Difference between revisions of "Team:Newcastle/Model"

Line 462: Line 462:
  
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Screening Design for Salt Supplements</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">Screening Design for Salt Supplements</h3>
       <p>Previous research has shown that the concentration of certain salts in the CFPS supplement premix are crucial for maximal protein synthesis activity [REF]. A Design of Experiments approach was used to determine which of the four salts (magnesium glutamate, potassium glutamate, sodium oxalate, and ammonium acetate) are the most important using the JMP software. A classical screening design was created with all four salts as continuous factors and CFPS activity as the response to be maximised. A concentration of ‘0’ was used as the lower limit for each factor, and the concentration used normally in CFPS supplement premixes was used as the upper limit (Figure 1). The screening design generated is shown in table 1.
+
       <p>Previous research has shown that the concentration of certain salts in the CFPS supplement premix are crucial for maximal protein synthesis activity (Yang <i>et al.</i> 2012). A Design of Experiments approach was used to determine which of the four salts (magnesium glutamate, potassium glutamate, sodium oxalate, and ammonium acetate) are the most important using the JMP software. A classical screening design was created with all four salts as continuous factors and CFPS activity as the response to be maximised. A concentration of ‘0’ was used as the lower limit for each factor, and the concentration used normally in CFPS supplement premixes was used as the upper limit (Figure 1). The screening design generated is shown in table 1.
 
</p>
 
</p>
  
Line 600: Line 600:
  
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">References</h3>
 
       <h3 style="font-family: Rubik; margin-top: 2%; margin-bottom: 2%">References</h3>
 +
<p>
  
 +
Anderson, M. J. & Whitcomb, P. J., 2010. Design of Experiments. In: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. <i>s.l.:John Wiley & Sons, Inc</i>, pp. 1-22. <br />
 +
 +
Garamella, J., Marshall, R., Rustad, M. & Noireaux, V., 2016. The All E. coli TX-TL Toolbox 2.0: A Platform for Cell-Free Synthetic Biology. <i>ACS Syn. Biol.</i>, 5(4), pp. 344-355.<br />
 +
 +
Kelwick, R., Webb, A. J., MacDonald, J. & Freemont, P. S., 2016. Development of a Bacillus subtilis cell-free transcription-translation system for prototyping regulatory elements. <i>Metab. Eng.</i>, Volume 38, pp. 370-381.<br />
 +
 +
Li, J., Gu, L., Aach, J. & Church, G. M., 2014. Improved Cell-Free RNA and Protein Synthesis System. PLoS ONE, 9(9).<br />
 +
 +
SAS Institute Inc., 2016. JMP® 13 Design of Experiments Guide. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc.<br />
 +
 +
Yang, W. C., Patel, K. & Wong, H. E., 2012. Simplifying and streamlining <i>Escherichia coli</i>-based cell-free protein synthesis. <i>Biotechnol. Prog.</i>, 28(2), pp. 413-420.<br />
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
</p>
  
 
</div>
 
</div>

Revision as of 14:46, 1 November 2017

spacefill

Our Models

For our project, we built three types of models. The first was an agent-based model which simulated our multicellular biosensor framework. This model gave insight into the optimal ratio of cell-types to have in the system. This information was used during experimental characterisation to optimise our system.

Our second model was a statistical, multifactorial Design of Experiments (DoE) approach towards optimising Cell-Free Protein Synthesis (CFPS) systems. This statistical model was used to generate an experimental design to gather data on the importance of certain supplements in CFPS systems, and then use the experimental data to optimise CFPS systems.

Our third model was an agent-based model designed to replicate the functions of a digital microfluidic chip and schedule the tasks for the device. The final piece of software controls agents which are the microfluidic droplets and moves them around the simulated chip according to predefined movement plans which can be read from either the program itself or custom external files. This provides a quicker, more inexpensive means of testing the chip than repeated real-world experiments.