Team:EPF-Lausanne/Our Project/Summary

From 2011.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 49: Line 49:
We ran platereader experiments for 6 of our mutants. Increasing concentrations of ATC were added to force expression of RFP, which allowed us to appreciate the repressive effect of TetR on fluorescence expression. The following graph shows wild-type TetR characterization:
We ran platereader experiments for 6 of our mutants. Increasing concentrations of ATC were added to force expression of RFP, which allowed us to appreciate the repressive effect of TetR on fluorescence expression. The following graph shows wild-type TetR characterization:
-
[[File:EPFL_Nadine-exp3-induction.png|400px]]
+
[[File:EPFL_Nadine-exp3-induction.png|600px]]
''' 4) comparing the results of both characterization
''' 4) comparing the results of both characterization
-
Three of our mutants plus the wild-type were tested both ''in vivo'' and ''in vitro''. The results were consistent between the two experiments. The V36F exhibits the same behaviour as the wild-type, the P39K  
+
Three of our mutants plus the wild-type were tested both ''in vivo'' and ''in vitro''. The results were consistent between the two experiments. The V36F exhibits the same behaviour as the wild-type while the P39K shows no interaction to the DNA at all. The E37A triple mutant, however, has contradictory results: the MITOMI data indicate that this mutant has a change in specificity, with a consensus sequence being different from the wild-type Ptet. However, it still recognizes Ptet well, showing that there is still crosstalk with the endogenous promoter.
 +
 
 +
[[File:EPFL_Comparison_char.png|600px]]
{{:Team:EPF-Lausanne/Templates/Footer}}
{{:Team:EPF-Lausanne/Templates/Footer}}

Revision as of 13:58, 28 October 2011