Difference between revisions of "Team:EPFL/Notebook-Detection-ctDNA"

(Created page with "{{EPFL/Header-light}} <html> <body> <main> <section class="slice slice-lg"> <div class="container pt-lg-lg"> <div class="row justify-content-center le...")
 
Line 17: Line 17:
 
               <hr>
 
               <hr>
 
               <h6>Sunday,01/07/2018</h6>
 
               <h6>Sunday,01/07/2018</h6>
               <p>This set of experiments are based on our protocol: Fluorophore-Quencher reporter Cas12a assay.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">This set of experiments are based on our protocol: Fluorophore-Quencher reporter Cas12a assay.</p>
               <p>ts aim is to detect a specific dsDNA sequence (the Activator) with the CRSIPR/Cas12a system. If said sequence is found in the sample, Cas12a will unleash single-stranded DNase acivity and thus cleave every ssDNA found in the sample. We're
+
               <p class="lead">ts aim is to detect a specific dsDNA sequence (the Activator) with the CRSIPR/Cas12a system. If said sequence is found in the sample, Cas12a will unleash single-stranded DNase acivity and thus cleave every ssDNA found in the sample. We're
 
                 using this mechanism to get a fluorescent read out using DNaseAlert (ssDNA reporters).</p>
 
                 using this mechanism to get a fluorescent read out using DNaseAlert (ssDNA reporters).</p>
 
               <br>
 
               <br>
               <p>Our template is made of a non target strand (NTS) and a target strand (TS) (target 1_NTS /target 1_TS cf. supplementary materials of <i>Chen, J. S. et al</i>.)</p>
+
               <p class="lead">Our template is made of a non target strand (NTS) and a target strand (TS) (target 1_NTS /target 1_TS cf. supplementary materials of <i>Chen, J. S. et al</i>.)</p>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
                 <p>NTS (non targeting strand): G C T T G T G G C C G T T T A C G T C G C C G T C C A G C T C G A C C A G G A T G G G C A C C A C C C C G G C</p>
+
                 <p class="lead">NTS (non targeting strand): G C T T G T G G C C G T T T A C G T C G C C G T C C A G C T C G A C C A G G A T G G G C A C C A C C C C G G C</p>
                 <p>TS (targeting strand): G C C G G G G T G G T G C C C A T C C T G G T C G A G C T G G A C G G C G A C G T A A A C G G C C A C A A G C</p>
+
                 <p class="lead">TS (targeting strand): G C C G G G G T G G T G C C C A T C C T G G T C G A G C T G G A C G G C G A C G T A A A C G G C C A C A A G C</p>
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
               <p>The TS is the strand which will be recognized by the cas12a and thus is complementary to the crRNA.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">The TS is the strand which will be recognized by the cas12a and thus is complementary to the crRNA.</p>
               <p>We annealed our NTS and TS strand according to our annealing protocol: this is are activator/target.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We annealed our NTS and TS strand according to our annealing protocol: this is are activator/target.</p>
 
               <br>
 
               <br>
               <p>We transcribed our crRNA using our transcription protocol from the following sequence:</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We transcribed our crRNA using our transcription protocol from the following sequence:</p>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
                 <p>G G T C G A G C T G G A C G G C G A C G A T C T A C A C T T A G T A G A A A T T A C C T A T A G T G A G T C G T A T T A A G</p>
+
                 <p class="lead">G G T C G A G C T G G A C G G C G A C G A T C T A C A C T T A G T A G A A A T T A C C T A T A G T G A G T C G T A T T A A G</p>
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
  
Line 38: Line 38:
 
               <h6>Monday 30/07/18</h6>
 
               <h6>Monday 30/07/18</h6>
 
               <h3>Testing Cas12a complex + DNaseAlert</h3>
 
               <h3>Testing Cas12a complex + DNaseAlert</h3>
               <p>Simple experience to test whether the CRISPR/cas12a system works (i.e. if the crRNA was correctly designed and did form a complex with the cas12a which should eventually cleave the ssDNA reporter (DNaseAlert).</p>
+
               <p class="lead">Simple experience to test whether the CRISPR/cas12a system works (i.e. if the crRNA was correctly designed and did form a complex with the cas12a which should eventually cleave the ssDNA reporter (DNaseAlert).</p>
 
               <br>
 
               <br>
               <p>To get optimal results we've mixed the protocols found in the Supplementary materials of the paper stated above and the protocol given with the lba cas12a from <a href="https://international.neb.com/protocols/2017/12/19/in-vitro-digestion-of-dna-with-engen-
+
               <p class="lead">To get optimal results we've mixed the protocols found in the Supplementary materials of the paper stated above and the protocol given with the lba cas12a from <a href="https://international.neb.com/protocols/2017/12/19/in-vitro-digestion-of-dna-with-engen-
 
lba-cas12a-cpf1-neb-m0653">NEB</a></p>
 
lba-cas12a-cpf1-neb-m0653">NEB</a></p>
  
 
               <h4>Protocol:</h4>
 
               <h4>Protocol:</h4>
               <p><strong>Final sample (20μl) : Cas12a (50nM), crRNA (62nM), activator (1nM), DNaseAlert (50nM), NEBuffer 10x (1x)</strong></p>
+
               <p class="lead"><strong>Final sample (20μl) : Cas12a (50nM), crRNA (62nM), activator (1nM), DNaseAlert (50nM), NEBuffer 10x (1x)</strong></p>
 
               <ol>
 
               <ol>
 
                 <li>Add 2μl of nuclease free water</li>
 
                 <li>Add 2μl of nuclease free water</li>
Line 58: Line 58:
 
               </ol>
 
               </ol>
  
               <p><strong>Negative control (done at the same time as the sample)</strong></p>
+
               <p class="lead"><strong>Negative control (done at the same time as the sample)</strong></p>
 
               <ol>
 
               <ol>
 
                 <li>Add 3μl of Nuclease free water</li>
 
                 <li>Add 3μl of Nuclease free water</li>
Line 77: Line 77:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/7/7e/T--EPFL--DNaseAlert_test.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/7/7e/T--EPFL--DNaseAlert_test.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
  
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis/Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis/Discussion</h4>
               <p>As it can be seen on the picture there are some fluorescence from the sample with the activator and none from the negative control (without cas12a). This suggest that our <strong>CRISPR/cas12a system activates correctly the DNaseAlert. BUT</strong>                the negative control should have been the same as the other sample without the activator to see if cas12a truly only gains its nuclease activity when the activator is present in the sample.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">As it can be seen on the picture there are some fluorescence from the sample with the activator and none from the negative control (without cas12a). This suggest that our <strong>CRISPR/cas12a system activates correctly the DNaseAlert. BUT</strong>                the negative control should have been the same as the other sample without the activator to see if cas12a truly only gains its nuclease activity when the activator is present in the sample.</p>
  
 
               <h6>Tuseday 31/07/18</h6>
 
               <h6>Tuseday 31/07/18</h6>
 
               <h3>Trial 1 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 50 nM DNaseAlert, NEBuffer 2.1)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 1 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 50 nM DNaseAlert, NEBuffer 2.1)</h3>
  
               <p>This experiment contained 50 nM of DNaseAlert and negative control contained only DNaseAlert (in addition to buffer) Incubation step (30min/37°C) at the following concentrations: Lbcas12a 250nM / crRNA 320nM. We made different samples with
+
               <p class="lead">This experiment contained 50 nM of DNaseAlert and negative control contained only DNaseAlert (in addition to buffer) Incubation step (30min/37°C) at the following concentrations: Lbcas12a 250nM / crRNA 320nM. We made different samples with
 
                 different activator concentrations : 1nM-1μM.</p>
 
                 different activator concentrations : 1nM-1μM.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results:</h4>
 
               <h4>Results:</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/5/55/T--EPFL--FQ_reporter_assay_trial1.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/5/55/T--EPFL--FQ_reporter_assay_trial1.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis:</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis:</h4>
               <p>Controls seem to work and the enzyme seems to be activated, since we can measure fluorescence in all samples. Also, those with higher concentrations of template DNA exhibit more fluorescence, except for the 100 nM sample which has a fluorescence
+
               <p class="lead">Controls seem to work and the enzyme seems to be activated, since we can measure fluorescence in all samples. Also, those with higher concentrations of template DNA exhibit more fluorescence, except for the 100 nM sample which has a fluorescence
 
                 higher than the 1 μM sample.</p>
 
                 higher than the 1 μM sample.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>Overall, controls seem to work, samples with higher concentrations of template DNA exhibit more fluorescence, except for the 100 nM sample which has a fluorescence higher than the 1μM sample. Regarding this, we could have inverted the samples.
+
               <p class="lead">Overall, controls seem to work, samples with higher concentrations of template DNA exhibit more fluorescence, except for the 100 nM sample which has a fluorescence higher than the 1μM sample. Regarding this, we could have inverted the samples.
 
                 Another explanation would be that for higher concentration of activator, the enzyme might be cleaving that instead of DNaseAlert reporter. The negative control should be cas12a with crRNA without any template. We'll modify this for the
 
                 Another explanation would be that for higher concentration of activator, the enzyme might be cleaving that instead of DNaseAlert reporter. The negative control should be cas12a with crRNA without any template. We'll modify this for the
 
                 next experiment.</p>
 
                 next experiment.</p>
Line 109: Line 109:
  
 
               <h3>Trial 2 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 100 nM DNaseAlert, NEBuffer)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 2 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 100 nM DNaseAlert, NEBuffer)</h3>
               <p>We did this experiment using Nebuffer 2.1 protocol and added a negative control sample containing this time Cas12a enzyme. Incubation step (30min/37°C) at the following concentrations: Lbcas12a 250nM / crRNA 320nM. We made different samples
+
               <p class="lead">We did this experiment using Nebuffer 2.1 protocol and added a negative control sample containing this time Cas12a enzyme. Incubation step (30min/37°C) at the following concentrations: Lbcas12a 250nM / crRNA 320nM. We made different samples
 
                 with different activator concentrations : 1nM-1μM.</p>
 
                 with different activator concentrations : 1nM-1μM.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results:</h4>
 
               <h4>Results:</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis:</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis:</h4>
               <p>We can see the increase in the level of fluorescence signal (again 1 μM is below 100 nM activator in terms of fluorescence). Moreover, the negative control level is mostly above the ones with activators.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We can see the increase in the level of fluorescence signal (again 1 μM is below 100 nM activator in terms of fluorescence). Moreover, the negative control level is mostly above the ones with activators.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>It seems that Cas12a could be activated even without binding to the activator.. Or maybe we put some DNA by mistake. The pattern of fluorescence as a function of concentration is still not what we would expect (more fluorescence for concentrated
+
               <p class="lead">It seems that Cas12a could be activated even without binding to the activator.. Or maybe we put some DNA by mistake. The pattern of fluorescence as a function of concentration is still not what we would expect (more fluorescence for concentrated
 
                 samples). We’re planning on using Binding buffer for next trial.</p>
 
                 samples). We’re planning on using Binding buffer for next trial.</p>
  
Line 129: Line 129:
 
               <h6>Friday 03/08/2018</h6>
 
               <h6>Friday 03/08/2018</h6>
 
               <h3>Trial 3 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 3 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
               <p>We did this experiment as usual with the following changes: 200 nM DNaseAlert (concentration has been doubled), and again negative control containing the Cas12a enzyme. The experiment was performed using binding buffer (10X, 20mM Tris-HCl,
+
               <p class="lead">We did this experiment as usual with the following changes: 200 nM DNaseAlert (concentration has been doubled), and again negative control containing the Cas12a enzyme. The experiment was performed using binding buffer (10X, 20mM Tris-HCl,
 
                 pH7.5, 100mM KCL, 5mM MgCl2, 1mMDTT, 5% gylcerol, 50 ug/ml heparin) used in the paper.</p>
 
                 pH7.5, 100mM KCL, 5mM MgCl2, 1mMDTT, 5% gylcerol, 50 ug/ml heparin) used in the paper.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results:</h4>
 
               <h4>Results:</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>We can see the increase in the level of fluorescence signal (again 1 μM is below 100 nM activator in terms of fluorescence). This time the negative control has the lowest fluorescence. The DNaseAlert concentration was not doubled in the
+
               <p class="lead">We can see the increase in the level of fluorescence signal (again 1 μM is below 100 nM activator in terms of fluorescence). This time the negative control has the lowest fluorescence. The DNaseAlert concentration was not doubled in the
 
                 positive control by mistake.
 
                 positive control by mistake.
 
               </p>
 
               </p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>We might be comparing fluorescence signals which are quite low. Maybe we should once again increase the DNaseAlert concentration.
+
               <p class="lead">We might be comparing fluorescence signals which are quite low. Maybe we should once again increase the DNaseAlert concentration.
 
               </p>
 
               </p>
  
 
               <h6>Saturday 04/08/18</h6>
 
               <h6>Saturday 04/08/18</h6>
 
               <h3>Trial 4 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 4 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
               <p>We followed the protocol with the same modifications as in the 3rd trial (200 nM DNase alert). This time, we also repeated the dilutions in order to obtain activator at concentrations of 1μM, 100nM, 10nM and 1nM (i.e. we tested samples of
+
               <p class="lead">We followed the protocol with the same modifications as in the 3rd trial (200 nM DNase alert). This time, we also repeated the dilutions in order to obtain activator at concentrations of 1μM, 100nM, 10nM and 1nM (i.e. we tested samples of
 
                 100nM, 10nM, 1nM and 0.1nM concentrations). However we forgot to add the buffer after the incubation step.</p>
 
                 100nM, 10nM, 1nM and 0.1nM concentrations). However we forgot to add the buffer after the incubation step.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>It is clear that we couldn't activate the enzyme this time, since the fluorescence of all our samples is ranging near the negative control’s one at all time. However, we got an increase of fluorescence regarding our positive control compared
+
               <p class="lead">It is clear that we couldn't activate the enzyme this time, since the fluorescence of all our samples is ranging near the negative control’s one at all time. However, we got an increase of fluorescence regarding our positive control compared
 
                 to other trials (nearly two times more), which is consistent with the fact that we doubled the amount of DNaseAlert substrate, and indicates that we could have forgotten to do so in trial 3.</p>
 
                 to other trials (nearly two times more), which is consistent with the fact that we doubled the amount of DNaseAlert substrate, and indicates that we could have forgotten to do so in trial 3.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>Overall, we can conclude that this trial is a complete failure. This big difference in terms of fluorescent signal with the 3rd trial (same concentration of DNaseAlert substrate) was either due to the fact that we forgot to add the binding
+
               <p class="lead">Overall, we can conclude that this trial is a complete failure. This big difference in terms of fluorescent signal with the 3rd trial (same concentration of DNaseAlert substrate) was either due to the fact that we forgot to add the binding
 
                 buffer in an adequate amount, or maybe because our crRNA has degraded in the meantime</p>
 
                 buffer in an adequate amount, or maybe because our crRNA has degraded in the meantime</p>
  
Line 169: Line 169:
  
 
               <h3>Trial 5 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 5 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
               <p>Another trial following the same protocol using Binding buffer protocol.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">Another trial following the same protocol using Binding buffer protocol.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis/Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis/Discussion</h4>
               <p>The results are not good at all. Again, the negative control sample exhibits an abnormally high fluorescence, 100 nM sample is at the same level of fluorescence than the 1 μM</p>
+
               <p class="lead">The results are not good at all. Again, the negative control sample exhibits an abnormally high fluorescence, 100 nM sample is at the same level of fluorescence than the 1 μM</p>
  
 
               <h3>Trial 6 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 6 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
               <p>Another trial following the same protocol using Binding buffer, where we increased the concentration of LbCas12a to 75 nM and crRNA to 90 nM, compared to the previous trial.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">Another trial following the same protocol using Binding buffer, where we increased the concentration of LbCas12a to 75 nM and crRNA to 90 nM, compared to the previous trial.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>First, the signal of 1 μM of activator was below the others, but it increased slightly above the 100 nM, which we were expecting at the end. Also the negative control is increasing which is maybe due to contamination of DNase I enzyme.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">First, the signal of 1 μM of activator was below the others, but it increased slightly above the 100 nM, which we were expecting at the end. Also the negative control is increasing which is maybe due to contamination of DNase I enzyme.</p>
  
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>This one is has shown the best results so far. At the end of the assay, the fluorescence signal reached the expected pattern.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">This one is has shown the best results so far. At the end of the assay, the fluorescence signal reached the expected pattern.</p>
  
 
               <hr>
 
               <hr>
Line 199: Line 199:
  
 
               <h3>Trial 7</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 7</h3>
               <p>In this trial, we wanted to evaluate whether the increase in the concentration of Cas12 can give us higher level of signal. We performed this trial with two different concentrations of the enzyme, following the same protocol as usual (with
+
               <p class="lead">In this trial, we wanted to evaluate whether the increase in the concentration of Cas12 can give us higher level of signal. We performed this trial with two different concentrations of the enzyme, following the same protocol as usual (with
 
                 Binding buffer).</p>
 
                 Binding buffer).</p>
  
Line 207: Line 207:
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 215: Line 215:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>We can observe an increase in negative controls overall.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We can observe an increase in negative controls overall.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>The problem could be due to contamination of samples with pipettes (because we used the same pipette for taking Dnase I for positive control). We're planning on repeating another trial using new pipettes tips and cleaning well our pipettes.
+
               <p class="lead">The problem could be due to contamination of samples with pipettes (because we used the same pipette for taking Dnase I for positive control). We're planning on repeating another trial using new pipettes tips and cleaning well our pipettes.
 
                 Also, one of our TAs highlighted that Cas13a is very unstable at low salt, which means it might bind things that it is not meant to. It could be interesting to investigate the right concentration of buffer to use, since diluting it too
 
                 Also, one of our TAs highlighted that Cas13a is very unstable at low salt, which means it might bind things that it is not meant to. It could be interesting to investigate the right concentration of buffer to use, since diluting it too
 
                 much could lead to a very low sodium concentration which makes the enzyme promiscuous. The promiscuous binding could explain why our negative control actually cleaves.</p>
 
                 much could lead to a very low sodium concentration which makes the enzyme promiscuous. The promiscuous binding could explain why our negative control actually cleaves.</p>
Line 229: Line 229:
  
 
               <h3>Trial 8 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 8 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
               <p>We're still trying to evaluate whether the increase in the concentration of Cas12a can give us higher level of signal. We performed this trial with two different concentrations of the enzyme. This time we cleaned our pipettes carefully,
+
               <p class="lead">We're still trying to evaluate whether the increase in the concentration of Cas12a can give us higher level of signal. We performed this trial with two different concentrations of the enzyme. This time we cleaned our pipettes carefully,
 
                 used new sterile pipette tips, and made sure for every other aspect so that we wouldn't get any contamination.</p>
 
                 used new sterile pipette tips, and made sure for every other aspect so that we wouldn't get any contamination.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
               <p>Error bars were drawn just for 1 μM, for more clarity.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">Error bars were drawn just for 1 μM, for more clarity.</p>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis/Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis/Discussion</h4>
               <p>This time the rise in sample fluorescence was more satisfying (the 1 uM almost reached the same level of activation as previous positive controls). However, we still have a very sharp rise for the negative control (with Cas12+crRNA), which
+
               <p class="lead">This time the rise in sample fluorescence was more satisfying (the 1 uM almost reached the same level of activation as previous positive controls). However, we still have a very sharp rise for the negative control (with Cas12+crRNA), which
 
                 made this trial again unsuccessful. However, the negative control without Cas12 was not activated at all, and even the level of signal decreased somehow.</p>
 
                 made this trial again unsuccessful. However, the negative control without Cas12 was not activated at all, and even the level of signal decreased somehow.</p>
  
Line 249: Line 249:
  
 
                 <h3>Trial 9 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 180 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
                 <h3>Trial 9 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 180 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
                 <p>We Tried different concentration of salt to see if it influences the way the Cas12a system works. To do this we increased the
+
                 <p class="lead">We Tried different concentration of salt to see if it influences the way the Cas12a system works. To do this we increased the
 
binding buffer concentration as well as the NEBuffer 2.1 for another tube. We wanted to see which of the buffer worked better.</p>
 
binding buffer concentration as well as the NEBuffer 2.1 for another tube. We wanted to see which of the buffer worked better.</p>
  
Line 257: Line 257:
 
                 </ul>
 
                 </ul>
 
                 <figure class="figure">
 
                 <figure class="figure">
                   <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                   <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
                 </figure>
 
                 </figure>
 
                 <ul>
 
                 <ul>
Line 263: Line 263:
 
                 </ul>
 
                 </ul>
 
                 <figure class="figure">
 
                 <figure class="figure">
                   <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                   <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
                 </figure>
 
                 </figure>
  
 
                 <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
                 <h4>Analysis</h4>
                 <p>The results are not good at all. Increasing the concentration of one or the other of the two buffers results in an even lower
+
                 <p class="lead">The results are not good at all. Increasing the concentration of one or the other of the two buffers results in an even lower
 
activation of the enzyme. Indeed, increasing the concentration of binding buffer reduces both signals in negative control and
 
activation of the enzyme. Indeed, increasing the concentration of binding buffer reduces both signals in negative control and
 
sample with activators. Also Cas12a doesn't get fully activated neither in 1X NEBuffer, nor in 5X, which suggests that using binding
 
sample with activators. Also Cas12a doesn't get fully activated neither in 1X NEBuffer, nor in 5X, which suggests that using binding
Line 274: Line 274:
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>We're not sure that using 5x of each buffer is the most efficient way of increasing the salt concentration within the assay, but it
+
               <p class="lead">We're not sure that using 5x of each buffer is the most efficient way of increasing the salt concentration within the assay, but it
 
doesn't seem to fix our problem anyways, since increasing the concentration of buffer reduces both signals in negative control and
 
doesn't seem to fix our problem anyways, since increasing the concentration of buffer reduces both signals in negative control and
 
sample with activators. However, we got convinced that <STRONG>using binding buffer is a better option</strong>, since it has shown a better
 
sample with activators. However, we got convinced that <STRONG>using binding buffer is a better option</strong>, since it has shown a better
Line 284: Line 284:
  
 
               <h3>Trial 10 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 180 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 10 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 180 nM DNaseAlert)</h3>
               <p>Compared with the previous trial, we have once again diluted our activators. In addition, we have transcribed and purified our crRNA again and this time we made sure that we did every step in the right way. We wanted to try different kinds
+
               <p class="lead">Compared with the previous trial, we have once again diluted our activators. In addition, we have transcribed and purified our crRNA again and this time we made sure that we did every step in the right way. We wanted to try different kinds
 
                 of negative in order to check whether we had contamination in our of our tubes which could explain our high negative control.</p>
 
                 of negative in order to check whether we had contamination in our of our tubes which could explain our high negative control.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>The negative control sample which contains crRNA without Cas12a, does not produce a signal, which suggests that our purified crRNA is free of DNases.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">The negative control sample which contains crRNA without Cas12a, does not produce a signal, which suggests that our purified crRNA is free of DNases.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>There is no Dnase contamination in our crRNA solution, nor in our Cas12 solution or in our DnaseAlert substrate. The activation of cas12a in our sample seems to be due to something other than contamination...</p>
+
               <p class="lead">There is no Dnase contamination in our crRNA solution, nor in our Cas12 solution or in our DnaseAlert substrate. The activation of cas12a in our sample seems to be due to something other than contamination...</p>
  
 
               <hr>
 
               <hr>
 
               <h6>Friday, 17/08/18 </h6>
 
               <h6>Friday, 17/08/18 </h6>
 
               <h3>Trial 11</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 11</h3>
               <p>In this experiment with tried different concentration of crRNA while keeping Cas12a concentration constant (50nM cas12a vs. 62.5nM/50nM/36.25nM/25nM of crRNA). We did the pre-incubation at 37°C for around 15minutes.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">In this experiment with tried different concentration of crRNA while keeping Cas12a concentration constant (50nM cas12a vs. 62.5nM/50nM/36.25nM/25nM of crRNA). We did the pre-incubation at 37°C for around 15minutes.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
Line 308: Line 308:
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 314: Line 314:
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 320: Line 320:
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 326: Line 326:
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 332: Line 332:
 
               </ul>
 
               </ul>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>Once again the negative controls do not work and the fluorescent signal produced was above all the others which still makes no sense since the enzyme should not be active in that sample (no target in the solution).</p>
+
               <p class="lead">Once again the negative controls do not work and the fluorescent signal produced was above all the others which still makes no sense since the enzyme should not be active in that sample (no target in the solution).</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>We were thinking of doing the experiments as in the NEB protocol given with the cas12a (with NEBuffer + 10min preincubation at room temperature and a ratio of 10:10:1 of cas12a/crRNA/activator). Also thinking of ordering the Ascas12a from
+
               <p class="lead">We were thinking of doing the experiments as in the NEB protocol given with the cas12a (with NEBuffer + 10min preincubation at room temperature and a ratio of 10:10:1 of cas12a/crRNA/activator). Also thinking of ordering the Ascas12a from
 
                 IDT.
 
                 IDT.
 
               </p>
 
               </p>
Line 348: Line 348:
  
 
               <h3>Trial 12</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 12</h3>
               <p>We repeated once again the assay, this time according to the <a href="https://international.neb.com/protocols/2017/12/19/in-vitro-digestion-of-dna-with-engen-lba-cas12a-cpf1-neb-m0653">Neb protocol</a> given with LbCas12a</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We repeated once again the assay, this time according to the <a href="https://international.neb.com/protocols/2017/12/19/in-vitro-digestion-of-dna-with-engen-lba-cas12a-cpf1-neb-m0653">Neb protocol</a> given with LbCas12a</p>
  
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 423: Line 423:
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <h4>Results</h4>
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>This method does not seem to resolve our negative control problem in which there is still a mysterious activation of the enzyme that is once again cleaving the ssDNA reporters without activation.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">This method does not seem to resolve our negative control problem in which there is still a mysterious activation of the enzyme that is once again cleaving the ssDNA reporters without activation.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>We're going to stick to the other protocols based on our reference paper for the next trials...</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We're going to stick to the other protocols based on our reference paper for the next trials...</p>
  
 
               <h6>Monday, 20/08/18</h6>
 
               <h6>Monday, 20/08/18</h6>
 
               <h3>Trial 13</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 13</h3>
               <p>We're trying to test some combinations of different concentrations of LbCas12a and crRNA (while keeping the concentration of activator constant : 100 nM), to see which ones work the best for our system. Also testing whether not incubating
+
               <p class="lead">We're trying to test some combinations of different concentrations of LbCas12a and crRNA (while keeping the concentration of activator constant : 100 nM), to see which ones work the best for our system. Also testing whether not incubating
 
                 the samples could lead to better results. This time, we didn’t first create a Master Mix with 4X concentration of Cas12+crRNA (200 nM of Cas12 + 250 nM of crRNA) as in the paper, where we needed to dilute them to 1X (50 nM of Cas12 + 62.5
 
                 the samples could lead to better results. This time, we didn’t first create a Master Mix with 4X concentration of Cas12+crRNA (200 nM of Cas12 + 250 nM of crRNA) as in the paper, where we needed to dilute them to 1X (50 nM of Cas12 + 62.5
 
                 nM of crRNA). Instead, we directly put the right amount in order to obtain the final concentration of Cas12+crRNA in each sample separately, and performed the assay with or w/o pre-incubation of the Cas12a/crRNA complex (for assembling).</p>
 
                 nM of crRNA). Instead, we directly put the right amount in order to obtain the final concentration of Cas12+crRNA in each sample separately, and performed the assay with or w/o pre-incubation of the Cas12a/crRNA complex (for assembling).</p>
Line 444: Line 444:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 452: Line 452:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 459: Line 459:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 467: Line 467:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>We were able to get good activation for each of our samples (FQ1, FQ2, FQ3 and FQ4) with a relatively low rate of activation in the negative control for each except for the second one. Surprisingly, the experiment without pre-incubation
+
               <p class="lead">We were able to get good activation for each of our samples (FQ1, FQ2, FQ3 and FQ4) with a relatively low rate of activation in the negative control for each except for the second one. Surprisingly, the experiment without pre-incubation
 
                 gave up the best yield in terms of fluorescence.</p>
 
                 gave up the best yield in terms of fluorescence.</p>
               <p>Apart from that, we can also see through the error bars that we have a lot of variations between our two measured duplicates (not drawn for negative and positive controls), and from this, the only sample to consider for success would be
+
               <p class="lead">Apart from that, we can also see through the error bars that we have a lot of variations between our two measured duplicates (not drawn for negative and positive controls), and from this, the only sample to consider for success would be
 
                 the FQ4 one (without pre-incubation).</p>
 
                 the FQ4 one (without pre-incubation).</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>We finally concluded that the problem was related to the Master mix step: the cas12a and crRNA are incubated at too high of a concentration. Also, in the samples without pre-incubation we were able to get a very good result which could mean
+
               <p class="lead">We finally concluded that the problem was related to the Master mix step: the cas12a and crRNA are incubated at too high of a concentration. Also, in the samples without pre-incubation we were able to get a very good result which could mean
 
                 that pre-incubation made Cas12a not as activated as it should be.</p>
 
                 that pre-incubation made Cas12a not as activated as it should be.</p>
  
               <p>Besides, we're getting too much variation for each sample. Should we use more replica for each sample (right now we are using two replicas) ? or is it from the device ? Another possible sources of errors would be either pipetting or bubbles
+
               <p class="lead">Besides, we're getting too much variation for each sample. Should we use more replica for each sample (right now we are using two replicas) ? or is it from the device ? Another possible sources of errors would be either pipetting or bubbles
 
                 formation...
 
                 formation...
 
               </p>
 
               </p>
Line 486: Line 486:
 
               <h6>Tuesday, 21/08/18</h6>
 
               <h6>Tuesday, 21/08/18</h6>
 
               <h4>Trial 14</h4>
 
               <h4>Trial 14</h4>
               <p>Following the same hypothesis of the 13th trial, we're still looking for the ideal concentrations of LbCas12a and crRNA to use in our assay. Four Samples (100 nM of dsDNA activator) where either left to pre-incubate or not, and contained
+
               <p class="lead">Following the same hypothesis of the 13th trial, we're still looking for the ideal concentrations of LbCas12a and crRNA to use in our assay. Four Samples (100 nM of dsDNA activator) where either left to pre-incubate or not, and contained
 
                 different amounts of the enzyme and crRNA. No master mix was prepared. We also did the pipetting more carefully and tried our best to avoid bubbles.</p>
 
                 different amounts of the enzyme and crRNA. No master mix was prepared. We also did the pipetting more carefully and tried our best to avoid bubbles.</p>
  
Line 495: Line 495:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 503: Line 503:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 511: Line 511:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 519: Line 519:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>We can see the effect of pre-incubation here: without pre-incubation the slope is lower than with pre-incubation for the same concentrations of both Cas12a and crRNA (FQ3 vs FQ4). Also, we can see that the 75 nM of Cas12a and 90 nM of crRNA
+
               <p class="lead">We can see the effect of pre-incubation here: without pre-incubation the slope is lower than with pre-incubation for the same concentrations of both Cas12a and crRNA (FQ3 vs FQ4). Also, we can see that the 75 nM of Cas12a and 90 nM of crRNA
 
                 are the most efficient concentrations here (regardless of the incubation) since these samples (FQ3 and FQ4) gave out the highest signal.</p>
 
                 are the most efficient concentrations here (regardless of the incubation) since these samples (FQ3 and FQ4) gave out the highest signal.</p>
  
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>It looks like we're going in the right direction for figuring out the optimal concentrations to use in our assay.</p>
+
               <p class="lead">It looks like we're going in the right direction for figuring out the optimal concentrations to use in our assay.</p>
  
  
 
               <h6>Friday, 24/08/18</h6>
 
               <h6>Friday, 24/08/18</h6>
 
               <h3>Trial 16</h3>
 
               <h3>Trial 16</h3>
               <p>We did this experiment with the same hypothesis as in the previous two trials. We ran different assays with different concentrations of Cas12a and crRNA. All samples were incubated (for Cas12a assembling).</p>
+
               <p class="lead">We did this experiment with the same hypothesis as in the previous two trials. We ran different assays with different concentrations of Cas12a and crRNA. All samples were incubated (for Cas12a assembling).</p>
  
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 540: Line 540:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
 
               <ul>
 
               <ul>
Line 547: Line 547:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
Line 555: Line 555:
  
 
               <figure class="figure">
 
               <figure class="figure">
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="500">
+
                 <img alt="Image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/c/c0/T--EPFL--FAQ_reporter_assay2.png" class="img-fluid rounded" width="800">
 
               </figure>
 
               </figure>
  
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
 
               <h4>Analysis</h4>
               <p>Overall, this Trial was a success, and by looking at the slopes, we can say that the optimal concentrations of Cas12a and crRNA for our system were obtained for FQ6 sample (62.5 nM LbCas12a and 75 nM crRNA), since we got the sharpest slope,
+
               <p class="lead">Overall, this Trial was a success, and by looking at the slopes, we can say that the optimal concentrations of Cas12a and crRNA for our system were obtained for FQ6 sample (62.5 nM LbCas12a and 75 nM crRNA), since we got the sharpest slope,
 
                 i.e. faster activation of Cas, for our sample of interest, which surpassed the positive control.</p>
 
                 i.e. faster activation of Cas, for our sample of interest, which surpassed the positive control.</p>
  
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
 
               <h4>Discussion</h4>
               <p>We finished our optimization of the concentrations after obtaining a very nice result with our FQ6 sample, and an activation which reaches its maximum after approximatively 80 minutes. For the next assays, we're planning on working with
+
               <p class="lead">We finished our optimization of the concentrations after obtaining a very nice result with our FQ6 sample, and an activation which reaches its maximum after approximatively 80 minutes. For the next assays, we're planning on working with
 
                 62.5 nM of LbCas12a and 75 nM crRNA while maybe trying to change the concentration of dsDNA activator to see how it affects the signal.</p>
 
                 62.5 nM of LbCas12a and 75 nM crRNA while maybe trying to change the concentration of dsDNA activator to see how it affects the signal.</p>
  

Revision as of 10:40, 10 October 2018

iGEM EPFL 2018

FQ reporter assays Notebook


Sunday,01/07/2018

This set of experiments are based on our protocol: Fluorophore-Quencher reporter Cas12a assay.

ts aim is to detect a specific dsDNA sequence (the Activator) with the CRSIPR/Cas12a system. If said sequence is found in the sample, Cas12a will unleash single-stranded DNase acivity and thus cleave every ssDNA found in the sample. We're using this mechanism to get a fluorescent read out using DNaseAlert (ssDNA reporters).


Our template is made of a non target strand (NTS) and a target strand (TS) (target 1_NTS /target 1_TS cf. supplementary materials of Chen, J. S. et al.)

    NTS (non targeting strand): G C T T G T G G C C G T T T A C G T C G C C G T C C A G C T C G A C C A G G A T G G G C A C C A C C C C G G C

    TS (targeting strand): G C C G G G G T G G T G C C C A T C C T G G T C G A G C T G G A C G G C G A C G T A A A C G G C C A C A A G C

The TS is the strand which will be recognized by the cas12a and thus is complementary to the crRNA.

We annealed our NTS and TS strand according to our annealing protocol: this is are activator/target.


We transcribed our crRNA using our transcription protocol from the following sequence:

    G G T C G A G C T G G A C G G C G A C G A T C T A C A C T T A G T A G A A A T T A C C T A T A G T G A G T C G T A T T A A G


Monday 30/07/18

Testing Cas12a complex + DNaseAlert

Simple experience to test whether the CRISPR/cas12a system works (i.e. if the crRNA was correctly designed and did form a complex with the cas12a which should eventually cleave the ssDNA reporter (DNaseAlert).


To get optimal results we've mixed the protocols found in the Supplementary materials of the paper stated above and the protocol given with the lba cas12a from NEB

Protocol:

Final sample (20μl) : Cas12a (50nM), crRNA (62nM), activator (1nM), DNaseAlert (50nM), NEBuffer 10x (1x)

  1. Add 2μl of nuclease free water
  2. Add 2μl of NEBuffer
  3. Add 1μl of Cas12a (1μM)
  4. Add 1μl of crRNA (1.37 μM)
  5. Incubate 10 minutes at room temperatures
  6. Add 4μl of activator (5nM 4.a)
  7. Incubate 10 minutes at 37°C
  8. Add 10μl of DNaseAlert (single use tube diluted in 40μl)
  9. Let incubate in 37°C
  10. Look at the fluorescence at desired times (here we checked the fluorescence after ~10minutes)

Negative control (done at the same time as the sample)

  1. Add 3μl of Nuclease free water
  2. Add 2μl of NEBuffer
  3. Add 1μl of crRNA
  4. Incubate for 10 minutes at room temperature (with other sample)
  5. Add 4 μl of activator
  6. Incubate for 10 minutes at 37°C (with other sample)
  7. Add 10μl of DNaseAlert (single use tube diluted in 40μl)
  8. Look at the fluorescence at desired times (here we checked the fluorescence after ~10minutes)

Results

Image

Analysis/Discussion

As it can be seen on the picture there are some fluorescence from the sample with the activator and none from the negative control (without cas12a). This suggest that our CRISPR/cas12a system activates correctly the DNaseAlert. BUT the negative control should have been the same as the other sample without the activator to see if cas12a truly only gains its nuclease activity when the activator is present in the sample.

Tuseday 31/07/18

Trial 1 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 50 nM DNaseAlert, NEBuffer 2.1)

This experiment contained 50 nM of DNaseAlert and negative control contained only DNaseAlert (in addition to buffer) Incubation step (30min/37°C) at the following concentrations: Lbcas12a 250nM / crRNA 320nM. We made different samples with different activator concentrations : 1nM-1μM.

Results:

Image

Analysis:

Controls seem to work and the enzyme seems to be activated, since we can measure fluorescence in all samples. Also, those with higher concentrations of template DNA exhibit more fluorescence, except for the 100 nM sample which has a fluorescence higher than the 1 μM sample.

Discussion

Overall, controls seem to work, samples with higher concentrations of template DNA exhibit more fluorescence, except for the 100 nM sample which has a fluorescence higher than the 1μM sample. Regarding this, we could have inverted the samples. Another explanation would be that for higher concentration of activator, the enzyme might be cleaving that instead of DNaseAlert reporter. The negative control should be cas12a with crRNA without any template. We'll modify this for the next experiment.


Thursday 02/08/2018

Trial 2 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 100 nM DNaseAlert, NEBuffer)

We did this experiment using Nebuffer 2.1 protocol and added a negative control sample containing this time Cas12a enzyme. Incubation step (30min/37°C) at the following concentrations: Lbcas12a 250nM / crRNA 320nM. We made different samples with different activator concentrations : 1nM-1μM.

Results:

Image

Analysis:

We can see the increase in the level of fluorescence signal (again 1 μM is below 100 nM activator in terms of fluorescence). Moreover, the negative control level is mostly above the ones with activators.

Discussion

It seems that Cas12a could be activated even without binding to the activator.. Or maybe we put some DNA by mistake. The pattern of fluorescence as a function of concentration is still not what we would expect (more fluorescence for concentrated samples). We’re planning on using Binding buffer for next trial.


Friday 03/08/2018

Trial 3 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)

We did this experiment as usual with the following changes: 200 nM DNaseAlert (concentration has been doubled), and again negative control containing the Cas12a enzyme. The experiment was performed using binding buffer (10X, 20mM Tris-HCl, pH7.5, 100mM KCL, 5mM MgCl2, 1mMDTT, 5% gylcerol, 50 ug/ml heparin) used in the paper.

Results:

Image

Analysis

We can see the increase in the level of fluorescence signal (again 1 μM is below 100 nM activator in terms of fluorescence). This time the negative control has the lowest fluorescence. The DNaseAlert concentration was not doubled in the positive control by mistake.

Discussion

We might be comparing fluorescence signals which are quite low. Maybe we should once again increase the DNaseAlert concentration.

Saturday 04/08/18

Trial 4 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)

We followed the protocol with the same modifications as in the 3rd trial (200 nM DNase alert). This time, we also repeated the dilutions in order to obtain activator at concentrations of 1μM, 100nM, 10nM and 1nM (i.e. we tested samples of 100nM, 10nM, 1nM and 0.1nM concentrations). However we forgot to add the buffer after the incubation step.

Results

Image

Analysis

It is clear that we couldn't activate the enzyme this time, since the fluorescence of all our samples is ranging near the negative control’s one at all time. However, we got an increase of fluorescence regarding our positive control compared to other trials (nearly two times more), which is consistent with the fact that we doubled the amount of DNaseAlert substrate, and indicates that we could have forgotten to do so in trial 3.

Discussion

Overall, we can conclude that this trial is a complete failure. This big difference in terms of fluorescent signal with the 3rd trial (same concentration of DNaseAlert substrate) was either due to the fact that we forgot to add the binding buffer in an adequate amount, or maybe because our crRNA has degraded in the meantime


Saturday, 11/08/18

Trial 5 (50 nM Cas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)

Another trial following the same protocol using Binding buffer protocol.

Results

Image

Analysis/Discussion

The results are not good at all. Again, the negative control sample exhibits an abnormally high fluorescence, 100 nM sample is at the same level of fluorescence than the 1 μM

Trial 6 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)

Another trial following the same protocol using Binding buffer, where we increased the concentration of LbCas12a to 75 nM and crRNA to 90 nM, compared to the previous trial.

Results

Image

Analysis

First, the signal of 1 μM of activator was below the others, but it increased slightly above the 100 nM, which we were expecting at the end. Also the negative control is increasing which is maybe due to contamination of DNase I enzyme.

Discussion

This one is has shown the best results so far. At the end of the assay, the fluorescence signal reached the expected pattern.


mONDAY, 13/08/18

Trial 7

In this trial, we wanted to evaluate whether the increase in the concentration of Cas12 can give us higher level of signal. We performed this trial with two different concentrations of the enzyme, following the same protocol as usual (with Binding buffer).

Results

  • (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)
Image
  • (100 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)
Image

Analysis

We can observe an increase in negative controls overall.

Discussion

The problem could be due to contamination of samples with pipettes (because we used the same pipette for taking Dnase I for positive control). We're planning on repeating another trial using new pipettes tips and cleaning well our pipettes. Also, one of our TAs highlighted that Cas13a is very unstable at low salt, which means it might bind things that it is not meant to. It could be interesting to investigate the right concentration of buffer to use, since diluting it too much could lead to a very low sodium concentration which makes the enzyme promiscuous. The promiscuous binding could explain why our negative control actually cleaves.

Trial 8 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)

We're still trying to evaluate whether the increase in the concentration of Cas12a can give us higher level of signal. We performed this trial with two different concentrations of the enzyme. This time we cleaned our pipettes carefully, used new sterile pipette tips, and made sure for every other aspect so that we wouldn't get any contamination.

Results

Error bars were drawn just for 1 μM, for more clarity.

Image

Analysis/Discussion

This time the rise in sample fluorescence was more satisfying (the 1 uM almost reached the same level of activation as previous positive controls). However, we still have a very sharp rise for the negative control (with Cas12+crRNA), which made this trial again unsuccessful. However, the negative control without Cas12 was not activated at all, and even the level of signal decreased somehow.


Tuesday, 14/08/18

Trial 9 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 180 nM DNaseAlert)

We Tried different concentration of salt to see if it influences the way the Cas12a system works. To do this we increased the binding buffer concentration as well as the NEBuffer 2.1 for another tube. We wanted to see which of the buffer worked better.

Results

  • Activator as template
Image
  • Negative control as template
Image

Analysis

The results are not good at all. Increasing the concentration of one or the other of the two buffers results in an even lower activation of the enzyme. Indeed, increasing the concentration of binding buffer reduces both signals in negative control and sample with activators. Also Cas12a doesn't get fully activated neither in 1X NEBuffer, nor in 5X, which suggests that using binding buffer in the future could be more relevant.

Discussion

We're not sure that using 5x of each buffer is the most efficient way of increasing the salt concentration within the assay, but it doesn't seem to fix our problem anyways, since increasing the concentration of buffer reduces both signals in negative control and sample with activators. However, we got convinced that using binding buffer is a better option, since it has shown a better activation of the Cas12a enzyme. We decided to use it for all the other trials to come.


Wednesday, 15/08/18

Trial 10 (200 nM LbCas12a, 120 nM crRNA, 180 nM DNaseAlert)

Compared with the previous trial, we have once again diluted our activators. In addition, we have transcribed and purified our crRNA again and this time we made sure that we did every step in the right way. We wanted to try different kinds of negative in order to check whether we had contamination in our of our tubes which could explain our high negative control.

Results

Image

Analysis

The negative control sample which contains crRNA without Cas12a, does not produce a signal, which suggests that our purified crRNA is free of DNases.

Discussion

There is no Dnase contamination in our crRNA solution, nor in our Cas12 solution or in our DnaseAlert substrate. The activation of cas12a in our sample seems to be due to something other than contamination...


Friday, 17/08/18

Trial 11

In this experiment with tried different concentration of crRNA while keeping Cas12a concentration constant (50nM cas12a vs. 62.5nM/50nM/36.25nM/25nM of crRNA). We did the pre-incubation at 37°C for around 15minutes.

Results

  • (50 nM LbCas12a, 36.25 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)
Image
  • (50 nM LbCas12a, 50 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)
Image
  • (50 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)
Image
  • (50 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 200 nM DNaseAlert)
Image
  • (50 nM LbCas12a, 25 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert)
Image

Analysis

Once again the negative controls do not work and the fluorescent signal produced was above all the others which still makes no sense since the enzyme should not be active in that sample (no target in the solution).

Discussion

We were thinking of doing the experiments as in the NEB protocol given with the cas12a (with NEBuffer + 10min preincubation at room temperature and a ratio of 10:10:1 of cas12a/crRNA/activator). Also thinking of ordering the Ascas12a from IDT.


Sunday, 19/08/18

Trial 12

We repeated once again the assay, this time according to the Neb protocol given with LbCas12a

  • 10 minute preincubation at 25°C
  • same concentration of crRNA as cas12a
A B N P
NEBuffer 5 5 5 5
Cas12a (1um) 1.5 1.5 1.5 -
crRNA(1um) 1.5 1.5 1.5 -
activator 5 [tube 2: 1uM] 5 [tube 3: 0.1uM] - -
DNaseAlert 5 5 5 5
DNase I - - - -
NFW 32 32 37 39.8
Total 50 50 50 50

Results

Image

Analysis

This method does not seem to resolve our negative control problem in which there is still a mysterious activation of the enzyme that is once again cleaving the ssDNA reporters without activation.

Discussion

We're going to stick to the other protocols based on our reference paper for the next trials...

Monday, 20/08/18

Trial 13

We're trying to test some combinations of different concentrations of LbCas12a and crRNA (while keeping the concentration of activator constant : 100 nM), to see which ones work the best for our system. Also testing whether not incubating the samples could lead to better results. This time, we didn’t first create a Master Mix with 4X concentration of Cas12+crRNA (200 nM of Cas12 + 250 nM of crRNA) as in the paper, where we needed to dilute them to 1X (50 nM of Cas12 + 62.5 nM of crRNA). Instead, we directly put the right amount in order to obtain the final concentration of Cas12+crRNA in each sample separately, and performed the assay with or w/o pre-incubation of the Cas12a/crRNA complex (for assembling).

Results

  • FQ1 (50 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with Pre-incubation
Image
  • FQ2 (75 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation.
Image
  • FQ3 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation.
Image
  • FQ4 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), without pre-incubation.
Image

Analysis

We were able to get good activation for each of our samples (FQ1, FQ2, FQ3 and FQ4) with a relatively low rate of activation in the negative control for each except for the second one. Surprisingly, the experiment without pre-incubation gave up the best yield in terms of fluorescence.

Apart from that, we can also see through the error bars that we have a lot of variations between our two measured duplicates (not drawn for negative and positive controls), and from this, the only sample to consider for success would be the FQ4 one (without pre-incubation).

Discussion

We finally concluded that the problem was related to the Master mix step: the cas12a and crRNA are incubated at too high of a concentration. Also, in the samples without pre-incubation we were able to get a very good result which could mean that pre-incubation made Cas12a not as activated as it should be.

Besides, we're getting too much variation for each sample. Should we use more replica for each sample (right now we are using two replicas) ? or is it from the device ? Another possible sources of errors would be either pipetting or bubbles formation...

Tuesday, 21/08/18

Trial 14

Following the same hypothesis of the 13th trial, we're still looking for the ideal concentrations of LbCas12a and crRNA to use in our assay. Four Samples (100 nM of dsDNA activator) where either left to pre-incubate or not, and contained different amounts of the enzyme and crRNA. No master mix was prepared. We also did the pipetting more carefully and tried our best to avoid bubbles.

Results

  • FQ1 (50 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation
Image
  • FQ2 (75 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation
Image
  • FQ3 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation
Image
  • FQ4 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), without pre-incubation
Image

Analysis

We can see the effect of pre-incubation here: without pre-incubation the slope is lower than with pre-incubation for the same concentrations of both Cas12a and crRNA (FQ3 vs FQ4). Also, we can see that the 75 nM of Cas12a and 90 nM of crRNA are the most efficient concentrations here (regardless of the incubation) since these samples (FQ3 and FQ4) gave out the highest signal.

Discussion

It looks like we're going in the right direction for figuring out the optimal concentrations to use in our assay.

Friday, 24/08/18

Trial 16

We did this experiment with the same hypothesis as in the previous two trials. We ran different assays with different concentrations of Cas12a and crRNA. All samples were incubated (for Cas12a assembling).

  • FQ6 (62.5 nM LbCas12a, 75 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation
Image
  • FQ2 (75 nM LbCas12a, 62.5 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation
Image
  • FQ3 (75 nM LbCas12a, 90 nM crRNA, 160 nM DNaseAlert), with pre-incubation
Image

Analysis

Overall, this Trial was a success, and by looking at the slopes, we can say that the optimal concentrations of Cas12a and crRNA for our system were obtained for FQ6 sample (62.5 nM LbCas12a and 75 nM crRNA), since we got the sharpest slope, i.e. faster activation of Cas, for our sample of interest, which surpassed the positive control.

Discussion

We finished our optimization of the concentrations after obtaining a very nice result with our FQ6 sample, and an activation which reaches its maximum after approximatively 80 minutes. For the next assays, we're planning on working with 62.5 nM of LbCas12a and 75 nM crRNA while maybe trying to change the concentration of dsDNA activator to see how it affects the signal.