Team:Buenos Aires/Project/Schemes
From 2012.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Manugimenez (Talk | contribs) (→Independent Population Control) |
(→Schemes) |
||
(3 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
= Schemes = | = Schemes = | ||
+ | |||
+ | During the design phase of the project we though of several alternative schemes, each of which have pros and cons. Here we do a short summary of these schemes. | ||
== Crossfeeding == | == Crossfeeding == | ||
- | |||
- | |||
{| | {| | ||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
{| | {| | ||
|- valign="top" | |- valign="top" | ||
- | |This scheme is a modification of the | + | |This scheme is a modification of the ''independent population control'', where the autoinducers produce some effect on the other strain(s) beside modulating the growth of the strain that produces it. |
This coupling between strains can increase robustness and give rise to some interesting behaviors as oscillations. | This coupling between strains can increase robustness and give rise to some interesting behaviors as oscillations. | ||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
{| | {| | ||
|- | |- | ||
- | |This scheme is quite different to the previous ones in the sense that there is a single strain that has several stable states (e.g. A and B). | + | |This scheme is quite different to the previous ones in the sense that there is a single strain that has several stable states (e.g. '''A''' and '''B'''). |
Each state activates the transcription of different sets of genes. The transition between states is given in a stochastic manner, but the probability of transition can be externally modulated. Each cell will spend a fraction of the time in each state independently of other cell. | Each state activates the transcription of different sets of genes. The transition between states is given in a stochastic manner, but the probability of transition can be externally modulated. Each cell will spend a fraction of the time in each state independently of other cell. | ||
Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
* All components need to be incorporated in the same strain, thus no circuit integration or isolation is possible (see applications section). | * All components need to be incorporated in the same strain, thus no circuit integration or isolation is possible (see applications section). | ||
|} | |} | ||
+ | |||
+ | == References == | ||
+ | |||
+ | # You L., Sidney Cox III R., Weiss R., Arnold1 F. H. (2004). Programmed population control by cell–cell communication and regulated killing. Nature 428, 868-871. | ||
+ | # Derossi D., Chassaing G., Prochiantz A.. (1998). Trojan peptides: the penetratin system for intracellular delivery. Trends Cell Biol 8-2. 84-87. | ||
+ | # Shou W., Ram S., Vilar J. M. G. (2006). Synthetic cooperation in engineered yeast populations. PNAS 104-6 1877-1882 |
Latest revision as of 18:41, 18 September 2012
Contents |
Schemes
During the design phase of the project we though of several alternative schemes, each of which have pros and cons. Here we do a short summary of these schemes.
Crossfeeding
Pros | Cons |
---|---|
|
|
Independent Population Control
Pros | Cons |
---|---|
|
|
Cross-population control
Pros | Cons |
---|---|
|
|
Stochastic State Transitions
Pros | Cons |
---|---|
|
|
References
- You L., Sidney Cox III R., Weiss R., Arnold1 F. H. (2004). Programmed population control by cell–cell communication and regulated killing. Nature 428, 868-871.
- Derossi D., Chassaing G., Prochiantz A.. (1998). Trojan peptides: the penetratin system for intracellular delivery. Trends Cell Biol 8-2. 84-87.
- Shou W., Ram S., Vilar J. M. G. (2006). Synthetic cooperation in engineered yeast populations. PNAS 104-6 1877-1882