JackDeKloe (Talk | contribs) |
JackDeKloe (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
<p style="text-align:center;"> <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/a/a6/T--Edinburgh_OG--JackNotebookFigure13.png" style="max-width: 60%; max-height: 70%;"><figcaption><p style="text-align:center; font-size:14px;"><b>Figure 4 </b> Plated colonies of Gibson reaction using linearized pSB1C3:Fragment 1 and Fragment 2. 1kb DNA ladder from Promega. Negative controls of transformations using only linear SB1C3:Fragment 1 contain similar number of colonies compared to reaction using SB1C3:Fragment1 + Fragment 2. Plates are imaged on a light box with emission centered around 470 nm.</figcaption> | <p style="text-align:center;"> <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2018/a/a6/T--Edinburgh_OG--JackNotebookFigure13.png" style="max-width: 60%; max-height: 70%;"><figcaption><p style="text-align:center; font-size:14px;"><b>Figure 4 </b> Plated colonies of Gibson reaction using linearized pSB1C3:Fragment 1 and Fragment 2. 1kb DNA ladder from Promega. Negative controls of transformations using only linear SB1C3:Fragment 1 contain similar number of colonies compared to reaction using SB1C3:Fragment1 + Fragment 2. Plates are imaged on a light box with emission centered around 470 nm.</figcaption> | ||
+ | </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p> | ||
+ | Because half of the toggle switch was inserted into the plasmid, another Gibson reaction using a linear plasmid and Fragment 1 could be used as the vector and Fragment 2 could be added in a higher ratio. Fragment 1:pSB1C3 was linearized using the plasmid Fwd primer and Fragment 1 Rev primer. This was used in a Gibson reaction along with Fragment 2 and DH5α was transformed using this reaction (<b>Figure 4</b>). These colonies were all red, but the amount of colonies seemed to be only largely between the DH5α samples if Fragment 2 was added or not. This was as expected because Fragment 1:pSB1C3 can circularize as seen in the original colony. | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
<h2 style="text-align: center;"><strong>Conclusion</strong></h2> | <h2 style="text-align: center;"><strong>Conclusion</strong></h2> | ||
<p> | <p> | ||
+ | This project set out to create a new biobrick for the 2018 iGEM competition. This strategy involved removing an EcoRI site from the starting toggle switch and then placing that control element into pSB1C3. Gibson assembly of the two fragments and the backbone proved mostly unsuccessful as it appears that only Fragment 1 successfully ligated into the plasmid for one colony during the Gibson assembly. | ||
+ | </p> | ||
+ | <p>Further experiments would be needed to create the toggle switch. By using PCR to remove the EcoRI site while adding the Biobrick Prefix and Suffix to the ends, a standard digestion and subsequent ligation into pSB1C3 could be performed to create the Biobrick. Digesting with EcoRI and PstI would avoid self-ligation of the plasmid while assuring the toggle switch would be inserted the correct direction. Primers to do this were created and are ready to be used for testing (see Appendix 1). After this Biobrick would be created, the same digestion could be used to prepare the pha CAB operon without its promoter while 3A assembly would ligate the toggle switch with the operon and the part could be characterized. These tests for PHB yield as well as observe the growth curve compared to the normal BBa_K1149051 part. | ||
+ | </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p>To continue to benefit the team it would be useful to try to combine some or a few of our projects into one system to test the efficiency of producing PHBV. Ideally this Biobrick would be able to act as another modular promoter and allow future iGEM teams to only use glucose concentration modulation for simple protein production or for the production of enzymes that would construct a metabolic pathway. | ||
+ | |||
</p> | </p> | ||
Revision as of 22:44, 17 October 2018