Team:Amsterdam/extra/faq
From 2012.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<h4>Won’t endogenous methylation cause interference?</h4> | <h4>Won’t endogenous methylation cause interference?</h4> | ||
- | E. coli posses several endogenous methyltransferases which are used for epigenetic purposes of E. | + | E. coli posses several endogenous methyltransferases which are used for epigenetic purposes of <i>E. coli</i>’s own genome. Our scan of these endogenous methyltransferases does not indicate that any of them posses the ability to bind to our M.ScaI-recognition site and are thus they are not able to methylate the detection site. |
- | <h4>Will the fusion-protein fold correctly or be processed by E. | + | <h4>Will the fusion-protein fold correctly or be processed by <i>E. coli</i>’s native systems?</h4> |
At the moment there is no indication that this will be the case. Separately the parts of the protein have been translated and expressed in E. coli without complications. | At the moment there is no indication that this will be the case. Separately the parts of the protein have been translated and expressed in E. coli without complications. | ||
<h4>Will the introduced methyltranferase cause problems inside the microorganism?</h4> | <h4>Will the introduced methyltranferase cause problems inside the microorganism?</h4> | ||
- | Right now all our experiments are conducted in the DH5alpha strain of E. coli which does not posses the M.ScaI methyltransferase we use. Actually the M.ScaI is a type 4 methyltransferase, that does not occur naturally in E. coli. After BLAST searching the E. coli genome we also did not find any potential binding site for our M.ScaI. | + | Right now all our experiments are conducted in the DH5alpha strain of <i>E. coli</i> which does not posses the M.ScaI methyltransferase we use. Actually the M.ScaI is a type 4 methyltransferase, that does not occur naturally in E. coli. After BLAST searching the E. coli genome we also did not find any potential binding site for our M.ScaI. |
<h4>Won’t the memory plasmid be cut or processed by the endogenous restriction enzymes?</h4> | <h4>Won’t the memory plasmid be cut or processed by the endogenous restriction enzymes?</h4> | ||
- | The chosen restriction sites in our plasmid are not recognized by E. | + | The chosen restriction sites in our plasmid are not recognized by <i>E. coli</i>’s endogenous restriction enzymes. The plasmid backbones and vectors that are used have all been previously used or expressed in E. coli without any complications. |
<h4>If there is leaky expression of the protein, would this cause interference?</h4> | <h4>If there is leaky expression of the protein, would this cause interference?</h4> | ||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
<h4>How much specificity is created by the Zinc-finger?</h4> | <h4>How much specificity is created by the Zinc-finger?</h4> | ||
- | The Zinc-finger uses an unique 18 bp sequence which is not found anywhere else on the plasmid or in the genome of E. coli. The Zinc-finger multiplies the overall probability of binding (PoB) to a much higher specificity when being attached to the M.ScaI which has its own PoB. | + | The Zinc-finger uses an unique 18 bp sequence which is not found anywhere else on the plasmid or in the genome of <i>E. coli</i>. The Zinc-finger multiplies the overall probability of binding (PoB) to a much higher specificity when being attached to the M.ScaI which has its own PoB. |
<h4>Would constitutive active promoters cause random or unspecific methylation?</h4> | <h4>Would constitutive active promoters cause random or unspecific methylation?</h4> |
Latest revision as of 03:57, 27 September 2012