Difference between revisions of "Team:TU Darmstadt/Collaborations"
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
<div class="content" id="lab1c"> | <div class="content" id="lab1c"> | ||
<p><h5>Collaboration with University of Göttingen</h5></p> | <p><h5>Collaboration with University of Göttingen</h5></p> | ||
| − | <p>The University of Göttingen helped us testing the cytotoxic activity of | + | <p>The University of Göttingen helped us testing the cytotoxic activity of miniColicin in other organisms than <i>E. coli</i>. Specifically, <i>Shimwellia blattae</i> was transformed with Minicolicin without mutation (\(\text{mCol}_{\text{WT}}\)) and with mutation (C266A) (mCol<sub style="font-size:50%;">Mut</sub>) under control of the T7 promoter BioBrick <a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K525998">BBa_K525998</a> on the BioBrick backbone pSB1A3.<br> |
| − | The <i> | + | The <i>Shimwellia blattae</i> cells were transformed via electroporation with the mCol variants and cultivated on LB-Agar plates supplemented with ampicillin. This procedure was performed in dublicate. I order to ensure that pSB1A3 is suitable for amplification in <i>Shimwellia blattae</i>, original pSB1A3 was also tested.<br> |
No significant difference in colony amount on each LB-Agar plate was obseverd between the two Minicolicin constructs: \(\text{mCol}_{\text{WT}}\) transformed cells yielded \(220\pm20\) colonies and \(\text{mCol}_{\text{Mut}}\) cells yielded \(200\pm50\) colonies (mean of the dublicate with standard deviation).</p> | No significant difference in colony amount on each LB-Agar plate was obseverd between the two Minicolicin constructs: \(\text{mCol}_{\text{WT}}\) transformed cells yielded \(220\pm20\) colonies and \(\text{mCol}_{\text{Mut}}\) cells yielded \(200\pm50\) colonies (mean of the dublicate with standard deviation).</p> | ||
Revision as of 11:04, 19 October 2016
Collaborations
Collaboration with University of Göttingen
The University of Göttingen helped us testing the cytotoxic activity of miniColicin in other organisms than E. coli. Specifically, Shimwellia blattae was transformed with Minicolicin without mutation (\(\text{mCol}_{\text{WT}}\)) and with mutation (C266A) (mColMut) under control of the T7 promoter BioBrick BBa_K525998 on the BioBrick backbone pSB1A3.
The Shimwellia blattae cells were transformed via electroporation with the mCol variants and cultivated on LB-Agar plates supplemented with ampicillin. This procedure was performed in dublicate. I order to ensure that pSB1A3 is suitable for amplification in Shimwellia blattae, original pSB1A3 was also tested.
No significant difference in colony amount on each LB-Agar plate was obseverd between the two Minicolicin constructs: \(\text{mCol}_{\text{WT}}\) transformed cells yielded \(220\pm20\) colonies and \(\text{mCol}_{\text{Mut}}\) cells yielded \(200\pm50\) colonies (mean of the dublicate with standard deviation).
Collaboration with RWTH Aachen
Since our iGEM team as well as the team of the RWTH Aachen worked with an expanded genetic code via amber supression, we exchanged our knowledge on this topic. Furthermore they tested the incorporation efficiency of our orthogonal tRNA OMT-RS pair with the "Expanded Genetic Code Measurement Kit". In exchange we modeled the molecular dynamics of Subtilisin E with the nnAA O-(2-nitrobenzyl)-l-tyrosine (ONBY) at the specified position.
Collaboration with TU Munich and LMU Munich
One part of our robot is a do-it-yourself syringe pump which we constructed and 3D printed on our own. Also the iGEM team of Munich had the idea to work with syringe pumps. They want to construct a feature to easily upgrade a 3D printer to a bio printer. The essential part for this transformation is a syringe pump, they constructed. Since our robot basis is a 3D printer and we also use a syringe pump it was natural to work together. Munich sent us their system and we printed the additional parts on our own. This is exactly how they imagine their system. We tested it and gave them feedback on their design and possible challenges, so they can improve their design. For us it was useful to test the multi purpose of our robot and how easy it is to add new parts and features. Also the syringe pump design is different and we had a good chance to evaluate our design and compare it to the one of Munich. We derived useful information within this collaboration and are interested in working closer together in the technical part of the iGEM project. Especially if Munich decides to go on focusing on the do-it-yourself sector, Darmstadt is related to. We like to thank the iGEM team of Munich for this opportunity and wish them success with their project. Keep on working :)
