Difference between revisions of "Team:SiCAU-China/Results"

 
(56 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
     margin: 0 50px;
 
     margin: 0 50px;
 
     }
 
     }
      
+
.pictureone img {
 +
    margin: 0 230px;
 +
    width:420px;
 +
    text-align:center
 +
     }
 +
figcaption{
 +
    font-family:'Calibri';
 +
    font-size:18px;
 +
    text-align:center;
 +
    line-height: 25px;
 +
    } 
 +
.p-size2{
 +
    margin:0 auto;
 +
    font-family:'Calibri';
 +
    text-align:center;
 +
    font-size:20px;
 +
    line-height: 60px
 +
    }
 +
.picture2 img{
 +
    width:330px;
 +
    }
 
</style>
 
</style>
  
 
<div class="wall">
 
<div class="wall">
 
   <div class="content">
 
   <div class="content">
 +
<div class="mao"><a href="#"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/b/bc/T-SICAU-sidebar_mao.jpg" /><div class="t"><b>top</b></div></a></div>
 
     <div class="title"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/24/T-SICAU-result_title.jpg" /></div>
 
     <div class="title"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/24/T-SICAU-result_title.jpg" /></div>
 
<div style="clear:both;height:40px;"></div>
 
<div style="clear:both;height:40px;"></div>
 
<div class="content1">
 
<div class="content1">
 
<div style="clear:both;height:30px;"></div>
 
<div style="clear:both;height:30px;"></div>
<h1>1. Fluorescence determination results of Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG</h1>
+
<h1><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/6/6f/T-SICAU-Fire_paint1.jpg" /> Detect the E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG fluorescence intensity </h1>
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Overnight culturing Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG and determinating its fluorescence, we found that the fluorescence is low( Table 1). The system cannot be opened through its background expression, reflecting the positive feedback system is weak. It didn’t match with our expection. We speculated that phenomenon appeared because of the LuxI protein’s low effective expression, could not produce a lot of AHL. Therefore verified module LuxI. The fluorescence values were significantly increased by adding different concentrations of AHL(Table 2) . The system was opened which indicating there was a problem with the LuxI module. Analysis of LuxI gene sequence, we found out the LuxI cloned down from iGEM part() has LVA tags.The tag will speed up the degradation rate of the corresponding protein, making the LuxI protein in cell can not play a stable role.The AHL signal factor was too weak to open the positive feedback system.</br></div>
+
 
<div class="picture2">
+
<div class="p-size">
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/6/6b/T-SiCAU-result-fig1.jpg">
+
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;We acquired the strains E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG with recombinant plasmid vector pSB4A5-R-IG, according to the initial experimental methods.
 +
<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The recombinant colonies was transferred into LB culture medium with ampicillin , and shaked overnight at 37℃, then took the medium for fluorescence detection. We found the fluorescence signal was weak (Figure 1) and cannot be detected under the condition of its background expression as we expect. Thus it is speculated that the phenomenon may be caused by the low effective expression of the LuxI protein, in which cases there is not enough AHL. <br/>
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/e/ef/T-SICAU-result_figure1.jpg" /><figcaption> Figure&nbsp;1: Regard the fluorescence of Ecoli BL21 as “1”, the relative fluorescnce of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG after culturing 20h.  </figcaption></figure></div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/6/6b/T-SiCAU-result-fig1.jpg" /><figcaption> Figure&nbsp;2: Left:E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG; Left:E.coli BL21  </figcaption></figure></div>
 +
 
 +
<div class="p-size">
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;To test our hypothesis, we next verified the module-LuxI. The fluorescence intensity significantly increased after adding different concentrations of AHL (Figure 3). Therefore, the system was probably activated by adding AHL which indicated that there was a problem with the LuxI module. By analyzing  the LuxI gene sequence, we found out there is an LVA tag in LuxI module, which was cloned from iGEM part (BBa_C0061). This tag will accelerate the degradation rate of its corresponding proteins, so that it can prevent the LuxI protein from playing a stable role in cell. It may, therefore, be concluded that the AHL signal was too weak to activate the positive feedback system.<br/></div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/9/96/T-SICAU-result_figure2.jpg" /><figcaption> Figure 3:Regard the fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG without AHL as “1”, the fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG added different concentrations of AHL after being cultured 20h.  </figcaption></figure></div>
 +
 
 +
<h1><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/28/T-SICAU-fire_paint2.jpg" /> Delete the LVA tag of LuxI</h1>
 +
 
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;After fermenting E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA and adding AHL at the same time, we measured fluorescence values comparing with the control group. The fluorescence value of test group increased rapidly (Figure 4). <br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Our system was activated that indicated the positive feedback was effective. However, after 20 hours, the AHL-free control group was still up to xx, in other words, the system background expression could also make the system to be activated and enable the positive feedback system to be constructed successfully.<br/></div>
 +
 
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/a/a4/T-SICAU-result_figure3.jpg" /><figcaption> Figure 4: The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA after adding AHL 6h and 20h. After being cultured 6h, the fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA added 10^-8 AHL was about twice as without being added AHL. While the fluorescence was almost indifferent between the two groups after 20h.  </figcaption></figure></div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/1/14/L-SiCAU-result-fig2.png" /><figcaption> Figure 5: Different bacteria after 20h culturing, from left to right: E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG(△LVA); E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG adding AHL(10^-8M); E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG with no AHL; E.coli BL21  </figcaption></figure></div>
 +
 
 +
<h1><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/20/T-SICAU-fire_paint3.jpg" /> E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA add lac control area</h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;In order to avoid the impact of system detection limits and the influences of the prolonged cell growth period (See <a href="https://2017.igem.org/Team:SiCAU-China/Model">modeling</a> for details), we added lac operon to the positive feedback system expecting the positive feedback system to be activated when IPTG was added into the culture medium in the stationary period of E.coli.<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;With adding IPTG, the results showed that the positive feedback was normal; without IPTG, the positive feedback was closed (Figure 6). This indicated that the PLux/Lac switch functions well.<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Then we added IPTG to the medium in the cell stationary phase. After 12h induction, no positive feedback was found, which means the system didn’t work normally. <br/>
 +
And then AHL was added in the stationary phase, in that case the positive feedback system still didn’t work .  Through reading lots of literature, we speculated that model-LuxR may not work in the stable period, leading to the failure of activating positive feedback system <sup>[1]</sup>. (If you want to read more details, you can click here to see our <a href="https://2017.igem.org/Team:SiCAU-China/Contribution">contribution</a>)<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;So we would rather choose logarithmic growth period than stationary phase to detect the input signal.<br/></div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/e/e2/T-SICAU-result_figure4.jpg" /><figcaption>Figure 6:The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-lac(+lacI) after being culturd 20h; IPTG(-)without adding IPTG; IPTG(L+)adding IPTG in logarithmic growth period;IPTG(S+) adding IPTG in stationary phase.</figcaption></figure></div>
 +
 
 +
<h1><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/d/d8/T-SICAU-fire_paint4.jpg" /> Determine the amplification effect of the system</h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;After adding a series of concentrations for AHL, we measured fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-RG and E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA. The results showed that the measurement accuracy of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA could reach the concentration of 10^-9M(Figure 7) while the one of E.coli BL21-4A5-RG, which has no positive feedback, was 10^-8M. As for the ordinary high performance liquid chromatography, when AHL concentration accuracy reached 10^-6M (Figure 8), its detection was not very obvious. Comparing the measurement accuracy of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA with that of E.coli BL21-4A5-RG, the former is approximately an order of magnitude higher than the latter. When compared with High Performance Liquid Chromatography(HLPC), the measurement accuracy of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA was nearly three orders higher than that of HLPC. To achieve the accuracy of 10^-9M, you can also use HPLC-TMS, but its operation will be slightly complex<sup>[2]</sup>. </div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/7/74/T-SICAU-result_figure5.jpg" /><figcaption> Figure 7: The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA added different gradient concentrations of AHL and measured at different time  </figcaption></figure></div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/f/f7/T-SICAU-result_figure6%281%29.jpg" /><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/8/84/T-SICAU-result_figure6%282%29.jpg"/><figcaption>Figure 8:The left one is 10^-2 AHL;The right one is 10^-6 AHL.Both are measured by HLPC. </figcaption></figure><br/></div>
 +
 
 +
<h1><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/1/1d/T-SICAU-fire_paint5.jpg" /> Control the background expression of AHL</h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;A high background expression can affect the detection limits of the system. Fortunately, AiiA hydrolytic enzymes can hydrolyze the AHL protein while LVA tag accelerates degradation of LuxI, thereby reducing the generation of AHL. Both of these ways are able to control AHL background expression. However, the effect of LVA tag will be strengthen with the enlargement of positive feedback system. The reason is that LVA tag exists on model LuxI. With the expression of LuxI, the total number of intracellular tags will increase accordingly, which may lead to a too strong control ability on the positive feedback effect, during the stationary period. According to the Michaelis-Menten equation, when the AHL is enough, the degradation rate of AHL is constant. So using AiiA to control background expression would not have a significant effect on the positive feedback. Thoughtfully, we chose to add AiiA for system control. When compared with E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA, the added AiiA will delay the threshold, but the increase rate is basically same as before(Figure 9), which was in line with our expectations. The decrease in the end point may be caused by the thing that the positive feedback effect had already stopped before cells reached the stationary period, which also confirmed our previous speculation that LuxR did not work stationary period.</div>
 +
<div class="pictureone"><figure><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/2b/T-SICAU-result_figure7.jpg" /><figcaption> Figure 9: The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA added different gradient concentrations of AHL and measured at different time.  </figcaption></figure><br/></div>
 +
 
 +
<h1><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/f/f7/T-SICAU-fire_paint6.jpg" /> After accessing to tetracycline converter </h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;We constructed E.coli BL21-1C3-RT to detect whether the converter is normal or not. It can be found that the background level was high, which means the double plasmid system may need more AiiA hydrolase to control the background expression of AHL. We intended to switch  to a stronger promoter or RBS to improve AiiA expression, but due to the limited time, the improvement hasn’t been done.<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;If we could solve the problem of  AHL background expression ,we would isolate E.coli BL21-4A5-AiiA/1C3-IT which contains both pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA and pSB1C3-LuxI-TetR plasmids, then add different concentrations of Tetracycline into LB medium to detect performance of that system.<br/></div>
 +
<h1>Future work:</h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1. Change the positive feedback system to make sure that can work in a stationary phase<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2. Change the different intensities of the promoter or RBS to eliminate background expression<br/></div>
 +
<h1>References</h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1] Zhu J. Winans SC. Auto inducer binding by the quorum sensing regulator TraR increases affinity for target promoters in vitro and decreases TraR tumover rates in whole cells. Proc.Natl.Acad. Sci. USA, 1999,96:4832-4837.<br/>
 +
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[2] Chenchen Ma, Jie Ou, Bolin Li. Method for measuring AHLs by HPLC-TMS:CN 103063774 B[P]. 2014.<br/></div>
 +
<h1>Plasmids</h1>
 +
<div class="p-size">
 +
<table>
 +
<tr><th>Number</th> <th>Plasmid name</th> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>1</td> <td><i>pSB4A5-RG</i></td> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>2</td> <td><i>pSB4A5-R-IG</i>(BBa_K2311000)</td> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>3</td> <td><i>pSB1C3-RFP-TetR</i></td> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>4</td> <td><i>pSB1C3- LuxI-TetR</i></td> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>5</td> <td><i>pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA</i>(BBa_K2311002)</td> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>6</td> <td><i>pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA-lac5</i></td> </tr>
 +
<tr><td>7</td> <td><i>pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA</i>(BBa_K2311001)</td> </tr>
 +
</table>
 
</div>
 
</div>
</br>
 
<h1>2. After deleting the LVA label of the LuxI, the results of system qualitative detection </h1>
 
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Fragmentating of Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG- △ LVA and additing AHL at the same time,then measuring fluorescence values compared with control which was without AHL. The relative fluorescence value of test group increased significantly(Figure 3). We could see the system is open, and the positive feedback effect is normal. After 20 hours, it was found that the AHL-free control group was also up to xx, that is, the system background expression made the system open and the positive feedback system was constructed successfully.</br></div>
 
</br>
 
  
<h1>3. System control of the engineering bacteria added lac control area</h1>
+
<h1>Strains</h1>
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;In order to avoid the impact of system detection limits or detection time
+
<div class="p-size">
because of the prolonged cell growth period(See modeling for details), we added lac control area in the positive feedback system expecting the positive feedback system will be opened when IPTG added to stationary period E. coli.</br>
+
<table>  
</br>
+
<tr> <th>Number</th> <th>Strain name</th> </tr>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;After addition of IPTG inoculation, the results showed that the positive feedback effect was normal; without adding IPTG, the positive feedback effect was closed (Table 3), indicating that the plux / Lac switch can work properly.</br>
+
<tr> <td>1</td> <td><i>E.coli BL21-4A5-RG</i></td></tr>
</br>
+
<tr> <td>2</td> <td><i>E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG</i></td></tr>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;In the stationary phase of cell growth, IPTG induction was added. After 12h induction, no positive feedback was found, the system did not work normally,either. (Figure 4)</br>
+
<tr> <td>3</td> <td><i>E.coli BL21-1C3-RT</i></td></tr>
</br>
+
<tr> <td>4</td> <td><i>E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA</i></td></tr>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;At smooth period,different concentrations of AHL were added in medium, positive feedback system still did not work (Figure 5). And then we accessing to a large number of literature to explore the reasons .Ultimately ,we speculated that LuxR may be in the stable period of E. coli did not work and led to positive feedback system failure (reference  1). (If you want to read more details, you can click here to see our contribution)</br>
+
<tr> <td>5</td> <td><i>E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-lac</i></td></tr>
</br>
+
<tr> <td>6</td> <td><i>E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA</i></td></tr>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;So we would rather choose logarithmic growth period than stationary phase to detect the input signal.</br></div>
+
</table>
</br>
+
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;If you want to read more details about how to construct the plasmids and strains, you can click here to see our <a href="https://2017.igem.org/Team:SiCAU-China/Experiments">protocol</a> and <a href="https://2017.igem.org/Team:SiCAU-China/Notebook">notebook</a>!</div>
<h1>4. Determine the amplification effect of the system</h1>
+
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Relative fluorescence of Ecoli BL21-4A5-RG and Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG- △ LVA were measured after added different concentrations AHL. Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG- △ LVA measurement accuracy was 10-9M while Ecoli BL21-4A5-RG was 10-8M (Figure 7). As for the ordinary high performance liquid chromatography,when the concentration reached 10-6M (Figure 8), Its detection was not very obvious. Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG- △ LVA compared with the Ecoli BL21-4A5-RG, the measurement accuracy was higher than an order of magnitude; compared with high performance liquid chromatography, the measurement accuracy was higher than three orders of magnitude. To achieve the accuracy of 10-9M, you can also use the method of chromatography mass spectrometry, but its operation method will be a little complex. (reference  2)</br></div>
+
</br>
+
  
<h1>5. Control the background expression</h1>
 
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;A higher background expression can affect the detection limits of the system. AiiA hydrolytic enzymes can hydrolyze the presence of AHL and LVA tag labels to accelerate the degradation of LuxI, thereby reducing the generation of AHL . Both are able to  control AHL background expression . However, the effect of LVA tag on AHL background expression will increase with the enlargement of positive feedback system. The reason is that the tag exists on LuxI. With the expression of LuxI, the total number of intracellular tags will increase accordingly. Leading to its inability to turn on the positive feedback effect (1 result) before the stationary period. While the AiiA hydrolase is different. According to the Michaelis-Menten equation, when the AHL is enough, the degradation rate of AHL is constant, so using AiiA to control background expression will not have a significant effect on the positive feedback effect. Considering, we chose to add AiiA for system control. Compared with Ecoli BL21-4A5-R-IG- △ LVA, the addition of AiiA will delay the threshold, but the  increase  rate is basically same as before(Figure 9), in line with our expectations. The decrease in the end point may because  the positive feedback effect had already over after cell reached the stationary period .It also confirmed our previous speculation that LuxR did not work at stationary period.</br></div>
 
</br>
 
<h1>6. Results of system after accessing to tetracycline converter </h1>
 
<div class="p-size">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Isolation Ecoli BL21-4A5-AiiA/1C3-IT containing both pSB4A5-R-IG- △ LVA-AiiA and pSB1C3-LuxI-TetR plasmids, added into different concentrations of tetracycline. The results showed that there was no significant difference between different concentrations Threshold, the system detection performance of Tetracycline is not high.</br>
 
</br>
 
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Construction of Ecoli BL21-1C3-RT to detect whether the converter is normal or not.Finding out the background level was high, meaning the double plasmid system needed more AiiA hydrolase to control background expression of AHL.Initially, we intended to switch to a stronger promoter or RBS to improve this system, but because we have little time, the improvment hasn’t been done.</br>
 
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
</br>
 
</br>

Latest revision as of 03:17, 2 November 2017

Detect the E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG fluorescence intensity

     We acquired the strains E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG with recombinant plasmid vector pSB4A5-R-IG, according to the initial experimental methods.
     The recombinant colonies was transferred into LB culture medium with ampicillin , and shaked overnight at 37℃, then took the medium for fluorescence detection. We found the fluorescence signal was weak (Figure 1) and cannot be detected under the condition of its background expression as we expect. Thus it is speculated that the phenomenon may be caused by the low effective expression of the LuxI protein, in which cases there is not enough AHL.
Figure 1: Regard the fluorescence of Ecoli BL21 as “1”, the relative fluorescnce of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG after culturing 20h.
Figure 2: Left:E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG; Left:E.coli BL21
     To test our hypothesis, we next verified the module-LuxI. The fluorescence intensity significantly increased after adding different concentrations of AHL (Figure 3). Therefore, the system was probably activated by adding AHL which indicated that there was a problem with the LuxI module. By analyzing the LuxI gene sequence, we found out there is an LVA tag in LuxI module, which was cloned from iGEM part (BBa_C0061). This tag will accelerate the degradation rate of its corresponding proteins, so that it can prevent the LuxI protein from playing a stable role in cell. It may, therefore, be concluded that the AHL signal was too weak to activate the positive feedback system.
Figure 3:Regard the fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG without AHL as “1”, the fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG added different concentrations of AHL after being cultured 20h.

Delete the LVA tag of LuxI

     After fermenting E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA and adding AHL at the same time, we measured fluorescence values comparing with the control group. The fluorescence value of test group increased rapidly (Figure 4).
     Our system was activated that indicated the positive feedback was effective. However, after 20 hours, the AHL-free control group was still up to xx, in other words, the system background expression could also make the system to be activated and enable the positive feedback system to be constructed successfully.
Figure 4: The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA after adding AHL 6h and 20h. After being cultured 6h, the fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA added 10^-8 AHL was about twice as without being added AHL. While the fluorescence was almost indifferent between the two groups after 20h.
Figure 5: Different bacteria after 20h culturing, from left to right: E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG(△LVA); E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG adding AHL(10^-8M); E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG with no AHL; E.coli BL21

E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA add lac control area

     In order to avoid the impact of system detection limits and the influences of the prolonged cell growth period (See modeling for details), we added lac operon to the positive feedback system expecting the positive feedback system to be activated when IPTG was added into the culture medium in the stationary period of E.coli.
     With adding IPTG, the results showed that the positive feedback was normal; without IPTG, the positive feedback was closed (Figure 6). This indicated that the PLux/Lac switch functions well.
     Then we added IPTG to the medium in the cell stationary phase. After 12h induction, no positive feedback was found, which means the system didn’t work normally.
And then AHL was added in the stationary phase, in that case the positive feedback system still didn’t work . Through reading lots of literature, we speculated that model-LuxR may not work in the stable period, leading to the failure of activating positive feedback system [1]. (If you want to read more details, you can click here to see our contribution)
     So we would rather choose logarithmic growth period than stationary phase to detect the input signal.
Figure 6:The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-lac(+lacI) after being culturd 20h; IPTG(-)without adding IPTG; IPTG(L+)adding IPTG in logarithmic growth period;IPTG(S+) adding IPTG in stationary phase.

Determine the amplification effect of the system

     After adding a series of concentrations for AHL, we measured fluorescence of E.coli BL21-4A5-RG and E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA. The results showed that the measurement accuracy of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA could reach the concentration of 10^-9M(Figure 7) while the one of E.coli BL21-4A5-RG, which has no positive feedback, was 10^-8M. As for the ordinary high performance liquid chromatography, when AHL concentration accuracy reached 10^-6M (Figure 8), its detection was not very obvious. Comparing the measurement accuracy of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA with that of E.coli BL21-4A5-RG, the former is approximately an order of magnitude higher than the latter. When compared with High Performance Liquid Chromatography(HLPC), the measurement accuracy of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA was nearly three orders higher than that of HLPC. To achieve the accuracy of 10^-9M, you can also use HPLC-TMS, but its operation will be slightly complex[2].
Figure 7: The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA added different gradient concentrations of AHL and measured at different time
Figure 8:The left one is 10^-2 AHL;The right one is 10^-6 AHL.Both are measured by HLPC.

Control the background expression of AHL

     A high background expression can affect the detection limits of the system. Fortunately, AiiA hydrolytic enzymes can hydrolyze the AHL protein while LVA tag accelerates degradation of LuxI, thereby reducing the generation of AHL. Both of these ways are able to control AHL background expression. However, the effect of LVA tag will be strengthen with the enlargement of positive feedback system. The reason is that LVA tag exists on model LuxI. With the expression of LuxI, the total number of intracellular tags will increase accordingly, which may lead to a too strong control ability on the positive feedback effect, during the stationary period. According to the Michaelis-Menten equation, when the AHL is enough, the degradation rate of AHL is constant. So using AiiA to control background expression would not have a significant effect on the positive feedback. Thoughtfully, we chose to add AiiA for system control. When compared with E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA, the added AiiA will delay the threshold, but the increase rate is basically same as before(Figure 9), which was in line with our expectations. The decrease in the end point may be caused by the thing that the positive feedback effect had already stopped before cells reached the stationary period, which also confirmed our previous speculation that LuxR did not work stationary period.
Figure 9: The fluorescence/OD600 of E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA added different gradient concentrations of AHL and measured at different time.

After accessing to tetracycline converter

     We constructed E.coli BL21-1C3-RT to detect whether the converter is normal or not. It can be found that the background level was high, which means the double plasmid system may need more AiiA hydrolase to control the background expression of AHL. We intended to switch to a stronger promoter or RBS to improve AiiA expression, but due to the limited time, the improvement hasn’t been done.
     If we could solve the problem of AHL background expression ,we would isolate E.coli BL21-4A5-AiiA/1C3-IT which contains both pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA and pSB1C3-LuxI-TetR plasmids, then add different concentrations of Tetracycline into LB medium to detect performance of that system.

Future work:

     1. Change the positive feedback system to make sure that can work in a stationary phase
     2. Change the different intensities of the promoter or RBS to eliminate background expression

References

     [1] Zhu J. Winans SC. Auto inducer binding by the quorum sensing regulator TraR increases affinity for target promoters in vitro and decreases TraR tumover rates in whole cells. Proc.Natl.Acad. Sci. USA, 1999,96:4832-4837.
     [2] Chenchen Ma, Jie Ou, Bolin Li. Method for measuring AHLs by HPLC-TMS:CN 103063774 B[P]. 2014.

Plasmids

Number Plasmid name
1 pSB4A5-RG
2 pSB4A5-R-IG(BBa_K2311000)
3 pSB1C3-RFP-TetR
4 pSB1C3- LuxI-TetR
5 pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA(BBa_K2311002)
6 pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA-lac5
7 pSB4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA(BBa_K2311001)

Strains

Number Strain name
1 E.coli BL21-4A5-RG
2 E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG
3 E.coli BL21-1C3-RT
4 E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA
5 E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-lac
6 E.coli BL21-4A5-R-IG-△LVA-AiiA
     If you want to read more details about how to construct the plasmids and strains, you can click here to see our protocol and notebook!