Team:UIUC-Illinois/Project/Design

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 137: Line 137:
     <tr>
     <tr>
       <td>YFP + Control Binding Site in protet plasmid + pBAD30 Plasmid</td>
       <td>YFP + Control Binding Site in protet plasmid + pBAD30 Plasmid</td>
-
       <td>This determines the effects of a pBAD30 Plasmid when used with a YFP + Control Binding Site.</td>
+
       <td>This can help understand whether cotransformation of two plasmids in the cell will interfere with YFP expression.</td>
     </tr>
     </tr>
     <tr>
     <tr>
       <td>YFP + Specific Binding Site in protet plasmid + pBAD30 Plasmid</td>
       <td>YFP + Specific Binding Site in protet plasmid + pBAD30 Plasmid</td>
-
       <td>This determines the effects of a pBAD30 Plasmid when used with a YFP + Specific Binding Site.</td>
+
       <td>This can help understand whether cotransformation of two plasmids in the cell will interfere with YFP expression.</td>
     </tr>
     </tr>
     <tr>
     <tr>

Revision as of 21:38, 26 October 2012

Header

Project Design

PUF Project Design

  • Overview
  • PUF+PIN Fusion
  • YFP Reporter
  • Non-Specific Control
  • Experiments
  • Theoretical Results
  • PUF Experimental Design


    In designing our project we based our quantitative tests on fluorescence measured by a plate fluorescence reader. Our constructs were created in ways that best suit providing evidence for our hypothesis of the PUF-PIN fusion protein showing endonuclease activity. Generally, our results were collected from quantifying two main PUF-PIN fusion protein types, a wild type and a mutant type, in different conditions. These two fusion proteins had recognition sites that differed by two base pairs.

    Click on the list to the left to read about each of our constructs and why we decided to do them. All expressions were done in vivo with the DH5a strain of E.Coli on pBAD30 or pPROTet.E plasmids.

    Retrieved from "https://2012.igem.org/Team:UIUC-Illinois/Project/Design"