Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
uptake by <i>E. coli</i>. Its CO<sub>2</sub> uptake rate change with time as well. | uptake by <i>E. coli</i>. Its CO<sub>2</sub> uptake rate change with time as well. | ||
As a result, we collect the CO<sub>2</sub> uptake rate and then calculate with the xylose consumed rate and | As a result, we collect the CO<sub>2</sub> uptake rate and then calculate with the xylose consumed rate and | ||
− | pyruvate produced rate. What’s more, the main reaction of CO<sub>2</sub> in engineered <i>E. coli</i> happened between | + | pyruvate produced rate. What’s more, the main reaction of CO<sub>2</sub> in engineered <i>E. coli</i> happened between RuBP to 3PGA, |
which is another part we are going to discuss. | which is another part we are going to discuss. | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
Line 175: | Line 175: | ||
It can also fit with experiment data easily. Next, we discuss about the true CO<sub>2</sub> reaction in <i>E. coli</i> | It can also fit with experiment data easily. Next, we discuss about the true CO<sub>2</sub> reaction in <i>E. coli</i> | ||
CO<sub>2</sub> utilization bypass pathway. Every single mole of CO<sub>2</sub> uptake will react | CO<sub>2</sub> utilization bypass pathway. Every single mole of CO<sub>2</sub> uptake will react | ||
− | with one mole of | + | with one mole of RuBP and then produce 2 mole of 3PGA. |
</p> | </p> | ||
<div id="centerimg"> | <div id="centerimg"> | ||
<img class="oneimg" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/0/08/T--NCKU_Tainan--analysis_fig4.png"> | <img class="oneimg" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/0/08/T--NCKU_Tainan--analysis_fig4.png"> | ||
− | <p class="pcenter">Fig. 4 result of | + | <p class="pcenter">Fig. 4 result of RuBP and 3PGA during CO<sub>2</sub> uptake</p> |
</div> | </div> | ||
− | <p class="pcontent">Since that | + | <p class="pcontent">Since that RuBP and 3PGA are just intermediate products in metabolism, |
their concentration is quite low. Besides, results of three CO<sub>2</sub> uptake time interval showed similar. | their concentration is quite low. Besides, results of three CO<sub>2</sub> uptake time interval showed similar. | ||
− | We still can see that 3PGA produced is 2 times larger | + | We still can see that 3PGA produced is 2 times larger than RuBP produced. |
We then calculate their produced rate in three CO<sub>2</sub> uptake time interval. | We then calculate their produced rate in three CO<sub>2</sub> uptake time interval. | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
Line 219: | Line 219: | ||
entering CO<sub>2</sub> bypass pathway and utilize CO<sub>2</sub>. | entering CO<sub>2</sub> bypass pathway and utilize CO<sub>2</sub>. | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
− | <p class="pcontent">It | + | <p class="pcontent">It takes a lot of time to get absolute metabolic flux of CO<sub>2</sub> in engineered <i>E. coli</i> and require feed of <sup>13</sup>CO<sub>2</sub> during cultivation. |
Since the metabolic flux of the original metabolic pathway is quite stable, | Since the metabolic flux of the original metabolic pathway is quite stable, | ||
the relative metabolic flux of CO<sub>2</sub>-utilization over that of the original metabolic pathway could | the relative metabolic flux of CO<sub>2</sub>-utilization over that of the original metabolic pathway could | ||
Line 247: | Line 247: | ||
<p class="pcontent">Besides, X and Y represent the actual 3PGA detected from the original pathway and CO<sub>2</sub> bypass pathway, | <p class="pcontent">Besides, X and Y represent the actual 3PGA detected from the original pathway and CO<sub>2</sub> bypass pathway, | ||
which show in 3PGA<sub>0</sub> and 3PGA’ in the fig. 1, respectively. | which show in 3PGA<sub>0</sub> and 3PGA’ in the fig. 1, respectively. | ||
− | In the experiment, we use 13C-labeled CO<sub>2</sub> and unlabeled sugar to get the amount of 3PGA<sub>0</sub> and 3PGA’. | + | In the experiment, we use <sup>13C</sup>-labeled CO<sub>2</sub> and unlabeled sugar to get the amount of 3PGA<sub>0</sub> and 3PGA’. |
However, it was reported that 3.45% of unlabeled 3PGA, which is noted as 3PGA’, | However, it was reported that 3.45% of unlabeled 3PGA, which is noted as 3PGA’, | ||
will convert to its isotopic during the culturing <i>E. coli</i> strains in medium. | will convert to its isotopic during the culturing <i>E. coli</i> strains in medium. | ||
Line 311: | Line 311: | ||
CO<sub>2</sub> convert into pyruvate through <i>E. coli</i> and then express on its cell growth. | CO<sub>2</sub> convert into pyruvate through <i>E. coli</i> and then express on its cell growth. | ||
Therefore, we can conclude that pyruvate production will have correlation with biomass, | Therefore, we can conclude that pyruvate production will have correlation with biomass, | ||
− | which | + | which confirms that our model is reasonable to show the result with pyruvate production. |
</p> | </p> | ||
</div> | </div> |
Revision as of 13:33, 27 September 2018