(→Assessment of the minimal distance to have fluorescence) |
(→Assessment of the minimal distance to have fluorescence) |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
This question is essential because the distance between the dCas9 may cause major problems. First, the steric hindrance and the dCas9 footprint may avoid the GFP assembling if we target sequences that are too close. Secondly, the protein sizes we chose avoid GFP assembling if they are too far away. As a result, fluorescence emission would be detected only if the proteins, as well as the DNA regions, are distant between a precise range of distances. | This question is essential because the distance between the dCas9 may cause major problems. First, the steric hindrance and the dCas9 footprint may avoid the GFP assembling if we target sequences that are too close. Secondly, the protein sizes we chose avoid GFP assembling if they are too far away. As a result, fluorescence emission would be detected only if the proteins, as well as the DNA regions, are distant between a precise range of distances. | ||
− | To assess experimentally such distance, we decided to design different plasmids containing the visualization target sequences separated from each other | + | To assess experimentally such distance, we decided to design different plasmids containing the visualization target sequences separated from each other by different number of base pairs. To do so, we designed specific primers to carry out reverse PCR and obtain, from a plasmid in which the target sequences are distant by 1kB, different plasmids where the numer of base pairs between the target sequences is reduced. |
− | This plasmid would have been | + | This plasmid would have been expressed with the composite biobrick composed of the BioBricks 3, 4 and 5. |
The target sequence would have been separated from: | The target sequence would have been separated from: | ||
Revision as of 14:55, 10 October 2016