Team:Michigan/Future
From 2012.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
(One intermediate revision not shown) | |||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
<h2>Positive Feedback Loop</h2> | <h2>Positive Feedback Loop</h2> | ||
- | + | Leaky expression of each recombinase when under an inducible promoter may cause a significant fraction of the cell population to have a switch flipped in the wrong direction if the recombinase leakage is above the concentration threshold necessary to flip the switch. If neither of the recombinases are being induced, the only way the switch can be flipped is through leaky expression. In other words, the state of the switch may degrade over time into a mixed state. In order to remedy this problem, we propose a positive feedback mechanism. In addition to the desired genes to be expressed on either side of the switch, one could add the recombinase that will flip the switch back to its current state in the event that undesirable basal level expression of the opposite recombinase flips the switch. This will create a threshold level of recombinase activity that will need to be overcome by the opposite recombinase in order to completely flip the switch. Extra consideration would have to be given to the transcription and translation rates involved in a circuit like this. The threshold level of recombinase activity must not be so high that the opposite recombinase is unable to overcome this activity and flip the switch. Too high of a threshold may be a burden on the cell as well. On the other hand, the threshold level must not be so low that the basal level expression of the opposite recombinase is able to flip the switch to the wrong state. | |
+ | |||
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
Line 42: | Line 43: | ||
<h2>Adding LRP and IHF sites</h2> | <h2>Adding LRP and IHF sites</h2> | ||
- | NA-bending proteins such as leucine-responsive regulatory proteins (Lrp) anting the switching sequence, bringing IRR and IRL sites closer together. This additional component may increase the rate at which the tyrosine recombinases form a Holliday junction and flip the switching sequend integration host factor (IHF) protein natively interact with <i>fimS</i> in fimbriae producing <i>E. coli</i>. These proteins could bind close to and assist in creating a loop encapsulace. | + | NA-bending proteins such as leucine-responsive regulatory proteins (Lrp) anting the switching sequence, bringing IRR and IRL sites closer together. This additional component may increase the rate at which the tyrosine recombinases form a Holliday junction and flip the switching sequend integration host factor (IHF) protein natively interact with <i>fimS</i> in fimbriae producing <i>E. coli</i>. These proteins could bind close to and assist in creating a loop encapsulace (Holden et al., 2007). |
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
- | |||
- | |||
<h2>Future Impacts</h2> | <h2>Future Impacts</h2> | ||
The ability to accurately control the onset and termination of expression for proteins of interest enables further automation on cell/virus-based protein synthesis systems, opening opportunities for novel or better optimized high or low-throughput applications. I imagine a simultaneous induced switch flipping in a 96-well microplate, which is particularly beneficial for time sensitive assays and also serves to reduce the number of samples required for meaningful statistical analysis. | The ability to accurately control the onset and termination of expression for proteins of interest enables further automation on cell/virus-based protein synthesis systems, opening opportunities for novel or better optimized high or low-throughput applications. I imagine a simultaneous induced switch flipping in a 96-well microplate, which is particularly beneficial for time sensitive assays and also serves to reduce the number of samples required for meaningful statistical analysis. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h2>References</h2> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Holden et al., Microbiology (2007) 153(12) | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
</html> | </html> |
Latest revision as of 20:59, 14 October 2012
Future Directions
Making a better switch
Push-button Switch
It is possible to construct the switch such that brief exposure with an inducer produces a burst of recombinase expression, which in turn act upon the switching sequence and forming a sustained switch. An example of such a mechanism would utilize constitutively expressed repressors to suppress recombinase expression until the inducer temporarily inhibits repression.Positive Feedback Loop
Leaky expression of each recombinase when under an inducible promoter may cause a significant fraction of the cell population to have a switch flipped in the wrong direction if the recombinase leakage is above the concentration threshold necessary to flip the switch. If neither of the recombinases are being induced, the only way the switch can be flipped is through leaky expression. In other words, the state of the switch may degrade over time into a mixed state. In order to remedy this problem, we propose a positive feedback mechanism. In addition to the desired genes to be expressed on either side of the switch, one could add the recombinase that will flip the switch back to its current state in the event that undesirable basal level expression of the opposite recombinase flips the switch. This will create a threshold level of recombinase activity that will need to be overcome by the opposite recombinase in order to completely flip the switch. Extra consideration would have to be given to the transcription and translation rates involved in a circuit like this. The threshold level of recombinase activity must not be so high that the opposite recombinase is unable to overcome this activity and flip the switch. Too high of a threshold may be a burden on the cell as well. On the other hand, the threshold level must not be so low that the basal level expression of the opposite recombinase is able to flip the switch to the wrong state.