br>
Since we had no time points between 60 -120 we decided to take time points  at 80 100 120 to better visualise the change (fig 2).
+
Azure A solution can be removed from surfaces (such as a benchtop or staining tray) with 100% Ethanol and paper towel.
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
 
</br>
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/9/98/2015-Glasgow-sur2.png" height="70%" width="70%"/>
 
<figcaption>Fig 2 mean  estimated cell count per 10ul of a 5ml overnight in lb broth over time of exposure to 50 µmoles/m2/s to UVA time points at 0 80 100 120  time points connected  by straight line </figcaption>
 
 
</br>
 
</br>
As noted above figure 2 show this second decline seems to be a feature of MG6115 and  DS941, may be du e to their recA status
+
 
 +
 
 +
NCBE. 2003a. National Centre for Biotechnology Education | DNA50 | Staining DNA [Online]. <a href="http://www.ncbe.reading.ac.uk/dna50/staining1.html">Available</a>
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
NCBE. 2003b. National Centre for Biotechnology Education | DNA50 | Staining DNA Table [Online]. <a href="http://www.ncbe.reading.ac.uk/dna50/stainingtable.html">Available</a>
 
</br>
 
</br>
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/1/19/2015-Glasgow-sur3.png" height="70%" width="70%"/>
+
PAUL, P. & KUMAR, G. S. 2013. Spectroscopic studies on the binding interaction of phenothiazinium dyes toluidine blue O, azure A and azure B to DNA.
<figcaption>Figure 3 estimated  cell count per 10ul of a 5ml overnight in lb broth over time of exposure to 60 µmoles/m2/s to UVA composite figure including mean from  previous 2 graphs </figcaption>
+
Spectrochimica Acta Part a-Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, 107, 303-310.
 
</br>
 
</br>
It’s reported that E.coli suffer lethal effects at around 1000kw  with illumination at  366nminin continuous culture (Berney et al 2006).this corresponds with around 16 hour with the fluence and wavelength we were using.  We decide to illuminate bacteria for 14hours  as we felt that if least some  bacteria could withstand 14 hours  of activating radiation then the idea as using UVA as the input into the toy was at least theoretically feasible 
+
SIGMA-ALDRICH. 2015. Ethidium bromide solution BioReagent, for molecular biology, 10 mg/mL in H2O | Sigma-Aldrich [Online].
 
</br>
 
</br>
 +
SUMNER, A. T. 1980. DYE BINDING MECHANISMS IN G-BANDING OF CHROMOSOMES. Journal of Microscopy-Oxford, 119, 397-406.
 
</br>
 
</br>
Plates at 14 hours showed growth
+
VWR. 2015. UV transilluminators, Benchtop series [Online]. <a href="https://uk.vwr.com/store/catalog/product.jsp?catalog_number=732-4368">Available</a>
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
  
 +
</p>
  
</div>
 
</div>
 
  
 
 
<div class="scrollConclusion"></div>
 
      </br>
 
</br>
 
 
            <h2>Conclusion</h2>
 
     
 
            <h2 class="readMore">Read More!</h2>
 
           
 
        <div class="monsterContainer">
 
<div class="monster"><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Glasgow/Project/Overview/Protocols"><img class='monsterImg' src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/9/9d/Monster2-inverted.png">
 
            <h3><span class="monsterSpan">Protocols</span></h3></a></div>
 
           
 
            <div class="monster"><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Glasgow/Project/Overview/Bioluminesence"><img class='monsterImg' src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/d4/Monster3-inverted.jpg">
 
            <h3 style="left:2.5%;"><span class="monsterSpan" style="font-size:20px;">Bioluminescence</span></h3></a></div>
 
           
 
            <div class="monster"><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Glasgow/Project/Overview/Terminator"><img class='monsterImg' src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/e/e1/Monster4-inverted.jpg">
 
            <h3><span class="monsterSpan">Terminator</span></h3></a></div>
 
           
 
            <div class="monster"><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Glasgow/Project/Overview/Repressors"><img class='monsterImg' src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/d1/Monster5-inverted.jpg">
 
            <h3><span class="monsterSpan">Repressors</span></h3></a></div>
 
 
          
 
          
 
         </div>
 
         </div>
Line 749: Line 777:
 
             $('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: $('.scrollTop').offset().top}, 1000);
 
             $('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: $('.scrollTop').offset().top}, 1000);
 
         });
 
         });
          
+
            $('.a').click(function() {
 +
            $('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: $('.scrollA').offset().top}, 1000);
 +
         });
 +
    $('.b').click(function() {
 +
            $('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: $('.scrollB').offset().top}, 1000);
 +
        });
 +
    $('.c').click(function() {
 +
            $('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: $('.scrollC').offset().top}, 1000);
 +
        });
 +
  $('.d').click(function() {
 +
            $('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: $('.scrollD').offset().top}, 1000);
 +
        });
 
         </script>  
 
         </script>  
 
<script type="text/javascript">
 
<script type="text/javascript">

Latest revision as of 16:13, 17 October 2015

Glasglow

Azure A Staining

Summary

Figure 1: The Glasgow 2015 iGEM Azure A staining equipment
Azure A (Dimethylthionine) is a blue dye of the Thiazin family which can be used to visually stain DNA down to quantities of 20ng. Azure A staining requires no expensive equipment or controlled disposal techniques like the common DNA stain Ethidium Bromide. Glasgow’s 2015 iGEM team utilised Azure A staining for the vast majority of the Agarose gel DNA purification/extractions we performed. We aim to promote Azure A staining in order to expand the participation of community and high school labs in iGEM and molecular biology, where they would not be able to meet the expense of equipment or disposal of Ethidium bromide for DNA visualisation.



Background

Azure A is produced when Methylene blue, another Thiazin stain, is oxidised. Methylene blue is less sensitive for staining DNA than its oxidation products, while Azure A demonstrates reduced background gel staining and a reduced required staining time (NCBE, 2003b). The Thiazin family is thought to stain nucleic acids through ionic interactions with the phosphate groups of the sugar-phosphate backbone (NCBE, 2003a); but weak intercalative interactions with DNA have also been described (Paul and Kumar, 2013).

Figure 2: Chemical structures of four of the Thiazin family of dyes, including Azure A and Methylene blue.


Thiazin dyes are combined with Eosin to make Giemsa stain, a ubiquitous diagnostic stain for intracellular protozoan parasites such as Malaria and Trichomonas. Giemsa stain is also utilised to visualise chromosomal configurations by the so-called “G-Banding” of karyograms, which were the early methods of detecting chromosomal deletions and translocations (Sumner, 1980).
The Azure A compound used herein was Azure A chloride; supplied as a dark green powdered solid available from several chemical supply vendors. The Azure A used by Glasgow Team was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (A6270)



The costs of staining DNA

Sigma-Aldrich sells 10ml of Ethidium bromide (EtBr) solution at a concentration of 10mg/ml for £45/$56 (E1510) (Sigma-Aldrich, 2015). We used a solution of 15ul (10mg/ml) EtBr per 0.5L of TAE running buffer for post-run staining, which works out to ~6666 0.5L stains per bottle of Ethidium. Traditional DNA staining with Ethidium bromide appears to be low-cost when only the expense of buying the stain is considered; with a cost per gel of £0.0067. However the cost to a lab is greater than simply the stock stain; Ethidium stained DNA requires visualisation on a UV-transilluminator, and the model of UV transilluminator available to us comes from a range which begins at £600/$900 (VWR, 2015). UV illumination requires an enclosed space where other people and sensitive items will not be damaged by irradiation. Additionally, imaging an Ethidium stained gel requires specialist camera filters to prevent camera sensor damage by the UV radiation, or the use of an enclosed illumination and photographing apparatus such as the BioRad Gel Doc™ XR system. Disposal of Ethidium bromide stained gels is also costly; EtBr has been found to be a potent mutagen in in vitro testing, thus disposal and handling is treated very seriously. The EtBr disposal policy of the University of Glasgow states that EtBr waste should be disposed of into biohazard marked containers, which must be uplifted by a 3rd party waste disposal service.

10g of Azure A chloride powder costs ~£36/$60. 500ml of 1x stain was reused by Glasgow up to 2x per day, for two weeks, equalling somewhere in the region of 28 gels per 500ml of 1x. 10g of Azure A chloride will produce 25L of 1x stain, or 50 500ml batches. This calculates to an estimated 1,400 gels per 10g of Azure A; or £0.026/$0.042 per gel. At face value this is more expensive per gel than EtBr, but Azure A does not require specialist disposal services, the lightbox which is helpful for visualising bands for gel extraction can vary in price but will not likely reach the price of a UV transilluminator, with a Top of the Range professional white light box for photography purposes costing ~£282/$440 (Calumet: https://www.calphoto.co.uk/product/Calumet-Light-Box-A3-/710-407X) with cheaper alternatives available. Imaging an Azure A gel can be done on any lab or office scanner, if the gel is placed between two sheets of acetate, rather than requiring specialist UV illumination and capture equipment.

Figure 3: Sequential destains of one Azure A stained 1% Agarose gel, following the protocol provided below, imaged between two sheets of Acetate on a office scanner. Click for full size.


Protocol for producing a 2x stock solution of Azure A stain


We maintained a 2x stock solution in line with the recommendation of the NCBE guidance from which we first learned of Azure A staining (NCBE, 2003b).

To produce 1L of 2x Azure A (0.08% Azure A/40% Ethanol):
  • Dissolve 0.8g Azure A chloride solid in 1L 40% Ethanol
  • Store in a glass screw capped bottle out of direct sunlight, or alternatively wrap the bottle in aluminium foil. Azure A will bleach over time in sunlight and lose effectiveness.

  • Prior to use, a 1x (0.04% Azure A/20% Ethanol) solution should be prepared by diluting the 2x stock 1:1 with distilled or deionised water to a desired final volume.
  • 1x stock should also be stored in a glass screw capped bottle out of direct sunlight.

Approximately 500ml of 1x stain was found to be suitable for staining of gels used in our experiments, however this may vary depending on gel and staining tray size.


Protocol for staining with 1x Azure A



In this protocol Azure A is used as a post-electrophoresis gel stain. The effect of putting it in the running buffer is unknown, other than it will definitely stain the gel-kit blue.

  • First, transfer the gel to a tray or container.
  • Glasgow team used a large clear plastic Tupperware box with a lid. A lidded container prevents accidental overflow of the stain
  • Azure A can stain plastics so any tray used for Azure A should not be utilised for other uses unless it has been thoroughly cleaned with 100% Ethanol.

  • Pour enough 1x Azure A solution into the container to cover the gel, without overfilling it.
  • Shake the container for 10-15 minutes, either by a low setting on a benchtop shaker, or by hand (fun)

  • 1x stain was shown to be usable for several weeks before making up a new batch, without any demonstrable contamination issues or reduction in effectiveness.

  • After a 10-15min stain, DNA bands of high concentration may already be visible at this stage, but we recommend at least one round of destaining for improved visualisation.
  • To destain, cover the gel in the used running buffer from the gel-kit, or distilled/deionised water. Shake for 10-15 mins. The destaining solution should be discarded into a sink drain along with running water.
  • Repeated rounds of destaining will improve visualisation bands of weak concentration, as demonstrated in Figure 3 above.
  • Band visualisation is improved by viewing the gel on a white lightbox, either inside a clear plastic staining container, or atop of a sheet of acetate to prevent staining.



    Gel extraction using Azure A

    Gel extraction after staining with Azure A follows the same protocol as an Ethidium bromide gel extraction, without the need to use a UV transilluminator and associated face protection.

    As the Glasgow team used a clear plastic Tupperware box to stain our gels, we often proceeded to place them straight on top of our benchtop lightbox after destaining and perform the gel extraction there, without having to manipulate the gel onto another surface.


    Figure 4: A typical Azure A gel following extractions with a scalpel


    The scalpel blade should be cleaned between sequential fragment extractions from the gel to prevent contamination.

    DNA extracted from gels following electrophoresis was purified using a QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit by QIAGEN. The only difference caused by use of Azure A was a change of colour not normally seen in use of the kit; after addition of yellow Buffer QG for the fragment melting stage the colour changes to green, due to the interaction of the blue and yellow dyes in the gel fragment and QG respectively.

    N.B. This is not the same erroneous colour change that is warned about in the protocol due to issues with pH.

    Figure 6: The inconsequential colour change observed after addition of Buffer QG from the QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit.



    Comparison of Azure A staining to Ethidium Bromide staining

    We attempted to demonstrate the DNA staining sensitivity of Azure A and Ethidium bromide through a repeatable, directly comparable experimental protocol.

    iGEM transformation efficiency control DNA (J04450 (RFP) in pSB1C3) was transformed into chemically competent DH5a cells, and then a resulting transformant colony was inoculated into a 10ml overnight culture. Plasmid DNA was isolated from 4.5ml of an overnight culture following the standard QIAGEN “QIAprep Spin Miniprep Kit” protocol.From the resulting J04450.pSB1C3 miniprep a 1/100 dilution was created and OD260 was measured in a spectrophotometer to determine the DNA concentration. DNA concentration of the miniprep DNA was calculated to be ~285ng/ul from the spectrophotometer reading.

    Restriction digests were set up with EcoRI-HF enzyme and an “uncut”control Serial dilutions of the cut and uncut DNAwere made in order to get a range of known DNA concentrations to load onto two gels;

    1. Stained with Ethidium bromide and imaged in a Bio-rad Gel Doc XR imager,
    2. Stained with Azure A (destained repeatedly over 2 hours) and imaged on a standard office scanner between two sheets of acetate.

    The results (Fig 7 & 8 below) show that Ethidium bromide could resolve bands of DNA as low as 2ng, whereas with Azure A band with ~17ng of DNA was the lowest resolvable on an office scanner after 3 hours of destaining.



    Figures 7 & 8: 1% Agarose gels loaded with an identical dilution series of prepared DNA of known concentration; one gel stained with Azure A and one gel stained with Ethidium bromide (For EtBr staining method see: Protocols)




    Conclusions

    Azure A is an easy to use, visible light DNA stain which does not require expensive equipment or biohazard disposal techniques. For routine DNA manipulation techniques such as gel extractions from high copy number plasmids like pSB1C3, Azure A staining is an effective alternative to Ethidium bromide without the need for UV light visualisation.
    Glasgow 2015 iGEM team hopes to promote the use of Azure A in order to extend the reach of iGEM, synthetic biology, and molecular biology in general, further into settings where the need for Ethidium bromide and the associated costs may prevent participation, such as high schools and community labs.



    Safety and considerations of Azure A

    Azure A Chloride's Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) is available from the supplier; it is not deemed to be hazardous.
    Azure A solution can be disposed of down a conventional sink.
    Azure A stained Agarose gels can be disposed of in standard laboratory waste.
    Standard laboratory safety measures for handling a dye; such as gloves, goggles, lab coat, should be followed when using Azure A.
    Flames should not be used near to preparation of Azure A/Ethanol solution due to flammability.
    Azure A solutions will stain clothing and surfaces if spilled.
    Azure A solution can be removed from surfaces (such as a benchtop or staining tray) with 100% Ethanol and paper towel.


    NCBE. 2003a. National Centre for Biotechnology Education | DNA50 | Staining DNA [Online]. Available
    NCBE. 2003b. National Centre for Biotechnology Education | DNA50 | Staining DNA Table [Online]. Available
    PAUL, P. & KUMAR, G. S. 2013. Spectroscopic studies on the binding interaction of phenothiazinium dyes toluidine blue O, azure A and azure B to DNA. Spectrochimica Acta Part a-Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, 107, 303-310.
    SIGMA-ALDRICH. 2015. Ethidium bromide solution BioReagent, for molecular biology, 10 mg/mL in H2O | Sigma-Aldrich [Online].
    SUMNER, A. T. 1980. DYE BINDING MECHANISMS IN G-BANDING OF CHROMOSOMES. Journal of Microscopy-Oxford, 119, 397-406.
    VWR. 2015. UV transilluminators, Benchtop series [Online]. Available

Location

Bower Building, Wilkins Teaching Laboratory
University of Glasgow
University Avenue
G12 8QQ

Follow Us On