Team:LMU-Munich/Spore Coat Proteins

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 42: Line 42:
{| style="color:black;" cellpadding="0" width="70%" cellspacing="0" border="0" align="center" style="text-align:center;"
{| style="color:black;" cellpadding="0" width="70%" cellspacing="0" border="0" align="center" style="text-align:center;"
|style="width: 70%;background-color: #EBFCE4;" |
|style="width: 70%;background-color: #EBFCE4;" |
-
<font color="#000000"; size="2">Gene clusters of ''cotZ'' and ''cgeA''</font>
+
<font color="#000000"; size="2">Fig. 2: Gene clusters of ''cotZ'' and ''cgeA''</font>
|}
|}
|}
|}
Line 48: Line 48:
-
<p align="justify">The first step was to fuse [http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_K823039 ''gfp''] to ''cgeA'' and [http://partsregistry.org/wiki/index.php?title=Part:BBa_K823031 ''cotZ''] as a proof of principle. This way we would determine if it is possible to display proteins on the spore crust and if their expression has any effect on spore formation.</p>  
+
<p align="justify">First, we used [http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_K823039 ''gfp''] as a proof of principle and fused it to ''cgeA'' and [http://partsregistry.org/wiki/index.php?title=Part:BBa_K823031 ''cotZ'']. This way we would determine if it is possible to display proteins on the spore crust and if their expression has any effect on spore formation.</p>  
   
   
-
<p align="justify">Therefore we first fused ''cotZ'' to its two native promoters, P<sub>''cotV''</sub> and P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub>, and to P<sub>''cgeA''</sub>, which regulates the transcription of ''cgeA''. For cgeA we only used its native promoter P<sub>''cgeA''</sub> and the stonger one of the two promoters of the ''cotVWXYZ'' cluster, P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub> (for more details see [https://2012.igem.org/Team:LMU-Munich/Data/crustpromoters crust promotor evaluation]. While [http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_K823039 ''gfp''] was ligated to the terminator B0014 (see [http://partsregistry.org/wiki/index.php?title=Part:BBa_B0014 Registry]). When these constructs were finished and confirmed by sequencing, we fused them together applying the [http://partsregistry.org/Help:Assembly_standard_25 Freiburg standard] to create in frame fusion proteins, flanked by one of the three promoters and the terminator.This way we created C-terminal fusion proteins.  
+
<p align="justify">We first constructed the BioBrick for ''cotZ'', ''cgeA'' and ''gfp'' in [http://partsregistry.org/Help:Assembly_standard_25 Freiburg Standard]. ''cotZ''was then fused to its two native promoters, P<sub>''cotV''</sub> and to P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub>, and P<sub>''cgeA''</sub>, which regulates the transcription of ''cgeA''. For ''cgeA'' we only used its native promoter P<sub>''cgeA''</sub> and the stronger one of the two promoters of the ''cotVWXYZ'' cluster, P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub> (for more details see [https://2012.igem.org/Team:LMU-Munich/Data/crustpromoters crust promotor evaluation]. While [http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_K823039 ''gfp''] was ligated to the terminator B0014 (see [http://partsregistry.org/wiki/index.php?title=Part:BBa_B0014 Registry]). When these constructs were finished and confirmed by sequencing, we fused them together by applying the Freiburg standard to create constructs, in which gfp is fused C-terminally to ''cotZ'' or ''cgeA'' flanked by one of the three promoters and the terminator. This way we created C-terminal fusion proteins.  
-
<br>But as we did not know if C- or N-terminal fusion would influence the fusion protein expression, our second aim was to construct N-terminal fusion proteins as well. For this purpose we wanted to fuse the genes for the crust proteins ''cotZ'' and ''cgeA'' to the terminator and ''gfp'' to the three chosen promoters. Unsuccessfully, there occured a mutation in the XbaI site during construction of ''gfp'' in Freiburg Standard which is why we were not able to finish these constructs.
+
<br>But as we did not know if C- or N-terminal fusion would influence the fusion protein expression, our second aim was to construct N-terminal fusion proteins as well. For this purpose we wanted to fuse the genes for the crust proteins ''cotZ'' and ''cgeA'' to the terminator and ''gfp'' to the three chosen promoters. Unfortunately, there occured a mutation in the XbaI site during construction of ''gfp'' in Freiburg Standard. Therefore we were not able to finish these constructs.
</p>  
</p>  
Line 66: Line 66:
{| style="color:black;" cellpadding="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" border="0" align="center" style="text-align:center;"
{| style="color:black;" cellpadding="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" border="0" align="center" style="text-align:center;"
|style="width: 70%;background-color: #EBFCE4;" |
|style="width: 70%;background-color: #EBFCE4;" |
-
<font color="#000000"; size="2">Section of the genome of ''B. subtilis'' with the various integrated constructs.</font>
+
<font color="#000000"; size="2">Fig. 3: Section of the genome of ''B. subtilis'' with the various integrated constructs.</font>
|}
|}
|}
|}
-
<p align="justify">As we are working with B. subtilis spores, we needed to clone our final constructs into an empty Bacillus vector, so that they could get integrated into the genome of ''B. subtilis'' after transformation. Thus we picked the empty vector pSB<sub>BS</sub>1C from our '''''Bacillus''B'''io'''B'''rick'''B'''ox,  for the ''cotZ'' constructs. This vector integrates into the ''amyE'' locus in the ''B. subtilis'' genome. Therefore we checked the integration of our construct via a starch test.  The clones with the right integrated device have then been chosen for further analysis. In oder to express both crust protein constructs in one strain the ''cgeA'' fusion proteins had to be cloned into one of the other empty vectors. Unfortunately for unknown reasons, the cloning of the constructs with ''cgeA'' into this vector have been unsuccessful so far.</p>  
+
<p align="justify">Finally we needed to clone our constructs into an empty ''Bacillus'' vector, so that they could get integrated into the genome of ''B. subtilis'' after transformation. Thus we picked the empty vector pSB<sub>BS</sub>1C from our [https://2012.igem.org/Team:LMU-Munich/Bacillus_BioBricks#Bacillus_Vectors '''''Bacillus''B'''io'''B'''rick'''B'''ox],  for the ''cotZ'' constructs. This vector integrates into the ''amyE'' locus, which allows to easily check the integration via starch test. In oder to also express both crust protein constructs in one strain, the ''cgeA'' fusion proteins had to be cloned into one of our other empty vectors pSB<sub>BS</sub>4S. Unfortunately for unknown reasons, the cloning of the constructs with ''cgeA'' into this vector has so far not been successful.</p>  
-
<p align="justify">Finally we could start with the important experiment for our GFP-'''Sporo'''beads, fluorescence microscopy. Therefore we developed a sporulation protocol, that increases the rates of mature spores in our mutant samples (for details see link). The cells were fixed on agarose-pads and imaged in bright field and excited in blue wavelength. Because of the low but distinct fluorescence of wildtype sores, we measured and compared the fluorescence intensity of 100 spores per mutant. We obtained significant differences between wildtype spores and all our '''Sporo'''beads [link data]. We only worked with the P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub>-''cotZ''-''gfp''-''terminator'' spores for further experiments as these showed the brightest fluorescence.</p>
+
<p align="justify">Finally, we started with the most important experiment for our GFP-'''Sporo'''beads, the fluorescence microscopy. Therefore we developed a sporulation protocol(for details see [https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2012/e/e9/LMU-Munich_2012_Protocol_for_enhancement_of_mature_spore_numbers.pdf Protocol for enhancement of mature spore numbers]), that increases the rates of mature spores in our mutant samples. The cells were fixed on agarose-pads and imaged in bright field and excited in blue wavelength. All '''Sporo'''beads showed green fluorescence on their surface. But B53-'''Sporo'''bead (containing the P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub>-''cotZ''-''gfp''-terminator construct) illusidated the highest fluorescence intensity (see Figure 4). For further experiments, we chose this as it showed the brightest fluorescence.</p>
Line 84: Line 84:
{| style="color:black;" cellpadding="0" width="70%" cellspacing="0" border="0" align="center" style="text-align:center;"
{| style="color:black;" cellpadding="0" width="70%" cellspacing="0" border="0" align="center" style="text-align:center;"
|style="width: 70%;background-color: #EBFCE4;" |
|style="width: 70%;background-color: #EBFCE4;" |
-
<font color="#000000"; size="2">Fluorescence of wildtype spore and B 53 '''Sporo'''bead</font>
+
<font color="#000000"; size="2">Fig. 4: Fluorescence of wildtype spores and B53-'''Sporo'''beads (containing the P<sub>''cotYZ''</sub>-''cotZ''-''gfp''-terminator construct)</font>
|}
|}
|}
|}
Line 109: Line 109:
-
<p align="justify">The '''Sporo'''beads-Δ''cotZ'' were investigated by fluorescence microscopy and analysed like the other '''Sporo'''beads. The intensity bar charts should thereby show the fluorescence difference between wildtype (W168), B53- and B70-'''Sporo'''beads. To demonstrate the distribution of the fusion proteins we created 3D graphs, which show the fluorescence intensity spread across the spore surface. For analysis we measured the fluorescence intensity of a area of 750px per spore by using ImageJ and evaluated it with the statistical software '''R'''. The following graph shows the results of microscopy and ImageJ analysis.</p>   
+
<p align="justify">Because of the low but distinct fluorescence of wildtype spores, we measured and compared the fluorescence intensity of 100 spores per construct. The '''Sporo'''beads were investigated by fluorescence microscopy and analysed. We obtained significant differences between wildtype spores and all our '''Sporo'''beads [see https://2012.igem.org/Team:LMU-Munich/Data/gfp_spore Data]. The intensity bar charts should thereby show the fluorescence difference between wildtype (W168), B53- and B70-'''Sporo'''beads (B53 strain with native ''cotZ'' deletion). To demonstrate the distribution of the fusion proteins we created 3D graphs, which show the fluorescence intensity spread across the spore surface. For analysis we measured the fluorescence intensity of a area of 750px per spore by using ImageJ and evaluated it with the statistical software '''R'''. The following graph shows the results of microscopy and ImageJ analysis.</p>   

Revision as of 21:10, 26 September 2012

iGEM Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Beadzillus

Team-LMU eppis.resized.jpg

The LMU-Munich team is exuberantly happy about the great success at the World Championship Jamboree in Boston. Our project Beadzillus finished 4th and won the prize for the "Best Wiki" (with Slovenia) and "Best New Application Project".

IGEM HQ LMU prize.jpg

[ more news ]

Sporenfreunde