Team:ZJU-China/project.htm

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(versus)
Line 760: Line 760:
<p align="justify">If you want more details about SAS source programs and software computational results, please click here <a class="parts" href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:ZJU-China/sourcecode1.htm" target="_blank">[code]</a>. </p>
<p align="justify">If you want more details about SAS source programs and software computational results, please click here <a class="parts" href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:ZJU-China/sourcecode1.htm" target="_blank">[code]</a>. </p>
 +
</br>
 +
<h3>Clover version 3 versus 2</h3>
 +
</br>
 +
<div class="floatC">
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/igem.org/7/7a/Clover23_37.png" width="450px" />
 +
</div>
 +
<p class="fig" align="justify"><b>Fig.7</b> Biotek Synergy H1 Hybrid Reader controlled experiments. The BL21*DE3 of the E. coli were transformed with figure showing plasmids. Expression was under 37℃. (0.4 mM theophylline was adding for contrast with theophylline absence.) 0.4mM theophylline increases clover version 2’s luminescence efficiency by 30.77% and clover version 3 by 57.23%. Also, when theophylline is absent, clover version 3 shows less fluorescence intensity. It turns out that clover version 3 response to theophylline more sensitively, thus more efficient to regulate.</p>
 +
</br>
 +
<div class="floatC">
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/igem.org/f/f2/Clover23_20.png" width="450px" />
 +
</div>
 +
<p class="fig"><b>Fig.8</b> Biotek Synergy H1 Hybrid Reader controlled experiments. The BL21*DE3 of the E. coli were transformed with figure showing plasmids. Expression was under 20℃. (0.4 mM theophylline was adding for contrast with theophylline absence.) 0.4mM theophylline increases clover version 2’s luminescence efficiency by 13.27% and clover version 3 by 41.31%. Also, when theophylline is absent, clover version 3 shows less fluorescence intensity. It turns out that clover version 3 responses to theophylline more sensitively, thus more efficient to regulate.</p>
 +
</br>
 +
<p>Results show that our improvement of clover version 2 succeeds. Clover version 3 behaves more responsive to theophylline than clover version 2 thus more controllable and tunable. See <a class="parts" href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:ZJU-China/project_result2_out2.htm" target="_blank">original data</a>. And in clover version 3, primary scaffold function in the absence of theophylline is inconspicuous, which foresees in our future design and optimization, the alloscaffold’s behavior could reach “0-1” step response (when theophylline is absent, alloscaffold almost doesn’t work; when adding theophylline, alloscaffold works as scaffold significantly.)</p>
 +
</br>
</div>
</div>
</div><!-- end .acc_container -->
</div><!-- end .acc_container -->

Revision as of 07:27, 26 October 2012

PROJECT

01 ABSTRACT

02 BACKGROUND

03 S0: BASIC RNA SCAFFOLD

04 S1: ALLOSCAFFOLD

05 S2: SCAFFOLD LIBRARY

06 S3: BIOSYNTHESIS OF IAA

07 PARTS

08 RESULTS

09 PERSPECTIVES