Team:UC Davis/Project

From 2011.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 21: Line 21:
To test our protocol's ability to produce functional protein mutants, we ran E0240 (GFP) through our error-prone PCR procedure and performed visual inspections of the resulting colonies for their variation from wild-type GFP.<br><br>
To test our protocol's ability to produce functional protein mutants, we ran E0240 (GFP) through our error-prone PCR procedure and performed visual inspections of the resulting colonies for their variation from wild-type GFP.<br><br>
-
 
-
To show that our protocol can also be used to diversify the application of promoters and other regulatory gene sequences, we performed the same procedure on parts R0010, R0040 and R0051 (the LacI, TetR and c1 Lambda promoters), changing only the number of successive rounds of error-prone PCR. We screened these mutants for promoter activity compared to wild type, and characterized their response to changes in repressor concentration. We also characterized the response of wild-type and mutant LacI to IPTG at various repressor concentration levels.
 
-
 
 +
</div>
</div>
</div>
 +
<div class="floatbox">
 +
<h1 id ="promotermut">Promoter Mutant Libraries</h1>
 +
<div class="floatbox3">
 +
To show that our protocol can also be used to diversify the application of promoters and other regulatory gene sequences, we performed the same procedure on parts R0010, R0040 and R0051 (the LacI, TetR and c1 Lambda promoters), changing only the number of successive rounds of error-prone PCR. We screened these mutants for promoter activity compared to wild type, and characterized their response to changes in repressor concentration. We also characterized the response of wild-type and mutant LacI to IPTG at various repressor concentration levels.
 +
</div>
<div class="floatbox2">
<div class="floatbox2">
-
<h2>General Construct</h2>
+
<h2 id="construct">General Mutant Screening Constructs</h2>
-
<center>
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/2/21/UCD_Gen_pMut_construct.png"></center><br><br>
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/2/21/UCD_Gen_pMut_construct.png"></center><br><br>
We designed this construct for characterizing promoter mutants. When pBAD is induced with arabinose, the repressor of choice is transcribed leading to decreased levels of the reporter, GFP. The specific order in which the parts are depicted allows the user to swap in any promoter/repressor or promoter/activator pair using our regulatory characterization plasmid, K611018.<br><br>   
We designed this construct for characterizing promoter mutants. When pBAD is induced with arabinose, the repressor of choice is transcribed leading to decreased levels of the reporter, GFP. The specific order in which the parts are depicted allows the user to swap in any promoter/repressor or promoter/activator pair using our regulatory characterization plasmid, K611018.<br><br>   

Revision as of 22:37, 24 September 2011

Our Sponsors

Start a Family

Got a favorite BioBrick? Check our our process for expanding basic parts into part families.

Criteria

View our judging criteria for iGEM 2011 here.

Overview

The parts registry contains many useful parts, many of which could be made more useful if they were available in a range of activity levels and characteristics. Because of this, we set out to develop a rugged, easy-to-use mutagenic PCR protocol for the rapid production of mutant libraries of any BioBrick part using standard primers.

To test our protocol's ability to produce functional protein mutants, we ran E0240 (GFP) through our error-prone PCR procedure and performed visual inspections of the resulting colonies for their variation from wild-type GFP.

Promoter Mutant Libraries

To show that our protocol can also be used to diversify the application of promoters and other regulatory gene sequences, we performed the same procedure on parts R0010, R0040 and R0051 (the LacI, TetR and c1 Lambda promoters), changing only the number of successive rounds of error-prone PCR. We screened these mutants for promoter activity compared to wild type, and characterized their response to changes in repressor concentration. We also characterized the response of wild-type and mutant LacI to IPTG at various repressor concentration levels.

General Mutant Screening Constructs



We designed this construct for characterizing promoter mutants. When pBAD is induced with arabinose, the repressor of choice is transcribed leading to decreased levels of the reporter, GFP. The specific order in which the parts are depicted allows the user to swap in any promoter/repressor or promoter/activator pair using our regulatory characterization plasmid, K611018.



The mutant repressor characterization construct is identical to the promoter mutant construct with the exception that the user must put the wildtype promoter on the 5' end and a mutant repressor/activator on the 3' end.

LacI

The lac repressor is responsible for regulating the metabolism of lactose. In the absence of lactose, LacI forms a tetramer with identical subunits which appears as two dimers. Each dimer binds in the major groove of the DNA binding region which subsequently blocks the RNA polymerase from binding. In nature, allolactose will bind the repressor leading to transcription of the lac operon. Using IPTG as an inducer has the same effect as allolactose. Read more about it here.

Tet

E. coli have evolved a resistance to the tetracycline antibiotic which is found in the tetracycline operon. This operon is regulated by TetR, the tetracycline repressor, which is a dimeric protein that binds the tetracycline repressible promoter. We mutated both of these. Read more about it here.

cI Lambda

This repressor originates from Lambda phage. Having either lytic or lysogenic life cycles, this bacteriophage infects it's E. coli host with double stranded DNA. cI binds at OR1, OR2 and OR3 sites with preference given to the OR1 site. For more information on how we mutated this repressor and it's associated promoter, click here.