Difference between revisions of "Team:NTNU Trondheim/Measurement"

Development of a biofilm meassurement protocol

General info.

Testing of biofilm promoting mediums (2. – 6. August)

We had been informed by Kåre Bergh and Sven Even Borgos (see Human Practices for more information about these interviews) that the bacteria’s ability to form biofilms is highly dependent on their growth conditions, and that they are especially sensitive to glucose concentrations and pH levels. We wanted to test our CRISPRi system in a medium that promotes biofilm formation because it would make it easier to see a noticeable effect if the system works as expected.

In order to investigate which medium gives the highest degree of biofilm formation, we made nine variants of LB and M63B1 medium varying in pH levels (4.5, 7.2 and 9.2) and glucose concentrations (0%, 0.4%, and 0.8%). E. coli TG1 cells were inoculated in each medium and incubated. Table 1 shows the measured OD values for the overnight TG1 cultures. We observed a higher planktonic growth in LB than in M63B1. This is consistent with the fact that M63B1 is a minimal medium with a limited amount of nutrition, mimicking natural conditions (KILDE ). LB, on the other hand, is a nutrition rich medium which provides good conditions for rapid and numerous growth (KILDE ). Generally, the highest growth in both LB and M63B1 were observed in mediums with a pH level of 7.2 supplemented with glucose, either 0.4%, and 0.8%, with only slight differences between the two.

Table 1: Measured OD600 values in overnight E. coli TG1 cell cultures grown in LB and M63B1 mediums with different pH levels (4.5, 7.2 and 9.2) and supplemented with different glucose concentrations (0%, 0.4% and 0.8%).

pH, glucose	OD600
	LB	M63B1
4.5, 0%	1.790	0
4.5, 0.4%	0.023	0.002
4.5, 0.8%	0.600	0.001
7.2, 0%	1.697	0.002
7.2, 0.4%	1.200	0.201
7.2, 0.8%	1.255	0.228
9.2, 0%	0.006	0
9.2, 0.4%	0.005	0.002
9.2, 0.8%	1.366	0.002

To measure the biofilm formation capabilities of the TG1 cells in the different mediums, we plated each culture on microtiter plates and incubated them for 24 hours. The amount of biofilm adhered to the walls of the wells were then measured by a Crystal Violet Assay. The amount of produced biofilm in each medium is illustrated in Figure 7. Even though M63B1 gave a low degree of planktonic growth compared to LB (see Table 5), the M63B1 seemed to have a strong biofilm promoting effect in mediums with pH 7.2 and glucose concentrations of 0.4% and 0.8%. The biofilm formation in LB followed the same trend as the planktonic growth. We concluded that the best biofilm conditions were in M63B1 with a pH level of 7.2 and a glucose concentration of either 0.4% or 0.8%. For comparation purposes we also decided to do measurements in LB medium having the equivalent pH level and glucose concentrations as the optimal biofilm promoting M63B1 mediums. 5. Improving the Crystal Violet Assay for quantitative biofilm measurements (8. - ) Forslag til oppsett The next step was to test if we were able to reduce biofilm formation in bacteria using our CRISPRi system targeting the luxS gene in E. coli. We inoculated the chosen LB and M63B1 (pH 7.2 and glucose concentrations of 0.4% and 0.8%) with DH5α and TG1 cells transformed with pdCas9 and pgRNA with the anti-luxS sequence. After an overnight incubation, the cultures were diluted and plated on microtiter plates. Tetracycline was added to the mediums of our test groups, since it is the inducer for the transcription of dCas9. Our control groups lacked this addition. During the first run, we observed that there was some variation between replicates. We therefore decided to run it several times to perfect the protocol to measure biofilm formation using Crystal Violet. In total we ran ____ before we were satisfied. For each run we did som slight changes to the protocol: ⦁ Biofilm measurements with Crystal Violet after only 24 hours of incubation The first time we performed the Crystal Violet assay we the measurement only after an incubation time of 24 hours. The protocol we followed was advised to us by … ⦁ Biofilm measurements with Crystal Violet Assay conducted after 3, 5, 8, 24 and 72 hours of incubation ⦁ Removing the step to change medium after 4 hours of adhesion, to reduce the possibility to get contamination between the wells. We also reduced the time of the last measurement from 72 hours to 30 hours. ⦁ Tried with parafilm over the plates to reduce evaporation, which may be the reason for the variability observed between the replicates – especially the measurements after 24 and 30 hours. ⦁ Created a humidity chamber to even further reduce the evaporation.