Team:EPF Lausanne/Sensing-Effector

From 2013.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Cad Promoter)
 
(190 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Template:EPFL2013Header}}
{{Template:EPFL2013Header}}
-
Sensing
+
=='''Sensing'''==
-
Overview
+
==Overview==
-
The Idea of this module was to transform the bacterium with a plasmid that would contain a promoter which senses a specific signal. Once this promoter senses the signal, it would initiate transcription of an enzyme which degrades the nanocapsule, thus releasing its contents.
+
The idea of this module was to transform bacteria with a plasmid that contains a promoter which senses a specific signal. Once this promoter senses the signal, it would initiate transcription of an enzyme which degrades the nanoparticle, thus releasing its contents.
-
We decided to use pH as the specific trigger that activates the promoter. As a proof of principle, we inserted three different promoters into three plasmids in front of the bio brick BBa_I746916 which encodes superfolded GFP. Then we transformed cells with these plasmids and let them grow in media with different pHs in order to check the expression.
+
We decided to use pH as the specific trigger that activates the promoter. As a proof of principle, we inserted three different promoters into three plasmids in front of the BioBrick BBa_I746916 ([http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_I746908  BBa_I746916, Main Page]) which encodes superfolded GFP. Then, we transformed cells with these plasmids and let them grow in media with different pHs in order to check the expression.
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne Sensing_Overviie.jpg|thumb|600px|center|Figure 1: A Graphical summary of what the sensing module contained. Each promoter was inserted into the same plasmid in front of GFP]]
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne Sensing_Overviie.jpg|thumb|600px|center|Figure 1: A Graphical summary of what the sensing module contained. Each promoter was inserted into the same plasmid in front of GFP]]
-
 
+
==Experiments==
-
Experiments <BR>
+
We chose the following three pH sensitive promoters: <BR>
We chose the following three pH sensitive promoters: <BR>
-
1.) Hya-promoter, isolated from the Escherichia Coli K-12 MG1655 strain <BR>
+
1.) Hya-promoter, isolated from the Escherichia Coli K-12 MG1655 strain [http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1111002 BBa_K1111002] <BR>
-
2.) Cad-promoter, isolated from the Escherichia Coli K-12 MG1655 strain <BR>
+
2.) Cad-promoter, isolated from the Escherichia Coli K-12 MG1655 strain [http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1111004 BBa_K1111004] <BR>
-
3.) BioBrick BBa_J23119, a constitutive promoter that was made by the 2006 Berkley team. <BR>
+
3.) BioBrick BBa_J23119, a constitutive promoter that was made by the 2006 Berkley team. [http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1111005 BBa_K1111005] <BR>
 +
'''Promoter Sequences'''
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Sequence.jpg|thumb|400px|center|Figure 2: Sequence of the Hya promoter ]]
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Sequence.jpg|thumb|400px|center|Figure 2: Sequence of the Hya promoter ]]
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Sequence.jpg|thumb|400px|center|Figure 3: Sequence of the Cad promoter]]
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Sequence.jpg|thumb|400px|center|Figure 3: Sequence of the Cad promoter]]
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Sequence.jpg|thumb|400px|center|Figure 4: Sequuence of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119]]  
+
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Sequence.jpg|thumb|400px|center|Figure 4: Sequence of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119]]
-
We digested the Plasmid containing the biobrick BBa_I746908 which would serve us as backbone for our constructs in order to qualitatively asses if it was indeed the expected plasmid. <BR>
+
==Restriction Digest==
 +
We digested the plasmid containing the biobrick BBa_I746908 ([http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_I746908 BBa_I746908]) which would serve as backbone for our constructs.  <BR>
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne AraC_RestDigest.jpg|thumb|300px|center|Figure 5: Sequuence of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119]]
 
-
All the promoters were isolated by PCR and then assembled into the pSB1C3 Plasmid in front of the superfolded GFP. <BR>
+
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne AraC_RestDigest.jpg|thumb|300px|center|Figure 5: 0,8% Gel, Restriction digest of the BioBrick BBa_I74608 with BamHI]]
 +
==PCRs and Gibson Assemblies==
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne PCR_1.1+1.2+1.3_BB.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6: PCRs of the three Backbones ]]
+
All the promoters were isolated by PCR and then assembled into the pSB1C3 Plasmid in front of the superfolded GFP.
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne PCR_1.1+1.2-I.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 7: PCRs of the Hya and the Cad promoter]]
+
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne PCR_1.2-I.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 8: PCR of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119]]
+
-
<BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>
+
-
Then each of the constructs was used to transform DH5-alpha competent cells, which were first plated and then incubated into media with different pHs. <BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
+
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne PCR_1.1+1.2+1.3_BB.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6: 0.8% Gel, PCRs of the three backbones ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne PCR_1.1+1.2-I.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 7: 0.8% Gel, PCRs of the Hya and the Cad promoter]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne PCR_1.2-I.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 8: 2% Gel, PCR of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
Then, each of the constructs was used to transform DH5-alpha competent cells, which were first plated on chloramphenicol containing LB agar plates for selection of positive transformants, and then incubated into media with different pHs.
We used four media: <BR>
We used four media: <BR>
-
1.) LB-Chloramphenicol with 10X MOPS+HCl, with a final pH of 5 <BR>
+
1.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 5 (Adjusted with 10X MOPS+HCl) <BR>
-
2.) LB-Chloramphenicol with 10X MOPS, with a final pH of 6 <BR>
+
2.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 6 (Adjusted with 10X MOPS)  <BR>
-
3.) LB-Chloramphenicol without any buffer, with a final pH of 7 <BR>
+
3.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 7 (Adjusted with water) <BR>
-
4.) LB-Chloramphenicol with 10X HEPES, with a final pH of 8.5 <BR>
+
4.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 8.5 (with 10X HEPES)<BR>
-
GFP expression was measured using a plate reader where we made three replicates of each promoter with each pH. Then, the average for each replicate was calculated and used to establish a curve depicting GFP expression within each medium. <BR>
+
For each medium, we measured the OD of the cells. This helped us establish whether a low expression of GFP was really due to the fact that the promoters did not work, or simply resulting from the cells dying before they could initiate transcription and translation of the protein. It would also tell us whether an increase of fluorescence was only due to an accumulation of bacteria or to the actual accumulation of GFP.
 +
==OD measurements==
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_OD_Measurements.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 9: OD measurements of Bacteria with the hya promoter in different media]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_OD_Measurements.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 10: OD measurements of Bacteria with the cad promoter in different media ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_OD_Measurements.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 11: OD measurements of Bacteria with the constitutive promoter in different media ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
-
==Hya Promoter==
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH1.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH2.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH3.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH4.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 
-
==Cad Promoter==
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH1.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH2.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH3.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH4.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
 
-
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 
-
==Constitutive Promoter==
+
GFP expression was measured using a plate reader. We made three replicates for each promoter with each pH. Both the fluorescence and the 1:600 absorbance were measured, in order to normalize the obtained fluorescence. Then, the average for each replicate was calculated and used to establish a curve depicting GFP expression within each medium. <BR>
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH1.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
+
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH2.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6: ]]
+
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH3.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
+
-
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH4.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 6:  ]]
+
-
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
+
 +
==GFP Measurements==
 +
'''Hya Promoter'''
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH1.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 12: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 5.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH2.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 13: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 6.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH3.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 14: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 7.0 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_Graph_pH4.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 15: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 8.5 ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
 +
'''Cad Promoter'''
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH1.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 16: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 5.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH2.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 17: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 6.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH3.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 18: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 7.0 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_Graph_pH4.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 19: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 8.5 ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
 +
'''Constitutive Promoter'''
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH1.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 20:  Normalized Fluorescence at pH 5.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH2.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 21:  Normalized Fluorescence at pH 6.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH3.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 22:  Normalized Fluorescence at pH 7.0 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_Graph_pH4.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 23:  Normalized Fluorescence at pH 8.5 ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
 +
==Microscopy==
The Cells were also looked at under a microscope to qualitatively study their GFP expression.
The Cells were also looked at under a microscope to qualitatively study their GFP expression.
-
Expected outcome:
 
-
The Promoters Hya and Cad were supposed to initiate transcription upon external acidification, which would then cause the bacteria to express superfolded GFP and turn bright green. The biobrick from 2006, being a constitutive promoter, would turn the bacteria green independently of their medium.
+
'''Hya Promoter'''
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_MS_MOPS.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 24: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 6.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_MS_HEPES.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 25: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 8.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.1_MS_WATER.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 26: FRAC_image, exposure: 550ms, Multiplier 1, pH 7 ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
-
Results:
+
'''Cad Promoter'''
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_MS_MOPS.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 27: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 50, pH 6.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_MS_HEPES.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 28: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 50, pH 8.5  ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.2_MS_WATER.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 29: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 50, pH 7 ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
-
We successully managed to isolate and amplify each of the three promoters as well as inserting them into the pSB1C3 plasmid so that they would control the expression of superfolded GFP. The transformation that followed was also successful, which was determined by sequencing the plasmid isolated from the colonies on the plate. This sequencing result showed a 100% match between the original promoter sequence and the inserted sequence that the bacteria contained.
+
'''Constitutive Promoter (Positive Control)'''
-
Also, the bacteria containing the biobrick pH-promoter had turned green on the plates as well as in liquid culture, which was just as expected.
+
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_MS_MOPS.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 30:FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 6.5  ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_MS_HEPES.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 31: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 8.5 ]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPFL-Lausanne 1.3_MS_WATER.jpg|thumb|200px|left|Figure 32: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 7  ]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
''Note''<BR>
 +
We overexposed some of the images to be sure that there was no fluorescence in the bacteria in these media.
 +
<BR><BR>
 +
==Expected outcome==
-
Effecting
+
The promoters Hya and Cad were supposed to initiate transcription upon external acidification, which would then cause the bacteria to express superfolded GFP and turn bright green. The biobrick BBa_J23119, being a constitutive promoter, would turn the bacteria green independently of their medium.
 +
For our project, the promoters were inserted in front of a gelatinase so that the later would be expressed upon arrival in an acidic medium. The bacterium would then secrete the gelatinase causing the degradation of the nanoparticle and the release of its contents.
-
Overview:
+
==Results==
-
The goal of the effecting part of the project was to build a plasmid containing an arabinose promoter driving a tagged enzyme able to cleave gelatinase, the fabric used for our nano particles. We chose three different enzymes that would be inserted in part BBa_I746908, a pBAD promoter driving superfolder GFP, either between the promoter and GFP tag or instead of the GFP tag since it sometimes causes folding troubles. All of the constructs were planned to have a His tag as well, just in case something went wrong with the GFP tag, so we could extract and purify our expressed protein anyway.
+
We successfully managed to PCR amplify each of the three promoters as well as to insert them by Gibson Assembly into the pSB1C3 plasmid so that they would control the expression of superfolded GFP. These assemblies were all successful, which was determined by sequencing the plasmid isolated from the positive transformants on the plate. This sequencing result showed a 100% match between the reference promoter sequence and the inserted sequence that the bacteria contained.
 +
Also, the bacteria containing the biobrick promoter turned green on the plates as well as in liquid culture, as expected.
-
Experiments:
+
==Discussion==
-
The three different enzymes that we chose to use were gelatinase E (gelE) from Gram positive bacterium E. faecalis, metalloprotease 2 (MMP2) from H. sapiens and metalloprotease 9 (MMP9) from M. musculus. The genomic DNA of E. faecalis was ordered and a PCR was performed on it using Gibson primers that also added a His tag in front of the protein sequence. For MMP2 and MMP9, plasmids containing the coding sequence (CDS) of the proteins were ordered from plasmid.med.harvard.edu and the CDS were extracted in the same way as for gelatinase. In the meantime, PCRs were performed on the iGEM part BBa_I746908 to clone the backbone, add the overlap for the Gibson and, when needed, remove the GFP from the backbone (since we wanted to have a construct for each protein where GFP was replaced directly by the CDS).
+
'''GFP expression under the hya and the cad promoters'''<BR>
-
Competent cells were then transformed with the successful constructs, grown at 37C and later on activated, by adding 50ul of 20% arabinose solution to 5ml of inoculated culture, grown overnight, for 2h. A Western blot was then performed on the lysate and supernatural of the cells to check for the presence of the protein either out (if secreted as desired) or in (not secreted but at least expressed) the cells. A His-tag purification followed by SDS-PAGE were also executed.
+
From the measurements we made on the plate reader, we were not able to conclude whether the promoters are really induced at low pH as the cells died very quickly. This was also supported by the OD measurements we took. On those graphs one can see very clearly that the cells which are in the acidic media die almost immediately. Furthermore, there was some expression in both the neutral and the basic medium. This would indicate that the promoter is either a constitutive promoter or that it is inducible but leaky. <BR>
 +
Comparing these graphs with the microscopy pictures, one cannot say conclusively that the promoter is inducible by pH. Even though under the microscope there are only fluorescent bacteria at acidic pH, the results from the plate reader clearly indicate that there are also fluorescent bacteria at neutral and high pH. However, one can see a trend that for both the hya and the cad promoter, the fluorescence is strongest at acidic pH and weakest at basic pH under the microscope. This trend cannot be seen in the Plate Reader measurements, as the bacteria at low pH die before being able to express GFP. <BR>
 +
Using the constitutive promoter as a positive control one can see that both hya and cad are weak promoters, as the fluorescence in the bacteria with the constitutive promoter is much stronger in acidic, neutral and basic media than the fluorescence in bacteria containing the hya or the cad promoter. Furthermore, a comparison with the constitutive promoter again supports the hypothesis that the bacteria grow best at neutral pH, as there are much more bacteria at pH 7 and at pH 6.5 or 8.5. <BR>
 +
<BR>
 +
'''Conclusion'''<BR>
 +
Thus, we can conclude that the hya promoter and the cad promoter work, in the sense that they in fact induce expression of GFP. But from our data, we were not able to conclusively say that they are inducible by low pH.
 +
Nevertheless, we were able to show that they are weak promoters that can be used to express a protein that should be present at low concentrations.
-
Expected outcome:
+
'''With respect to our project''' <BR>
 +
In order to be sure that hya and cad are induced only at low pH, we would need to do further testing. As soon as their inducibility would be confirmed, we would insert them by gibson assembly in front of either GelE gelatinase or MMP2 gelatinase. Upon arrival in a medium with pH below 7 the enzyme would be synthesized and released.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
''References:''
 +
 
 +
[http://jb.asm.org/content/181/17/5250.full [1]] Journal of Bacteriology <BR>
 +
Response of hya Expression to External pH in Escherichia coli <BR>
 +
Paul W. King and Alan E. Przybyla <BR>
 +
J.Bacteriol. 1990 <BR>
 +
 
 +
[http://jb.asm.org/content/173/15/4851.abstract?sid=2a119bc7-0c26-4543-a671-d3a50521253f [2]] Journal of Bacteriology <BR>
 +
Mutational analysis and characterization of the Escherichia coli hya operin, which encodes [NiFe] hydrogenase1 <BR>
 +
N K Menon, J Robbins, J C Wendt, K T Shanmuagam and A E Przybyla <BR> J. Bacteriol 1991 <BR>
 +
 
 +
[http://jb.asm.org/content/174/8/2659.short [3]] Journal of Bacteriology<BR>
 +
Nucleotode Sequence of the Escherichiea coli cad Operon: a system for neutralization of Low Extracellular pH <BR>
 +
Shi-Yuan meng and George N. Bennett<BR>
 +
J. Bacteriol 1992<BR>
 +
 
 +
[http://jb.asm.org/content/174/8/2670.short [4]] Journal of Bacteriology <BR>
 +
Regulation of the Escherichia coli cad Operon: Location of a Site Required for Acid Induction <BR>
 +
Shi-Yuan meng and George N. Bennett <BR>
 +
J. Bacteriol 1992 <BR>
 +
 
 +
=='''Effecting'''==
 +
 
 +
==Overview==
 +
 
 +
The goal of the effecting part was to build a plasmid containing an arabinose-inducible promoter driving a tagged enzyme able to cleave gelatin, the polymer used to build our nanoparticles. We chose three different enzymes that were inserted into part BBa_I746908([http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_I746908 [BBa_I746908, Main Page]) either between the promoter and GFP or replacing the GFP. All of the constructs were designed to have a His tag at the beginning of the protein so we could extract and purify our expressed protein.
 +
<br>
 +
We would then transform cells with our construct, make them express the gelatinase by inducing the promoter and then isolate and purify the protein.
 +
 
 +
[[Image: protein wo GFP construct.PNG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 33: Gibson assembly: Protein without GFP]]
 +
[[Image: GFP construct.PNG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 34: Gibson assembly: Protein with GFP]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
 
 +
==Experiments==
 +
 
 +
The three different enzymes that we chose to use were gelatinase E (gelE) from Gram positive bacterium E.faecalis , metalloprotease 2 (MMP2) from H. sapiens [http://plasmid.med.harvard.edu/PLASMID/GetCloneDetail.do?cloneid=2849&species=Homo%20sapiens [1]] and metalloprotease 9 (MMP9) from M. musculus. We ordered the genomic DNA of E.faecalis as well as two plasmids containing the CDSs of MMP2 and MMP9 from plasmid.med.harvard.edu.
 +
 
 +
==PCR== 
 +
We first amplified the CDS of our three proteins by PCR. Because we had introduced a frame shift during the PCR due to our primers, we had constructs that had a stop codon in front of GFP. Thus we decided to continue with these construct knowing that we could still purify the protein because of the His-Tag we added.
 +
[[Image: GelE insert PCR.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 35: 0.8% Gel, PCR of the GelE insert]]
 +
[[Image: GelE backbone PCR.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 36: 0.8% Gel, PCR of the GelE backbone]]
 +
[[Image: MMP2 insert PCR.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 37: 0.8% Gel, PCR of the MMP2 insert]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
[[Image: MMP2&MMP9 backbone PCR.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 38: 0.8% Gel,PCR of the MMP2 & MMP9 backbones]]
 +
[[Image: MMP9 insert PCR.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 39: 0.8% Gel, PCR of teh MMP9 insert]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
We then purified the PCR products.
 +
 
 +
==Gibson Assembly==
 +
The next step was the Gibson assembly reaction which would put together the inserts and their corresponding backbones. The reaction was performed only for the constructs that should have GFP as a reporter but had a stop in front of the latter because of the above mentioned frame shift. The three other constructs that were not supposed to have GFP after the gelatinase gene were not done, as the result would have been the same. <BR>
 +
The assembly worked for both the GelE and MMP2 constructs, but not for MMP9.<BR>
 +
 
 +
[[Image: GelE Gibson.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 40: Gibson Assembly: GelE-GFP construct]]
 +
[[Image: MMP2 Gibson.JPEG|thumb|200px|left|Figure 41: Gibson Assembly: MMP2-GFP construct]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
 
 +
==Transformation, control PCR and sequencing==
 +
We then transformed bacteria with the two constructs. Before sending them for sequencing we did a control PCR on each using primers that were specific to the insert, i.e. the GelE and the MMP2 gene.<BR>
 +
[[Image: MMP2 GelE minipreps.JPEG|thumb|250px|center|Figure 42: Minipreps: GelE-GFP and MMP2-GFP constructs]]<BR><BR>
 +
[[Image: Team-EPF-Lausanne-3.4_Seque_FV.jpg|thumb|300px|left|Figure 43: Sequence analysis of the GelE gene with a forward Primer]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPF-Lausanne-3.4_Seque_RV.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Figure 44: Sequence analysis of the GelE gene with a reverse Primer]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
[[Image: GelE sequence overlap.JPEG|thumb|200px|center|Figure 45: GelE sequencing overlaps]]<BR>
 +
[[Image: MMP2 sequence overlap.JPEG|thumb|200px|center|Figure 46: MMP2 sequencing overlaps]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPF-Lausanne-5.4_Seque_FV.jpg|thumb|300px|left| Figure 47: Figure 43: Sequence analysis of the MMP2 gene with a forward Primer]]
 +
[[Image: Team-EPF-Lausanne-5.4_Seque_RV.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Figure 43: Sequence analysis of the MMP2 gene with a reverse Primer]]
 +
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
 +
We also incubated the positive transformants with arabinose and looked at them under the microscope. As expected they did not express GFP.
-
We would expect the cells to be green and express/secrete a protein-GFP complex upon arabinose induction if everything works perfectly. The secreted protein, if correctly folded, could then break open the nano particles attached to the bacteria's surface, thus releasing the contained drug. However, we did not proceed to transform our bacteria with the coupling plasmid since the coupling section was stopped due to the lack of an antibody needed to prove that the coupling plasmid was complete.  
+
==Western Blot==
 +
The next assay to test the expression and secretion of our proteins was a Western Blot, performed on the supernatant and cell lysate fractions of our liquid cell culture. The antibody used to detect our protein was an anti-His tag antibody, which was supposed to detect the His-tag that had been added to the CDS of our proteins. This assay unfortunately came out negative. We were unable to check for the presence of the His tag with the sequencing because the primers we used to do it did not initiate sequencing at the beginning of the protein as the sequencing starts a bit downstream of the primer binding site. The sequencing of the middle sequence showed a 97%-98% match between the insert and the reference sequence.
-
Results:
+
<BR><BR>
-
The PCR reactions to amplify and extract the proteins CDSs and plasmid backbone were successful. We then proceeded to a Gibson assembly of the constructs that were meant to keep the GFP, for all three proteins. The Gibsons for the pBAD/araC-gelE-GFP and pBAD/araC-MMP2-GFP constructs worked, but not the one for the MMP9. We then transformed bacteria, isolated the plasmids and sent them for sequencing with the iGEM primers for the backbone and also with our own Gibson primers. This showed that the Gibson had been a success, but that a STOP codon had appeared in front of the GFP sequence, just after the linker. Indeed, the transformed bacteria did not appear green when induced with arabinose. Since a His tag had been added to the CDS of each protein using the Gibson primers, we did a Western blot with anti-his tag antibodies on the induced cell media and lysates. The result came out negative. We then proceeded to a his-tag purification of the cell lysates (Ni-NTA spin kit).
+
==Protein purification and SDS-PAGE==
 +
A protein purification method under native conditions using a Ni-NTA spin kit was performed. The native conditions were chosen because we wanted to perform a digestion assay with the purified protein on the nanoparticles to assess their digestion capacities.  
 +
The lysates, flow-through, wash and final eluate (supposed to contain the purified protein) were kept and analyzed with a NanoDrop before being used for an SDS-PAGE. The NanoDrop revealed that the eluates contained no protein, but that the wash fraction contained about 0.4 mg/ml of protein. Possible reasons for this were: <BR>
 +
1) the His tag was not properly added to the protein CDS <BR>
 +
2) the His tag was hidden in the protein structure and could not bind to the column since the purification was done under native conditions<BR>
 +
3.) As the Kit was left at room temperature it is possible that the binding columns were defective <BR>
 +
When we did the SDS Page did not work due to a Coomassie stain issue.
 +
==Discussion and Future==
 +
We unfortunately could not come to a satisfying final result in the effecting part of the project because we could not prove that the plasmids actually conferred to the bacteria the ability to secrete a gelatin-degrading protein. We can later perform the digestion assay with the wash fraction of the Ni-NTA purification to see whether a gelatin-degrading protein is indeed present in it. Also, the next experiment would be to redo the SDS-PAGE on the remains of the Ni-NTA purification.
 +
To learn more about how we would continue, see [https://2013.igem.org/Team:EPF_Lausanne/Next_steps Next Steps] or [https://2013.igem.org/Team:EPF_Lausanne/Perspectives Perspectives]<BR>
{{Template:EPFL2013Footer}}
{{Template:EPFL2013Footer}}

Latest revision as of 18:11, 27 October 2013

Taxi.Coli: Smart Drug Delivery iGEM EPFL

Header

Contents

Sensing

Overview

The idea of this module was to transform bacteria with a plasmid that contains a promoter which senses a specific signal. Once this promoter senses the signal, it would initiate transcription of an enzyme which degrades the nanoparticle, thus releasing its contents. We decided to use pH as the specific trigger that activates the promoter. As a proof of principle, we inserted three different promoters into three plasmids in front of the BioBrick BBa_I746916 ([http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_I746908 BBa_I746916, Main Page]) which encodes superfolded GFP. Then, we transformed cells with these plasmids and let them grow in media with different pHs in order to check the expression.

Figure 1: A Graphical summary of what the sensing module contained. Each promoter was inserted into the same plasmid in front of GFP

Experiments

We chose the following three pH sensitive promoters:
1.) Hya-promoter, isolated from the Escherichia Coli K-12 MG1655 strain [http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1111002 BBa_K1111002]
2.) Cad-promoter, isolated from the Escherichia Coli K-12 MG1655 strain [http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1111004 BBa_K1111004]
3.) BioBrick BBa_J23119, a constitutive promoter that was made by the 2006 Berkley team. [http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1111005 BBa_K1111005]

Promoter Sequences


Figure 2: Sequence of the Hya promoter
Figure 3: Sequence of the Cad promoter
Figure 4: Sequence of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119

Restriction Digest

We digested the plasmid containing the biobrick BBa_I746908 ([http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_I746908 BBa_I746908]) which would serve as backbone for our constructs.


Figure 5: 0,8% Gel, Restriction digest of the BioBrick BBa_I74608 with BamHI

PCRs and Gibson Assemblies

All the promoters were isolated by PCR and then assembled into the pSB1C3 Plasmid in front of the superfolded GFP.


Figure 6: 0.8% Gel, PCRs of the three backbones
Figure 7: 0.8% Gel, PCRs of the Hya and the Cad promoter
Figure 8: 2% Gel, PCR of the constitutive promoter BBa_J23119















Then, each of the constructs was used to transform DH5-alpha competent cells, which were first plated on chloramphenicol containing LB agar plates for selection of positive transformants, and then incubated into media with different pHs.

We used four media:
1.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 5 (Adjusted with 10X MOPS+HCl)
2.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 6 (Adjusted with 10X MOPS)
3.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 7 (Adjusted with water)
4.) LB-Chloramphenicol with a final pH of 8.5 (with 10X HEPES)

For each medium, we measured the OD of the cells. This helped us establish whether a low expression of GFP was really due to the fact that the promoters did not work, or simply resulting from the cells dying before they could initiate transcription and translation of the protein. It would also tell us whether an increase of fluorescence was only due to an accumulation of bacteria or to the actual accumulation of GFP.

OD measurements

Figure 9: OD measurements of Bacteria with the hya promoter in different media
Figure 10: OD measurements of Bacteria with the cad promoter in different media
Figure 11: OD measurements of Bacteria with the constitutive promoter in different media












GFP expression was measured using a plate reader. We made three replicates for each promoter with each pH. Both the fluorescence and the 1:600 absorbance were measured, in order to normalize the obtained fluorescence. Then, the average for each replicate was calculated and used to establish a curve depicting GFP expression within each medium.

GFP Measurements

Hya Promoter

Figure 12: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 5.5
Figure 13: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 6.5
Figure 14: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 7.0
Figure 15: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 8.5


















Cad Promoter

Figure 16: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 5.5
Figure 17: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 6.5
Figure 18: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 7.0
Figure 19: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 8.5


















Constitutive Promoter

Figure 20: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 5.5
Figure 21: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 6.5
Figure 22: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 7.0
Figure 23: Normalized Fluorescence at pH 8.5



















Microscopy

The Cells were also looked at under a microscope to qualitatively study their GFP expression.

Hya Promoter

Figure 24: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 6.5
Figure 25: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 8.5
Figure 26: FRAC_image, exposure: 550ms, Multiplier 1, pH 7













Cad Promoter

Figure 27: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 50, pH 6.5
Figure 28: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 50, pH 8.5
Figure 29: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 50, pH 7













Constitutive Promoter (Positive Control)

Figure 30:FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 6.5
Figure 31: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 8.5
Figure 32: FRAC_image, exposure: 400ms, Multiplier 1, pH 7













Note
We overexposed some of the images to be sure that there was no fluorescence in the bacteria in these media.

Expected outcome

The promoters Hya and Cad were supposed to initiate transcription upon external acidification, which would then cause the bacteria to express superfolded GFP and turn bright green. The biobrick BBa_J23119, being a constitutive promoter, would turn the bacteria green independently of their medium. For our project, the promoters were inserted in front of a gelatinase so that the later would be expressed upon arrival in an acidic medium. The bacterium would then secrete the gelatinase causing the degradation of the nanoparticle and the release of its contents.

Results

We successfully managed to PCR amplify each of the three promoters as well as to insert them by Gibson Assembly into the pSB1C3 plasmid so that they would control the expression of superfolded GFP. These assemblies were all successful, which was determined by sequencing the plasmid isolated from the positive transformants on the plate. This sequencing result showed a 100% match between the reference promoter sequence and the inserted sequence that the bacteria contained. Also, the bacteria containing the biobrick promoter turned green on the plates as well as in liquid culture, as expected.

Discussion

GFP expression under the hya and the cad promoters
From the measurements we made on the plate reader, we were not able to conclude whether the promoters are really induced at low pH as the cells died very quickly. This was also supported by the OD measurements we took. On those graphs one can see very clearly that the cells which are in the acidic media die almost immediately. Furthermore, there was some expression in both the neutral and the basic medium. This would indicate that the promoter is either a constitutive promoter or that it is inducible but leaky.
Comparing these graphs with the microscopy pictures, one cannot say conclusively that the promoter is inducible by pH. Even though under the microscope there are only fluorescent bacteria at acidic pH, the results from the plate reader clearly indicate that there are also fluorescent bacteria at neutral and high pH. However, one can see a trend that for both the hya and the cad promoter, the fluorescence is strongest at acidic pH and weakest at basic pH under the microscope. This trend cannot be seen in the Plate Reader measurements, as the bacteria at low pH die before being able to express GFP.
Using the constitutive promoter as a positive control one can see that both hya and cad are weak promoters, as the fluorescence in the bacteria with the constitutive promoter is much stronger in acidic, neutral and basic media than the fluorescence in bacteria containing the hya or the cad promoter. Furthermore, a comparison with the constitutive promoter again supports the hypothesis that the bacteria grow best at neutral pH, as there are much more bacteria at pH 7 and at pH 6.5 or 8.5.

Conclusion
Thus, we can conclude that the hya promoter and the cad promoter work, in the sense that they in fact induce expression of GFP. But from our data, we were not able to conclusively say that they are inducible by low pH. Nevertheless, we were able to show that they are weak promoters that can be used to express a protein that should be present at low concentrations.

With respect to our project
In order to be sure that hya and cad are induced only at low pH, we would need to do further testing. As soon as their inducibility would be confirmed, we would insert them by gibson assembly in front of either GelE gelatinase or MMP2 gelatinase. Upon arrival in a medium with pH below 7 the enzyme would be synthesized and released.



References:

[http://jb.asm.org/content/181/17/5250.full [1]] Journal of Bacteriology
Response of hya Expression to External pH in Escherichia coli
Paul W. King and Alan E. Przybyla
J.Bacteriol. 1990

[http://jb.asm.org/content/173/15/4851.abstract?sid=2a119bc7-0c26-4543-a671-d3a50521253f [2]] Journal of Bacteriology
Mutational analysis and characterization of the Escherichia coli hya operin, which encodes [NiFe] hydrogenase1
N K Menon, J Robbins, J C Wendt, K T Shanmuagam and A E Przybyla
J. Bacteriol 1991

[http://jb.asm.org/content/174/8/2659.short [3]] Journal of Bacteriology
Nucleotode Sequence of the Escherichiea coli cad Operon: a system for neutralization of Low Extracellular pH
Shi-Yuan meng and George N. Bennett
J. Bacteriol 1992

[http://jb.asm.org/content/174/8/2670.short [4]] Journal of Bacteriology
Regulation of the Escherichia coli cad Operon: Location of a Site Required for Acid Induction
Shi-Yuan meng and George N. Bennett
J. Bacteriol 1992

Effecting

Overview

The goal of the effecting part was to build a plasmid containing an arabinose-inducible promoter driving a tagged enzyme able to cleave gelatin, the polymer used to build our nanoparticles. We chose three different enzymes that were inserted into part BBa_I746908([http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_I746908 [BBa_I746908, Main Page]) either between the promoter and GFP or replacing the GFP. All of the constructs were designed to have a His tag at the beginning of the protein so we could extract and purify our expressed protein.
We would then transform cells with our construct, make them express the gelatinase by inducing the promoter and then isolate and purify the protein.

Figure 33: Gibson assembly: Protein without GFP
Figure 34: Gibson assembly: Protein with GFP














Experiments

The three different enzymes that we chose to use were gelatinase E (gelE) from Gram positive bacterium E.faecalis , metalloprotease 2 (MMP2) from H. sapiens [http://plasmid.med.harvard.edu/PLASMID/GetCloneDetail.do?cloneid=2849&species=Homo%20sapiens [1]] and metalloprotease 9 (MMP9) from M. musculus. We ordered the genomic DNA of E.faecalis as well as two plasmids containing the CDSs of MMP2 and MMP9 from plasmid.med.harvard.edu.

PCR

We first amplified the CDS of our three proteins by PCR. Because we had introduced a frame shift during the PCR due to our primers, we had constructs that had a stop codon in front of GFP. Thus we decided to continue with these construct knowing that we could still purify the protein because of the His-Tag we added.

Figure 35: 0.8% Gel, PCR of the GelE insert
Figure 36: 0.8% Gel, PCR of the GelE backbone
Figure 37: 0.8% Gel, PCR of the MMP2 insert



















Figure 38: 0.8% Gel,PCR of the MMP2 & MMP9 backbones
Figure 39: 0.8% Gel, PCR of teh MMP9 insert
















We then purified the PCR products.

Gibson Assembly

The next step was the Gibson assembly reaction which would put together the inserts and their corresponding backbones. The reaction was performed only for the constructs that should have GFP as a reporter but had a stop in front of the latter because of the above mentioned frame shift. The three other constructs that were not supposed to have GFP after the gelatinase gene were not done, as the result would have been the same.
The assembly worked for both the GelE and MMP2 constructs, but not for MMP9.

Figure 40: Gibson Assembly: GelE-GFP construct
Figure 41: Gibson Assembly: MMP2-GFP construct



















Transformation, control PCR and sequencing

We then transformed bacteria with the two constructs. Before sending them for sequencing we did a control PCR on each using primers that were specific to the insert, i.e. the GelE and the MMP2 gene.

Figure 42: Minipreps: GelE-GFP and MMP2-GFP constructs


Figure 43: Sequence analysis of the GelE gene with a forward Primer
Figure 44: Sequence analysis of the GelE gene with a reverse Primer












Figure 45: GelE sequencing overlaps

Figure 46: MMP2 sequencing overlaps
Figure 47: Figure 43: Sequence analysis of the MMP2 gene with a forward Primer
Figure 43: Sequence analysis of the MMP2 gene with a reverse Primer

























We also incubated the positive transformants with arabinose and looked at them under the microscope. As expected they did not express GFP.

Western Blot

The next assay to test the expression and secretion of our proteins was a Western Blot, performed on the supernatant and cell lysate fractions of our liquid cell culture. The antibody used to detect our protein was an anti-His tag antibody, which was supposed to detect the His-tag that had been added to the CDS of our proteins. This assay unfortunately came out negative. We were unable to check for the presence of the His tag with the sequencing because the primers we used to do it did not initiate sequencing at the beginning of the protein as the sequencing starts a bit downstream of the primer binding site. The sequencing of the middle sequence showed a 97%-98% match between the insert and the reference sequence.



Protein purification and SDS-PAGE

A protein purification method under native conditions using a Ni-NTA spin kit was performed. The native conditions were chosen because we wanted to perform a digestion assay with the purified protein on the nanoparticles to assess their digestion capacities. The lysates, flow-through, wash and final eluate (supposed to contain the purified protein) were kept and analyzed with a NanoDrop before being used for an SDS-PAGE. The NanoDrop revealed that the eluates contained no protein, but that the wash fraction contained about 0.4 mg/ml of protein. Possible reasons for this were:
1) the His tag was not properly added to the protein CDS
2) the His tag was hidden in the protein structure and could not bind to the column since the purification was done under native conditions
3.) As the Kit was left at room temperature it is possible that the binding columns were defective
When we did the SDS Page did not work due to a Coomassie stain issue.

Discussion and Future

We unfortunately could not come to a satisfying final result in the effecting part of the project because we could not prove that the plasmids actually conferred to the bacteria the ability to secrete a gelatin-degrading protein. We can later perform the digestion assay with the wash fraction of the Ni-NTA purification to see whether a gelatin-degrading protein is indeed present in it. Also, the next experiment would be to redo the SDS-PAGE on the remains of the Ni-NTA purification.

To learn more about how we would continue, see Next Steps or Perspectives