Difference between revisions of "Team:UiOslo Norway/Parts"

Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
<div class="padding-right padding-left">
 
<div class="padding-right padding-left">
Our biological system was very basic compared to what a lot of other teams did, and the amount of parts used was low. Part of this was because the basic premise of our project is something as simple as GFP-expression, but another factor is our the organism of choice for the bio-laser medium; as few previous teams have done any work on Schizosaccharomyces Pombe, there are quite few parts in the registry that have been documented as useful for S. Pombe.
+
As few previous teams have done any work on <i>Schizosaccharomyces Pombe</i>, there are few parts in the registry that have been documented as useful for S. Pombe. We wanted to design and document a system to express GFP in <i>S. Pombe</i>, which meant that we had to design and test parts specifically for this.
 
<br><br>
 
<br><br>
 
We elected to use sfGFP as the fluorescent protein of choice as this is a more stably folded form of GFP, and we wanted to ensure that the protein we used wouldn't be damaged by high light intensity. NMT1 was chosen as the promoter of choice as it's the most commonly used expression system in S. Pombe. Our supervisor had a lot of experience with this system, which we also considered to be beneficial as it would make it easier to troubleshoot problems. Likewise for CYC1. Combining all of these, we created our composite part, which was made with the intention of cloning it into the pJK148 yeast expression vector as well as into the pSB1C3 submission vector.
 
We elected to use sfGFP as the fluorescent protein of choice as this is a more stably folded form of GFP, and we wanted to ensure that the protein we used wouldn't be damaged by high light intensity. NMT1 was chosen as the promoter of choice as it's the most commonly used expression system in S. Pombe. Our supervisor had a lot of experience with this system, which we also considered to be beneficial as it would make it easier to troubleshoot problems. Likewise for CYC1. Combining all of these, we created our composite part, which was made with the intention of cloning it into the pJK148 yeast expression vector as well as into the pSB1C3 submission vector.

Revision as of 16:16, 1 November 2017



<groupparts>iGEM17 UiOslo_Norway</groupparts>

We used cyc1 (BBa_K2110000) as the terminator for our composite part.
As few previous teams have done any work on Schizosaccharomyces Pombe, there are few parts in the registry that have been documented as useful for S. Pombe. We wanted to design and document a system to express GFP in S. Pombe, which meant that we had to design and test parts specifically for this.

We elected to use sfGFP as the fluorescent protein of choice as this is a more stably folded form of GFP, and we wanted to ensure that the protein we used wouldn't be damaged by high light intensity. NMT1 was chosen as the promoter of choice as it's the most commonly used expression system in S. Pombe. Our supervisor had a lot of experience with this system, which we also considered to be beneficial as it would make it easier to troubleshoot problems. Likewise for CYC1. Combining all of these, we created our composite part, which was made with the intention of cloning it into the pJK148 yeast expression vector as well as into the pSB1C3 submission vector.

While doing the parts design and comparing our planned parts to existing sequences, we made a script that allowed us to search through the annual parts distributions for parts with particular names or properties. This sped up the process of figuring out if our parts were unique or had already been submitted greatly, and we are providing this as we believe this may be useful for future teams as well.