Difference between revisions of "Team:UiOslo Norway/Results"
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
Nmt1: | Nmt1: | ||
Successful transformation of E.coli TOP10 with Gibson solution indicated by bacterial growth on LB plates containing chloramphenicol(25 mg/mL). However there were red colonies persent, meaning that they contained an empty vector. (reference to the iGEM page Athanasios found) (plate picture) <br> <br> | Successful transformation of E.coli TOP10 with Gibson solution indicated by bacterial growth on LB plates containing chloramphenicol(25 mg/mL). However there were red colonies persent, meaning that they contained an empty vector. (reference to the iGEM page Athanasios found) (plate picture) <br> <br> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <img scr="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/2/2d/T--UiOslo_norway--results_nmt1_fail.JPG" width="480" height="270"> <br> <br> | ||
Gel from PCR suggested that white colonies do not contain insert, but rather are bacteria that are not chloramphenicol resistant. This occurs when plates are incubated to long and antibiotica has deteriorated. Reason for longer incubation time than recommended is due to the antibiotics used. Chloramphenicol is tougher on bacteria cells than ampicillin and bacteria may need more time to grow. (gel bilde) <br> <br> | Gel from PCR suggested that white colonies do not contain insert, but rather are bacteria that are not chloramphenicol resistant. This occurs when plates are incubated to long and antibiotica has deteriorated. Reason for longer incubation time than recommended is due to the antibiotics used. Chloramphenicol is tougher on bacteria cells than ampicillin and bacteria may need more time to grow. (gel bilde) <br> <br> | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | Several attempts have given same result. It been theorized that the reason why nmt1 is harder to insert is caused by its DNA secondary structure. (Eric told me, need to find source). <br> <br> | ||
| + | |||
However, this stepback has caused us to modify gibson assembly protocol. Increase incubation to 1h and dilute the gibson solution to remove some molecules in the Gibens Mix causing trouble during transformation. We have diluted 1:3, but increased the volume used in transformation by 3 times. Leading to the same volume of plasmid, but ⅓ of the gibson mix. Results show an increased number of transformed colonies from the diluted solution. (picture plate)<br> <br> | However, this stepback has caused us to modify gibson assembly protocol. Increase incubation to 1h and dilute the gibson solution to remove some molecules in the Gibens Mix causing trouble during transformation. We have diluted 1:3, but increased the volume used in transformation by 3 times. Leading to the same volume of plasmid, but ⅓ of the gibson mix. Results show an increased number of transformed colonies from the diluted solution. (picture plate)<br> <br> | ||
Revision as of 15:59, 31 October 2017
Results
Physics
Our results vary from the characteristics of light from a LED to how a protein solution with fluorescent properties (GFP) act when light upon:- We managed to create a light source that emitted light in the correct wavelength for the GFP to get excited. This being a homemade LED-circuit with a blue diode.
- We proved that there were no fluorescens from the GFP when light upon with green or red light, only when being light upon by the light source that had the correct wavelength (blue LED-circuit).
- We managed to verify that you do not need monochromatic light to get fluorescens.
- We were not able to measure the light emitted from the GFP with a CCD-camera.
- We got to test multiple setups with the GFP solution, but none proved lasing, at least not with our equipment.
- In the end we had some red light emitted from the GFP used, this we could see in the spectrometer.
The light spectrum for the LED with no filters, a 4000 spaces pr inch. Showing that the light is not monochromatic.
One of the sfGFP sample that did not work
sfGFp sample that had fluorescence with our set up
Testing the same sfGFP as above with red light, no fluorescence.
Testing the same sfGFP as aboce with green light, still no fluorescence.
Parts in submission vector:
Cyc1: Successful transformation of E.coli TOP10 with Gibson solution indicated by bacterial growth on LB plates containing chloramphenicol(25 mg/mL). (plate picture)Results from PCR further confirm an insert of correct length. (Gel picture)
Sequencing results show as successful insertion into pSB1C3. Sequencing data provided here. Has a 100% identity with BBa_K2110000.
Nmt1: Successful transformation of E.coli TOP10 with Gibson solution indicated by bacterial growth on LB plates containing chloramphenicol(25 mg/mL). However there were red colonies persent, meaning that they contained an empty vector. (reference to the iGEM page Athanasios found) (plate picture)
Gel from PCR suggested that white colonies do not contain insert, but rather are bacteria that are not chloramphenicol resistant. This occurs when plates are incubated to long and antibiotica has deteriorated. Reason for longer incubation time than recommended is due to the antibiotics used. Chloramphenicol is tougher on bacteria cells than ampicillin and bacteria may need more time to grow. (gel bilde)
Several attempts have given same result. It been theorized that the reason why nmt1 is harder to insert is caused by its DNA secondary structure. (Eric told me, need to find source).
However, this stepback has caused us to modify gibson assembly protocol. Increase incubation to 1h and dilute the gibson solution to remove some molecules in the Gibens Mix causing trouble during transformation. We have diluted 1:3, but increased the volume used in transformation by 3 times. Leading to the same volume of plasmid, but ⅓ of the gibson mix. Results show an increased number of transformed colonies from the diluted solution. (picture plate)
Further results for PCR indicat a insert of right size, followed by sequencing confirmation. (gel picture and sequencing results).
Composite part : (the same as above, if we manage to do it)
INTERLAB 96-Well Transformation Protocol: http://parts.igem.org/Help:Protocols/Transformation#96-Well_Transformation_Protocol Plate reader protocol: https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2017/8/85/InterLab_2017_Plate_Reader_Protocol.pdf We used both clear and black bottom plates We did not do PCR to conform; we thought the presence of colonies on the plates was sufficient
