Team:UNIPV-Pavia/Modelling03

From 2011.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "{{main}} <html> <h2 class="art-postheader"> CTRL + <em>E</em> </h2> <div class=...")
 
(131 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 10: Line 10:
<p style="text-align:center;"><span style="font-style:italic;">Signalling is nothing without control...</span></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"><span style="font-style:italic;">Signalling is nothing without control...</span></p>
 +
<br>
 +
 +
<table id="toc" class="toc"><tr><td><div id="toctitle"><h2>Contents</h2></div>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="#Mathematical_modelling_page"><span class="tocnumber">1</span> <span class="toctext">Mathematical modelling: introduction</span></a>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="#The importance of the mathematical model"><span class="tocnumber">1.1</span> <span class="toctext">The importance of mathematical modelling</span></a></li>
 +
<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="#Equations_for_gene_networks"><span class="tocnumber">1.2</span> <span class="toctext">Equations for gene networks</span></a></li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Hypothesis"><span class="tocnumber">1.2.1</span> <span class="toctext">Hypothesis of the model</span></a></li>     
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Equations_1_and_2"><span class="tocnumber">1.2.2</span> <span class="toctext">Equations (1) and (2)</span></a></li>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Equation_3"><span class="tocnumber">1.2.3</span> <span class="toctext">Equation (3)</span></a></li>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Equation_4"><span class="tocnumber">1.2.4</span> <span class="toctext">Equation (4)</span></a></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
 +
<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="#Table_of_parameters"><span class="tocnumber">1.3</span> <span class="toctext">Table of parameters</span></a></li>
 +
 +
<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="#Parameter_estimation"><span class="tocnumber">1.4</span> <span class="toctext">Parameter estimation</span></a></li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Ptet_&_Plux"><span class="tocnumber">1.4.1</span> <span class="toctext">pTet & pLux</span></a></li>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Enzymes"><span class="tocnumber">1.4.2</span> <span class="toctext"> AiiA & LuxI</span></a></li>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#N"><span class="tocnumber">1.4.3</span> <span class="toctext">N</span></a></li></ul>
 +
<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="#Degradation_rates"><span class="tocnumber">1.4.4</span> <span class="toctext">Degradation rates</span></a></li></ul>
 +
 +
 +
<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="#Simulations"><span class="tocnumber">1.5</span> <span class="toctext">Simulations</span></a></li>
 +
 +
<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="#References"><span class="tocnumber">1.6</span> <span class="toctext">References</span></a></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</td></tr></table>
 +
<br><br>
 +
<a name="Mathematical_modeling_page"></a><h1><span class="mw-headline"> <b>Mathematical modelling: introduction</b> </span></h1>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'>Mathematical modelling plays nowadays a central role in Synthetic Biology, due to its ability to serve as a crucial link between the concept and realization of a biological circuit: what we propose in this page is a modelling approach to our project, which has proven extremely useful and very helpful before and after the "wet lab". <br>
 +
Thus, immediately at the beginning, when there was little knowledge, a mathematical model based on a system of differential equations was derived and implemented using a set of parameters, to validate the feasibility of the project. Once this became clear, starting from the characterization of the single subparts created in the wet lab, some of the parameters of the mathematical model were estimated (the others are known from literature) and they have been fixed to simulate the same model, in order to predict the final behaviour of the whole engineered closed-loop circuit. <font color="red">This approach is consistent with the typical one adopted for the analysis and synthesis of a biological circuit, as exemplified by Pasotti et al 2011.</font>
<br>
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
Therefore here, after a brief overview about the advantages that modelling engineered circuits can bring, we deeply analyze the system of equation formulas, underlining the role and function of the parameters involved. <br>
 +
Experimental procedures for parameter estimation are discussed and, finally, a different type of circuit is presented. Simulations were performed, using <em>ODEs</em> with MATLAB and used to explain the difference between a closed-loop control system model and an open one.</div>
 +
<br />
 +
<br />
-
<p>MODELLING <br><br>
 
-
<b>BASIC CONCEPT</b> <br><br>
 
-
(se trovo articoli e riferimenti posso cambiare la prima frase dicendo "It is well recognized that...") <br>
 
-
Synthetic biology greatly relies on modelling as a tool for quantitatively analysing the behaviour of a system. Specifically, it allows to conduct dynamical and stationary phase analyses and parameter sensitivity estimations, based on a mathematical description of the biological system of interest. Therefore it is a valuable predictive tool of the desired behaviour, allowing to test different configurations of the system prior to its implementation. Moreover, it is an essential constituent of the experimental approach, as regards the design of the experiments for the characterization of the parts of the system and data elaboration.<br>
 
-
According to this, modelling plays a central role in the development of our project, from the characterization of the individual components to the design of the final device.
+
<a name="The importance of the mathematical model"></a><h2> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>The importance of mathematical modelling</b> </span></h2>
-
<div>Indeed, for every functional part designed, we have realized several variants differing in the entity of the input-output relation. For example, we have assembled various combinations of the promoters of our circuit (namely, pTet and pLux) with different RBSs, resulting in a particular POPSin-POPSout relation.</div><br>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'>The purposes of deriving mathematical models for gene networks can be:
 +
<br><br>
 +
<li><b>Prediction</b>: in the initial steps of the project, a good <em>a-priori</em> identification "in silico" allows to suppose the kinetics of the enzymes (AiiA, Luxi) and HSL involved in our gene network, basically to understand if the complex circuit structure and functioning could be achievable and to investigate the range of parameters values ​​for which the behavior is the one expected. <font color="red">(Endler et al, 2009)</font>
 +
<br><br>
 +
<li><b>Parameter identification</b>: a modellistic approach is helpful to get all the parameters involved, in order to perform realistic simulations not only of the single subparts created, but also of the whole final circuit, according to the <em>a-posteriori</em> identification.
 +
<br><br>
 +
<li><b>Modularity</b>: studying and characterizing basic BioBrick Parts can allow to reuse this knowledge in other studies, concerning with the same basic modules <font color="red">(Braun et al, 2005; Canton et al, 2008).</font>
 +
</div>
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
-
"mettere disegno?"<br><br>
 
-
After the quantitative characterization of every part, modelling of the final assembled device allows us to predict the global input-output relation of the circuit. This in turn gives an insight into the best choice for the final device, based on criteria such as the achievement of the desired behaviour, the degree of sensitivity and biological tolerance.<br>
 
-
In this section the mathematics of our project is provided: first, the system of equations is introduced, together with an explanation of the variables and parameters involved. Subsequently, experimental procedures for parameters estimation are presented.<br><br>
+
<a name="Equations_for_gene_networks"></a><h2> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Equations for gene networks</b> </span></h2>
-
+
<div style='text-align:justify'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 800px;"><a href="File:Circuito.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/2/2a/Circuito.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="65%" width="80%"></a></div></div>
-
<b>SYSTEM OF EQUATIONS Equazioni</b><br><br>
+
<br>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 850px;"><a href="File:Schema_controllo.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/e/e2/Schema_controllo.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="75%" width="80%"></a></div></div>
 +
<br>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 850px;"><a href="File:Model1.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/0/07/Model1.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="68%" width="87%"></a></div></div>
 +
<br>
 +
<a name="Hyphotesis"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Hyphotesis of the model</b> </span></h4>
 +
<table class="data">
 +
<tr>
 +
<td>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'>
 +
<em>
 +
<b>HP<sub>1</sub></b>: In order to  better investigate the range of dynamics of each subparts, every promoter has been
 +
studied with 4 different RBSs, so as to develop more knowledge about the state variables in several configurations
 +
of RBS' efficiency. Hereafter, referring to the notation "RBSx" we mean, respectively,
 +
<a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_B0030">RBS30</a>,
 +
<a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_B0031">RBS31</a>,
 +
<a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_B0032">RBS32</a>,
 +
<a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_B0034">RBS34</a>.
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<b>HP<sub>2</sub></b>: In equation (2) only HSL is considered as inducer, instead of the complex LuxR-HSL.
 +
This is motivated by the fact that our final device offers a constitutive LuxR production due to the upstream constitutive promoter P&lambda. Assuming LuxR is abundant and always saturated in the cytoplasm, we can justify the simplification of attributing pLux promoter i
 +
nduction only by HSL. In conclusion LuxR, LuxI and AiiA were not included in the equation system.
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<b>HP<sub>3</sub></b>: in system equation, LuxI and AiiA amounts are expressed per cell. For this reason, the whole equation (3), except for the
 +
term of intrinsic degradation of HSL, is multiplied by the number of cells N, due to the property of the lactone to diffuse freely inside/outside bacteria.
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<b>HP<sub>4</sub></b>: as regards promoters pTet and pLux, we assume their strengths (measured in PoPs),  due to a given concentration of inducer (aTc, HSL for Ptet and Plux respectively), to be
 +
independent from the gene encoding.
 +
In other words, in our hypotesis, if the mRFP coding region is substituted with a region coding for another gene (in our case, AiiA or LuxI), we would obtain the same synthesis rate:
 +
this is the reason why the strength of the complex promoter-RBSx is expressed in Arbitrary Units [AUr].
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<b>HP<sub>5</sub></b>: considering the exponential growth, the enzymes AiiA and LuxI concentration is supposed to be constant, because their production is equally compensated by dilution.
 +
</em>
 +
</div>
 +
</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
</table>
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
 +
<a name="Equations_1_and_2"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Equations (1) and (2)</b> </span></h4>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'> Equations (1) and (2) have identical structure, differing only in the parameters involved. They represent the synthesis degradation and diluition of both the enzymes in the circuit, LuxI and AiiA, respectively in the first and second equation: in each of them both transcription and translation processes have been condensed.<font color="red"> The corresponding mathematical formalism is analogous to the one used by Pasotti et al 2011, Suppl. Inf., even if we do not take LuxR-HSL complex formation into account, as explained below.</font><br>
 +
These equations are composed of 2 parts:<br><br>
 +
<ol>
 +
<li> The first term describes, through Hill's equation formalism, the synthesis rate of the protein of interest (either LuxI or AiiA) depending on the concentration of the inducer (anhydrotetracicline -aTc- or HSL respectively), responsible for the activation of the regulatory element composed of promoter and RBSx. In the parameter table (see below), &alpha; refers to the maximum activation of the promoter, while &delta; stands for its leakage activity (this means that the promoter is slightly active even if there is no induction). In particular, in equation (1), the almost entire inhibition of pTet promoter is given by the constitutive production of TetR by our MGZ1 strain. In equation (2), pLux is almost inactive  in the absence of the complex LuxR-HSL.<br>
 +
Furthermore, in both equations k stands for the dissociation constant of the promoter from the inducer (respectively aTc and HSL in eq. 1 and 2), while &eta; is the cooperativity constant.<br><br
 +
<li>The second term in equations (1) and (2) is in turn composed of 2 parts. The former one (<em>&gamma;</em>*LuxI or <em>&gamma;</em>*AiiA respectively) describes, with an exponential decay, the degradation rate per cell of the protein. The latter (&mu;*(Nmax-N)/Nmax)*LuxI or &mu;*(Nmax-N)/Nmax)*AiiA, respectively) takes into account the dilution factor against cell growth which is related to the cell replication process.
 +
</ol>
 +
</div>
 +
<br>
-
"\frac{d[HSL]}{dt}= N*Vmax_L_u_x_I*\frac{LuxI}{(km_L_u_x_I + LuxI)} - N*Vmax_A_i_i_A*\frac{[HSL]}{(km_A_i_i_A + [HSL])} - %gamma * [HSL]"<br><br>
 
-
We have condensed in a unique equation transcription and translation processes. (riferimenti ad altri studi).
+
<a name="Equation_3"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Equation (3)</b> </span></h4>
-
Equations (1) and (2) have identical structure, differing only in the parameters involved.
+
<div style='text-align:justify'>Here the kinetics of HSL is modeled, through enzymatic reactions either related to the production or the degradation of HSL: based on the experiments performed, we derived appropriate expressions for HSL synthesis and degradation. This equation is composed of 3 parts: <br><br>
-
<div>The first  term describes, through Hill's equation formalism, the synthesis rate of the protein of interest (either LuxI or AiiA) depending on the concentration of the inducible protein (anhydrotetracicline -aTc- or HSL respectively). As can be seen in the parameters table (see below), the term delta stands for the leakage activity of the promoter, who is supposed to be partially active, even in the absence of inducer. In particular, in equation (1), the quite total inhibition of pTet promoter is due to the constitutive production of TetR by our MGZ1 strain, while in equation (2), pLux is almost repressed in the absence of the complex given by LuxR and HSL.</div> <br>
+
<ol>
 +
<li> The first term represents the production of HSL due to LuxI expression. We modeled this process with a saturation curve in which V<sub>max</sub> is the HSL maximum transcription rate, while k<sub>M,LuxI</sub> is the dissociation constant of LuxI from the substrate HSL.
 +
<br><br>
 +
<li> The second term represents the degradation of HSL due to the AiiA expression. Similarly to LuxI, k<sub>cat</sub> represents the maximum degradation per unit of HSL concentration, while k<sub>M,AiiA</sub> is the concentration at which AiiA dependent HSL concentration rate is (k<sub>cat</sub>*HSL)/2. <font color="red"> The formalism is similar to that found in the Supplementary Information of Danino et al, 2010.</font>
 +
<br><br>
 +
<li> The third term (&gamma;<sub>HSL</sub>*HSL) is similar to the corresponding ones present in the first two equations and describes the intrinsic protein degradation.</div>
 +
<br><br>
-
In the first term of equation (2) we have described the inducer as being represented only by HSL. This formalism stems from the fact that our final device offers a constitutive production of LuxR (due to the upstream constitutive promoter pLac), so that, assuming it abundant in the cytoplasm, we can derive the semplification of attributing pLux promoter induction only by HSL.<br>
 
-
The second term in equation (1) and (2) is composed of two parts. The first one (gamma*LuxI/HSL) describes with a linear relation the degradation rate per cell of the protein. The second one  (mu*(Nmax-N)/Nmax)*luxI/HSL) is a dilution term and is related to the cell replication process. To understand this, let's consider the simplest case of a single cell's division.<br><br>
+
<a name="Equation_4"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Equation (4)</b> </span></h4>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'>This is the common logistic population cells growth, depending on the rate &mu; and the maximum number N<sub>max</sub> of cells per well reachable.</div>
 +
<br><br>
-
<b>DISEGNO CELLULA CHE SI DIVIDE</b><br><br>
 
-
When this happens, we can assume that all the content of the mother cell equally distributes in the two derived cells. Consequently, if we had for example ten molecules of LuxI per cell, after the cellular division they would become five molecules per cell.<br>
+
<a name="Table_of_parameters"></a><h2> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Table of parameters and species</b> </span></h2>
-
 
+
<br>
-
Now consider equation (3). The processes described herein are not those of transcription and translation, but in principle are enzymatic reactions either related to the production or the degradation of HSL. Based on the experiments performed, we derived Hill's equation in the case of eta=1. They cannot be exactly defined Michaelis Menten's equations since that in our formalism, LuxI and AiiA aren't described as enzymes (since they appear also in the denominator). We simply derived empirical formulas relating either LuxI or AiiA to HSL, and treated them with the typical Michaelis Menten formalism since they presented the corresponding sigmoidal shape/switching like behaviour. Regarding to this, we believe that the saturation phenomenon observed either in HSL production rate due to LuxI, or HSL degradation rate due to AiiA, underlies limiting elements in cell metabolism. Intuitively, LuxI activity as an enzyme encounters an intrinsic limit in HSL synthesis depending on the finite and hypothetically fixed substrate concentration (namely SAM and hexanoyl-ACP, see ref.); this means that at a certain LuxI concentration, all the substrate forms activation complexes with LuxI, so that there is no more substrate available for the other LuxI produced.<br>
+
-
<div>Similarly, HSL degradation rate is limited by HSL availability; even if HSL concentration varies with time, there is always a corresponding limit in AiiA concentration, which determines a saturation in the degradation rate.</div><br>
+
-
The third term in equation three is similar to the corresponding ones present in the first two equations and describes protein degradation.<br><br>
 
-
Equation (4) is the common equation describing logistic cell growth.<br><br>
 
<center>
<center>
<table class="data">
<table class="data">
     <tr>
     <tr>
-
       <td class="row"><b>Parameter</b></td>
+
       <td class="row"><b>Parameter & Species</b></td>
 +
      <td class="row"><b>Description</b></td>
       <td class="row"><b>Unit of Measurement</b></td>
       <td class="row"><b>Unit of Measurement</b></td>
       <td class="row"><b>Value</b></td>
       <td class="row"><b>Value</b></td>
Line 67: Line 167:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&alpha;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&alpha;<sub>p<sub>Tet</sub></sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[(mRFP/min)/cell]</td>
+
      <td class="row">maximum transcription rate of pTet (related to RBSx efficiency)</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[(AUr/min)/cell]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
Line 74: Line 175:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&delta;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&delta;<sub>p<sub>Tet</sub></sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">leakage factor of promoter pTet basic activity</td>
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
Line 80: Line 182:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">k<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&eta;<sub>p<sub>Tet</sub></sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
      <td class="row">Hill coefficient of pTet</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&eta;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">k<sub>p<sub>Tet</sub></sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
+
      <td class="row">dissociation constant of aTc from pTet</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[nM]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&alpha;<sub>p<sub>Lux</sub></sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
+
      <td class="row">maximum transcription rate of pLux (related to RBSx efficiency)</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[(AUr/min)/cell]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
 +
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&alpha;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&delta;<sub>p<sub>Lux</sub></sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[(mRFP/min)/cell]</td>
+
       <td class="row">leakage factor of promoter pLux basic activity</td>
 +
      <td class="row">[-]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
-
 
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&delta;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&eta;<sub>p<sub>Lux</sub></sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">Hill coefficient of pLux</td>
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
Line 111: Line 218:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">k<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">k<sub>p<sub>Lux</sub></sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">dissociation constant of HSL from pLux</td>
       <td class="row">[nM]</td>
       <td class="row">[nM]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
Line 117: Line 225:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&eta;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>p<sub>Lux</sub></sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[-]</td>
+
      <td class="row">LuxI constant degradation</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
 +
      <td class="row">-</td>
 +
  </tr>
 +
  <tr>
 +
      <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>AiiA</sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">AiiA constant degradation</td>
 +
      <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>HSL</sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">HSL constant degradation</td>
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
Line 129: Line 245:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">V<sub>max_LuxI</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">V<sub>max</sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">maximum transcription rate of LuxI</td>
       <td class="row">[nM/(min*cell)]</td>
       <td class="row">[nM/(min*cell)]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
Line 135: Line 252:
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">k<sub>m_LuxI</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">k<sub>M,LuxI</sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
      <td class="row">dissociation constant of LuxI from HSL</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[AUr/cell]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">V<sub>max_AiiA</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">k<sub>cat</sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[nM/(min*cell)]</td>
+
      <td class="row">maximum number of enzymatic reactions catalyzed per minute</td>
 +
       <td class="row">[1/(min*cell)]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
   <tr>
   <tr>
-
       <td class="row">k<sub>m_AiiA</sub></td>
+
       <td class="row">k<sub>M,AiiA</sub></td>
-
       <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
       <td class="row">dissociation constant of AiiA from HSL</td>
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
       <td class="row">[AUr/cell]</td>
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>HSL</sub></td>
+
-
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
+
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
Line 159: Line 273:
   <tr>
   <tr>
       <td class="row">N<sub>max</sub></td>
       <td class="row">N<sub>max</sub></td>
 +
      <td class="row">maximum number of bacteria per well</td>
       <td class="row">[cell]</td>
       <td class="row">[cell]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
Line 165: Line 280:
   <tr>
   <tr>
       <td class="row">&mu;</td>
       <td class="row">&mu;</td>
 +
      <td class="row">rate of bacteria growth</td>
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
       <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
       <td class="row">-</td>
   </tr>
   </tr>
-
</table>
 
-
</center>
 
-
<br><br><b>Spiegazione parametri e test con cui misurarli</b><br><br>
+
    <tr>
 +
      <td class="row"><b>LuxI</b></td>
 +
      <td class="row">kinetics of enzyme LuxI</td>
 +
      <td class="row">[<sup>AUr</sup>&frasl;<sub>cell</sub>]</td>
 +
      <td class="row">-</td>
 +
  </tr>
-
<b>Equations (1) and (2)</b><br><br>
+
    <tr>
-
In this section we examine the parameters of the model and justify the units of measure, relating them to the experiments performed for the characterization of the parts.<br>
+
      <td class="row"><b>AiiA</b></td>
 +
      <td class="row">kinetics of enzyme AiiA</td>
 +
      <td class="row">[<sup>AUr</sup>&frasl;<sub>cell</sub>]</td>
 +
      <td class="row">-</td>
 +
  </tr>
-
Relating to the equations (1) and (2), we assume acquainted the protein degradation rate, which equals gamma_i=0.0173 due to the presence of the LVA tag (see registry...).<br>
+
    <tr>
 +
      <td class="row"><b>HSL</b></td>
 +
      <td class="row">kinetics of HSL</b></td>
 +
      <td class="row">[<sup>nM</sup>&frasl;<sub>(min)</sub>]</td>
 +
      <td class="row">-</td>
 +
  </tr>
-
Moreover the dilution term is exactly the specific growth rate, to be determined through an apposite experiment.<br>
+
    <tr>
 +
      <td class="row"><b>N</b></td>
 +
      <td class="row">number of cells</td>
 +
      <td class="row">cell</td>
 +
      <td class="row">-</td>
 +
  </tr>
-
What remains is the term describing the synthesis rate.
+
</table>
-
<div>The parameters involved were experimentally determined through ad hoc designed experiments. We exploited specifically assembled parts, formed by the sequence of <br><br>
+
</center>
-
promoter-RBS-mRFP-TT  FARE DISEGNO AL RIGUARDO<br><br>
+
<br>
 +
<br>
-
Indeed, this parts are also amenable to be applied as components for subsequent iGem projects. </div><br>
 
-
What we want to characterize is the promoter+RBS complex. We realize this by introducing the mRFP fuorescent protein (followed by a double terminator), and we make the assumption that the number of fluorescent protein produced is exactly the same as the number given by any other protein that would be espressed instead of the mRFP. In other words, in our hypotesis, if we would substitute the mRFP coding region with a region coding for another protein, we would obtain the same synthesis rate. Clearly this is a strong hypotesis, however its level of approximation is considered to be adequate.
 
-
<div>The construct realized is the best suited for our laboratory equipment instruments. Specifically, our TECAN spectrophotometer allows us to measure Scell(dmRFP/dt/OD) as a function of inducer concentration, thereby providing the desired input-output relation (inducer concentration versus promoter+RBS activity), which was modelled as a Hill curve.</div><br>
 
-
alfa_pTet and alfa_pLux represent the protein maximum synthesis rate, which is reached, in accordance with Hill's formalism, when the inducer concentration tends to infinite, and, more practically, for sufficently high concentrations of inducer.<br> <br>
+
<a name="Parameter_estimation"></a><h2> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Parameter estimation</b></span></h2>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'>The philosophy of the model is to predict the behavior of the final closed loop circuit starting from the characterization of single BioBrick parts through a set of well-designed <em>ad hoc</em> experiments. Relating to these, in this section the way parameters of the model have been identified is presented.
 +
As explained before in <a href="#Hypothesis"><span class="toctext"><b><em>HP<sub>1</sub></em></b></span></a>, considering a set of 4 RBS for each subpart expands the range of dynamics and helps us to better understand the interactions between state variables and parameters.
 +
</div>
 +
<br>
-
delta_ptet and delta_plux, as previously explained, are responsible for basal protein expression  (given by alfa_pTet*delta_pTet/pLux), liable for protein production (LuxI and AiiA respectively) even in the absence of autoinducer.<br><br>
 
-
eta_ptet and eta_plux are thed Hill's cooperativity constants, and determine the ripidity of the switch like curve relating Scell with the concentration of inducer.<br>
 
-
<div>Katc and kplux are the semi-saturation constant, and in case of a unity value for eta_atc and eta_plux, indicate the concentration of substrate at which  half the synthesis rate is achieved.</div><br>
 
-
The unities of the various parameters can be easily derived considering the hill equation and the unity of its left handed side.<br><br>
+
<a name="Ptet_&_Plux"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Promoter (PTet & pLux)</b> </span></h4>
 +
<div align="center"><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 500px;"><a href="File:Ptet.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/f/f0/Ptet.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="75%" width="60%"></a></div></div>  
-
[dGFP/dt/cell]=[dGFP/dt/cell]*([-]+([.]-[-])/([-]+[nM]/[nM]))<br><br>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'>These were the first subparts tested.
-
 
+
In this phase of the project the target is to learn more about promoter pTet and pLux. Characterizing promoters only is a very hard task: for this reason we considered promoter and each RBS from the RBSx set as a whole (reference to <a href="#Hypothesis"><span class="toctext"><b><em>HP<sub>1</sub></em></b></span></a>).
-
<b>Third equation</b><br>
+
<br>
<br>
-
It can be recognized that the characterization of the processes implied in this equation required a greatest level application and formalization, since it involved us to design ad hoc experimental measures we hadn't previously engaged in. Both the experiments can be regarded as made of tho phases, which we can define  the <b>stimulation/inducing phase</b> and the <b>reading phase</b> respectively. Each of them relies on a specific construct appropiately induced; the inducing phase construct is different for LuxI dependent HSL synthesis rate and AiiA dependent HSL degradation rate characterization, while the reading phase construct is the same for the two experiments; indeed, it relies on T9002, and allows to determine HSL concentration based on the Scell produced Further details are given in the following paragraphs.<br><br>
+
As shown in the figure below, we considered a range of inductions  and we monitored, in time, absorbance (O.D. stands for "optical density") and fluorescence; the two vertical segments for each graph highlight the exponential phase of bacterial growth. S<sub>cell</sub> (namely, synthesis rate per cell) can be derived as a function of inducer concentration, thereby providing the desired input-output relation (inducer concentration versus promoter+RBS activity), which was modelled as a Hill curve:
-
<b>LuxI dependent HSL synthesis rate</b><br>
+
<div align="center"><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 600px;"><a href="File:Scell.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/5/58/Scell.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="80%" width="45%"></a></div></div>
-
<div>As we have previously seen, the first term in equation (3) describes HSL synthesis rate dependence on LuxI concentration. We have also yet explained why we took such a formalism. This is not the typical mathematical modelling approach used to describe pLux promoter activity, usually represented as a function of HSL-LuxR complex concentration. There is plenty of literature references in this context, while little is available in the case of  LuxR abundance. Theoretically, this is a particular situation of the more general relating to the complex contemplation, but  obviously it is not easy to derive from it.</div>
+
-
In the stimulation phase of the experimental set up, we used the following construct:<br><br>
+
-
pTet-RBS-LuxI-TT<br><br>
+
However, also Relative Promoter Unit (RPU) has been calculated as a ratio of S<sub>cell</sub> of promoter of interest and the S<sub>cell</sub> of <a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_J23101">BBa_J23101</a> (reference to <a href="#Hypothesis"><span class="toctext"><b><em>HP<sub>4</sub></em></b></span></a>).
-
Theoretically, the biological processes related to this biobrick are those of LuxI synthesis and degradation and the LuxI driven HSL synthesis. In order to isolate the last one, namely HSL synthesis, we should make sure that it is possible to consider LuxI in stationary phase (and so at a constant concentration) and  to leave aside LuxI degradation.
+
<div style='text-align:justify'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 600px;"><a href="File:Box1_new.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/7/71/Box1_new.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="100%" width="120%"></a></div></div>
-
<div>The condition on LuxI degradation subsists, since we operate on a shorter time scale (order of hours).
+
-
Moreover, the adopted experimental protocol allowed us to consider LuxI in stationary phase.
+
-
So we can hypotesize that the HSL produced only depends on the relation between LuxI and HSL, given a specific stationary concentration of LuxI, that in turn depends on aTc concentration.</div>  
+
-
In order to measure this HSL concentration, we used the T9002 device (reading phase).<br>
+
-
It is worth mentioning that we can predict LuxI "concentration" (in terms of (dmRFP/dt)/OD) based on the previously characterized pTet-RBS constructs. Moreover, varying the RBS, we can span a relatively large range of LuxI concentrations, providing us with more experimental points.<br>
+
As shown in the figure above, &alpha;, as already mentioned, represents the protein maximum synthesis rate, which is reached, in accordance with Hill's formalism, when the inducer concentration tends to infinite, and, for sufficently high concentrations of inducer. Meanwhile the product &alpha;*&delta; stands for the leakage activity (at no induction), liable for protein production (LuxI and AiiA respectively) even in the absence of inducer. The paramenter &eta; is the Hill's cooperativity constant and it  affects the rapidity and ripidity of the switch like curve relating S<sub>cell</sub> with the concentration of inducer.
 +
Lastly, k stands for the semi-saturation constant and, in case of &eta;=1, it indicates the concentration of substrate at which half the synthesis rate is achieved.
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
-
Hereafter the single passes of the experiment are schematically proposed, in order to better understand it:<br><br>
 
-
<div>1) Transform a MGZ1 E. coli strain with the pTet-RBS-LuxI-TT construct,  and wait three hours for reaching the exponential phase growth.</div>
 
-
<div>2) Induce the culture with a proper amount of aTc.</div>
 
-
<div>3) Take samples of the supernatant at different times (i.e. 0 h, 1 h, 4 h) and store them in the freezer at -20° C </div>
 
-
<div>4) Retrieve the supernatants prepared and use them to induce the T9002 constructs contained in the TECAN spectrophotometer wells</div>
 
-
<div>5) Wait until sensing is completed and retrieve the results from TECAN.</div><br>
 
-
<b>AiiA dependent HSL degradation rate</b><br>
 
-
AiiA dependent HSL degradation rate experiment is the same as the previous one as regards the passes involved, and simply differs in that there is no part producing HSL, so we have to inject it at a proper concentration. Then, the construct used in the stimulation phase, namely<br>
 
-
pTet-RBS-AiiA-TT,<br>
 
-
brings to the production of a known amount of AiiA (expressed in terms of dmRFP/dt/cell). Therefore, this time, when we take samples at different times from aTc induction (after having waited for AiiA to become in stationary phase) we will see AiiA dependent HSL degradation.<br>
 
-
So the following are the passes involved in the experiment:<br><br>
+
<a name="Enzymes"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>AiiA & LuxI</b> </span></h4>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'> This paragraph explains how parameters of equation (3) are estimated. The target is to learn the AiiA and LuxI degradation and production mechanisms in addition to HSL intrinsic degradation, in order to estimate V<sub>max</sub>, k<sub>M,LuxI</sub>, k<sub>cat</sub> and k<sub>M,AiiA</sub> parameters. These tests have been performed using the following BioBrick parts:
 +
</div>
-
<div>1) Transform a MGZ1 E. coli strain with the pTet-RBS-AiiA-TT construct,  and wait three hours for reaching the exponential phase growth.</div>
+
<div align="center"><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 500px;"><a href="File:AiiA.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/3/3e/AiiA.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="75%" width="60%"></a></div></div>
-
<div>2) Induce the culture with a proper amount of aTc.</div>
+
-
<div>3) Take samples of the supernatant at different times (i.e. 0 h, 1 h, 4 h) and store them in the freezer at -20° C </div>
+
-
<div>4) Retrieve the supernatants prepared and use them to induce the T9002 constructs contained in the TECAN spectrophotometer wells</div>
+
-
<div>5) Wait until sensing is completed and retrieve the results from TECAN.</div><br>  
+
-
<b>Equation (4)</b><br><br>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'>By now, parameter identification about promoters has already been performed. Furthermore, as explained before, the <a href="#Hypothesis"><span class="toctext"><b><em>HP<sub>4</sub></em></b></span></a> is also valid in this case. Moreover, it's possible to quantify exactly the concentration of HSL, using the well-characterized BioBrick <a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_T9002">BBa_T9002</a>.
-
The parameters N<sub>max</sub> and &mu;, can be calculated from the analysis of the OD<sub>600</sub> produced by our MGZ1 culture. In particular, &mu; is derived as the slope of the log(OD<sub>600</sub>) growth curve. N<sub>max</sub> is determined with a proper procedure. After having reached saturation phase and having retrieved the corresponding OD<sub>600</sub>, we take a sample of the culture and make serial dilutions of it, then we plate the final diluted culture on a Petri and wait for the formation of colonies. The dilution serves to avoid the growth of too many and too close colonies in the Petri. Finally, we count the number of colonies, which correspond to N<sub>max</sub>.<br><br>   
+
<div align="center"><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 500px;"><a href="File:T9002.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/c/c2/T9002.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="80%" width="110%"></a></div></div>
 +
This is a biosensor which receives HSL concentration as input and returns GFP intensity (more precisely S<sub>cell</sub>) as output.<font color="red"> (Canton et al, 2008).</font>
 +
According to this, it is necessary to understand the input-output relationship: so, a T9002 "calibration" curve is plotted for each test performed.<br><br>
 +
So, our idea is to control the degradation of HSL in time. ATc activates pTet and, later, a certain concentration of HSL is introduced. Then, at fixed times, O.D.<sub>600</sub> and HSL concentration are monitored using Tecan and T9002 biosensor.
 +
-
<font size="3"><b>CLOSED LOOP VS OPEN LOOP</b></font><br><br>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 500px;"><a href="" class="image"><img alt="File:Degradation.jpg" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/9/99/Degradation.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="65%" width="140%"></a></div></div>
-
Now that we have gone deep into the various aspects of the mathematical model of our closed loop, it's time to explain why it is advantageous with respect to the open loop.<br>
+
Referring to <a href="#Hypothesis"><span class="toctext"><b><em>HP<sub>5</sub></em></b></span></a>, in exponential growth enzymes equilibrium is conserved.
 +
Due to a known induction of aTc, the steady-state level per cell can be calculated:
-
In order to see that, we implemented and simulated in Matlab our closed loop circuit and the open loop one, consisting of the same construct without the feedback loop, that is the part pLux-RBS-AiiA-TT (E37-E40). The table below provides the values for the parameters of the model.<br><br>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 500px;"><a href="File:Aiia_cost.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/7/74/Aiia_cost.jpg" class="thumbimage" height="70%" width="120%"></a></div></div>
 +
Considering, for a determined promoter-RBSx couple, several induction of aTc and, for each of them, several samples of HSL concentration during time, parameters V<sub>max</sub>, k<sub>M,LuxI</sub>, k<sub>cat</sub> and k<sub>M,AiiA</sub> can be estimated, through numerous iterations of an algorithm implemented in MATLAB.
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
-
<center>
 
-
<table class="data">
 
-
    <tr>
 
-
      <td class="row"><b>Parameter</b></td>
 
-
      <td class="row"><b>Unit of Measurement</b></td>
 
-
      <td class="row"><b>Value</b></td>
 
-
  </tr>
 
 +
<a name="N"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>N</b> </span></h4>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'>The parameters N<sub>max</sub> and μ can be calculated from the analysis of the OD<sub>600</sub> produced by our MGZ1 culture. In particular, μ is derived as the slope of the log(O.D.<sub>600</sub>) growth curve. Counting the number of cells of a saturated culture would be considerably complicated, so N<sub>max</sub> is determined with a proper procedure. The aim here is to derive the linear proportional coefficient &Theta; between O.D'.<sub>600</sub> and N: this constant can be estimated as the ratio between absorbance (read from TECAN) and the respective number of CFU on a petri plate. Finally, N<sub>max</sub> is calcultated as &Theta;*O.D'.<sub>600</sub>.
 +
<font color="red">(Pasotti et al, 2010)</font>.
 +
</div>
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
-
  <tr>
 
-
      <td class="row">&alpha;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
 
-
      <td class="row">[(mRFP/min)/cell]</td>
 
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
 
-
  </tr>
 
 +
<a name="Degradation_rates"></a><h4> <span class="mw-headline"> <b>Degradation rates</b> </span></h4>
 +
<div style='text-align:justify'>The parameters &gamma;<sub>LuxI</sub> and &gamma;<sub>AiiA</sub> are taken from literature since they contain LVA tag for rapid degradation. Instead, approximating HSL kinetics as a decaying exponential, &gamma;<sub>HSL</sub> can be derived as the slope of the log(concentration), which can be monitored through <a href="http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_T9002">BBa_T9002</a>.
 +
</div>
 +
<br>
 +
<br>
-
  <tr>
 
-
      <td class="row">&delta;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
 
-
      <td class="row">[-]</td>
 
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
 
-
  </tr>
 
-
  <tr>
+
<a name="Simulations"></a><h1><span class="mw-headline"> <b>Simulations</b> </span></h1>
-
      <td class="row">k<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'>
-
      <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
On a biological level, the ability to control the concentration of a given molecule reveals itself as fundamental in limiting the metabolic burden of the cell; moreover, in the particular case of HSL signalling molecules, this would give the possibility to regulate quorum sensing-based population behaviours. In this section we first present the results of the simulations of the closed-loop circuit for feasible values of the parameters. The reported figures highlight some fundamental characteristics.</div>
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'> First of all, it is clear the validity of the steady state approximation in the exponential growth phase, since that LuxI, AiiA, and also HSL, undergo only minor changes in this phase (500>t<2500 min). Secondly, it can be noted that the circuit negative feedback rapidly activates above a proper amount of HSL, and after that it competes with LuxI synthesis term in defining HSL steady state value.
-
  </tr>
+
</div>  
-
  <tr>
+
<table align='center' width='100%'>
-
      <td class="row">&eta;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
<div style='text-align:center'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 100%;"><a href="File:LuxI AiiA time course.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/c/cd/LuxI_AiiA_time_course.jpg" class="thumbimage" width="80%"></a></div></div>
-
      <td class="row">[-]</td>
+
</table>
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
  <tr>
+
<table align='center' width='100%'>
-
      <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>pTet</sub></td>
+
<div style='text-align:center'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 100%;"><a href="File:HSL time course.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/1/15/HSL_time_course.jpg" class="thumbimage" width="80%"></a></div></div>
-
      <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
+
</table>
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
  <tr>
+
<p>The concept of the closed-loop model we have discussed so far can be validated by the comparison with another circuit we implemented in Matlab, that is an open loop circuit, similar to CTRL+E, except for the constitutive production of AiiA. We can point out that, under the hypothesis of an equal amount of HSL production, the open-loop circuit requires a higher AiiA production level, thereby constituting a greater metabolic burden for the cell (see figure below), uncertain to be fulfilled in realistic conditions. Moreover, there is  another major issue with the open loop circuit, that is the inability to monitor the output of the controlled system, so that it is not generally capable to adapt to changes in the system behavior.</p>
-
      <td class="row">&alpha;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[(mRFP/min)/cell]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
 +
<table align='center' width='100%'>
 +
<div style='text-align:center'><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 100%;"><a href="File:UNIPV AiiA open loop VS closed loop.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2011/9/96/UNIPV_AiiA_open_loop_VS_closed_loop.jpg" class="thumbimage" width="80%"></a></div></div>
 +
</table>
-
  <tr>
 
-
      <td class="row">&delta;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
 
-
      <td class="row">[-]</td>
 
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
 
-
  </tr>
 
-
  <tr>
+
<a name="References"></a><h1><span class="mw-headline"> <b>References</b> </span></h1>
-
      <td class="row">k<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
<div style='text-align:justify'>
-
      <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
D. Braun, S. Basu, R. Weiss, "Parameter Estimation for Two Synthetic Gene Networks: a Case Study", ICASSP 2005, vol. 5, v/769 - v/772.<br><br>
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">&eta;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[-]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>pLux</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">V<sub>max_LuxI</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[nM/(min*cell)]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">k<sub>m_LuxI</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">V<sub>max_AiiA</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[nM/(min*cell)]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">k<sub>m_AiiA</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[nM]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">&gamma;<sub>HSL</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">N<sub>max</sub></td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[cell]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
  <tr>
+
-
      <td class="row">&mu;</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">[1/min]</td>
+
-
      <td class="row">-</td>
+
-
  </tr>
+
-
 
+
-
</table>
+
-
</center>  
+
-
</p>
+
B. Canton, A. Labno and D. Endy, "Refinement and Standardization of Synthetic Biological Parts and Devices", Volume 26, Number 7, July 2008.</div><br><br>
-
<p>
+
T. Danino, O. Mondragon-Palomino, L. Tsimring & J. Hasty, "A Synchronized Quorum of Genetic Clocks", Nature vol. 463, pp. 326-330, January 2010.<br><br>
-
The following graphs represent the corresponding results from the two models. As can be seen, both reach a stable equilibrium point, since that there isn't any positive feedback loop capable of bringing instability. However, starting from the same initial conditions (and with the same values for the parameters), the closed loop settles to a HSL steady state level far lower than the open loop, highlighting its capability to limit HSL concentration to a treshold level.
+
-
</p>
+
 +
L. Endler, N. Rodriguez, N. Juty, V. Chelliah, C. Laibe, C. Li and N. Le Novere, "Designing and Encoding Models for Synthetic Biology", Journal of the Royal Society, 2009 Aug 6;6 Suppl 4:S405-17. Epub 2009 Apr 1.<br><br>
-
<p>
+
L. Pasotti, M. Quattrocelli, D. Galli, M.G. Cusella De Angelis, P. Magni, "Multiplexing and Demultiplexing Logic Functions for Computing Signal Processing Tasks in Synthetic Biology", Biotechnology Journal, Volume 6,pp. 784-795, 2011.<br><br>
-
INSERISCI GRAFICI
+
-
</p>
+
-
<p>
+
L. Pasotti, M. Quattrocelli, D. Galli, M.G. Cusella De Angelis, P. Magni, "Multiplexing and Demultiplexing Logic Functions for Computing Signal Processing Tasks in Synthetic Biology, Supporting Information", Biotechnology Journal, Volume 6,available online, 2011.
-
On the same basis, it is interesting to observe what happens if we introduce a HSL impulse/stimulus, regarded as a noise. In the open loop model, it adds to the steady state bringing to a higher value of the equilibrium point. On the contrary, the feedback loop circuit is able to partially counteract it and to avoid great changes in the steady state value.  
+
-
</p>
+
-
<div class="center"><div class="thumb tnone"><div class="thumbinner" style="width: 700px;"><a href="File:closed_loop.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" class="thumbimage" height="80%" width="80%"></a></div></div></div>
 
-
<p>
 
-
INSERISCI GRAFICI
 
-
</p>
 
-
<p>
+
</div>
-
On a biological level, the ability to control the concentration of a given molecule reveals fundamental in limiting the metabolic burden of the cell; moreover, in the particular case of HSL signalling molecules, this would give the possibility to regulate quorum sensing based population's behaviours.
+
-
</p>
+
-
<h4>T9002</h4>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      T9002 is an input/output device (vedere nel registry), with HSL as input and GFP
 
-
      (more precisely SCell)&nbsp;as output. It was created by (team). With T9002 it is
 
-
      possible to measure the HSL concentration of a substance based on the measured fluorescence
 
-
      intensity.
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    <b>HOW DOES IT WORK </b>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      First, it is necessary to create the (curva di taratura), which represents the input/output
 
-
      relationship between HSL and SCell. It is obtained by inducing T9002 with known
 
-
      concentrations of HSL, and measuring the corresponding level of GFP intensity. With
 
-
      these experimental values it is possible to derive the non linear least square fitting
 
-
      curve relating HSL to GFP. After that, reading on the (curva di taratura) the GFP
 
-
      level of a solution with unknown HSL concentration, you can get the corresponding
 
-
      HSL level (see figure below).
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      <b>WHY WE USED IT </b>
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      We used T9002 in order to experimentally characterize two processes related to HSL.
 
-
      One is HSL degradation rate dependence on AiiA concentration and the other is HSL
 
-
      synthesis rate variation depending on LuxI concentration.
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    <h3>Equation (3): AiiA DEPENDENT HSL DEGRADATION</h3>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      <b>STATE OF THE ART </b>
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    As described in (Motivations), AiiA is an enzyme family capable of degrading N-Acyl
 
-
    homoserine lactones (HSLs). Several studies and related papers describe its structural
 
-
    properties and in vitro kinetics (Dong et al 1999, Lee et al 2002, Pan et al 2007,
 
-
    Kim et al 2005, Liu et al 2008, Wang et al 2004, Momb et al 2008). Here, AiiA enzymatic
 
-
    degradation of lactones is described with the common Michaelis Menten equation.<br>On
 
-
    the contrary there are few examples of its application in synthetic biology. Nevertheless
 
-
    Danino et al 2010, in their synchronized quorum of genetic clocks, exploited the
 
-
    quorum sensing signalling molecules (HSL and LuxR) and the quorum quenching lactonase
 
-
    (AiiA) in order to synchronize on a population level the single cell oscillatory
 
-
    behaviour. In the equation relating to internal HSL concentration, they described
 
-
    AiiA dependent HSL degradation with a saturation kinetic.
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      <b>MODELLING OF HSL DEGRADATION BY AiiA </b>
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      We created an ad hoc experimental set up in order to characterize AiiA driven degradation
 
-
      of HSL (see also Measurements). First, we used E37, E38, E39 and E40 AiiA producing
 
-
      constructs induced with aTc and in presence of 1 &mu;M of HSL. <br>Then, we took
 
-
      diluted samples at differing time scales and determined HSL degradation over time
 
-
      through T9002. The adopted mathematical formalism is the saturation kinetic presented
 
-
      as second term in equation 3.
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    <h4>Equation (3): LuxI DEPENDENT HSL SYNTHESIS</h4>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      <b>MODELLING OF HSL DEGRADATION BY LuxI</b>
 
-
    </div>
 
-
    There is plenty of literature references and synthetic biology models describing
 
-
    LuxI driven HSL synthesis (Danino et al 2010, Goriachev et al 2005, Garcia-Ojalvo
 
-
    et al 2004). Nevertheless, they adopted different mathematical formalisms and they
 
-
    are difficult to apply to our biological system. Similarly to AiiA, we created an
 
-
    ad hoc experimental set up in order to characterize LuxI driven HSL synthesis (see
 
-
    also Measurements). First, we used E28, E31, E41 and E42 LuxI producing constructs
 
-
    induced with aTc. <br>Then, we took diluted samples at differing time scales and
 
-
    determined HSL synthesis over time through T9002. The adopted mathematical formalism
 
-
    is the saturation kinetic presented as first term in equation 3. As can be seen,
 
-
    it is very similar to the one used to describe the degradation of HSL due to AiiA.
 
-
    <h4>MODELLING OF CELL'S POPULATION GROWTH</h4>
 
-
    <div>
 
-
      The growth in the number of cells is described with a typical logistic function,
 
-
      whose parameters have been previously characterized.
 
-
    </div>
 

Latest revision as of 10:23, 21 September 2011

UNIPV TEAM 2011

CTRL + E

Signalling is nothing without control...


Contents



Mathematical modelling: introduction

Mathematical modelling plays nowadays a central role in Synthetic Biology, due to its ability to serve as a crucial link between the concept and realization of a biological circuit: what we propose in this page is a modelling approach to our project, which has proven extremely useful and very helpful before and after the "wet lab".
Thus, immediately at the beginning, when there was little knowledge, a mathematical model based on a system of differential equations was derived and implemented using a set of parameters, to validate the feasibility of the project. Once this became clear, starting from the characterization of the single subparts created in the wet lab, some of the parameters of the mathematical model were estimated (the others are known from literature) and they have been fixed to simulate the same model, in order to predict the final behaviour of the whole engineered closed-loop circuit. This approach is consistent with the typical one adopted for the analysis and synthesis of a biological circuit, as exemplified by Pasotti et al 2011.

Therefore here, after a brief overview about the advantages that modelling engineered circuits can bring, we deeply analyze the system of equation formulas, underlining the role and function of the parameters involved.
Experimental procedures for parameter estimation are discussed and, finally, a different type of circuit is presented. Simulations were performed, using ODEs with MATLAB and used to explain the difference between a closed-loop control system model and an open one.


The importance of mathematical modelling

The purposes of deriving mathematical models for gene networks can be:

  • Prediction: in the initial steps of the project, a good a-priori identification "in silico" allows to suppose the kinetics of the enzymes (AiiA, Luxi) and HSL involved in our gene network, basically to understand if the complex circuit structure and functioning could be achievable and to investigate the range of parameters values ​​for which the behavior is the one expected. (Endler et al, 2009)

  • Parameter identification: a modellistic approach is helpful to get all the parameters involved, in order to perform realistic simulations not only of the single subparts created, but also of the whole final circuit, according to the a-posteriori identification.

  • Modularity: studying and characterizing basic BioBrick Parts can allow to reuse this knowledge in other studies, concerning with the same basic modules (Braun et al, 2005; Canton et al, 2008).


  • Equations for gene networks




    Hyphotesis of the model

    HP1: In order to better investigate the range of dynamics of each subparts, every promoter has been studied with 4 different RBSs, so as to develop more knowledge about the state variables in several configurations of RBS' efficiency. Hereafter, referring to the notation "RBSx" we mean, respectively, RBS30, RBS31, RBS32, RBS34.

    HP2: In equation (2) only HSL is considered as inducer, instead of the complex LuxR-HSL. This is motivated by the fact that our final device offers a constitutive LuxR production due to the upstream constitutive promoter P&lambda. Assuming LuxR is abundant and always saturated in the cytoplasm, we can justify the simplification of attributing pLux promoter i nduction only by HSL. In conclusion LuxR, LuxI and AiiA were not included in the equation system.

    HP3: in system equation, LuxI and AiiA amounts are expressed per cell. For this reason, the whole equation (3), except for the term of intrinsic degradation of HSL, is multiplied by the number of cells N, due to the property of the lactone to diffuse freely inside/outside bacteria.

    HP4: as regards promoters pTet and pLux, we assume their strengths (measured in PoPs), due to a given concentration of inducer (aTc, HSL for Ptet and Plux respectively), to be independent from the gene encoding. In other words, in our hypotesis, if the mRFP coding region is substituted with a region coding for another gene (in our case, AiiA or LuxI), we would obtain the same synthesis rate: this is the reason why the strength of the complex promoter-RBSx is expressed in Arbitrary Units [AUr].

    HP5: considering the exponential growth, the enzymes AiiA and LuxI concentration is supposed to be constant, because their production is equally compensated by dilution.


    Equations (1) and (2)

    Equations (1) and (2) have identical structure, differing only in the parameters involved. They represent the synthesis degradation and diluition of both the enzymes in the circuit, LuxI and AiiA, respectively in the first and second equation: in each of them both transcription and translation processes have been condensed. The corresponding mathematical formalism is analogous to the one used by Pasotti et al 2011, Suppl. Inf., even if we do not take LuxR-HSL complex formation into account, as explained below.
    These equations are composed of 2 parts:

    1. The first term describes, through Hill's equation formalism, the synthesis rate of the protein of interest (either LuxI or AiiA) depending on the concentration of the inducer (anhydrotetracicline -aTc- or HSL respectively), responsible for the activation of the regulatory element composed of promoter and RBSx. In the parameter table (see below), α refers to the maximum activation of the promoter, while δ stands for its leakage activity (this means that the promoter is slightly active even if there is no induction). In particular, in equation (1), the almost entire inhibition of pTet promoter is given by the constitutive production of TetR by our MGZ1 strain. In equation (2), pLux is almost inactive in the absence of the complex LuxR-HSL.
      Furthermore, in both equations k stands for the dissociation constant of the promoter from the inducer (respectively aTc and HSL in eq. 1 and 2), while η is the cooperativity constant.

      The second term in equations (1) and (2) is in turn composed of 2 parts. The former one (γ*LuxI or γ*AiiA respectively) describes, with an exponential decay, the degradation rate per cell of the protein. The latter (μ*(Nmax-N)/Nmax)*LuxI or μ*(Nmax-N)/Nmax)*AiiA, respectively) takes into account the dilution factor against cell growth which is related to the cell replication process.

    Equation (3)

    Here the kinetics of HSL is modeled, through enzymatic reactions either related to the production or the degradation of HSL: based on the experiments performed, we derived appropriate expressions for HSL synthesis and degradation. This equation is composed of 3 parts:

    1. The first term represents the production of HSL due to LuxI expression. We modeled this process with a saturation curve in which Vmax is the HSL maximum transcription rate, while kM,LuxI is the dissociation constant of LuxI from the substrate HSL.

    2. The second term represents the degradation of HSL due to the AiiA expression. Similarly to LuxI, kcat represents the maximum degradation per unit of HSL concentration, while kM,AiiA is the concentration at which AiiA dependent HSL concentration rate is (kcat*HSL)/2. The formalism is similar to that found in the Supplementary Information of Danino et al, 2010.

    3. The third term (γHSL*HSL) is similar to the corresponding ones present in the first two equations and describes the intrinsic protein degradation.


    Equation (4)

    This is the common logistic population cells growth, depending on the rate μ and the maximum number Nmax of cells per well reachable.


    Table of parameters and species


    Parameter & Species Description Unit of Measurement Value
    αpTet maximum transcription rate of pTet (related to RBSx efficiency) [(AUr/min)/cell] -
    δpTet leakage factor of promoter pTet basic activity [-] -
    ηpTet Hill coefficient of pTet [-] -
    kpTet dissociation constant of aTc from pTet [nM] -
    αpLux maximum transcription rate of pLux (related to RBSx efficiency) [(AUr/min)/cell] -
    δpLux leakage factor of promoter pLux basic activity [-] -
    ηpLux Hill coefficient of pLux [-] -
    kpLux dissociation constant of HSL from pLux [nM] -
    γpLux LuxI constant degradation [1/min] -
    γAiiA AiiA constant degradation [1/min] -
    γHSL HSL constant degradation [1/min] -
    Vmax maximum transcription rate of LuxI [nM/(min*cell)] -
    kM,LuxI dissociation constant of LuxI from HSL [AUr/cell] -
    kcat maximum number of enzymatic reactions catalyzed per minute [1/(min*cell)] -
    kM,AiiA dissociation constant of AiiA from HSL [AUr/cell] -
    Nmax maximum number of bacteria per well [cell] -
    μ rate of bacteria growth [1/min] -
    LuxI kinetics of enzyme LuxI [AUrcell] -
    AiiA kinetics of enzyme AiiA [AUrcell] -
    HSL kinetics of HSL [nM(min)] -
    N number of cells cell -


    Parameter estimation

    The philosophy of the model is to predict the behavior of the final closed loop circuit starting from the characterization of single BioBrick parts through a set of well-designed ad hoc experiments. Relating to these, in this section the way parameters of the model have been identified is presented. As explained before in HP1, considering a set of 4 RBS for each subpart expands the range of dynamics and helps us to better understand the interactions between state variables and parameters.

    Promoter (PTet & pLux)

    These were the first subparts tested. In this phase of the project the target is to learn more about promoter pTet and pLux. Characterizing promoters only is a very hard task: for this reason we considered promoter and each RBS from the RBSx set as a whole (reference to HP1).
    As shown in the figure below, we considered a range of inductions and we monitored, in time, absorbance (O.D. stands for "optical density") and fluorescence; the two vertical segments for each graph highlight the exponential phase of bacterial growth. Scell (namely, synthesis rate per cell) can be derived as a function of inducer concentration, thereby providing the desired input-output relation (inducer concentration versus promoter+RBS activity), which was modelled as a Hill curve:
    However, also Relative Promoter Unit (RPU) has been calculated as a ratio of Scell of promoter of interest and the Scell of BBa_J23101 (reference to HP4).
    As shown in the figure above, α, as already mentioned, represents the protein maximum synthesis rate, which is reached, in accordance with Hill's formalism, when the inducer concentration tends to infinite, and, for sufficently high concentrations of inducer. Meanwhile the product α*δ stands for the leakage activity (at no induction), liable for protein production (LuxI and AiiA respectively) even in the absence of inducer. The paramenter η is the Hill's cooperativity constant and it affects the rapidity and ripidity of the switch like curve relating Scell with the concentration of inducer. Lastly, k stands for the semi-saturation constant and, in case of η=1, it indicates the concentration of substrate at which half the synthesis rate is achieved.

    AiiA & LuxI

    This paragraph explains how parameters of equation (3) are estimated. The target is to learn the AiiA and LuxI degradation and production mechanisms in addition to HSL intrinsic degradation, in order to estimate Vmax, kM,LuxI, kcat and kM,AiiA parameters. These tests have been performed using the following BioBrick parts:
    By now, parameter identification about promoters has already been performed. Furthermore, as explained before, the HP4 is also valid in this case. Moreover, it's possible to quantify exactly the concentration of HSL, using the well-characterized BioBrick BBa_T9002.
    This is a biosensor which receives HSL concentration as input and returns GFP intensity (more precisely Scell) as output. (Canton et al, 2008). According to this, it is necessary to understand the input-output relationship: so, a T9002 "calibration" curve is plotted for each test performed.

    So, our idea is to control the degradation of HSL in time. ATc activates pTet and, later, a certain concentration of HSL is introduced. Then, at fixed times, O.D.600 and HSL concentration are monitored using Tecan and T9002 biosensor.
    File:Degradation.jpg
    Referring to HP5, in exponential growth enzymes equilibrium is conserved. Due to a known induction of aTc, the steady-state level per cell can be calculated:
    Considering, for a determined promoter-RBSx couple, several induction of aTc and, for each of them, several samples of HSL concentration during time, parameters Vmax, kM,LuxI, kcat and kM,AiiA can be estimated, through numerous iterations of an algorithm implemented in MATLAB.

    N

    The parameters Nmax and μ can be calculated from the analysis of the OD600 produced by our MGZ1 culture. In particular, μ is derived as the slope of the log(O.D.600) growth curve. Counting the number of cells of a saturated culture would be considerably complicated, so Nmax is determined with a proper procedure. The aim here is to derive the linear proportional coefficient Θ between O.D'.600 and N: this constant can be estimated as the ratio between absorbance (read from TECAN) and the respective number of CFU on a petri plate. Finally, Nmax is calcultated as Θ*O.D'.600. (Pasotti et al, 2010).


    Degradation rates

    The parameters γLuxI and γAiiA are taken from literature since they contain LVA tag for rapid degradation. Instead, approximating HSL kinetics as a decaying exponential, γHSL can be derived as the slope of the log(concentration), which can be monitored through BBa_T9002.


    Simulations

    On a biological level, the ability to control the concentration of a given molecule reveals itself as fundamental in limiting the metabolic burden of the cell; moreover, in the particular case of HSL signalling molecules, this would give the possibility to regulate quorum sensing-based population behaviours. In this section we first present the results of the simulations of the closed-loop circuit for feasible values of the parameters. The reported figures highlight some fundamental characteristics.
    First of all, it is clear the validity of the steady state approximation in the exponential growth phase, since that LuxI, AiiA, and also HSL, undergo only minor changes in this phase (500>t<2500 min). Secondly, it can be noted that the circuit negative feedback rapidly activates above a proper amount of HSL, and after that it competes with LuxI synthesis term in defining HSL steady state value.

    The concept of the closed-loop model we have discussed so far can be validated by the comparison with another circuit we implemented in Matlab, that is an open loop circuit, similar to CTRL+E, except for the constitutive production of AiiA. We can point out that, under the hypothesis of an equal amount of HSL production, the open-loop circuit requires a higher AiiA production level, thereby constituting a greater metabolic burden for the cell (see figure below), uncertain to be fulfilled in realistic conditions. Moreover, there is another major issue with the open loop circuit, that is the inability to monitor the output of the controlled system, so that it is not generally capable to adapt to changes in the system behavior.

    References

    D. Braun, S. Basu, R. Weiss, "Parameter Estimation for Two Synthetic Gene Networks: a Case Study", ICASSP 2005, vol. 5, v/769 - v/772.

    B. Canton, A. Labno and D. Endy, "Refinement and Standardization of Synthetic Biological Parts and Devices", Volume 26, Number 7, July 2008.


    T. Danino, O. Mondragon-Palomino, L. Tsimring & J. Hasty, "A Synchronized Quorum of Genetic Clocks", Nature vol. 463, pp. 326-330, January 2010.

    L. Endler, N. Rodriguez, N. Juty, V. Chelliah, C. Laibe, C. Li and N. Le Novere, "Designing and Encoding Models for Synthetic Biology", Journal of the Royal Society, 2009 Aug 6;6 Suppl 4:S405-17. Epub 2009 Apr 1.

    L. Pasotti, M. Quattrocelli, D. Galli, M.G. Cusella De Angelis, P. Magni, "Multiplexing and Demultiplexing Logic Functions for Computing Signal Processing Tasks in Synthetic Biology", Biotechnology Journal, Volume 6,pp. 784-795, 2011.

    L. Pasotti, M. Quattrocelli, D. Galli, M.G. Cusella De Angelis, P. Magni, "Multiplexing and Demultiplexing Logic Functions for Computing Signal Processing Tasks in Synthetic Biology, Supporting Information", Biotechnology Journal, Volume 6,available online, 2011.

    Retrieved from "http://2011.igem.org/Team:UNIPV-Pavia/Modelling03"