Team:ZJU-China/project.htm
From 2012.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Line 349: | Line 349: | ||
<p>Fig.3 Three version of clovers. Version one and version two have adjacent MS2 and theophylline aptamer, while vesion three has separated ones. Version one has an interaction between the loop of theophylline aptamer and the loop of MS2 aptamer, while version two and version three have an interaction between the loop of theophylline aptamer and the stem of MS2 aptamer.</p> | <p>Fig.3 Three version of clovers. Version one and version two have adjacent MS2 and theophylline aptamer, while vesion three has separated ones. Version one has an interaction between the loop of theophylline aptamer and the loop of MS2 aptamer, while version two and version three have an interaction between the loop of theophylline aptamer and the stem of MS2 aptamer.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Original scaffold D0:</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>The base sequence of original scaffold D0:</p> | <p>The base sequence of original scaffold D0:</p> | ||
Line 357: | Line 357: | ||
<p>Fig.4 The secondary (left) and the tertiary(right) structure of D0.</p> | <p>Fig.4 The secondary (left) and the tertiary(right) structure of D0.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Clover version 1</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>The interaction is between the loop of theophylline aptamer and the loop of the MS2 aptamer.</p> | <p>The interaction is between the loop of theophylline aptamer and the loop of the MS2 aptamer.</p> | ||
Line 369: | Line 369: | ||
<p>Fig.5 The secondary (left) and the tertiary (right) structure of clover version 1.</p> | <p>Fig.5 The secondary (left) and the tertiary (right) structure of clover version 1.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Clover version 2</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>The interaction is between the loop of the theophylline aptamer and the stem of the MS2 apatamer. And the theophylline aptamer is just beside the MS2 apatamer.</p> | <p>The interaction is between the loop of the theophylline aptamer and the stem of the MS2 apatamer. And the theophylline aptamer is just beside the MS2 apatamer.</p> | ||
Line 379: | Line 379: | ||
<p>Fig.6 The secondary (left) and the tertiary (right) structure of clover version 2.</p> | <p>Fig.6 The secondary (left) and the tertiary (right) structure of clover version 2.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Clover version 3</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>The interaction is between the loop of the theophylline aptamer and the stem of the MS2 apatamer. Although the theophylline and the MS2 apatamer is separated by the PP7 aptamer in the base sequence, they are closed according to the three- dimensional structure prediction.</p> | <p>The interaction is between the loop of the theophylline aptamer and the stem of the MS2 apatamer. Although the theophylline and the MS2 apatamer is separated by the PP7 aptamer in the base sequence, they are closed according to the three- dimensional structure prediction.</p> | ||
Line 395: | Line 395: | ||
<p>To make tentative steps in order to fix the theophylline concentration of our clover coexpression experiment, we test some theophylline riboswitches tagged with fluorescent proteins.</p> | <p>To make tentative steps in order to fix the theophylline concentration of our clover coexpression experiment, we test some theophylline riboswitches tagged with fluorescent proteins.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>BioBrick Part K537009:</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>To characterise the theophylline riboswitches (part K537009, iGEM11_WITS_CSIR_SA), we quantified their activation at different theophylline concentrations (0 mM, 1 mM, 5 mM, 10 mM and 20 mM) over 2 hours using fluorometry. </p> | <p>To characterise the theophylline riboswitches (part K537009, iGEM11_WITS_CSIR_SA), we quantified their activation at different theophylline concentrations (0 mM, 1 mM, 5 mM, 10 mM and 20 mM) over 2 hours using fluorometry. </p> | ||
Line 409: | Line 409: | ||
<p>"Fluorescence intensity / OD" increases greatly with theophylline concentration.</p> | <p>"Fluorescence intensity / OD" increases greatly with theophylline concentration.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
+ | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/igem.org/d/d4/Riboscaffold_fig_9.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | |||
<p>Fig.9 The 5 different concentration of theophylline comparision on part K537009 theophylline robswitch tagged with venus YFP. Excitation at 505nm and emission at 535nm. Up to 20mM theophylline, cells didn't show side effects and YFP production is proportioned with theophylline concentration, showing that K537009 is an effective riboswitch which can be regulated by theophylline.</p> | <p>Fig.9 The 5 different concentration of theophylline comparision on part K537009 theophylline robswitch tagged with venus YFP. Excitation at 505nm and emission at 535nm. Up to 20mM theophylline, cells didn't show side effects and YFP production is proportioned with theophylline concentration, showing that K537009 is an effective riboswitch which can be regulated by theophylline.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
Line 415: | Line 417: | ||
<p>Except for the difference that though K537009 is an YFP, we excite it at 532nm (green light) and it glow red.</p> | <p>Except for the difference that though K537009 is an YFP, we excite it at 532nm (green light) and it glow red.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_10.jpg" width="700px" /> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>Fig.10 The 5 different concentration of theophylline comparision on part K537009 theophylline riboswitch tagged with venus YFP. The brightfield (BF) images in the right column depict all bacterial cells. The venus images in the left column depict bacterial cells which emitted fluorescence. We excite it at 532nm (green light) and it glow red, seeing the obvious trend that when adding more theophylline, cells showing Veuns appeal more.</p> | <p>Fig.10 The 5 different concentration of theophylline comparision on part K537009 theophylline riboswitch tagged with venus YFP. The brightfield (BF) images in the right column depict all bacterial cells. The venus images in the left column depict bacterial cells which emitted fluorescence. We excite it at 532nm (green light) and it glow red, seeing the obvious trend that when adding more theophylline, cells showing Veuns appeal more.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>BioBrick Part K411003:</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>This is a"pLAC promotor,Theophylline-inducible Riboswitch, GFP+Terminator" part made by 2010 NYMU-Taipe. We make similar tests as K537009 at different theophylline concentrations (0 mM, 0.1mM, 0.3mM, 0.5 mM,1mM,5mM,10mM and 20mM) over 2 hours using fluorometry.</p> | <p>This is a"pLAC promotor,Theophylline-inducible Riboswitch, GFP+Terminator" part made by 2010 NYMU-Taipe. We make similar tests as K537009 at different theophylline concentrations (0 mM, 0.1mM, 0.3mM, 0.5 mM,1mM,5mM,10mM and 20mM) over 2 hours using fluorometry.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>Synergy hybrid reader detects effective effects of theophylline on GFP production.</p> | <p>Synergy hybrid reader detects effective effects of theophylline on GFP production.</p> | ||
+ | <p> </p> | ||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_11.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>Fig.11 The 8 different concentration of theophylline comparision on part K411003 theophylline robswitch tagged with GFP. Excitation at 480nm and emission at 535nm. Up to 10mM theophylline, cells didn't show obvious side effects and GFP production is proportioned with theophylline concentration, showing that K411003 is an effective riboswitch which can be regulated by theophylline. When theophylline concentration is beyond a certain degree (about 10 mM), it somewhat affect cell growth and GFP production.</p> | <p>Fig.11 The 8 different concentration of theophylline comparision on part K411003 theophylline robswitch tagged with GFP. Excitation at 480nm and emission at 535nm. Up to 10mM theophylline, cells didn't show obvious side effects and GFP production is proportioned with theophylline concentration, showing that K411003 is an effective riboswitch which can be regulated by theophylline. When theophylline concentration is beyond a certain degree (about 10 mM), it somewhat affect cell growth and GFP production.</p> | ||
Line 435: | Line 439: | ||
<p>Clover 2 is synthesized by Genscript and is a regulatory and tunable RNA scaffold with a theophylline aptamer. As we design it, when theophylline is added, MS2 aptamer will be free to combine FA tagged MS2 protein and closer with PP7 aptamer thus give out increasing light. We use fluorescence microscope, confocal microscopy and microplate reader to test our riboscaffold clover 2. For microplate hybrid reader experiments, fluorescence intensity/ OD 630 are used to be measurement criteria for comparison of the ability of give out light in microplate hybrid reader test.</p> | <p>Clover 2 is synthesized by Genscript and is a regulatory and tunable RNA scaffold with a theophylline aptamer. As we design it, when theophylline is added, MS2 aptamer will be free to combine FA tagged MS2 protein and closer with PP7 aptamer thus give out increasing light. We use fluorescence microscope, confocal microscopy and microplate reader to test our riboscaffold clover 2. For microplate hybrid reader experiments, fluorescence intensity/ OD 630 are used to be measurement criteria for comparison of the ability of give out light in microplate hybrid reader test.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Scaffold</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>We use fluorescence complementation to detect 3D comformational change of our riboscaffold clover 2. Green fluorescent protein (GFP) split into two halves (FA and FB) fused to the PP7 or MS2 aptamer binding proteins was used. Cells expressing FA and FB alone or clover 2 without the split GFPs displayed little fluorescence. However, the coexpression of clover 2 with the split GFPs showed increased fluorescence. Thus, our RNA scaffold clover 2 served as docking sites to promote protein-protein interactions in cells. </p> | <p>We use fluorescence complementation to detect 3D comformational change of our riboscaffold clover 2. Green fluorescent protein (GFP) split into two halves (FA and FB) fused to the PP7 or MS2 aptamer binding proteins was used. Cells expressing FA and FB alone or clover 2 without the split GFPs displayed little fluorescence. However, the coexpression of clover 2 with the split GFPs showed increased fluorescence. Thus, our RNA scaffold clover 2 served as docking sites to promote protein-protein interactions in cells. </p> | ||
Line 441: | Line 445: | ||
<p>We make a series of cotransformation containing D0,clover2,FA,FB,FA+D0,FB+D0,FB+clover 2,FA+FB,and FA+FB+D0 & FA+FB+clover2. At mid-log phase we low-temperature-induced the E.colis by adding IPTG (0.2mM & 1mM) at 20 degree. After 5 hours, strains containing clover 2 were adding 0.5mM Theophylline. Successfully results are shown as we expected that, strains expressing only RNA scaffolds almost don't give out light, strains expressing FA+FB give out medium light and strains containing RNA scaffold &FA+FB emit a powerful beam after excitation.</p> | <p>We make a series of cotransformation containing D0,clover2,FA,FB,FA+D0,FB+D0,FB+clover 2,FA+FB,and FA+FB+D0 & FA+FB+clover2. At mid-log phase we low-temperature-induced the E.colis by adding IPTG (0.2mM & 1mM) at 20 degree. After 5 hours, strains containing clover 2 were adding 0.5mM Theophylline. Successfully results are shown as we expected that, strains expressing only RNA scaffolds almost don't give out light, strains expressing FA+FB give out medium light and strains containing RNA scaffold &FA+FB emit a powerful beam after excitation.</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | <p>To our surprise, the RNA scaffold clover 2 serves as a more effective scaffold than the origin D0, whose luminescence efficiency is 124.67% and performs better than D0 by 39.5%. | + | <p>To our surprise, the RNA scaffold clover 2 serves as a more effective scaffold than the origin D0, whose luminescence efficiency is 124.67% and performs better than D0 by 39.5%.<p> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>(Formula: luminescence efficiency=(FI/OD(FA+FB+scaffold)-FI/OD(FA+FB))/(FI/OD(FA+FB)))</p> | <p>(Formula: luminescence efficiency=(FI/OD(FA+FB+scaffold)-FI/OD(FA+FB))/(FI/OD(FA+FB)))</p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Regulate and control by Theophylline</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>To characterise the theophylline tuned RNA scaffold clover 2 (part K738002), we quantified their activation at different theophylline concentrations (0 mM,0.1mM, 0.2 mM, 0.3mM, 0.4 mM, 0.5 mM, 0.6 mM, 0.7 mM,1 mM) over a period of time using fluorometry. Competent E. coli (strain BL21*DE3) cells were transformed with plasmid vectors containing the riboscaffold and were cultured until the mid-log phase of growth, then 0.2mM IPTG were added. After 3 hours, a different concentration of theophylline was added to each culture for induction. 2 hours later, we use PBS to wash the culture and prepare for following tests. The regulatory effect of the Theophylline aptamer was detected as a fluorescent response as a result of increased release of the MS2 aptamer. MS2 aptamer will be free to combine MS2 protein tagged FA and be closer with PP7 aptamer when Theophylline adding. A Synergy Hybrid Reader was used to excite the cultures at 480 nm and the intensity of the emission peak was detected at 535 nm. 3 replications were taken each culture, and 4 repeated experiment. </p> | <p>To characterise the theophylline tuned RNA scaffold clover 2 (part K738002), we quantified their activation at different theophylline concentrations (0 mM,0.1mM, 0.2 mM, 0.3mM, 0.4 mM, 0.5 mM, 0.6 mM, 0.7 mM,1 mM) over a period of time using fluorometry. Competent E. coli (strain BL21*DE3) cells were transformed with plasmid vectors containing the riboscaffold and were cultured until the mid-log phase of growth, then 0.2mM IPTG were added. After 3 hours, a different concentration of theophylline was added to each culture for induction. 2 hours later, we use PBS to wash the culture and prepare for following tests. The regulatory effect of the Theophylline aptamer was detected as a fluorescent response as a result of increased release of the MS2 aptamer. MS2 aptamer will be free to combine MS2 protein tagged FA and be closer with PP7 aptamer when Theophylline adding. A Synergy Hybrid Reader was used to excite the cultures at 480 nm and the intensity of the emission peak was detected at 535 nm. 3 replications were taken each culture, and 4 repeated experiment. </p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | <p>We find that up to a certain point (0.5 mM), a positive correlation exists between the GFP production and theophylline concentration, indicating that at first MS2 aptamer and theophylline aptamer are interacting(through specific base pairing) and close, when theophylline goes in, MS2 aptamer combines FA+MS2 and interact with FB+PP7 on PP7 aptamer thus give out fluorescence light. More theophylline, more light. SAS software results show significant variation(P-value<0.05) between 0mM theophylline and 0.5mM theophylline (optimum theophylline concentration to make clover 2 work) effects on clover 2. | + | <p>We find that up to a certain point (0.5 mM), a positive correlation exists between the GFP production and theophylline concentration, indicating that at first MS2 aptamer and theophylline aptamer are interacting(through specific base pairing) and close, when theophylline goes in, MS2 aptamer combines FA+MS2 and interact with FB+PP7 on PP7 aptamer thus give out fluorescence light. More theophylline, more light. SAS software results show significant variation(P-value<0.05) between 0mM theophylline and 0.5mM theophylline (optimum theophylline concentration to make clover 2 work) effects on clover 2.</h3> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
<p>It turns out that our riboscaffold clover 2 can be regulated and controlled through conformational change by theophylline. This scaffold, by theophylline management, could have a variety of functions, more than accelerate the reaction, but whether to accelerate or not, the degree of acceleration and even reduce the reaction rate. </p> | <p>It turns out that our riboscaffold clover 2 can be regulated and controlled through conformational change by theophylline. This scaffold, by theophylline management, could have a variety of functions, more than accelerate the reaction, but whether to accelerate or not, the degree of acceleration and even reduce the reaction rate. </p> | ||
Line 455: | Line 459: | ||
<h3>Results</h3> | <h3>Results</h3> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | < | + | <h5>Scaffold</h5> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_12.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
<p>Fig.12 Fluorescence microscopy. The (BL21*DE3) of the E. coli were transformed with FA+FB, FA+FB+ original RNA scaffold D0, and FA+FB+ our designed RNA scaffold clover 2(0.5 mM theophylline adding). As expected, strains without RNA scaffold did not fluoresce. Upon the existence of RNA scaffold, many of the cells emitted fluorescence indicating a substantial amount of split GFP combination is permitted because of the function of RNA scaffold. The brightfield images in the right column depict all bacterial cells. The GFP images in the left column depict bacterial cells which emitted fluorescence. </p> | <p>Fig.12 Fluorescence microscopy. The (BL21*DE3) of the E. coli were transformed with FA+FB, FA+FB+ original RNA scaffold D0, and FA+FB+ our designed RNA scaffold clover 2(0.5 mM theophylline adding). As expected, strains without RNA scaffold did not fluoresce. Upon the existence of RNA scaffold, many of the cells emitted fluorescence indicating a substantial amount of split GFP combination is permitted because of the function of RNA scaffold. The brightfield images in the right column depict all bacterial cells. The GFP images in the left column depict bacterial cells which emitted fluorescence. </p> | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | <p>Fig.13 Synergy Hybrid Microplate Reader controlled experiments. The BL21*DE3 of the E. coli were transformed with figure showing plasmids. (0.5 mM theophylline was adding in strains containing clover 2). | + | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_13.jpg" width="700px" /> |
- | + | <p>Fig.13 Synergy Hybrid Microplate Reader controlled experiments. The BL21*DE3 of the E. coli were transformed with figure showing plasmids. (0.5 mM theophylline was adding in strains containing clover 2). </p> | |
- | <p>luminescence efficiency of | + | <p>`luminescence efficiency of clover 2=\frac{\frac{FI}{OD(FA+FB+clover 2)}-\frac{FI}{OD(FA+FB)}{\frac{FI}{OD(FA+FB)}}=\frac{53425-23779}{23779}=124.67\%`</p> |
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
- | <p> | + | <p>`luminescence efficiency of D0=\frac{\frac{FI}{OD(FA+FB+clover 2}-\frac{FI}{OD(FA+FB)}}{\frac{FI}{OD(FA+FB}}=\frac{38288-23779}{23779}=61\%`</p> |
<p> </p> | <p> </p> | ||
+ | <p>The original intention of our designing RNA scaffold clover 2 is to create a regulatory scaffold which can tune its conformation thus have various functions. To our surprise, clover version 2, when adding optimal Theophylline concentration 0.5mM, happens to be a more powerful scaffold which helps two halves of GFP’s combination and give out light strongly.</p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p>One possible reason is in clover version 2, distance between MS2 aptamer and PP7 aptamer is closer than in D0 (showing in Fig.4 and Fig.6), so that when binding phage coat proteins, FA and FB on clover version 2 were set closer than on D0. We submit the inference that when RNA scaffold binds enzymes, clover version 2 draws two enzymes nearer than D0 thus has more ability to accelerate the enzymatic reaction.</p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <h5>late and control by Theophylline</h5> | ||
+ | <p>When the concentration of Theophylline is in the range from 0mM to 0.5mM, the concentration of Theophylline and the resulting fluorescence intensity are directly proportional. </p> | ||
+ | <p>Theophylline concentration beyond certain extent will be hazardous to cells and how it affects cells depends on strain type. The study by NYMU Taipei 2010 alerted adding more than 4mM of Theophylline would cause E. coli to die. In our experiments, we find that after adding more than 0.5mM, the Theophylline spectrum curve would be invalid. As a result, we pick up data with concentrations below 0.5mM to analyze as the E. coli cell would be unstable or the regulation of the Theophylline aptamer would not be accurate. </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_14.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Fig.14 origin data of clover 2 regulatory tests. First line of each form is different treatments of Theophylline concentration and data in table cells are fluorescence intensity/ OD. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_15_上.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_fig_15_下.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Fig.15 7 tests of fluorescence/ OD change over theophylline concentration. There’s evident positive correlation in between. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Then we build several SAS models to analyze data between 0-0.5mM Theophylline concentrations of treatments, choosing” clover version 2: different treatments versus blocks” test 5-7 to run a SAS model. | ||
+ | P-value shows that Theophylline concentrations have significant impact on fluorescence intensity of clover version 2 and almost no impact on D0. That is to say, our designed RNA scaffold clover version 2 can be regulated and controlled by Theophylline within 0-0.5mM not for random errors or common phenomenon in RNA scaffolds. | ||
+ | |||
+ | If you want more details about SAS source programs and software computational results, please click here. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <h3>Source program 1:</h3> | ||
+ | <p>data ribo;</p> | ||
+ | <p>input gfp theo @@;</p> | ||
+ | <p>cards;</p> | ||
+ | <p>22230 0 25855 0.1 29227 0.2 34357 0.3 34575 0.4 39766 0.5</p> | ||
+ | <p>14905 0 21407 0.1 21546 0.2 24699 0.3 27383 0.4 30470 0.5</p> | ||
+ | <p>27774 0 28647 0.1 29131 0.2 29751 0.3 31131 0.4 46907 0.5</p> | ||
+ | <p>;</p> | ||
+ | <p>proc glm;</p> | ||
+ | <p>class theo;</p> | ||
+ | <p>model gfp=theo;</p> | ||
+ | <p>Means theo/LSD;</p> | ||
+ | <p>run;</p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_SAS_1.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_SAS_2.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | <img src="https://igem.org/Image:Riboscaffold_SAS_3.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p>White means no significant variations between two treatments of Theophylline and red means significant variations. </p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h3>Source program 2:</h3> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p>data ribo;</p> | ||
+ | <p>input gfp theo @@;</p> | ||
+ | <p>cards;</p> | ||
+ | <p>29188 0 30700 0.1 19999 0.3 23492 0.5 31119 0.7 15671 1</p> | ||
+ | <p>13870 0 16483 0.2 16965 0.4 17516 0.5 16221 0.6</p> | ||
+ | <p>;</p> | ||
+ | <p>proc glm;</p> | ||
+ | <p>class theo;</p> | ||
+ | <p>model gfp=theo;</p> | ||
+ | <p>Means theo/LSD;</p> | ||
+ | <p>run;</p> | ||
+ | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/igem.org/4/4f/Riboscaffold_SAS_4.jpg" width="700px" /> | ||
</div><!-- end .acc_container --> | </div><!-- end .acc_container --> |