Difference between revisions of "Team:Queens Canada/Modeling"
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
<figure style="float: left; width: 400px;"> | <figure style="float: left; width: 400px;"> | ||
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/1/14/Qqq_QGEM_Type3AFP.jpg" style="width: 400px;"/> | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/1/14/Qqq_QGEM_Type3AFP.jpg" style="width: 400px;"/> | ||
− | <figcaption>Figure 1. <strong>Crystal structure of the Type III Ocean Pout.</strong>This protein is represented by the PDB file 1AME. The distance between the two termini was found using Pymol<sup>1</sup>.</figcaption> | + | <figcaption>Figure 1. <strong>Crystal structure of the Type III Ocean Pout.</strong>This protein is represented by the PDB file 1AME. The distance between the two termini was found using <a href="https://www.pymol.org/">Pymol</a><sup>1</sup>.</figcaption> |
</figure> | </figure> | ||
<p style="margin-top: 120px;">After weighing the pros and cons, we decided to work with Type III AFP, from the ocean pout. Relatively active in antifreeeze activity, it serves as an ideal AFP for use in industrial purposes. Furthermore, its termini are only 19.8 Angstroms apart, making it easier to circularize using a smaller linker (Figure 1).</p> | <p style="margin-top: 120px;">After weighing the pros and cons, we decided to work with Type III AFP, from the ocean pout. Relatively active in antifreeeze activity, it serves as an ideal AFP for use in industrial purposes. Furthermore, its termini are only 19.8 Angstroms apart, making it easier to circularize using a smaller linker (Figure 1).</p> | ||
Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
<h2>Linker Design & Spatial Fitting</h2> | <h2>Linker Design & Spatial Fitting</h2> | ||
− | <p><strong>Approach 1:</strong> The idea for this project was meant to be a continuation of the work of team <a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg">Heidelberg 2014</a> and validation of their parts. Using their <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1362000">intein BioBrick </a> we wanted to circularize our own protein, a Type III AFP. Using the CRAUT software | + | <p><strong>Approach 1:</strong> The idea for this project was meant to be a continuation of the work of team <a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Heidelberg">Heidelberg 2014</a> and validation of their parts. Using their <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1362000">intein BioBrick </a> we wanted to circularize our own protein, a Type III AFP. Using the <a href="https://github.com/igemsoftware/Heidelberg_2014">CRAUT software </a>, we ran our protein through the program. After fixing syntax errors, the following linkers were suggested:</p> |
<li> | <li> | ||
Line 165: | Line 165: | ||
<h2>The E/K-coil system</h2> | <h2>The E/K-coil system</h2> | ||
− | <p>We sought a strong, highly efficient means to connecting AFPs to the self-assembling scaffold. After considering our options, we opted for the E/K coil method used by <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Calgary">Calgary iGEM 2013 </a>. These non-covalent interactions are highly specific and should enable selective binding between AFPs and the scaffold subunit. Read more about coiled-coils on our <a href=" | + | <p>We sought a strong, highly efficient means to connecting AFPs to the self-assembling scaffold. After considering our options, we opted for the E/K coil method used by <a href="https://2013.igem.org/Team:Calgary">Calgary iGEM 2013 </a>. These non-covalent interactions are highly specific and should enable selective binding between AFPs and the scaffold subunit. Read more about coiled-coils on our <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Queens_Canada/Background">Background page.</a> </p> |
<p> The coil sequences to be used:</p> | <p> The coil sequences to be used:</p> | ||
<li> | <li> | ||
Line 172: | Line 172: | ||
</li> | </li> | ||
− | <p>Upon examination of their work and the sequences used, we noted a discrepancy in their data. According to the PDB file and NMR structure elicited in 2004 <sup>5</sup>, the coils interact in a parallel fashion, incorrectly identified as anti-parallel in the <a href=""> | + | <p>Upon examination of their work and the sequences used, we noted a discrepancy in their data. According to the PDB file and NMR structure elicited in 2004 <sup>5</sup>, the coils interact in a parallel fashion, incorrectly identified as anti-parallel in the registry: <a href="http://parts.igem.org/wiki/index.php?title=Part:BBa_K1189010">K coil</a> and <a href="http://parts.igem.org/wiki/index.php?title=Part:BBa_K1189011">E coil.</a> This has been reviewed by us to indicate the correct interaction according to the PDB file 1U0I. </p> |
<figure style="float: left; width: 580px;"> | <figure style="float: left; width: 580px;"> | ||
Line 234: | Line 234: | ||
<h1>PyRosetta Docking & Linker Testing Program</h1> | <h1>PyRosetta Docking & Linker Testing Program</h1> | ||
<h2>AFP & Scaffold Docking</h2> | <h2>AFP & Scaffold Docking</h2> | ||
− | <p>In order to test the self-assembly of the AFPs and scaffold proteins with E/K coils, docking simulations were run. These were used to assess the energetic stability of the coiled coil interaction and determine the orientation of the ice-binding surface of the AFP. This was done using <a href="">PyRosetta</a> by following the standard procedure for initial low resolution docking prior to high resolution docking on favourable protein structures. Sorting of low energy dockings was used with consideration given to the proximity of the E/K coils to choose a final selection of proteins for refinement and scoring. The general procedure used is outlined in Figure 8 and the final docked structure reached shown in Figure 9.</p> | + | <p>In order to test the self-assembly of the AFPs and scaffold proteins with E/K coils, docking simulations were run. These were used to assess the energetic stability of the coiled coil interaction and determine the orientation of the ice-binding surface of the AFP. This was done using <a href="http://www.pyrosetta.org/">PyRosetta</a> by following the standard procedure for initial low resolution docking prior to high resolution docking on favourable protein structures. Sorting of low energy dockings was used with consideration given to the proximity of the E/K coils to choose a final selection of proteins for refinement and scoring. The general procedure used is outlined in Figure 8 and the final docked structure reached shown in Figure 9.</p> |
<figure> | <figure> | ||
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/0/01/Qqq_QGEM_AFPscaffdocking.jpg" /> | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/0/01/Qqq_QGEM_AFPscaffdocking.jpg" /> | ||
− | <figcaption>Figure 8. <strong>Flow chart of general protocol used to determine configuration of docked AFP/scaffold complex.</strong> Flow chart starts with PDB files and structures of the proteins of interest, and involves isolating the most stable conformations for further analysis.<a href=" | + | <figcaption>Figure 8. <strong>Flow chart of general protocol used to determine configuration of docked AFP/scaffold complex.</strong> Flow chart starts with PDB files and structures of the proteins of interest, and involves isolating the most stable conformations for further analysis.<a href="http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore.do?structureId=4EGG">T3-10 Scaffold</a> and <a href="http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore.do?structureId=1AME">Type III AFP</a>. </figcaption> |
</figure> | </figure> | ||
Line 264: | Line 264: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
− | + | <div class="footer"> | |
− | + | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/iGEMQueens?fref=ts"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/2/29/Qqq_QGEM_FB_FindUsOnFacebook.png" /> </a> | |
− | + | ||
− | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/iGEMQueens?fref=ts"><img src=" | + | |
− | <a href="https://twitter.com/igemqueens"><img id="twitter" src=" | + | <a href="https://twitter.com/igemqueens"><img id="twitter" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/3/34/Qqq_QGEM_twitterlogo.png" /></a> |
+ | |||
</div> | </div> | ||
</body> | </body> | ||
</html> | </html> |
Revision as of 14:49, 23 August 2015