Team:UNITN-Trento/Project/Blue light

From 2013.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 163: Line 163:
<b>Fig. 2: Light successfully induced AmilCP production.</b> We started the characterization test splitting the cultures (OD = 0.7) into 3 samples of 5 ml under 3 different conditions: Blue LED induced culture (1), Normal light induced culture (2), Dark control (3). We induced O/N at 37° and the next day <b>we could admire a very conspicuous difference in color of liquid cultures and pellets</b> .
<b>Fig. 2: Light successfully induced AmilCP production.</b> We started the characterization test splitting the cultures (OD = 0.7) into 3 samples of 5 ml under 3 different conditions: Blue LED induced culture (1), Normal light induced culture (2), Dark control (3). We induced O/N at 37° and the next day <b>we could admire a very conspicuous difference in color of liquid cultures and pellets</b> .
</span>
</span>
 +
<P>
 +
Moreover, AmilCP has an absorbance peak at 588 nm so we measured the absorbance peak with the spectrophotometer in order to have concrete data.
 +
</P>
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/e8/Blue_fluorimeter-plot.jpg" class="plot"/>
 +
<span class="caption">
 +
<b>Fig. 3:</b>b> by measuring the absorbance of the three samples (588 nm), we observed a substantial difference between the dark control and the other two samples; this is a quantitative proof that the production of AMILCP at dark was strongly repressed. The graph also proves that white light induction is a little less efficient.
 +
</span>
 +
<p>
 +
We carried out several tests in order to demonstrate the reproducibility of the behavior, although sometimes we observed amilCP production even in the dark control, so we could assume that the circuit doesn’t act like a perfectly controlled switch.
 +
 +
We can make a speculation on the cause: probably the inverter cassette presence is responsible of this flawed behavior; Plambda is actually a strong promoter but CI transcription is at the end of a pretty long cascade that is likely to produce low CI; this means that there isn’t enough inhibitor to block Plambda activity.
 +
 +
In order to confirm our theory <b>we tested also the circuit without the inverter</b>. This device, on the contrary, is designed to get switched on at dark and to be inhibited by blue light though.
 +
</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<!--end content--></html>|<html>https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/5/53/Tn-2013-headerbg-Sfondobb.png</html>|<html>https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/d2/Tn-2013-headerbg-Sfondobb_or.png</html>}}
<!--end content--></html>|<html>https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/5/53/Tn-2013-headerbg-Sfondobb.png</html>|<html>https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/d2/Tn-2013-headerbg-Sfondobb_or.png</html>}}

Revision as of 13:15, 21 September 2013

Results - Blue Light

We decided to develop a photo-inducible genetic circuit that triggers the production of Ethylene in presence of blue light (470 nm), and stops at dark.

We thought to use blue light as our inducer because it would fit perfectly to our very own B. fruity vending machine, being the easiest way to control a genetic device in a totally automated scaffold. All parts have been transformed and characterized in E. coli (strain NEB10b).



The device

We aimed at first to get ethylene production at blue light (470 nm) and the off state at dark, so we went for the design of a blue light dependent device that includes an inverter cassette.

BBa_K1065310


We engineered in E. coli a blue-light sensor composed by:

  • Anderson promoter BBa_J23100;
  • the blue light receptor YF1, which consist of YtvA from B. subtilis fused to a kinase domain (fixL) from B. japonicum (Möglich A, Ayers RA, Moffat K. 2008);
  • its response regulator, FixJ;
  • a downstream promoter PfixK2, which is turned off by phosphorylated FixJ;
  • an inverter cassette composed of cI and Plambda;
  • a reporter (chromoprotein amilCP), which was later substituted by EFE (our ethylene forming enzyme).

To assemble this device we used the following parts from the registry:


We characterized this circuit along with the version without the inverter cassette (activated at dark and inhibited by blue light). Thus we also created the part:

BBa-Bba_K1065302



If you are interested in all the molecular details of these circuits, please check our datapage

Different sources of blue light induces AmilCP production in the "inverted circuit"

We first assembled the “inverted circuit” with a blue chromo-protein (AmilCP) downstream instead of EFE to obtain easy-to-watch and clear characterization results.
At first we compared the induction power of several light sources:

  • 1 LED blue light;
  • 1 blue light bulb;
  • 1 white light bulb.
Fig. 1: Different light sources induction power. We had massive production of amilCP at LED light (4) and white light (3), instead exposure to the blue light bulb (2) induced a little less but still way more than the dark control (1): probably white light worked as well because it included the right wavelength (470), instead the blue bulb wavelength range is unknown, so we could assume that the right WL was not as much intense as in the other sources.

Then we decided to use only blue LED and normal light as inducers in further tests.

Fig. 2: Light successfully induced AmilCP production. We started the characterization test splitting the cultures (OD = 0.7) into 3 samples of 5 ml under 3 different conditions: Blue LED induced culture (1), Normal light induced culture (2), Dark control (3). We induced O/N at 37° and the next day we could admire a very conspicuous difference in color of liquid cultures and pellets .

Moreover, AmilCP has an absorbance peak at 588 nm so we measured the absorbance peak with the spectrophotometer in order to have concrete data.

Fig. 3:b> by measuring the absorbance of the three samples (588 nm), we observed a substantial difference between the dark control and the other two samples; this is a quantitative proof that the production of AMILCP at dark was strongly repressed. The graph also proves that white light induction is a little less efficient.

We carried out several tests in order to demonstrate the reproducibility of the behavior, although sometimes we observed amilCP production even in the dark control, so we could assume that the circuit doesn’t act like a perfectly controlled switch. We can make a speculation on the cause: probably the inverter cassette presence is responsible of this flawed behavior; Plambda is actually a strong promoter but CI transcription is at the end of a pretty long cascade that is likely to produce low CI; this means that there isn’t enough inhibitor to block Plambda activity. In order to confirm our theory we tested also the circuit without the inverter. This device, on the contrary, is designed to get switched on at dark and to be inhibited by blue light though.

[http://2013.igem.org/wiki/index.php?title=Team:UNITN-Trento/Project/Blue_light&action=edit Edit this page] | Main Page

Retrieved from "http://2013.igem.org/Team:UNITN-Trento/Project/Blue_light"