Team:Calgary/Modelling/Results
From 2009.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
<center> Figure 2. The rate of GFP degradation for different AI-2 levels with respect to time. The LuxPQ level was kept at 100 because as shown in figure 1, LuxPQ at 1, 10, and 100 seemed to produce a consistent rate of GFP degradation.</center> | <center> Figure 2. The rate of GFP degradation for different AI-2 levels with respect to time. The LuxPQ level was kept at 100 because as shown in figure 1, LuxPQ at 1, 10, and 100 seemed to produce a consistent rate of GFP degradation.</center> | ||
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
- | At AI-2 levels of 1 and 10, the degradation rate of GFP remain constant due to lack of [AI-2:LuxPQ] complex to carry out the de-phosphorylation of LuxU. At 100 AI-2 molecules, we start to see some degradation of GFP due to increase in the [AI-2:LuxPQ] phosphotase. However, as the binding of AI-2 to LuxPQ is not 100 | + | At AI-2 levels of 1 and 10, the degradation rate of GFP remain constant due to lack of [AI-2:LuxPQ] complex to carry out the de-phosphorylation of LuxU. At 100 AI-2 molecules, we start to see some degradation of GFP due to increase in the [AI-2:LuxPQ] phosphotase. However, as the binding of AI-2 to LuxPQ is not 100%, not all of 100 AI-2 are bound to LuxPQ molecules, and therefore the GFP degradation does not reach 0. Finally, beyond AI-2 levels of 1000, we see a significant decrease in GFP, almost reaching 0. This phenomenon possibly suggests that the AI-2 level have to be at least a fold higher than the level of LuxPQ in order to see a significant difference between system on and off. |
</div> | </div> | ||
Latest revision as of 03:21, 22 October 2009
UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY