(13 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
<p></p> | <p></p> | ||
<h4>Approach:</h4> | <h4>Approach:</h4> | ||
− | <p>Develop a novel whole-cell biosensor that responds to β-lactam antibiotics (input) with bioluminescence (output).</p> | + | <p>Develop a novel whole-cell biosensor that responds to a variety of β-lactam antibiotics (input) with bioluminescence (output).</p> |
<p></p> | <p></p> | ||
<h4>Achievements:</h4> | <h4>Achievements:</h4> | ||
− | <p>(I) A fully functional | + | <p>(I) A fully functional <a href="#design" class="hashlink">BlaR1I-P<sub><i>blaZ</i></sub></a> system from <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> was heterologously established in <i>Bacillus subtilis</i>. (II) The resulting whole-cell biosensor responded specifically to the presence of a <a href="#detection" class="hashlink">diverse range of β-lactam antibiotics</a> in a dose-dependent manner. (III) <a href="#peptidosomes" class="hashlink">Encapsulated biosensor</a> cells could respond to antibiotics provided to the outside. (IV) 8 novel basic <a href="#BioBricks" class="hashlink">BioBrick parts</a> were generated and fully evaluated for functionality.</p> |
</figure> | </figure> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
alt="Figure 1 β-Lactam Compounds" class="zoom"> | alt="Figure 1 β-Lactam Compounds" class="zoom"> | ||
<figcaption><b>Figure 1: Commonly used β-lactam antibiotics and their chemical structure.</b> All of them share the so-called β-lactam ring structure (here shown as square structure containing nitrogen).<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Β-lactam_antibiotic">[4]</a></td></figcaption></figure> | <figcaption><b>Figure 1: Commonly used β-lactam antibiotics and their chemical structure.</b> All of them share the so-called β-lactam ring structure (here shown as square structure containing nitrogen).<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Β-lactam_antibiotic">[4]</a></td></figcaption></figure> | ||
− | <p>Antibiotics represent the most effective treatment against bacterial infections. Since the discovery of penicillin by Alexander Fleming in 1928, many new antibiotics have been constantly developed and were successfully applied to treat life-threatening diseases. This significant advancement in medicine saved millions of lives and still does today. However, fighting microorganisms has never been a completed task, but rather an ongoing race between drug discovery and pathogens developing resistances. Thus, multi-drug resistant bacteria still constitute a major threat for humanity, as infectious diseases represent the second leading cause of death worldwide. <a target="_blank" href ="https://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/52563">[1]</a><a target="_blank" href ="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4422635/">[2]</a></p> | + | <p>Antibiotics represent the most effective treatment against bacterial infections. Since the discovery of penicillin by Alexander Fleming in 1928, many new antibiotics have been constantly developed and were successfully applied to treat life-threatening diseases. This significant advancement in medicine saved millions of lives and still does today. However, fighting microorganisms has never been a completed task, but rather an ongoing race between drug discovery and pathogens developing resistances. Thus, multi-drug resistant bacteria still constitute a major threat for humanity, as infectious diseases represent the second leading cause of death worldwide.<a target="_blank" href ="https://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/52563">[1]</a><a target="_blank" href ="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4422635/">[2]</a></p> |
<figure class="makeresponsive floatright" style="width: 55%"> | <figure class="makeresponsive floatright" style="width: 55%"> | ||
<figcaption><b>Table 1: β-lactams and controls tested in this project and their respective classification.<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Β-lactam_antibiotic">[4]</a></td></b></figcaption> | <figcaption><b>Table 1: β-lactams and controls tested in this project and their respective classification.<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Β-lactam_antibiotic">[4]</a></td></b></figcaption> | ||
Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
} | } | ||
</style> | </style> | ||
− | <figure class="jonathanstables" style="width:100%;" id="BioBricks" | + | <figure class="jonathanstables" style="width:100%;"> |
− | + | <figcaption id="BioBricks"><b>Table 2: Overview of the basic parts designed for the biosensor project in the pSB1C3 backbone .</b></figcaption> | |
<table style="width:100%; display: table;"> | <table style="width:100%; display: table;"> | ||
<tbody style="max-width:inherit;"> | <tbody style="max-width:inherit;"> | ||
Line 219: | Line 219: | ||
<p>As shown in Figure 5, the wildtype W168 (black with white dots) shows no increase in RLU/OD<sub>600</sub> values when induced with the different β-lactam antibiotics and controls. Control 1 (black tight stripes) behaves similarly to the wild type strain. The slight decrease of control 2 (light grey) in the bar chart where induction with ampicillin and carbenicillin happened, is mostly explained by the high growth inhibition caused by the chosen concentrations for W168 (with functional PenP). Most of the times, the constitutive expression of the <i>lux</i> operon resulted in an RLU/OD<sub>600</sub> of over 1.3 million for control 2 (see Figure 5).</p> | <p>As shown in Figure 5, the wildtype W168 (black with white dots) shows no increase in RLU/OD<sub>600</sub> values when induced with the different β-lactam antibiotics and controls. Control 1 (black tight stripes) behaves similarly to the wild type strain. The slight decrease of control 2 (light grey) in the bar chart where induction with ampicillin and carbenicillin happened, is mostly explained by the high growth inhibition caused by the chosen concentrations for W168 (with functional PenP). Most of the times, the constitutive expression of the <i>lux</i> operon resulted in an RLU/OD<sub>600</sub> of over 1.3 million for control 2 (see Figure 5).</p> | ||
<p>Biosensor 1 gives an overall good signal for all β-lactam antibiotics tested, but also shows a higher basal activity in absence of the β-lactam compounds of 40.000- 90.000 RLU/OD<sub>600</sub> (see Figure 5, bar chart with bacitracin and dH<sub>2</sub>O). Further, we could observe a difference in signal intensity dependent on the β-lactam antibiotic tested. Therefore, biosensor 1 gives the highest signal in presence of penicillin G, cefoxitin and cefoperazone with up to 2.7 million RLU/OD<sub>600</sub>. Ampicillin and penicillin G again show a weaker increase in signal produced by biosensor 1, which could be due to the same reason as for control 2 (see Figure 5).</p> | <p>Biosensor 1 gives an overall good signal for all β-lactam antibiotics tested, but also shows a higher basal activity in absence of the β-lactam compounds of 40.000- 90.000 RLU/OD<sub>600</sub> (see Figure 5, bar chart with bacitracin and dH<sub>2</sub>O). Further, we could observe a difference in signal intensity dependent on the β-lactam antibiotic tested. Therefore, biosensor 1 gives the highest signal in presence of penicillin G, cefoxitin and cefoperazone with up to 2.7 million RLU/OD<sub>600</sub>. Ampicillin and penicillin G again show a weaker increase in signal produced by biosensor 1, which could be due to the same reason as for control 2 (see Figure 5).</p> | ||
− | <p>For biosensor 2, the detection range and sensitivity is comparable to biosensor 1 | + | <p>For biosensor 2, the detection range and sensitivity is comparable to biosensor 1. This strain strongly senses cefoxitin, ampicillin and cefoperazone reaching up to 2.4 million RLU/OD<sub>600</sub>. Even the basal activity of the P<sub><i>blaZ</i></sub> promoter in biosensor 2, as shown in the bar charts with bacitracin and dH<sub>2</sub>O, conforms with the one from biosensor 1.</p> |
</figure> | </figure> | ||
Line 248: | Line 248: | ||
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/d/d5/T--TU_Dresden--P_Biosensor_Figure7.png" | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/d/d5/T--TU_Dresden--P_Biosensor_Figure7.png" | ||
alt="Figure 7: Disk Diffusion Assay showing the biosensors' activity on solid agar plates" class="zoom"> | alt="Figure 7: Disk Diffusion Assay showing the biosensors' activity on solid agar plates" class="zoom"> | ||
− | <figcaption><b>Figure 7: Photographs of the plates from the disk diffusion assay. </b>The upper rows (Panel A and C) show pictures of the plates with the strains under daylight conditions, while the row beneath (Panel B and D) shows the plate after detection of | + | <figcaption><b>Figure 7: Photographs of the plates from the disk diffusion assay. </b>The upper rows (Panel A and C) show pictures of the plates with the strains under daylight conditions, while the row beneath (Panel B and D) shows the plate after detection of bioluminescence (2 minutes exposure time). At the bottom in Panel E, the disk layout and the most important remarks of the genotype of all strains are indicated. |
</figcaption> | </figcaption> | ||
</figure> | </figure> | ||
− | <p>We expected the control substances (water and bacitracin) to not cause any luminescence signal at the edge of the inhibition zones. The β-lactam antibiotics should lead to a glowing halo when tested with the three different biosensor versions. The wildtype strain and control 1 should not show any signal, since both strains are lacking the <i>lux</i> operon. In the case of control 2 a luminescence signal should be spread over the whole plate, due to the constitutive expression (P<sub><i>veg</i></sub>) of luciferase. Figure 7 sums up the results of the disk diffusion assay for all strains tested. After 24 hours of incubation at 37°C, plates were photographed under day light conditions and under a chemiluminescence dock (with two minutes exposure time).</p> | + | <p>We expected the control substances (water and bacitracin) to not cause any luminescence signal at the edge of the inhibition zones. The β-lactam antibiotics should lead to a glowing halo when tested with the three different biosensor versions. The wildtype strain and control 1 should not show any signal, since both strains are lacking the <i>lux</i> operon. In the case of control 2, a luminescence signal should be spread over the whole plate, due to the constitutive expression (P<sub><i>veg</i></sub>) of luciferase. Figure 7 sums up the results of the disk diffusion assay for all strains tested. After 24 hours of incubation at 37°C, plates were photographed under day light conditions and under a chemiluminescence dock (with two minutes exposure time).</p> |
<p>As expected, the wildtype and control 1, show no luminescence signal, while control 2 leads to a strong luminescence signal spread across the entire plate (Figure 7, Panel B). Neither bacitracin, nor dH<sub>2</sub>O lead to an detectable output, accounting for all strains tested. While in liquid medium biosensor 1 behaves similar compared to biosensor 2, there is a tremendous difference in the detection capability. Biosensor 2 showed detection for all β-lactams tested (Figure 7, Panel D). Au contraire, biosensor 1 only showed a luminescence signal for cefoperazone, cefoxitin and cefalexin (Figure 7, Panel D). Further, the luminescence halo around the cefoxitin disk is quite broad compared to the others, indicating an increased diffusion of the compound into the lawn. Although, biosensor 1 was activated by penicillin G in liquid medium, we could not observe an induction on plate (Figure 7, Panel D).</p> | <p>As expected, the wildtype and control 1, show no luminescence signal, while control 2 leads to a strong luminescence signal spread across the entire plate (Figure 7, Panel B). Neither bacitracin, nor dH<sub>2</sub>O lead to an detectable output, accounting for all strains tested. While in liquid medium biosensor 1 behaves similar compared to biosensor 2, there is a tremendous difference in the detection capability. Biosensor 2 showed detection for all β-lactams tested (Figure 7, Panel D). Au contraire, biosensor 1 only showed a luminescence signal for cefoperazone, cefoxitin and cefalexin (Figure 7, Panel D). Further, the luminescence halo around the cefoxitin disk is quite broad compared to the others, indicating an increased diffusion of the compound into the lawn. Although, biosensor 1 was activated by penicillin G in liquid medium, we could not observe an induction on plate (Figure 7, Panel D).</p> | ||
<p>Biosensor 2 was activated by all of the β-lactam compounds tested (Figure 7, Panel D). Ampicillin, cefoxitin, cefalexin and cefoperazone strongly activate the system, while penicillin G and carbenicillin just show a weak induction of the signal on plate. These findings go along with the results obtained in liquid medium in the previous experiments. | <p>Biosensor 2 was activated by all of the β-lactam compounds tested (Figure 7, Panel D). Ampicillin, cefoxitin, cefalexin and cefoperazone strongly activate the system, while penicillin G and carbenicillin just show a weak induction of the signal on plate. These findings go along with the results obtained in liquid medium in the previous experiments. | ||
Line 296: | Line 296: | ||
<h3 id="peptidosomes">3. Encapsulation of the Biosensor into Peptidosomes – Proving the Application Potential</h3> | <h3 id="peptidosomes">3. Encapsulation of the Biosensor into Peptidosomes – Proving the Application Potential</h3> | ||
<p></p> | <p></p> | ||
− | <p>After evaluation of the biosensor we probed its activity when encapsulated in Peptidosomes. An overnight culture was inoculated in Fmoc-FF-Solution with a final | + | <p>After evaluation of the biosensor we probed its activity when encapsulated in Peptidosomes. An overnight culture was inoculated in Fmoc-FF-Solution with a final OD<sub>600</sub>=10. Peptidosomes were prepare containing no bacteria (A), W168 (B), control 2 (C) and biosensor 2 (D) (see Figure 10 below) and underwent 3 washing steps. Afterwards, the Peptidosomes were transferred to a 12-well plate, incubated at 37˚C and luminescence was detected every hour. Induction with 0.2 µg µl<sup>-1</sup> cefoperazone happened after 1 hour of growth. |
</p> | </p> | ||
<p>The Peptidosomes without cells and the wild type W168 are expected to show no luminescence signal at all times (A and B). We estimate control 2 to reach a luminescence signal under non-induced as well as under induced conditions (C). This signal should be weaker than that of the induced biosensor 2 (D, +AB). No signal is expected for the encapsulated biosensor in absence of cefoperazone (D, -AB).</p> | <p>The Peptidosomes without cells and the wild type W168 are expected to show no luminescence signal at all times (A and B). We estimate control 2 to reach a luminescence signal under non-induced as well as under induced conditions (C). This signal should be weaker than that of the induced biosensor 2 (D, +AB). No signal is expected for the encapsulated biosensor in absence of cefoperazone (D, -AB).</p> | ||
Line 302: | Line 302: | ||
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/9/90/T--TU_Dresden--P_Biosensor_Figure10.png" | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/9/90/T--TU_Dresden--P_Biosensor_Figure10.png" | ||
alt="Figure 10: Encapsulation of the biosensor into peptidosomes" class="zoom"> | alt="Figure 10: Encapsulation of the biosensor into peptidosomes" class="zoom"> | ||
− | <figcaption><b>Figure 10: Encapsulation experiment with biosensor 2.</b> The pictures in the upper row show the distribution of the Peptidosomes at the time point of luminescence detection, which was immediately performed afterwards using a chemiluminescence dock (bottom row). Pink arrows indicate Peptidosomes with a luminescence signal deriving from the encapsulated biosensor. Upper row of well plates contain non-induced samples. Lower row of well plates were induced with cefoperazone (0.2µg µl<sup>-1</sup>). | + | <figcaption><b>Figure 10: Encapsulation experiment with biosensor 2.</b> The pictures in the upper row show the distribution of the Peptidosomes at the time point of luminescence detection, which was immediately performed afterwards using a chemiluminescence dock (bottom row). Pink arrows indicate Peptidosomes with a luminescence signal deriving from the encapsulated biosensor. Upper row of well plates contain non-induced samples. Lower row of well plates were induced with cefoperazone (0.2 µg µl<sup>-1</sup>). |
</figcaption> | </figcaption> | ||
</figure> | </figure> |
Latest revision as of 13:37, 13 December 2017