Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
<figure><center> | <figure><center> | ||
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/27/T--Northwestern--TEM1.png | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/27/T--Northwestern--TEM1.png | ||
− | " width=" | + | " width="200" border="0"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/c/c7/T--Northwestern--TEM2.png |
− | " width=" | + | " width="200" border="0"><figcaption><br>Figure 10. - OMV delivery experiment results - TEM visualization for different magnifications</figcaption> |
Revision as of 01:19, 2 November 2017
Results
Fractionation controls and protein expression
Figures 1-3 depict our fractionation controls and blot for the identification of saCas9 protein (expected size ~130 kB). The rightmost column of the blot, labelled "control" is a purified His-tagged protein and was used to ensure that the anti-His antibody could properly bind the protein in question. The fractionation results indicated that although Maltose-binding periplasmic protein (MBP) was exclusively present in the periplasmic fraction, showing strong bands of the expected size (42.5 kDa), GroEl was visible in both the cell's periplasm and cytoplasm (60 kDa) suggesting leakage from the cytoplasm to the periplasm. Although the positive control was successful, there was no evidence of saCas9 in the anti-His6 blot.
To prevent leakage between the two compartments, the current protocol (cold osmotic shock) could be optimized (e.g by minimizing incubation time of the cells on ice and proceeding to the centrifugation step earlier) or alternative protocols could be attempted (e.g. protocols utilizing lysozyme).
Cas9 functionality assay
OMV characterization
The size distribution and vesicle concentration of our purified OMV samples were determined using Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA). The mean diameter of the vesicles was found to be 99.7nm with a standard deviation of 50.6nm. Since the vesicles were isolated by both charge and precipitation, the concentration of the samples were high. Following a 1:50 dilution, the concentration was 1.83e+8 +/- 2.35e+7 particles/mL. The vesicle distribution portrayed graphically below (Figure 9):
Additionally, we made an attempt to visualize our OMV samples by carrying out TEM with undiluted vesicles. Samples were stained with uranyl acetate and air dried. The sample was very dense and the vesicles aggregated. Although vesicles were recognizable, the quality of the images was not ideal. To obtain better pictures plunge freezing and cryo-TEM were suggested as alternatives; we would also need to optimize sample preparations by identifying the correct dilution required.