Team:UC Davis/Data

From 2013.igem.org

Revision as of 01:06, 25 September 2013 by Alferreiro (Talk | contribs)

Proof of Concept: Our Testing Construct


To characterize the behavior of a RiboTALe device, we acquired cells containing the sequences for TAL repressors from the Tagkopoulos Lab at UC Davis, with which we have worked closely. We placed the TAL repressors downstream of theophylline-responsive riboswitches, the sequences of which were taken from the studies A high-throughput screen for synthetic riboswitches reveals mechanistic insights into their function (Lynch et al, Chem Biol. 2007 Feb;14(2):173-84.), and Synthetic Riboswitches That Induce Gene Expression in Diverse Bacterial Species (Topp et al, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. December 2010 vol. 76 no. 23 7881-7884). The riboswitch-TALe sequences were placed under the regulation of a pBAD promoter.

We inserted previously engineered TALe binding sites corresponding to the TAL repressors used in our characterization experiments upstream of a reporter, GFP. This target sequence was placed under the regulation of a pTET promoter.



We tested our construct by subjecting the pBAD promoter, the theophylline riboswitch, and the pTET promoter to a range of induction levels with arabinose, theophylline, and aTc, respectively. It was expected that at low levels of arabinose and theophylline, but at high levels of aTc, GFP expression would be maximal due to the very low production of TAL repressor protein. On the other hand, at high levels of arabinose and theophylline it was expected that fluorescence levels would be greatly reduced due the higher rate of TAL repressor production. We also expected to see many instances of neither total GFP expression or total GFP repression, depending on the relative states of induction of the pBAD promoter, the theophylline riboswitch, and the pTET promoter.

Fluorescence is modulated by theophylline concentrations


We subjected our testing construct to the induction condition of 10 mM aTc, which would result in constitutive and maximal expression of GFP given no repression. We also subjected the construct to the induction condition of 0.1% arabinose, which would produce a nominal level of RiboTALe transcript. We varied the only the concentration of theophylline, over a range of 0 mM to 10 mM. Thus, difference in fluorescence between induction conditions would be due only to the RiboTALe repression activity. We measured the fluorescence of our construct in E. Coli MG1655Z1 over a course of 9-10 hours using the Tecan Infinite 200Pro microplate reader. Please refer to the Protocols page for details on our culture preparation and Tecan testing parameters.



The image above illustrates that GFP fluorescence is inversely related to theophylline concentrations, indicating that the TAL repressor is in fact being translated at rates corresponding to the theophylline induction levels, and effectively binding to its target site. At maximal theophylline concentrations, the expression of GFP is reduced (X) fold.

Next, we investigated what difference in system response we could achieve by altering the binding affinity of the TAL repressor protein.


Variable binding affinities of the TAL repressors allow for system tunability


The TAL repressor protein expressed by our RiboTALe device in our initial experiment has a dissociation constant KD 1.3 ± .03 nM. We compared the activity of this RiboTALe to one under the control of the same theophylline riboswitch, but that expressed a TAL repressor with KD 240 ± 40 nM. We subjected both RiboTALes to the induction condition of 10 mM aTC, which would result in constitutive and maximal expression of GFP given no repression. At the same time, we subjected both RiboTALes to the separate conditions:


Arabinose Concentration (%) Theophylline Concentration (mM) Expected Result
0.0 0.0 Full GFP expression due to a lack of RiboTALe transcript and thus TAL repressor
0.1 0.0 Full GFP expression due to a lack of riboswitch inducer, and thus translation of the TAL protein. Decreased GFP expression could be attributed to riboswitch leakiness
0.1 10.0 Full GFP repression, due the nominal expression of the RiboTALe transcript and the TAL repressor





The image above displays the peak fluorescence of two RiboTALe constructs, one expressing TALe 1 and the other expressing TALe 8, under different induction conditions for arabinose and theophylline. Both RiboTALes exhibit the expected behavior pattern given the induction conditions, but at consistently different levels of fluorescence. We have attributed this to the difference in binding affinities of the two TAL repressors to their respective binding sites.This variable, if well characterized for different TAL repressors, will provide a powerful means to control the tunability of these devices.

It is similarly interesting to note that under conditions of 0.1% arabinose, but no theophylline, there was clearly some reduction in fluorescence. We concluded that the riboswitch we used in this experiment had some degree of leakiness. We next investigated the possibility of altering riboswitch leakiness as another means to increase the tunability of our RiboTALe devices.


Altering the riboswitch Shine-Delgarno sequence modulates RiboTALe activity

The study A flow cytometry-based screen for synthetic riboswitches by Sean Lynch and Justin Gallivan (Nucleic Acids Res. 2009 January; 37(1): 184–192) presents a library of theophylline riboswitches with randomized 8 base pair sequences in the Shine-Delgarno region of the transcript that were screened for riboswitch behavior. We proceeded to investigate the difference in RiboTALe system response achievable by varying the riboswitch controlling the translation of the TAL repressor. To this end we tested two RiboTALe devices, both of which expressed TALe 8. One of these RiboTALes was under the control of theophylline riboswitch Clone E and the other was under the control of theophylline riboswitch Clone 8.1*. We subjected both RiboTALes to the induction condition of 10 mM aTC, which would result in constitutive and maximal expression of GFP given no repression. At the same time, we subjected both RiboTALes to the separate conditions:

Arabinose Concentration (%) Theophylline Concentration (mM) Expected Result
0.0 0.0 Full GFP expression due to a lack of RiboTALe transcript and thus TAL repressor
0.1 0.0 Full GFP expression due to a lack of riboswitch inducer, and thus translation of the TAL protein. Decreased GFP expression could be attributed to riboswitch leakiness
1.0 0.0 Full GFP expression due to a lack of riboswitch inducer, and thus translation of the TAL protein. Decreased GFP expression could be attributed to riboswitch leakiness
0.0 10.0 Full GFP expression due to a lack of RiboTALe transcript and thus TAL repressor
0.1 10.0 Full GFP repression, due the nominal expression of the RiboTALe transcript and the TAL repressor
1.0 10.0 Full GFP repression, due the maximal expression of the RiboTALe transcript and the TAL repressor



The image above displays the relative change in fluorescence for the two RiboTALe devices tested in this experiment at arabinose induction levels of 0.0%, 0.1%, and 1.0% percent, where arabinose induces expression of the RiboTALe transcript. Riboswitch Clone E and riboswitch Clone 8.1* display the same activation ratio according to the studies from which we acquired the sequences. But it is clear that the two RiboTALe devices, differing only in the riboswitch controlling the translation of the TAL repressor, exhibit behavior indicating that differences in the SD sequence of the riboswitch do in fact impact system behavior[...complete .]

KO3D

0 ng/mL aTc

caatacgcaaaccgcctctccccgcgcgttggccgattcattaatgcagctggcacgacaggtttcccgactggaaagcgggcagtgagcgcaacgcaattaatgtgagttagctcactcattaggcaccccaggctttacactttatgcttccggctcgtatgttgtgtggaattgtgagcggataacaatttcacaca 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 599, 647, 690, 684, 494 0.0031579, 0.0052541, 0.0059555, 0.0069092, 0.0041919 6 0, .01, .1, .25, .5, 1 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 688, 634, 630, 567, 613, 599, 697, 690, 672, 686, 671, 647, 691, 709, 699, 689, 703, 690, 517, 719, 700, 699, 717, 684, 448, 510, 493, 500, 512, 494

100 ng/mL aTc

caatacgcaaaccgcctctccccgcgcgttggccgattcattaatgcagctggcacgacaggtttcccgactggaaagcgggcagtgagcgcaacgcaattaatgtgagttagctcactcattaggcaccccaggctttacactttatgcttccggctcgtatgttgtgtggaattgtgagcggataacaatttcacaca 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 19281, 14779, 18481, 16665, 7100 .017132, .016563, .010138, .0083723, .0036696, .0013295, .00029933 0, .01, .1, .25, .5, 1 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 27676, 27805, 27124, 20736, 22057, 19281, 25713, 27355, 25079, 18345, 15425, 14779, 25355, 26322, 26972, 17362, 17072, 18481, 18771, 19210, 21053, 10468, 11105, 16665, 5461, 6111, 7360, 2909, 2919, 7100

Project Background

Learn about how we combine riboswitches and TAL's into robust orthogonal mechanisms for inducible repression.

Results

Check out the results of our experiments.

Human Practices

Take a look at how we designed a new database for better raw data characterization of Biobricks.

Judging Criteria

Here's the criteria that we met for this year's team.