Difference between revisions of "Team:Bielefeld-CeBiTec/Results/HeavyMetals"

(copper)
Line 488: Line 488:
 
</figure>
 
</figure>
  
<figure style="width: 600px">
+
 
 +
<div class="row">
 +
    <div class="col-md-6 text-center" style="margin-bottom: 50px"> <figure style="width: 600px">
 
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/6/67/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo.jpeg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="During cultivation the sfGFP signal in reaction to different mercury concentrations was measured. The induction with mercury happened after 165 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates."><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/6/67/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo.jpeg" alt="Adjusting the detection limit"></a>
 
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/6/67/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo.jpeg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="During cultivation the sfGFP signal in reaction to different mercury concentrations was measured. The induction with mercury happened after 165 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates."><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/6/67/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo.jpeg" alt="Adjusting the detection limit"></a>
 
<figcaption>During cultivation the sfGFP signal in reaction to different mercury concentrations was measured. The induction with mercury happened after 165 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates.</figcaption>
 
<figcaption>During cultivation the sfGFP signal in reaction to different mercury concentrations was measured. The induction with mercury happened after 165 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates.</figcaption>
 
</figure>
 
</figure>
 
+
    </div>
<p><i>In vivo</i> data show a highly significant, well working  sensor which even reacts to concentrations which are mentioned as drinking water guidelines by the WHO. <p>
+
    <div class="col-md-6 text-center" style="margin-bottom: 50px">  
 
+
 
<figure style="width: 600px">
 
<figure style="width: 600px">
 
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/5/52/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="Fluorescence levels at two different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 120 minutes and 190 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates."><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/5/52/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" alt="Adjusting the detection limit"></a>
 
<a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/5/52/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" data-lightbox="heavymetals" data-title="Fluorescence levels at two different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 120 minutes and 190 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates."><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/5/52/Bielefeld-CeBiTec_mercury_fluorescence_in_vivo_Balkendiagramm.jpeg" alt="Adjusting the detection limit"></a>
 
<figcaption>Fluorescence levels at two different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 120 minutes and 190 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates.</figcaption>
 
<figcaption>Fluorescence levels at two different stages of cultivation. Shown are levels after 120 minutes and 190 minutes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three biological replicates.</figcaption>
 
</figure>
 
</figure>
 +
        </div>
 +
        </div>
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
<p><i>In vivo</i> data show a highly significant, well working  sensor which even reacts to concentrations which are mentioned as drinking water guidelines by the WHO. <p>
 +
 +
  
 
<p>The mercury detection was measured during the cultivation of <i>E. coli</i> KRX at 37 °C. The strain contains the plasmid with the activator MerRunder the control of  a constitutive promoter and the specific promoter with operator site which reacts to the activator with bound Hg-ions. The specific promoter is in front of sfGFP for measurment , so the mercury in the medium is detected directly.<i>In vivo</i> this sensor devise shows a fast answer to occurrence of his heavy metal contrary to the other sensor systems <i>in vivo</i>.</p>
 
<p>The mercury detection was measured during the cultivation of <i>E. coli</i> KRX at 37 °C. The strain contains the plasmid with the activator MerRunder the control of  a constitutive promoter and the specific promoter with operator site which reacts to the activator with bound Hg-ions. The specific promoter is in front of sfGFP for measurment , so the mercury in the medium is detected directly.<i>In vivo</i> this sensor devise shows a fast answer to occurrence of his heavy metal contrary to the other sensor systems <i>in vivo</i>.</p>

Revision as of 22:07, 17 September 2015

iGEM Bielefeld 2015


Heavy Metals

To make a long story short.

The different heavy metal sensors we worked with were characterized in vivo as well as in vitro.To check their response to different heavy metal conzentrations.

We tested the influence of each heavy metal on our sensors in vivo Therefore we used heavy metal concentrations based on heavy metal occurrences measured all over the world.


Adjusting the detection limit
Influence of heavy metals on the growth of E.coli KRX shown is the standard deviation of three biological replicates. For induction concentrations of 20 µg/L lead, 60 µg/L mercury, 60 µg/L chromium, 80 µg/L nickel, 40 mg/L copper which represent ten times of the WHO guideline were used.


The tested heavy metal concentrations had no negative effect on E. colis growth. Moreover there is no significant difference between the curves with heavy metals and the controls. This first experiment showed us, in vivo characterization with these sensors under the tested heavy metal concentrations is possible. Most of our sensors were cultivated in the BioLector. Due to the accuracy of this device we could measure our sample in duplicates.



Click on the test strip for more information about the heavy metals and how they can be detected:

teststrip

To sum it all up

We have characterized different heavy metal sensors for arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, mercury and nickel. The results for our nickel characterization indicated that the constructed nickel sensor is not suitable for our test strip. The sensors for lead and chromium showed great potential to become fitting sensors, as they show responses to chromium or lead. Copper our new heavy metal sensor already works as expected and detects different copper concentrations by difference in fluorescence. The already well working sensors for arsenic and mercury were tested, too. While arsenic needs some optimization to exploit its full potential even if it works in vitro as well as in vivo. Mercury showed that a fully optimized sensor which is adjusted to our in vitro system works desirable and has potential to detect even lower concentrations than in vivo.