Difference between revisions of "Team:MIT/Collaborations"

Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{MIT}}
 
{{MIT}}
 
<html>
 
<html>
−
<h1 style="color:#f20253; text-align: center; font-size: 40px; line-height: 40px;">Collaborations</h1>
+
<h1 style="color:#f20253; text-align: center; font-size: 40px; line-height: 40px;">Collaboration</h1>
  
  
 +
<p> We had the pleasure of collaborating with the Boston University Wetlab iGEM team!</p>
  
 +
<p> One of the many factors we considered when choosing proteins for our system included its modularity, and having the ability to add additional domains. After much consideration, we decided on using Ms2 to build upon current mechanisms to control alternative splicing (i.e. SSOs). With a gRNA sequence attached to the Ms2 protein, not only is Ms2 able to bind to the target RNA molecule, but the presence of the Ms2 can stabilize and prevent the degradation of the RNA sequence before it gets the chance to bind. Furthermore, there lies the possibility of adding more domains to the Ms2 protein to increase the chances that the RNA won't get degraded and will bind to the target.</p>
 +
 +
<p> In theory, the robustness and modularity of Ms2 should be helpful in transporting RNA. To test this idea, we sought a collaboration with the BU Wetlab iGEM team whose project also relies on RNA.</p>
 +
<p> In order to activate the toe hold switches, and therefore activate gene expression, there must be a "Trigger RNA" present to bind the hair pin loop on the "Switch RNA". This allows the ribosome binding sight to be accessible to the ribosome for translation. This process only works if the trigger RNA is present and not degraded.</p>
 +
 +
<p>This is where M2s comes in. We had Ms2 attached to the trigger sequence, where the trigger sequence in this case was and SSO. We hope that the presence of MS2 would decrease the likelihood of RNA degradation, while also allowing the possibility of adding additional domains to make RNA degradation even less likely.
 +
 +
<p style="font-weight:bold"> How did our team benefit from this collaboration?</p>
 
<div class="clear"></div>
 
<div class="clear"></div>
 +
The BU Wetlab team is using a cell-free system to test their toe hold switches. Since robustness was one of the criteria for choosing a sufficient ribosome binding protein (RBP) to control alternative splicing, we wanted to see how our Ms2 would fair in a cell free system. </p>
  
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/0/0c/BU_collab.png">
 
<div class="column full_size">
 
<div class="column full_size">
 
<h1>Collaborations</h1>
 
<h1>Collaborations</h1>

Revision as of 02:38, 29 October 2017

Collaboration

We had the pleasure of collaborating with the Boston University Wetlab iGEM team!

One of the many factors we considered when choosing proteins for our system included its modularity, and having the ability to add additional domains. After much consideration, we decided on using Ms2 to build upon current mechanisms to control alternative splicing (i.e. SSOs). With a gRNA sequence attached to the Ms2 protein, not only is Ms2 able to bind to the target RNA molecule, but the presence of the Ms2 can stabilize and prevent the degradation of the RNA sequence before it gets the chance to bind. Furthermore, there lies the possibility of adding more domains to the Ms2 protein to increase the chances that the RNA won't get degraded and will bind to the target.

In theory, the robustness and modularity of Ms2 should be helpful in transporting RNA. To test this idea, we sought a collaboration with the BU Wetlab iGEM team whose project also relies on RNA.

In order to activate the toe hold switches, and therefore activate gene expression, there must be a "Trigger RNA" present to bind the hair pin loop on the "Switch RNA". This allows the ribosome binding sight to be accessible to the ribosome for translation. This process only works if the trigger RNA is present and not degraded.

This is where M2s comes in. We had Ms2 attached to the trigger sequence, where the trigger sequence in this case was and SSO. We hope that the presence of MS2 would decrease the likelihood of RNA degradation, while also allowing the possibility of adding additional domains to make RNA degradation even less likely.

How did our team benefit from this collaboration?

The BU Wetlab team is using a cell-free system to test their toe hold switches. Since robustness was one of the criteria for choosing a sufficient ribosome binding protein (RBP) to control alternative splicing, we wanted to see how our Ms2 would fair in a cell free system.

Collaborations

Sharing and collaboration are core values of iGEM. We encourage you to reach out and work with other teams on difficult problems that you can more easily solve together.

Silver Medal Criterion #2

Complete this page if you intend to compete for the silver medal criterion #2 on collaboration. Please see the 2017 Medals Page for more information.

Which other teams can we work with?

You can work with any other team in the competition, including software, hardware, high school and other tracks. You can also work with non-iGEM research groups, but they do not count towards the iGEM team collaboration silver medal criterion.

In order to meet the silver medal criteria on helping another team, you must complete this page and detail the nature of your collaboration with another iGEM team.

Here are some suggestions for projects you could work on with other teams:

  • Improve the function of another team's BioBrick Part or Device
  • Characterize another team's part
  • Debug a construct
  • Model or simulating another team's system
  • Test another team's software
  • Help build and test another team's hardware project
  • Mentor a high-school team