m |
|||
Line 277: | Line 277: | ||
<div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | <div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | ||
<div class="col-full"> | <div class="col-full"> | ||
− | <p> A literature search, examining protocols for the preparation of chemically competent E. coli cells and transformation procedures, identified factors reported to influence transformation efficiency. This included factors such as E. coli strain, growth medium, growth volume, cell density, wash steps, wash buffer composition, DNA concentration, recovery medium and recovery time. It was noted that | + | <p> A literature search, examining protocols for the preparation of chemically competent E. coli cells and transformation procedures, identified factors reported to influence transformation efficiency. This included factors such as E. coli strain, growth medium, growth volume, cell density, wash steps, wash buffer composition, DNA concentration, recovery medium and recovery time. It was noted that transformation buffer (TB) composition, used in cell preparation, not only varied between protocols, but was also deemed the primary variable for inducing competency. Therefore, TB composition was selected for optimisation and other factors were set at a constant level.</p> |
Line 350: | Line 350: | ||
<div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | <div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | ||
<div class="col-full"> | <div class="col-full"> | ||
− | <p> | + | <p> TB composition was investigated at three levels, and two commonly used cryoprotectants, DMSO and glycerol, were also tested. |
<p> Data indicated that transformation efficiency was optimal at a moderate TB concentration. Choice of cryoprotectant alone did not affect transformation efficiency, however, there was evidence of an interaction between buffer complexity and cryoprotectant choice. Specifically, at a moderate concentration of TB with the inclusion of DMSO, transformation efficiency was significantly higher (Figure 7). </p> | <p> Data indicated that transformation efficiency was optimal at a moderate TB concentration. Choice of cryoprotectant alone did not affect transformation efficiency, however, there was evidence of an interaction between buffer complexity and cryoprotectant choice. Specifically, at a moderate concentration of TB with the inclusion of DMSO, transformation efficiency was significantly higher (Figure 7). </p> | ||
Line 379: | Line 379: | ||
<div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | <div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | ||
<div class="col-full"> | <div class="col-full"> | ||
− | <p> Initial research highlighted pH as an important factor relating to transformation efficiency. Therefore, several buffering agents were investigated: HEPES, PIPES, MES and MOPS. HEPES, PIPES and MES | + | <p> Initial research highlighted pH as an important factor relating to transformation efficiency. Therefore, several buffering agents were investigated: HEPES, PIPES, MES and MOPS. HEPES, PIPES and MES all had a positive effect on transformation efficiency, whereas MOPS showed no significant difference compared to the control (Figure 8).</p> |
<p>HEPES was selected for use in subsequent investigations as the highest transformation efficiency was observed with this buffer.</p> | <p>HEPES was selected for use in subsequent investigations as the highest transformation efficiency was observed with this buffer.</p> | ||
Line 424: | Line 424: | ||
<div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | <div class="row about-desc" data-aos="fade-up"> | ||
<div class="col-full"> | <div class="col-full"> | ||
− | <p> Optimisation of the automated competent cell and transformation workflow was successful and showed an increase in transformation efficiency. The initial protocol was semi-automated, containing multiple manual steps and a mean transformation efficiency of 1.89 x | + | <p> Optimisation of the automated competent cell and transformation workflow was successful and showed an increase in transformation efficiency. The initial protocol was semi-automated, containing multiple manual steps and a mean transformation efficiency of 1.89 x 10<sup>4</sup>. Next, the code and OT-2 deck environment were optimised to achieve a fully automated workflow [https://2018.igem.org/Team:Newcastle/Software/OT]. Following optimisation, the code was refactored to improve efficiency. This led to a significant increase in transformation efficiency, with a mean transformation efficiency of 1.20 x 10^5 (Figure 9). This optimised workflow was combined with a DoE complex TB buffer construction protocol to make the ‘Automated Transformation Buffer Optimisation and Transformation efficiency analysis protocol’ (ATBOT), to be used for the definitive screening of TB buffer components. </p> |
Line 430: | Line 430: | ||
− | <p><center><b>Figure 9. Comparison between initial unoptimised and further optimised automated competent cell and transformation protocols.</b> Circles indicate raw data values, with central line indicating mean with SD error bars. Both protocols followed the same 0 wash method. A significant increase in TrE was shown, with a mean TrE of 1.20 x | + | <p><center><b>Figure 9. Comparison between initial unoptimised and further optimised automated competent cell and transformation protocols.</b> Circles indicate raw data values, with central line indicating mean with SD error bars. Both protocols followed the same 0 wash method. A significant increase in TrE was shown, with a mean TrE of 1.20 x 10^5 (Mann-Whitney, U = 333.0, n. = 21,30, p < 0.001).</p> |
Line 452: | Line 452: | ||
<p> The opensource and adaptable nature of the OT-2 allowed us to design bespoke hardware specific to our needs. This included a tube rack to contain 8 x 20 mL universal tubes which could be inserted into a multipurpose ice box designed to keep reagents at 0-4 C. This rack, along with 100 mL and 250 mL Duran bottles for cultures or microbial waste were defined and uploaded to the robot API. This provided all the necessary components to carry out the protocol. </p> | <p> The opensource and adaptable nature of the OT-2 allowed us to design bespoke hardware specific to our needs. This included a tube rack to contain 8 x 20 mL universal tubes which could be inserted into a multipurpose ice box designed to keep reagents at 0-4 C. This rack, along with 100 mL and 250 mL Duran bottles for cultures or microbial waste were defined and uploaded to the robot API. This provided all the necessary components to carry out the protocol. </p> | ||
− | <p>The original protocol required manual interactions to chill, | + | <p>The original protocol required manual interactions to chill, heat shock and incubate the cells. In the ATBOT protocol, the TempDeck was employed to maintain cells at 4 C, heat shock cells at 42 C and provide recovery incubation at 37 C. However, it was noted that the heat shock step did not provide the same shock as would occur during the manual protocol. As such, the heat shock step was modified in the code. </p> |
</div> | </div> |
Revision as of 13:02, 17 October 2018