Difference between revisions of "Team:Tec-Chihuahua/Results"

Line 22: Line 22:
 
<h2 align="center">BioBrick assembly</h2>
 
<h2 align="center">BioBrick assembly</h2>
 
<div class="a">
 
<div class="a">
<p align="justify">The three composites of our creation, apidaecin - <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K2834003">[BBa_K2834003]</a></b>, defensin 1 - <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K2834005">[BBa_K2834005]</a>, and abaecin - <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K2834006">[BBa_K2834006]</a> were characterized with the intention of expressing the peptides in E. coli BL21 (DE3) by IPTG induction. Its antimicrobial activity was evaluated against Gram-positive bacteria with antibiotic susceptibility testing by measuring OD600 in broth.</p></div></a>
+
<p align="justify">The three composites of our creation, apidaecin - <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K2834003">[BBa_K2834003]</a></b>, defensin 1 - <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K2834005">[BBa_K2834005]</a>, and abaecin - <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K2834006">[BBa_K2834006]</a> were characterized with the intention of expressing the peptides in <i>E. coli>/i> BL21 (DE3) by IPTG induction. Its antimicrobial activity was evaluated against Gram-positive bacteria with antibiotic susceptibility testing by measuring OD<sub>600</sub> in broth.</p></div></a>
 
<br>
 
<br>
  

Revision as of 18:56, 17 October 2018

Erwinions













The Problem

While we were constructing our BioBricks™, we realized there was a problem because the insert wasn't ligating to pSB1C3. Everything seemed correct in the transformation protocol, but once the DNA was visualized on an agarose gel our insert was missing and only pSB1C3 was evident. We then thought there was a problem during ligation. Therefore, we analyzed IDT’s synthesized sequence and identified that there were missing additional base pairs that flanked the restriction site so that the enzyme could properly cling and cut the sequence.


The Solution

This issue was troubleshot with the TecCEM iGEM team. They had the great idea to create primers that add six base pairs before the prefix and after the suffix thereupon amplifying the gene of interest. This collaboration was crucial for the construction of our BioBricks. Read the entire collaboration



Figure 1. Apidaecin, abaecin and defensin 1 amplified with TecCEM’s iGEM team primers.

BioBrick assembly

The three composites of our creation, apidaecin - [BBa_K2834003], defensin 1 - [BBa_K2834005], and abaecin - [BBa_K2834006] were characterized with the intention of expressing the peptides in E. coli>/i> BL21 (DE3) by IPTG induction. Its antimicrobial activity was evaluated against Gram-positive bacteria with antibiotic susceptibility testing by measuring OD600 in broth.


Successes & Failures

The iGEM experience taught us a lot of unique things, and as we had significant achievements, we went through many unexpected obstacles. Throughout the year we faced many challenges for finally reaching our goal; we believe that the effort was worthwhile.


Model

Successful

  1. With minimal mathematical and informatics background, we were able to adapt a pharmacokinetic model to our situation and code effective solutions for diffusion data analysis. This model allows us to approximate peptide concentrations within a nanocapsule at several time intervals; it can also help further developments in similar projects.

Unsuccessful

  1. Our mathematical model went through many iterations (no pun intended) before arriving at its final state: we tried to develop a molecular model to evaluate protein production and a populational model to predict the health of the beehive by eliminating nodes of infection. In the end, time and resources forced us to concentrate our efforts on the most pressing of matters: peptide delivery.

  2. We were unsuccessful in solving the equation for D; we tried several series properties and other sorts of tricks, but we couldn’t find an analytical solution. We decided to find the diffusion coefficient with a simulation of multiple lines.

  3. Our most poignant failure was not being able to run the experiments successfully. Apidaecin was retained at a customs office for a whole month. By the time we needed the nanoencapsulation to be at the lab for experimentation, the peptide had not yet arrived. We are left with a burning vigor to help make importation easier for all sorts of experimentation in Mexico.

Laboratory

Successful

  1. We are the first iGEM team from Tec-Chihuahua that manages to send successful results for the InterLab Study. Besides being a rewarding experience, it was a lot of learning since we had never used a microplate reader.

Unsuccessful

  1. At the beginning, we worked with E. coli TOP10 but later we had to change to DH5a since the TOP10 strain was contaminated.

  2. For a few weeks, the successful transformation of our competent cells was difficult. We discovered that the key was in the quality of the competent cells. We tried to make several stocks of competent cells with glycerol and store them at -20 °C, however, this did not work. We had to make the competent cells on the same day that the transformation protocol was to be carried out.

  3. We worked in the transformation of competent cells of DH5a with the synthesis of our part linked with pSB1C3. When they were disseminated in the LB medium with chloramphenicol, there was a presence of colonies which meant that they had been correctly transformed. However, when performing the electrophoresis of plasmid extraction only one band of the size of pSB1C3 was observed. First, we thought that the protocols of digestion and ligation that we carried out were not the correct ones or there was a bad manipulation. This idea was discarded when using a control with RFP. Doing more research, we discovered that the parts that we sent to synthesize in IDT lacked base pairs next to the restriction sites of EcoRI-HF and PstI. This means that the enzyme has no way to attach to the DNA sequence and digest it. Why did we have colonies that grew on LB + CAM? We believe that the re-circularization of the plasmid was possible.


Future Plans

Eight months are not enough to address the full scope of our project. This does not end here!