Difference between revisions of "Team:UMaryland/HokSok"

Line 161: Line 161:
 
<div id='contentbox'>
 
<div id='contentbox'>
 
<a name="HS"><p style="font-size:32px;text-align:center;font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;"><b>Fluorescence Studies</b></a>  
 
<a name="HS"><p style="font-size:32px;text-align:center;font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;"><b>Fluorescence Studies</b></a>  
<p style="font-size:24px">In order to determine if Hok/Sok was capable of maintaining a plasmid without antibiotic pressure, we decided to use a visual reporter gene to quantify the ability of Hok/Sok to maintain plasmids over many generations. We decided to use a RFP along with a degradation tag as the reporter gene. The most suitable candidate was an unstable LVA-tagged RFP that has a half-life of 1 hour. The shorter half life allows for more frequent measurements of protein production that would not aggregate over time. Therefore we combined a constitutive promoter and RBS to the LVA-tagged RFP through 3A assembly. We transformed this construct to E. coli Dh5 alpha to confirm the effectiveness of this reporter gene and its expression through increased fluorescence. Afterwords we ordered a g-block of our Hok/Sok+reporter construct. The expression of this reporter gene is proportional to plasmid number. Therefore, we concluded that if the cells containing a plasmid with both Hok/Sok and reporter gene could maintain fluorescence over many generations without the positive pressure of antibiotics compared to our controls, Hok/Sok can be used as a viable plasmid maintenance system. We transformed this Biobrick onto both Dh5 alpha and BL21 strains for testing. </li>
+
<p style="font-size:24px">In order to determine if Hok/Sok was capable of maintaining a plasmid without antibiotic pressure, we decided to use a visual reporter gene to quantify the ability of Hok/Sok to maintain plasmids over many generations. We decided to use a RFP along with a degradation tag as the reporter gene. The most suitable candidate was an unstable LVA-tagged RFP that has a half-life of 1 hour. The shorter half life allows for more frequent measurements of protein production that would not aggregate over time. Therefore we combined a constitutive promoter and RBS to the LVA-tagged RFP through 3A assembly. We transformed this construct to E. coli Dh5 alpha to confirm the effectiveness of this reporter gene and its expression through increased fluorescence. Afterwords we ordered a g-block of our Hok/Sok+reporter construct. The expression of this reporter gene is proportional to plasmid number. Therefore, we concluded that if the cells containing a plasmid with both Hok/Sok and reporter gene could maintain fluorescence over many generations without the positive pressure of antibiotics compared to our controls, Hok/Sok can be used as a viable plasmid maintenance system. We transformed this Biobrick onto both Dh5 alpha and BL21 strains for testing. We tested fluorescence of 3 biological and 3 technical replicates of the 5 groups listed below using a microplate reader. The 5 groups and their replicates were picked off of plates and incubated in 5 mLs of LB in culture tubes. A 1000x chloramphenicol concentration was added to groups A, C, and D. There was no chloramphenicol added to groups B and E. After 20 hours, 200 uL of each overnight culture was transferred onto a 96 well plate and the fluorescence data was recorded. 4 hours later, 50 uL of this overnight was inoculated in a new culture tube containing 5 mL of LB. These new cultures were the new generation, and they were incubated for 20 more hours for more testing. This process was repeated for several generations. </li>
 
<li> For our first testing method to see if Hok-Sok was capable of maintaining a plasmid, we wanted to measure how RFP fluorescence was retained over many generations in two <i>E. coli</i> strains: BL21 and DH5α.</li>
 
<li> For our first testing method to see if Hok-Sok was capable of maintaining a plasmid, we wanted to measure how RFP fluorescence was retained over many generations in two <i>E. coli</i> strains: BL21 and DH5α.</li>
 
<ol>
 
<ol>

Revision as of 02:38, 19 September 2015