Difference between revisions of "Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Results"
(amphiphilic unlikely to be correct) |
m (E. coli in italics) |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
<li><a href="#" data-scroll="overview"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Overview</h3></a></li> | <li><a href="#" data-scroll="overview"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Overview</h3></a></li> | ||
<li><a href="#" data-scroll="propanepathway"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Propane pathway</h3></a></li> | <li><a href="#" data-scroll="propanepathway"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Propane pathway</h3></a></li> | ||
− | |||
<li><a href="#" data-scroll="continuous"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Continuous production</h3></a></li> | <li><a href="#" data-scroll="continuous"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Continuous production</h3></a></li> | ||
<li><a href="#" data-scroll="cellulose"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Cellulose degradation</h3></a></li> | <li><a href="#" data-scroll="cellulose"><h3 style="font-size:21px;">Cellulose degradation</h3></a></li> | ||
Line 93: | Line 92: | ||
<h3>Background</h3> | <h3>Background</h3> | ||
− | <p>Microbially produced propane holds enormous promise as a potential replacement of portable fossil fuels, but the propane yields with current biological pathways are low. | + | <p>Microbially produced propane holds enormous promise as a potential replacement of portable fossil fuels, but the propane yields with current biological pathways are low. Our pathway starts from acetyl-CoA and produces propane through 6 intermediates. To help concentrate engineering efforts on its critical parts, better quantitative understanding of the pathway is required. Our goals were to build a mathematical model of the pathway to better understand it and create and test BioBricks of the propane pathway to help future teams and researchers to continue improving it.</p> |
Line 108: | Line 107: | ||
<li><p>Improved our experimental plans according to the modeling results by changing one enzyme to a better homolog and expressing the rate-limiting enzyme from the highest copy number backbone used</p></li> | <li><p>Improved our experimental plans according to the modeling results by changing one enzyme to a better homolog and expressing the rate-limiting enzyme from the highest copy number backbone used</p></li> | ||
<li><p>Found that propane output was sensitive to NADPH/NADH, suggesting their efficient regeneration might be a limiting factor</p></li> | <li><p>Found that propane output was sensitive to NADPH/NADH, suggesting their efficient regeneration might be a limiting factor</p></li> | ||
− | <li><p>Designed two BioBricks containing all ten genes required for the propane pathway to produce propane in E. coli | + | <li><p>Designed two BioBricks containing all ten genes required for the propane pathway to produce propane in <i>E. coli</i> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><p>Chose three intercompatible backbones to ensure that the propane pathway could be integrated to the same cell with cellulose hydrolysis (which required the third backbone)</p></li> | <li><p>Chose three intercompatible backbones to ensure that the propane pathway could be integrated to the same cell with cellulose hydrolysis (which required the third backbone)</p></li> | ||
Line 124: | Line 123: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Parts#propane_1">Submitted a BioBrick</a> (Propane 1) containing three crucial enzymes of the propane pathway and inserted it in pSB6A1 backbone for usage in propane production</p></li> | <li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Parts#propane_1">Submitted a BioBrick</a> (Propane 1) containing three crucial enzymes of the propane pathway and inserted it in pSB6A1 backbone for usage in propane production</p></li> | ||
− | <li><p>After trying ELIC | + | <li><p>After trying both ELIC and OE-PCR once and Gibson assembly twice, we managed to assemble Propane 2 with Gibson assembly and detect the right size insert with colony PCR. However, as we ran out of time, we were unable to successfully propagate the correct plasmid, despite multiple tries. As we didn’t manage to assemble the whole pathway, we couldn’t try out whether the pathway was functional. |
</p></li> | </p></li> | ||
</ul></p></li> | </ul></p></li> | ||
Line 152: | Line 151: | ||
<li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Design">First report ever</a> worldwide of successful microbial production of propane in continuous production</p></li> | <li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Design">First report ever</a> worldwide of successful microbial production of propane in continuous production</p></li> | ||
<li><p>145 hour continuous production experiment in a 500 ml chemostat</p></li> | <li><p>145 hour continuous production experiment in a 500 ml chemostat</p></li> | ||
− | <li><p>Propane yield 22 | + | <li><p>Propane yield up to 22.7 µg/L in reactor gas phase</p></li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
Line 169: | Line 168: | ||
<h3>Background</h3> | <h3>Background</h3> | ||
− | <p>Well over | + | <p>Well over 200 million tonnes of cellulosic waste is left unused each year in the European Union alone. To elevate the microbially produced propane to a 2nd generation biofuel and avoid interfering with food production, we wanted to incorporate a plasmid for cellulose hydrolysis into the same bacteria that produces the propane. The plasmid contains three genes encoding the enzymes that hydrolyse cellulose polymers into glucose.</p> |
<h3>Outcome</h3> | <h3>Outcome</h3> | ||
<ul style="list-style-type:disc"> | <ul style="list-style-type:disc"> | ||
<li><p>Looked into <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Modeling_cellulose">modeling cellulose breakdown</a>, but found that there was not enough information to model the breakdown sufficiently well to get any practical benefit from the model.</p></li> | <li><p>Looked into <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Modeling_cellulose">modeling cellulose breakdown</a>, but found that there was not enough information to model the breakdown sufficiently well to get any practical benefit from the model.</p></li> | ||
− | <li><p>After trying Gibson assembly | + | <li><p>After trying Gibson assembly and ELIC twice, we were able to produce the Cellulose insert containing the genes encoding three enzymes required for cellulose hydrolysis with OE-PCR. However, due to its low concentration, we were unable to transfer it to a backbone and propagate it.</p></li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
Line 214: | Line 213: | ||
<h3>Background</h3> | <h3>Background</h3> | ||
− | <p>To validate our amphiphilic brick, we needed a GFP that could be fused to the amino-terminal end of the protein. There was no such brick | + | <p>To validate our amphiphilic brick, we needed a GFP that could be fused to the amino-terminal end of the protein. There was no such brick in the distribution kit. We also thought there was no such brick in the registry, but later came to realize we were wrong. We wanted to create a GFP BioBrick that could be fused to the N-terminal end of any protein using BioBrick methods.</p> |
<h3>Outcome</h3> | <h3>Outcome</h3> | ||
<ul style="list-style-type:disc"> | <ul style="list-style-type:disc"> | ||
− | <li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Parts#gfp">Submitted a BioBrick</a> encoding GFP with an extra nucleotide prior to the suffix, ensuring that it can be fused to the N-terminal end of a protein using BioBrick assembly methods while maintaining the reading frame</p></li> | + | <li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Parts#gfp">Submitted a BioBrick</a> encoding GFP with an extra nucleotide prior to the suffix, ensuring that it can be fused to the N-terminal end of a protein using BioBrick enzyme assembly methods while maintaining the reading frame</p></li> |
<li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Collaborations">Collaborated</a> with team HS Slovenia to validate the brick</p></li> | <li><p><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Collaborations">Collaborated</a> with team HS Slovenia to validate the brick</p></li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
<figure style="float:right;margin-left:20px;margin-bottom:3%;"> | <figure style="float:right;margin-left:20px;margin-bottom:3%;"> | ||
− | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/82/Aalto-Helsinki_GFP-amph_vs_ctrl.jpg" style="width:100%;"/> | + | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/archive/8/82/20150918182105!Aalto-Helsinki_GFP-amph_vs_ctrl.jpg" style="width:100%;"/> |
<figcaption><b>Figure 3:</b> Upper row: <i>E. coli</i> expressing GFP fused to the N-terminal end of our amphiphilic protein. Bottom row: control. On the left, a light microscope picture and in the middle a fluorescent microscope picture of the same cells (excitation at 488 nm, detection 493-598 nm). On the right the two pictures to the left merged, showing that GFP is expressed in transformed cells, but not in control cells.</figcaption> | <figcaption><b>Figure 3:</b> Upper row: <i>E. coli</i> expressing GFP fused to the N-terminal end of our amphiphilic protein. Bottom row: control. On the left, a light microscope picture and in the middle a fluorescent microscope picture of the same cells (excitation at 488 nm, detection 493-598 nm). On the right the two pictures to the left merged, showing that GFP is expressed in transformed cells, but not in control cells.</figcaption> | ||
</figure> | </figure> | ||
Line 250: | Line 249: | ||
<li><p>Biggest issues in collaboration between modelers and experimentalists are: lack of knowledge of the other field, lack of common terminology and differences in ways of thinking</p></li> | <li><p>Biggest issues in collaboration between modelers and experimentalists are: lack of knowledge of the other field, lack of common terminology and differences in ways of thinking</p></li> | ||
<li><p>Both modelers and biologists need to understand the basics of the other field to be able to effectively collaborate.</p></li> | <li><p>Both modelers and biologists need to understand the basics of the other field to be able to effectively collaborate.</p></li> | ||
− | <li><p>Having experimentalists and modelers work close together is beneficial. One approach generally found successful is to have some biologists get involved in modeling to help ensure models are useful for the project and connected to reality.</p></li> | + | <li><p>Having experimentalists and modelers work close together is beneficial. One approach generally found successful is to have some biologists get involved in modeling to help ensure models are useful for the project and connected to reality. Modelers can too take some time to get familiar with the wetlab in the beginning of the project</p></li> |
<li><p>Regular team meetings for presenting and discussing progress and issues of every field take time, but ensure all team members stay informed and can voice their insights.</p></li> | <li><p>Regular team meetings for presenting and discussing progress and issues of every field take time, but ensure all team members stay informed and can voice their insights.</p></li> | ||
<li><p>Students with a mathematical background are underrepresented in iGEM teams as compared to professional synthetic biology groups. </p></li> | <li><p>Students with a mathematical background are underrepresented in iGEM teams as compared to professional synthetic biology groups. </p></li> | ||
− | <li><p> | + | <li><p>iGEM teams have relatively many biotechnology students, who often stand seem to act as mediators between the modeling and experimentation.</p></li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
Line 267: | Line 266: | ||
<h3>Background</h3> | <h3>Background</h3> | ||
− | <p>Finding new collaboration partners in iGEM is not easy, as finding information about different teams projects is time-consuming and often difficult. On the other hand, communication with other teams as well as internal team communication can be difficult due to a multitude of platforms used, often cluttered with non-iGEM content. We wanted to do something to these issues to make iGEM even better.</p> | + | <p>Finding new collaboration partners in iGEM is not easy, as finding information about different teams' projects is time-consuming and often difficult. On the other hand, communication with other teams as well as internal team communication can be difficult due to a multitude of platforms used, often cluttered with non-iGEM content. We wanted to do something to these issues to make iGEM even better.</p> |
<h3>Outcome</h3> | <h3>Outcome</h3> |
Latest revision as of 04:31, 29 October 2015