Team:DTU Denmark/results
From 2009.igem.org
Klaudiamatos (Talk | contribs) |
Klaudiamatos (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 203: | Line 203: | ||
<p align="justify">Two strains were grown under diferent substrates, Glucose, Galactose, Glucose and Galactose and Ethanol. | <p align="justify">Two strains were grown under diferent substrates, Glucose, Galactose, Glucose and Galactose and Ethanol. | ||
- | These two strains that we denominate as Redoxilator and Leaky correspond to the redoxilator with a constitutive promoter and a minimal promoter repectivelly.<br>Our main goal with this experiment was to determine if there was a difference in GFP signal for different carbon sources and this way prove if the GFP signal is anyway dependent on the NaDH/NAD+ ratio in the cell or not. | + | These two strains that we denominate as Redoxilator and Leaky correspond to the redoxilator with a constitutive promoter and a minimal promoter repectivelly.<br>Our main goal with this experiment was to determine if there was a difference in GFP signal for different carbon sources and this way prove if the GFP signal is anyway dependent on the NaDH/NAD+ ratio in the cell or not. </p><br><br> |
Revision as of 19:43, 21 October 2009
Home | The Team | The Project | Parts submitted | Modelling | Notebook |
The redoxilator - Genetic design - Applications and perspectives - Results - Safety considerations The USER assembly standard - USER fusion of biobricks USER fusion primer design software - Abstract - Instructions - Output format |
The project Results Two strains were grown under diferent substrates, Glucose, Galactose, Glucose and Galactose and Ethanol.
These two strains that we denominate as Redoxilator and Leaky correspond to the redoxilator with a constitutive promoter and a minimal promoter repectivelly. Growth rates (h-1) obtained for the two strains on diferent carbon sources
As expected, both strains showed different profiles of growth accordingly to the substrate. For Glucose and Galactose, the growth curve showed two exponential phases, the first one corresponding to the growth on Glucose and the second corresponding to the growth on Galactose. Although the initial OD was similar in both cases, the growth on Galactose showed an even longer lag phase than the glucose. Finally, as expected, the substrate reporting less growth was ethanol. For the Redoxilator, the growth solely on Glucose showed a longer lag phase compared to the mixed substrate, probably due to a lower initial OD.
Regarding the GFP signal, all substrates showed different profiles. Nevertheless, the fermentative substrates, Glucose and Galactose, showed higher values of GFP than the respirative substrate, Ethanol.
Although these results are accordingly to what was expected, it is important to mention that these cultures didn’t have comparable growths, so, in order to subtract this variability of the growth, one should normalize the GFP expression with OD. Additionally, to the GFP values, the residual values for each case were subtracted.
|
Achievements
Redox sensing device |
Comments or questions to the team? Please Email us -- Comments of questions to webmaster? Please Email us |