Team:Imperial College London/Major results
From 2009.igem.org
Contents |
Major Results
This page contains highlights of our major results and simulations. It is by no means complete. However, more results will be presented at the jamboree.
Simulations: Chemoinduction for Module 1
Our simulation results indicate that increasing input amounts of IPTG result in a greater yield of polypeptide drug of interest.
An experiment was done to investigate how different input concentrations of IPTG affect cell growth. Our results show that IPTG has no significant effect on cell growth within the ranges we are using. Therefore, we can conclude that increasing IPTG concentration initially will have a positive contribution to our dosage.
Note 1: Results from these simulations were to be tied up with data from our LacI-RFP testing construct (See our part K200019. Unluckily, this part of the construct was not sent correcty from the registry, so testing again was not possible before the wiki-freeze deadline.
Note 2: Parameters used in the system are arbitrary. For a justification see the system's stability analysis.
Experimental: Module 2 - Encapsulation growth curves
Dependent on lab results today
Experimental: Autoinduction - Diauxic growth curve and CRP GFP
Here we can pick a diauxic growth curve and compare directly to a simulation
Simulations: Module 1 - Enzyme kinetics and dosage control
Many polypeptides of interest are enzymes. This means that detecting how much drug has been produced requires knowledge about their interaction with their respective substrates in the enzymatic assays. Here we assumed that enzymatic activity follows Michaelis-Menten kinetics [1-3]. This means that we can directly relate enzymatic activity to the required dosage for successful administration of the polypeptide of interest.
Dosage Calculations:
//upload summary and complete pdf file.
Experimental: Module 3 - Thermoinducible promoter
Need Matthieu's latest processed data
References
[1]Physica A: Statistical and Theoretical Physics, Vol. 188, No. 1-3. (1 September 1992), pp. 404-425. A rigorous derivation of the chemical master Equation