Team:Freiburg/Notebook/lab epigenetics
From 2013.igem.org
Lisaschmunk (Talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 1,244: | Line 1,244: | ||
<p> For the sake of time, the experiment will not be repeated, but the original experiment will be repeated to prove to reproducibility of our data. </p> | <p> For the sake of time, the experiment will not be repeated, but the original experiment will be repeated to prove to reproducibility of our data. </p> | ||
<h4> results of kinetic </h4> | <h4> results of kinetic </h4> | ||
- | < | + | <div> |
+ | <table class="image"> | ||
+ | <tr> | ||
+ | <td> <img class="image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/d/d9/Kinetic_wochange_Freiburg_2013.JPG"> </td> | ||
+ | </tr> | ||
+ | <tr> | ||
+ | <td> Results between the kinetic were the medium was not changed. We do not see any differences in between the constructs. </td> | ||
+ | </tr> | ||
+ | </table> | ||
+ | </div> | ||
+ | <div> | ||
+ | <table class="image"> | ||
+ | <tr> | ||
+ | <td> <img class="image" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/5/5d/Kinetic_change_Freiburg_2013.JPG"> </td> | ||
+ | </tr> | ||
+ | <tr> | ||
+ | <td> Results of the kinetic where the medium was changed every 24 hours. Again, we do not see any differences in between the constructs. possible explanations above. </td> | ||
+ | </tr> | ||
+ | </table> | ||
+ | </div> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
<div id="tag"> | <div id="tag"> |
Revision as of 21:04, 24 September 2013
June
05.06.13
G9a mus musculus DNA arrived from Stuttgart
Lyophilized DNA on Whatman paper was incubated with 50µl sterile H2O (10min at RT) and eluted from the paper by centrifugation: 51.7ng/µl (NanoDrop).
20µl were sent for sequencing.
Transformation of G9a
4µl of G9a-DNA were transformed into 25µl Top10 competent E. coli. 250µl LB medium was added and cells were grown on 33°C for 1h30min before plating on an ampicillin agar plate.
06.-07.06.13
Clone selection
Because no single clones could be picked, a dilution plating of the transformation was performed and two single clones were selected the next day and streaked out for mini preps.
08.06.13
Mini preps of G9a clones
Clones were prepped with the Roche High Pure Plasmid Isolation Kit. Both clones were sent for sequencing with oIG8007 and oIG8008.
Clone | 1 | 2 |
---|---|---|
concentration in ng/µl | 61 | 76 |
09.06.13
Sequencing results
Both clones contain G9a from mus musculus.
New primers to amplify G9a(mm) were designed and ordered.
insert primer list here?
14.06.13
New primers arrived (oIG8009-oIG8012)
PCR to amplify G9a-SET domaine
aIG8000 (linker-G9a-NLS): oIG8009 (fw) and oIG8010 (rev) with G9a-Mini prep 1 (8.6.) as template.
aIG8003 (NLS-G9a-linker): oIG8011 (fw) and oIG8012 (rev).
µl | type |
---|---|
10 | Q5-HF Reaction Buffer |
1 | Template |
1 | Primer1 |
1 | Primer2 |
4 | dNTPs |
1 | DMSO |
0.5 | Q5-HF Polymerase |
Add to 50 | H2O |
- Annealing: 60°C
- Elongation: 30 sec
- 24 cycles
PCR aIG8000 and aIG8003 |
Bands run too low, can be due to gelred. Check size after gelextraction by loading less DNA.
Gel extraction of PCR products aIG8000 and aIG8003d
name | ng/µl |
---|---|
aIG8000 | 115.6 |
aIG8003 | 105.4 |
PCR to amplify Cas9 (on pX334a)
We need the mutated non-cleaving Cas9. Therefore we use pIG2004 from Max as template to produce aIG8001 (oIG2000/oIG8002) and aIG8002 (oIG2006/oIG2009).
5µl of Q5 buffer were used instead of 10µl. Elongation: 4min20sec.
PCR aIG8001, Gelex aIG8003(size correct), marker, aIG8002 |
Gel extraction of PCR products aIG8001 and aIG8002
name | ng/µl |
---|---|
aIG8001 | 19.2 |
aIG8002 | 11.5 |
15.06. PCR for aIG 8004, aIG8008, aIG 8007, aIG 8010 and aIG 8011
- aIG8004: primers: oIG2008 and 8005; template: pIG2004
- aIG8007: primers: oIG8009 and 8014; template: G9a(mm)
- aIG8008: primers: oIG8013 and 8010; template: G9a(mm)
- aIG8010: primers: oIG8014 and 8011; template: G9a(mm)
- aIG8011: primers: oIG8013 and 8012; template: G9a(mm)
PCR reaction was performed as described below
µl | type |
---|---|
10 | Q5-HF Reaction Buffer |
1 | Template |
1 | Primer1 |
1 | Primer2 |
4 | dNTPs |
1 | DMSO |
0.5 | Q5-HF Polymerase |
Add to 50 | H2O |
- Annealing: 60°C
- Elongation: 120 sec
- 24 cycles
PCR aIG8001, Gelex aIG8003(size correct), marker, aIG8002 |
19.06. Gibson Cloning for pIG8002 and pIG8004
Even though aIG8001 did not yield good results by gelEx, we performed Gibson cloning, as PCR was not repeatable. Gibson mix was prepared as described below.
- pIG8002
- aIG8006: 0,35ul
- aIG8001: 1,85ul
- aIG8002: 2,8 ul
- pIG8004
- aIG8001: 1,75ul
- aIG8002: 2,64ul
- aIG8009: 0,617ul
DNA mix was added to the aliquoted Gibson reaction mix and was incubated for 60 minutes at 50°C, 3 minutes on ice and 3 minutes on RT. 5ul of the mixture was transformed into competent E.coli and plated on Amp(+) plates.
20.06.
Clones were obtained for pIG8002, but not for pIG8004. clones from pIG8002 were streaked out on plates for miniprep.
21.06. test digest of pIG8002
Clones were prepped using the Roche kit and eluted in 50ul ddH2O. concentrations were roughly 230ng/ul. A test digest was performed using EcoRV and NotI. If the correct plasmid is obtained, three bands will be visible (at 5850bp, 3400bp and 1700bp.).
µl | Substance |
---|---|
1 | Plasmid |
1 | buffer 4 |
0,5 | EcoRV-HF |
0,5 | NotI-HF |
7 | H2O |
- Incubation: 1.5 h at 37° C
Results of test digest
15 out of 17 colonies were positive. Clone 3 and 5 were sent for sequencing with oIG0009, oIG8007 and oIG8008. |
Gibson for pIG8004
Sequencing results of pIG8002
Sequencing confirmed clone 5 as pIG8002. The catalytically active dCAS9:G9a-SD is complete. Clone 3 showed a deletion in between promoter and ATG. We do not expect this mutation to influence the protein, but, nevertheless, clone 5 is completely correct.
Repetition of Gibson for pIG8004 (dCAS9:dG9a)
As the first Gibson did not yield any clones we repeated it. DNA mix was prepared as described below.
- aIG8001: 1,75ul
- aIG8002: 2,64ul
- aIG8009: 0,617ul
DNA mix was added to the aliquoted Gibson reaction mix and was incubated for 60 minutes at 50°C, 3 minutes on ice and 3 minutes on RT. 5ul of the mixture was transformed into competent E.coli and plated on Amp(+) plates.
23.06.
11 Clones were obtained and picked. They were streaked out on plates for further analysis.
24.06 test digest of pIG8004
Clones were prepped using the Roche kit. Test digest was performed using EcorV and NotI. See table below for composition of test digest.
µl | Substance |
---|---|
1 | Plasmid |
1 | buffer 4 |
0,5 | EcoRV-HF |
0,5 | NotI-HF |
7 | H2O |
- Incubation: 1,5h at 37° C
Results of digest
11 out of 12 clones were positive, as all 3 bands were visible as expected. Numer 3 and 5 were sent for sequencing with oIG0009,8007 and 8008. |
02.07. Sequencing results of pIG8004 and starting of target site ligation
pIG8004 was confirmed as positive. The next step is to ligate target sites designed by Manuel S. into both constructs (furthermore called VEGF1-4, respectively pIG8002_1-4 and pIG8004_1-4), for functional testing of our construct. To do so, the construct will be opened with BbsI and afterwards the annealed oligos will be ligated into the construct with T4 ligase. Digest was performed as follows.
µl | Substance |
---|---|
5 | Plasmid |
5 | buffer 2.1 |
2 | BbsI |
39 | H2O |
- Incubation: 2h at 37° C
Results of digest
loading scheme: marker - pIG8002(digested) - pIG8002(control) - pIG8004(digested) - pIG8004(control). No big shift is visible when loading only undigested control. |
digested bands were cut and extracted using the Qiagen gelEx kit. Yields were roughly 20ng/ul. The next day they will be ligated with the oligos.
03.07.
Ligation of the annealed oligos into pIG8002 and pIG8004. 50ng of opened vector is ligated with 150-200ng of insert. A strong excess of small oligo is suspected to work more efficiently than less.
- pIG8002+oKM511/512:pIG8002_1
- pIG8002+oKM513/514:pIG8002_2
- pIG8002+oKM515/516:pIG8002_3
- pIG8002+oKM517/518:pIG8002_4
- pIG8002+oKM511/512:pIG8004_1
- pIG8002+oKM513/514:pIG8004_2
- pIG8002+oKM515/516:pIG8004_3
- pIG8002+oKM517/518:pIG8004_4
ligation was performed as follows:
µl | Substance |
---|---|
2,5 | vector |
2 | insert |
1 | T4 buffer |
0,5 | T4 Ligase |
4 | H2O |
- Incubation: 1h at 22° C
5ul of each transformation assay was transformed into competent E.coli (batch 8.5.), following the standard protocol.
4.7. Test digest of ligated crRNAs
Clones were obtained for all constructs. Minipreps were performed and yielded roughly 230ng/ul. Test digest was performed with BbsI and XhoI as described several times above. Results are inconclusive, so pIG8002_1 and pIG8004_1 were sent for sequencing with oIG0015.
Test digest - no difference is visible |
5.7.
pIG8002_1 was sequenced as correct, pIG8004_1 was negative, BbsI seemed to have cut too much of the plasmid, one DR is missing. Strange. rest was sent for sequencing with oIG0015.
9.7.
Sequencing revealed positive clones for pIG8002_1 and 3, as well as for pIG8004_4. Negative colonies were discarded. More preps were done to screen for further clones.
- 8002_2.2
- 8002_4.2
- 8004_1.2
- 8004_2.2
- 8004_3.2
10.7.
8004_3.2 is positive, rest negative. For the missing constructs one of each clone was sent.
11.7.
positive clones were obtained for 8002_2.3, 8002_4.3, and 8004_1.3. New clones were sent for sequencing.
12.7.
positive clone for 8004_2.4 was found. All constructs are done. Midi preps were inoculated in 150ml LB with 150ul Amp. As well as control plasmids without target sites. Flasks were directely inoculated by giving a little bit of colony with a sterile tip into the flask.
15.7.
Midi preps were performed using the JetStar Midi Kit. Pellet was resolved in 100ul of ddH2O. All preps yielded acceptable results (500-1900 ng/ul).
HEK293T cells were seeded into 24 well plates. Our construct should be able to efficiently repress VEGF expression by methylating H3K9. As HEK293 cells have an open locus we should see a reduction in VEGF levels. 65.000 cells were seeded per well.
Each construct will be transfected in biological triplicates, let grow for 48 hours and the supernatant harvested. ELISA measurments will be performed using the peprotech VEGF ELISA kit.
16.7.
Transfection of the cells was performed as described in the table below. PIF-GFP was transfected as a transfection control to have a fast impression of transfection efficiency. Next transfection should be calculated for 2-3 wells more to have a buffer for pipetting mistakes. Recalibrate pipette?
Transfection scheme 16.07. |
17.7
Transfection seems to have worked, as we see green fluorescence in the nuclei of the cells.
VEGF ELISA kit arrived. Antibodies were aliquoted following the instructions and stored at -20°C. Buffers were prepared as follows:
- PBS: dilute 100ml 10xPBS in 900ml ddH2O.
- PBS-T: 1xPBS+0,05% Tween-20
- Blockbuffer: 31ml PBS+ 0,31g BSA
- Diluent: 45ml PBS-T+0,045g BSA
every buffer containing BSA is stored at 4°C. ELISA plate was coated with capture antibody as described in the instructions.
18.7. ELISA detection of VEGF content of supernatant
All steps were performed following the protocol of Peprotech, except the following steps: Blocking time was elongated to 2 hours, and washing was performed 3 times with 300ul wash buffer(PBS-T).
Samples were used diluted and 1:2 diluted for ELISA detection.
The loading scheme of the ELISA plate is shown below.
ELISA and plate scheme from 16.07. |
results of ELISA
Results of the first VEGF ELISA from 16.07.. Error bars represent standard deviation. |
direct comparison of 8002 and 8004 constructs show less VEGF in 8002(active G9a) as expected. controls show very low amounts as well. This is rather strange, but gives a hint that our primary idea is correct. Several possible problems and solutions wre identified.
- VEGF is secreted when cells are exposed to oxygen stress. The distribution of O2 could be varying inside the plate, messing with our results. The use of filters instead of lids could be a solution.
- The use of an internal standard could be a possible solution for reducing cell toxicity of G9a and gives us as well a hint on cell number/transfection efficiency. A SV40:SEAP plasmid will serve as this.
- Triplicates should be mandatory, if possible
22.07.
HEK293T cells were seeded at70.000 cells/well in 24 well plates.
23.07.
transfection was performed as described in scheme and protocol from 16.07.. Each well was co-transfected with 0,0375ug of SV40:SEAP (commercial pK2 SEAP control plasmid by CloneTech (R)) that will serve as internal standard. The cells were quite dense, so we will have to evaluate transfection efficiency carefully.
Transfection scheme for repeated experiment from 16.07. 5% SV-40 will serve as internal standard. |
24.07
Cells were too dense, transfection efficiency was low => Cells were discarded. Seeding of cells will be repeated.
27.07.
HEKs were seeded at 65.000 cellsper well in 24 well plates. We were advised by Bea to assure good distribution of cells.
28.07.
Cells show strange behaviour: They form a clump in the middle of the well, whereas the outer space is too lose. This will reduce the transfection efficiency strongly in the middle of the well, making our experiment quite difficult. Cells were discarded. again, cells were seeded with the help of Adrian Fischer.
29.07.
Same procedure as everyday. We suspect the cells to be misbehaving. We acquired new cells from AG Warscheidt for testing other cells. A contamination could explain the problems in growth.
for testing we transfected the old cells anyway to check efficiency.
01.08.
Cells are not dense enough for transfection (~30%), so transfection was postponed to the next day.
2.8.
Cells were transfected following the standard protocol as described in the following tables at 12.a.m..
Loading scheme of the plates used in the second ELISA experiment. |
hier fehlt das Transfektionsschema.... |
The plates were covered with O2 diffusible filters to prevent oxygen stress to occur and messing up our data.
03.08.
Medium of transfected cells was changed at 10 a.m., to repress the native VEGF level to a minimum. Transfection efficiency was around 50% when assaying the PIF-GFP construct. We are confident, that this will suffice for our experiment.
04.08
Supernatant of cells was harvested (400ul) for further analysis. 200ul are used for the VEGF ELISA, whereas the other 200ul were frozen to perform a SEAP measurement the next days as internal standard. ELISA was performed as described above.
Additionally cell lysis was performed using modified RIPA buffer for expression control of our construct by Western blot. Lysates were cooked for 5 minutes in sample buffer and frozen for later blotting.
VEGF locus 2 and 3 were displaying strong (!) repression this time (see graph) in comaprison to the control bar. But controls are varying strongly in VEGF expression. Even more, locus 1 behanves really strange. Maybe the cells have died in this wells? Western Blot will show the problems.
results of the second ELISA experiment performed. VEGF is measured using ELISA. Controls are varying strongly. Maybe normalization to SEAP will solve the problem. |
05.08.
SEAP measurement was performed as described in the standard protocol. All VEGF levels were divided by the SEAP level to get a normalization to an internal standard. Error was propagated using Gauß's mistake propagation.
by looking at the data now it is obvious that sample 4_1 can be discarded for further analysis. But nevertheless the rest of the samples is looking great. Even the controls are within range of one standard deviation. Strangely PIF:GFP displayed a very strong SEAP expression, lowering the bar in the normalized plot. But loci VEGF2 and VEGF3 display really strong effects.
results of the second ELISA experiment performed. VEGF is normalized to SEAP. Error bars represent standard deviation. |
For further expression analysis we were using a Western blot approach. To do so, 2 8% Acrylamide gels were pourn with 50% Sucrose added. They were stored at 4°C and will be ran tomorrow.
06.08.
Protein samples were run on an 8% gel at 130Volt. Afterwards a semidry blot was performed at 70mA to transfer protein onto an VDF-membrane. Primary antibody (anti-HA and anti-ß-act) was diluted 1:2500 in 2% milkpowder. Blocking was performed using 4% milk in PBS-T for 1 hour. Primary incubation took place overnight at 4°C on a vertical shaker.
07.08.
Membrane was washed 3x for 5 minutes with 1x PBS-T. Secondary antibody (anti-mouse) was diluted 1:5000 and applied to the membrane for 2 hrs at RT. An additional washing step was performed 3 times for 5 minutes in 1x PBS-T.
Detection of Western Signal<
Membranes were treated with 600ul of ECLI and II each. Signal was detected using the LS imageQuant. Results are displayed in the following figure.
Western blot with the samples of second ELISA experiment. Evident expression of Cas9-G9a is visible at all lanes (even for 4_1, but very weak). Nevertheless, loading controls are varying strongly, indicating badly performed cell lysis. |
We see expression of dCAS9:G9a in each well, except 4_1, which supports our hypothesis, that here a problem with the cells occurred. The ß-actin levels are varying strongly what leads to the impression, that cell lysis was not performed perfectly . Nevertheless, we could detect our protein in each well were we saw effect. Today is a good day!
08.08.
Further planning after discussion: A kinetic should be done, but should be planned carefully.
12.08.
Plans for Kinetics:
- Kinetics will be performed in two ways: Either measuring production of VEGF in 24hours over 5 days, and VEGF levels over 5 days, without medium change.
- To reduce variability in between plates we will transfect in 10cm dishes, and spread afterwards in 24 well plates.
- 6 24-well plates will be used
- Filters and SEAP standard will be used
14.08.
All constructs were transfected into HEK293 cells in 10cm-dishes. For DNA mix, see the following table. Every construct was treated the same.
Western blot with the samples of second ELISA experiment. Evident expression of Cas9-G9a is visible at all lanes (even for 4_1, but very weak). Nevertheless, loading controls are varying strongly, indicating badly performed cell lysis. |
15.08.
To detach cells from the plates, medium was removed. Afterwards they were washed in 5ml PBS.
PBS was removed and another 10ml of PBS was added. cells detached using a cell scraper centrifuged and resuspended in 4ml DMEM. 75% of a plate was diluted in 9.5ml medium. 500ul was put to each well of a 24 well plate. Plates were seeded according to following scheme.
Cell plate scheme and experimental setup. |
16-21.08.
Everyday supernatant was harvested and lysates were taken using modified RIPA buffer. They were frozen and evaluated on the 22.08.
16.08. Standardisation of G9a in RFC 25
Standardisation of G9a will be performed using a Gibson approach. 2 cutting sites have to be mutated in the protein sequence. Primers were designed that contain the mutation in the overhangs. With those primers PCR will be performed and Gibson will ligate the whole thing in the pSB1C3 backbone with RFC25 prefix and suffix.
All oligos arrived for the standardisation. PCR was performed on pIG8002 with:
- oIG8015 + 8017 => aIG8100
- oIG8018 + 8019 => aIG8101
- oIG8020 + 8016 => aIG8102
µl | type |
---|---|
10 | Q5-HF Reaction Buffer |
1 | Template |
1 | Primer1 |
1 | Primer2 |
4 | dNTPs |
1 | DMSO |
0.5 | Q5-HF Polymerase |
Add to 50 | H2O |
- Annealing: 60°C
- Elongation: 30 sec
- 24 cycles
all PCRs yielded desired products. loading scheme: aIG8100 - marker - aIG8101 - marker - aIG8102 |
All bands were extracted using the Roche kit. Gibson was performed using the three fragments and the opened pSB1C3 backbone. for DNA mix see the following table. Reaction was performed as described in the standard protocol.
5ul of the reaction mix were transformed into competent E.coli following the standard protocol. Bacteria was spread on Cap containing LB plates.
6.8.
SDS
Semidry Blot
Western Blot
7.8.
Western Blot of G9a continued
First antibody was decanted (and stored for further use at -20°C) and membrane was washed 3x 15 min. Secondary antibody (anti-mouse with HRP) was diluted 1:5000 in 2% milk powder in PBS and incubated in foil sealed for 2h. Antibody was decanted and membranes were washed with PBST (?%Tween in 1x PBS) in boxes (without foil) 3x for 5min.
Chemiluminescent detection of HRP
With image Quant: Membrane was placed on foil (in middle), focus adjusted. ECL I & ECL II were mixed (600 µl each) and spread over membrane (no incubation time). Imaging was started right away. Settings: Auto (overexposed). Measurement of 1a-HA was repeated with 1min exposure time.
loading scheme: 8004 - 8007 - M - 8008 - 8010 - 8011
all PCRs except 8004 yielded expected product. Bands were extracted using the Roche kit.
16.08.13
Red light inducible PhyB-G9A and Cas9-PIF system
PCR amplification of the backbone containing PhyB for Gibson
µl | type |
---|---|
10 | Q5-HF Reaction Buffer |
1 | pKM018 (30ng) |
1 | oIG8021 |
1 | oIG8022 |
2.5 | dNTPs |
1.5 | DMSO |
0.5 | Q5-HF Polymerase |
Add to 50 | H2O |
- Annealing: 60°C
- Extension: 2min 30sec
PCR amplification of G9A with specific overhangs to the PhyB-bb
µl | type |
---|---|
10 | Q5-HF Reaction Buffer |
1 | pIG8002 |
1 | oIG8023 |
1 | oIG8024 |
2.5 | dNTPs |
1.5 | DMSO |
0.5 | Q5-HF Polymerase |
Add to 50 | H2O |
- Annealing: 60°C
- Extension: 40sec
Results
Left side: 2log laddder; On the right side: G9A; everything else are different probes |
Left: 2log ladder, right: PhyB bb |
All bands had the expected size (gelred standard) and were band isolated and purificated
19.08.13
Red light inducible PhyB-G9A and Cas9-PIF system
A Gibson was performed using the PCR products of PhyB-bb and G9A in a ratio of 1/8 (58.39 ng PhyB; 0.9 43.25 ng G9A). The control plate showed nearly as many colonies and a test digest using Hind3 and EcoR1 only revealed one possitive colony. The sequencing showed a frameshift therefore a Gibson has to be repeated by using another ratio (maybe 1/4).
22.08.13
Red light inducible PhyB-G9A and Cas9-PIF system
Another gibson approach of G9A PhyB-bb using a 1/4 ratio
Gibson approach:
Test digest of some Gibson colonies using Sal1 and EcoR1
Left: 2 log ladder; then tested Gibson colonies from 1-10. Colony 5-10 seem to be defenitly possitive. |
Colony 5 was send for sequencing
Ligation of two VEGF crRNAs into pIG3010
For light experiments a plasmid containing the tracrRNA and crRNA is needed.
Ligation
µl: | Substance: |
---|---|
1 | pIG3010 |
5 | crRNA2/3 (2/3 refere to the different VEGF target sides) |
2 | 10X T4-Ligase Buffer |
1 | T4-Ligase |
11 | H2O |
20 | Total |
- 0.5h at RT
27.08.13
Red light inducible PhyB-G9A and Cas9-PIF system
Sequencing results of pIG8007 (PhyB-G9A) - the sixed colony from test digest was send for sequencing
A frameshift is inside the sequencing. Colonies 9 and 10 were send for sequencing and prepared for midi prep
crRNA-tracr Plasmid with two VEGF target sides
Colonies of crRNA ligation were minipreped and 2 colonies of each locus (2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2) were send for sequencing and emediatly prepared for minipreps
First cellculture experiment
Two 24 well plates were prepared with HEK293T cells (65,000 cells/well).
17.08.
Colonies were obtained for the standardized G9a-SD. To screen for positive ones, colony-PCR was performed as described in the standard protocol. The following PCR mix was used.
µl | type |
---|---|
2,5 | taq buffer |
1 | oIG6017 |
1 | oIG6018 |
2,5 | dNTPs |
0.125 | Taq-polymerase |
Add to 25 | H2O |
- Annealing: 60°C
- Elongation: 45 sec
- 24 cycles
One lane shows the desired band at roughly 1kb. Upper row, left lane. |
Positive colony was streaked out for miniprep.
18.08.
Colony was miniprepped and sent for sequencing with oIG6018
19.08.
Sequencing confirmed the clone. G9a is standardized!
22-23.8.
All the samples from the kinetic were evaluated following the usual protocols. VEGF content was measured using ELISA methods and the SEAP was assayed by measuring the activity following the standard protocol. The next day, the data will be evaluated.
24.8.
Data was evaluated. We do not see repressive effects in any of the kinetics. The experiment failed miserably (see figure below for details). Possible explanations are:
- VEGF is a stress response gene, that could have been activated by transfering the cells.
- There is no effect of G9a - all effects are simply measuring mistakes
- We screwed up transfection
For the sake of time, the experiment will not be repeated, but the original experiment will be repeated to prove to reproducibility of our data.
results of kinetic
Results between the kinetic were the medium was not changed. We do not see any differences in between the constructs. |
Results of the kinetic where the medium was changed every 24 hours. Again, we do not see any differences in between the constructs. possible explanations above. |
06.09.
As several other experimentators were not able to reproduce our results, we decided to do it again, as described earlier in this labbook.
Cells were transfected following the standard protocol as described in the following tables at 12.a.m..
The plates were covered with O2 diffusible filters to prevent oxygen stress to occur and messing up our data.
07.09.
Medium was changed at 8.a.m. to lower the native VEGF level after transfection. Supernatant will be harvested 24 hours later.
08.09.
Supernatant was harvested, ELISA was performed and SEAP was assayed as described above. We can draw the following conclusions from it (see figure below).
- the results are reproducible, even though not to the extend as last time
- the endogenous VEGF contents are strongly varying - Even though of the usage of an internal standard
- We should stop doing experiments, until the devices are finally built.
- the number of passages may influence the chromatin structure of the VEGF locus - maybe use fresh cells next time
24.09
Everything is stadardized. cells were seeded in 3 24 well-plates according to following scheme. They were seeded at 70.000 cells/well.