Team:UC Chile2/Cyanolux/Results
From 2012.igem.org
Question:
Should we separate plasmids from Biobricks? Should each section apply to each construct?
Contents |
Construction of plasmids
pSB1C3_IntK
Our first attempts to build the construct ( BBa_K743004) through Gibson Assemly were unsuccessful due to problems involving high compexity of the reaction, however we were able to Biobrick the recombination sites ( Part:BBa_K743000 and Part:BBa_K743001). Afterwards we decided to build a simple backbone first before continuing with more complex assemblies.
Through standard assembly we managed to build K743006 which led us to continue assembling our constructs through simpler Gibson Assemblies. In short time we were able to build our final constructs for the luciferase using 2 different versions of it available in the registry ( From Photorhabdus luminiscent, Part:BBa_K743014 and from Vibrio fisherii, Part:BBa_K743015) under an endogenous Synechocystis's promoter (transaldolase Reference???)
All constructs and parts have been verified by digestion and corroborated by sequencing.
pSB1A3_IntC (From 2010 Utah's iGEM team)
We decided to use this plasmid to place the LuxCDEG part of the Lux operon in this plasmid, however after various attempts to transform Synechocystis without success we reconsidered (see below SOMEWHERE!!! [[]]) due to problems regarding the design of this plasmid backbone (see below ANOTHERWHERE)
pSB1C3_IntK
When we reconsidered about using pSB1A3_IntC we designed a new plasmid backbone to place the LuxCDEG (substrate regeneration part of the Lux operon) under the Synechocystis
Corroborating sequences
Conclusions
Transforming Synechocystis PCC 6803
Transformation
Reestreaking
Confirming DNA
Conclusions
Revealing phenotypes
Microscopy
Luminometer readings
Conclusions