Line 174: | Line 174: | ||
<p>Figure 1 shows us that osmotic pressure alone can indeed have an effect on cell regulation and cell death and in Figure 2 it appears that the minimal water allowance threshold has a high impact on range of possible times. We also must accept that the range outside of 90 seconds to 90 minutes is completely undocumented territory as we can only say something about non-infinite values. Because we don't exactly know how much mmol*gDW-1*hour-1 is needed for proper maintenance under harsh conditions, we can not say anything about where on the scale that would be.</p> | <p>Figure 1 shows us that osmotic pressure alone can indeed have an effect on cell regulation and cell death and in Figure 2 it appears that the minimal water allowance threshold has a high impact on range of possible times. We also must accept that the range outside of 90 seconds to 90 minutes is completely undocumented territory as we can only say something about non-infinite values. Because we don't exactly know how much mmol*gDW-1*hour-1 is needed for proper maintenance under harsh conditions, we can not say anything about where on the scale that would be.</p> | ||
<p>What we can say is that if the cells can survive for longer outside of this period, then they must have enough ATP available for basic maintenance, and that if cell death occurs then, that other processes than pure water-efflux must be the cause of that. Perhaps combinations of lack of nutrients and water-efflux, or over production of osmolytes to keep the balance. </p> | <p>What we can say is that if the cells can survive for longer outside of this period, then they must have enough ATP available for basic maintenance, and that if cell death occurs then, that other processes than pure water-efflux must be the cause of that. Perhaps combinations of lack of nutrients and water-efflux, or over production of osmolytes to keep the balance. </p> | ||
+ | |||
</section> | </section> | ||
<section id="beehave"> | <section id="beehave"> | ||
<h1><b>Beehave</b></h1> | <h1><b>Beehave</b></h1> | ||
<!-- overview blurb, still need to properly format this. --> | <!-- overview blurb, still need to properly format this. --> | ||
− | <p> | + | <p> Due to regulatory and experimental hurdles it is difficult to test the effectiveness of BeeT in combating <i>Varroa destructor</i> in the field. We would still like to be able to give advice to local beekeepers on the ideal application strategy of BeeT based on several scenarios. To accomplish this the well-known model BEEHAVE was adapted to include the effect of BeeT on mite and virus dynamics in simulated colonies. BEEHAVE is an open-source, agent-based model which can be used to examine the multifactorial causes of Colony Collapse Disorder |
+ | <sup><a href="#frh1" id="refrh1">1</a> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: BEEHAVE: A systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure --> | ||
+ | <a href="#frh2" id="refrh2">2</a></sup> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: Multiple stressors: Using the honeybee model BEEHAVE to explore how spatial and temporal forage stress affects colony resilience -->. | ||
+ | It consists of several modules which controls aspects like foraging, mite dynamics and colony growth (figure 1) and was extensively tested for robustness and realism | ||
+ | <sup><a href="#frh1" id="refrh1">1</a></sup> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: BEEHAVE: A systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure -->. | ||
+ | <br/><br/> | ||
+ | |||
+ | BeeT can be transported into the hive by applying it to sugar water or bee bread, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Each mode of application requires the use of a different chassis, with the intended chassis of <i>Escherichia coli</i> for sugar water and <i>Lactobacillus</i> species for bee bread. Sugar water is supplemented to support a colony during honey harvest and before winter as a substitute for nectar | ||
+ | <sup><a href=”#frh3 “,id=” refrh3”>3</a> </sup> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF SUGAR SYRUP ON COLONY SIZE OF HONEYBEE!--> | ||
+ | <sup> <a href=#frh4",id="refrh4">4</a> </sup> | ||
+ | <!--Nutrition and health in honey bees -->. | ||
+ | Supplementing <i>Apis mellifera</i> (honey bee) with sugar water is a well established and familiar practice amongst beekeepers | ||
+ | <sup><a href=”#frh3 “,id=” refrh3”>3</a></sup> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF SUGAR SYRUP ON COLONY SIZE OF HONEYBEES-->. | ||
+ | Bee bread is a combination of pollen, regurgitated nectar and glandular secretions and is inoculated with fermenting bacteria by honeybees | ||
+ | <sup><a href=#frh5”,id=” refrh5”>5</a></sup> | ||
+ | <!-- An evaluation of fresh versus fermented diets for honey bees (Apis mellifera) -->. | ||
+ | There is mounting evidence that pollen supplementation increases protein content in honey bee haemolymph, likely improving survival of colonies to various stressors | ||
+ | <sup><a href=” #frh6” ,id=” refrh6” >6</a> | ||
+ | <a href=”#frh7”,id=”refrh7”>7</a> | ||
+ | </sup> | ||
+ | <!-- Bee bread increases honeybee haemolymph protein and promote better survival despite of causing higher Nosema ceranae abundance in honeybees, Pollen substitutes increase honey bee haemolymph protein levels as much as or more than does pollen <--. | ||
+ | To use bee bread as an application method would require extensive re-engineering of BeeT. With this in mind, sugar water is the preferred method, while bee bread is an alternative application if our model shows that sugar water is unfeasible. We will use our BeeT module for the BEEHAVE model to examine and contrast these two application strategies so we can come to a best practices recommendation.</p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <sup> | ||
+ | <a href="#frh1" id="refrh1"> | ||
+ | 1 | ||
+ | </a> | ||
+ | </sup> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: BEEHAVE: A systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure -->. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <br/><br/> | ||
+ | <p> BEEHAVE is an open-source, GNU licensed agent-based model utilizing NetLogo and consists of several interlocking modules which each model different aspects of the bee hive. BEEHAVE has the intended goal of modelling the wide variety of stresses affecting honey bees and is the only model incorporating all these different aspects <sup> | ||
+ | <a href="#frh1" id="refrh1"> | ||
+ | 1 | ||
+ | </a> | ||
+ | </sup> | ||
+ | <!-- REFERENCE: BEEHAVE: A systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure -->. | ||
+ | As such it is the ideal basis for our investigation into the effects of BeeT on mite and honey bee dynamics. BEEHAVE has several modules covering inter-colony dynamics, foraging and a mite model as depicted in figure 1. Two viruses are also included in the model; deformed wing virus and acute paralysis virus for which <i>Varroa destructor</i> is a vector. Our BeeT module, which runs parallel to BEEHAVE, is capable of modeling transport of BeeT into the hive using sugar water or bee bread. It also calculates how much BeeT is transported to larvae based on consumption of respectively honey and pollen stores. Based on the amount of BeeT at larvae the mite mortality, when mites emerge from brood cells, is determined. This in turn affects mite population levels in the hive, reducing virus loads in the hive and allowing colony survival. | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
+ | <figure> | ||
+ | <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2016/2/2a/T--Wageningen_UR--BEEHAVEoverview.png"> | ||
+ | <figcaption> | ||
+ | Figure 3: The honey bee colony model includes mite and virus dynamics, agent-based foraging behavior with either pre-defined landscape definitions or a representation of local floral patterns. It is also possible to include weather patterns to more accurately model local conditions. Note; model includes various interdependent mortalities and other parameters which are not included in this figure. | ||
+ | </figcaption> | ||
+ | </figure> | ||
</section> | </section> | ||
<h2>References</h2> | <h2>References</h2> | ||
Line 193: | Line 246: | ||
<a href="#refmm1" title="Jump back to footnote 2 in the text.">↩</a> | <a href="#refmm1" title="Jump back to footnote 2 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
− | <a id="mm2" href= http://bionumbers.hms.harvard.edu/bionumber.aspx?&id=100011 > | + | <a id="mm2" href= http://bionumbers.hms.harvard.edu/bionumber.aspx?&id=100011 >3.</a> |
Neidhardt F.C. Escherichia coli and Salmonella: Cellular and Molecular Biology. Vol 1. pp. 15, ASM Press 1996 | Neidhardt F.C. Escherichia coli and Salmonella: Cellular and Molecular Biology. Vol 1. pp. 15, ASM Press 1996 | ||
<a href="#refmm2" title="Jump back to footnote 2 in the text.">↩</a> | <a href="#refmm2" title="Jump back to footnote 2 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <a id="rh1" href= http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12222/epdf> 1. </a> | ||
+ | |||
+ | M. A. Becher, V. Grimm, P. Thorbek, J. Horn, P. J. Kennedy, and J. L. Osborne, (2014). BEEHAVE: A systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure, Journal of Applied Ecology., vol. 51, no. 2, 470–482. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href=”#refrh1” title=” Jump back to footnote 1 in the text.”>↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <a id="rh2” href=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/oik.02636/epdf >2.</a> | ||
+ | J. Horn, M. A. Becher, P. J. Kennedy, J. L. Osborne, and V. Grimm (2015), “Multiple stressors: Using the honeybee model BEEHAVE to explore how spatial and temporal forage stress affects colony resilience,” Oikos, no. September 2015, 1001–1016. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href=”#refrh2” title=” Jump back to footnote 2 in the text.” >↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <a id="rh3" href=http://journal.unaab.edu.ng/index.php/JNSET/article/view/1378/1271>3.</a> | ||
+ | Fasasi, K A (2011) "Cumulative effect of sugar syrup on colony size of honeybees, <i> Apis mellifera adansonii </i> (Hymenoptera : apidae) in artificial beehives " Journal of Natural Sciences, Engineering and Technology ed. 10: 33-43. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href="#refrh3" title="Jump back to footnote 3 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <a id="rh4" href=http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/pdf/2010/03/m09120.pdf>4.</a> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Robert Brodschneider, Karl Crailsheim (2010) "Nutrition and health in honey bees" Apidologie ed. 41: 278-294 | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href="#refrh4" title="Jump back to footnote 4 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <a id="rh5" href= http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/pdf/2010/03/m09120.pdf>5.</a> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Ellis, Amanda M. Hayes, Jr, G. W. (2009) "An evaluation of fresh versus fermented diets for honey bees (<i>Apis mellifera</i>)." Journal of Apicultural Research 48: 215-216 | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href="#refrh5" title="Jump back to footnote 5 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | � | ||
+ | <a id="rh6" href= http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1758-2229.12169/epdf>6.</a> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Basualdo, Marina Barragán, Sergio Antúnez, Karina (2014) "Bee bread increases honeybee haemolymph protein and promote better survival despite of causing higher <i>Nosema ceranae</i> abundance in honeybees" Environmental Microbiology Reports 6: 396-400 | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href="#refrh6" title="Jump back to footnote 6 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <a id="rh7" href=http://www.ibra.org.uk/articles/20090217_11>7.</a> | ||
+ | |||
+ | De Jong, David (2009) "Pollen substitutes increase honey bee haemolymph protein levels as much as or more than does pollen" Journal of Apicultural Research Reports 48: 34-37 | ||
+ | |||
+ | <a href="#refrh7" title="Jump back to footnote 7 in the text.">↩</a> | ||
+ | <br><br> | ||
+ | |||
</html> | </html> | ||
{{Wageningen_UR/footer}} | {{Wageningen_UR/footer}} |
Revision as of 09:43, 10 October 2016
Overview
In light of our guiding principles specificity, regulation and biocontainment, we modelled four different aspects of BeeT. The modelling work can inform and improve wet-lab experiments, providing a more robust and well rounded final product. Another facet is to assess the optimal application strategy for our project. We asked ourselves; what critical parts of our system can benefit the most from an interplay between modelling and experimental work? These considerations led us to ask the following questions;
- How can we assure optimal toxin production using quorum sensing and sub populations?
- What are important parameters for the killswitch to function optimally?
- Will BeeT be capable of surviving in sugar water?
- What is the best application strategy for BeeT?
Quorum Sensing
For the final product, BeeT, we intend to use toxins produced by Bacillus thuringiensis also called BT toxins. However, these toxins are also harmful to our chassis and would result in a reduction of toxin production. To counteract this effect we envision the use of quorum sensing that activates BT toxin production only when there is a large quantity of BeeT present. Synchronization of BT toxin production across the entire population would result in BeeT only producing a single burst of BT toxin before dying to its effects. Ideally, BeeT is able to produce BT toxin over a long period and dramatically improving effectiveness. To accomplish this we need multiple sub populations of BeeT, some producing BeeT while others are recuperating. This project is ideal for dynamic modelling as it represents a complex system with tune-able parameters, each parameter set can produce dramatically different population dynamics.
Introduction
For the iGEM project a toxin producing system has been made. We wanted to create a system where bacteria can produce toxin in waves and hereby create different cell populations. With the use of quorum sensing and the subpopulation system, as shown in Figure 1, we expect to find different cell populations.
Methods
During the research Matlab version R2016a has been used.
Because there was no data from the wet lab we assumed that all the parameters in the system were random.
The parameters are all obtained by latin hypercube Latin hypercube is a statistical method to get random numbers from a box of n by n numbers. For example x = 4 with x is divisions and n = 2 with n is number of samples. You will obtain a box with 4 square times 2 square, give you 24 random numbers. For each parameter one number out of this box is randomly chosen. samples.
Equations