Difference between revisions of "Team:USP-Brazil/Results"

Line 36: Line 36:
 
                 </p>
 
                 </p>
 
             </div>
 
             </div>
             <div class="column half_size">
+
             <div class="column half_size" style="width: 40%">
                 <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/5/5c/T--USP-Brazil--Good_assay.png" style="width: 90%">
+
                 <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/5/5c/T--USP-Brazil--Good_assay.png">
 
             <div>
 
             <div>
 
             <div class="column half_size">
 
             <div class="column half_size">

Revision as of 01:50, 14 October 2018

Wiki - iGEM Brazil

Results

After some trouble with gene synthesis and building our constructs, we got to doing experiments with the first three candidates for Sender systems (Lux, Las, Rhl) and all of the six Receiver systems. In this page, we will go through each one of the Sender systems and report how our reporters responded to the signal.

Our experiments were normally done in 15mL falcon tubes or 24-well plates (with admitted differences in aeration) and in 2 mL LB or M9 (for kinetic experiments) medium, at 37ºC and shaking at 180~200RPM. As the auto-induced quorum sensing system should be kickstarted by arabinose (see Design), after growing an overnight culture diluted 1:10 for one hour, we induced our cells with 2.5mM L-arabinose and started measurements.

Lux Sender

This was our first system to get results. As it had the most straightforward cloning steps from our Distribution Kit parts. To test if the system would respond, we first plated our co-transformations in solid medium, slathered with 20uL of 1M arabinose. Also, to check if it was really our quorum sensing signal inducing the fluorescence, we tested inducing with arabinose in a single point of the petri dish.

After seeing that our systems worked, we proceeded to the liquid medium assays. The promoters that showed the most significant response were pLux and pLas, with the latter having a lower sensitivity (about 3x the EC50 of pLux) but plateauing at a higher expression (about 2.5x pLux expression). The other promoters only showed significant expression at later stages of our experiment, and also at a very lower strength.

Las Sender

Rhl Sender