| Literature DB >> 24160305 |
Yi-Ying Lee, Chih-Yuan Hsu, Ling-Jiun Lin, Chih-Chun Chang, Hsiao-Chun Cheng, Tsung-Hsien Yeh, Rei-Hsing Hu, Che Lin, Zhen Xie, Bor-Sen Chen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Synthetic genetic transistors are vital for signal amplification and switching in genetic circuits. However, it is still problematic to efficiently select the adequate promoters, Ribosome Binding Sides (RBSs) and inducer concentrations to construct a genetic transistor with the desired linear amplification or switching in the Input/Output (I/O) characteristics for practical applications.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24160305 PMCID: PMC4015965 DOI: 10.1186/1752-0509-7-109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Syst Biol ISSN: 1752-0509
Figure 1The representation of synthetic genetic transistor circuit. (a) A genetic transistor. (b) A genetic transistor with measurement circuit. The input signal of the genetic transistor is measured by RFP reporter and the output signal of the genetic transistor is measured by GFP reporter.
Figure 2The amplifier design example of synthetic genetic transistor. For amplifier design example of synthetic genetic transistor, the prescribed amplification gain = -2 within the range g1 ∊ [298, 431] is computed by (11) (red line). The most adequate promoter-RBS component c3 and aTc concentration I to fit the prescribed amplification gain are searched as {c3, I} = {T3, 0 ng/ml} by minimizing J(c3, I) in (16) from the corresponding promoter-RBS library Lib and concentration range of inducer I. The green points are the experimental results based on {c3, I}, and the error bars are the standard deviations. The green line is the estimation of I/O response of the synthetic genetic transistor based on experimental data, with the estimated amplification gain = -1.978. Obviously, the amplification gain of the designed genetic transistor could match the desired amplification gain quite well.
Figure 3The switch design example of synthetic genetic transistor. For switch design example of synthetic genetic transistor, a desired I/O switch response is computed by (15) as shown in red line. The most adequate promoter-RBS component c3 and aTc concentration I to fit the desired I/O switch response are searched as {c3, I} = {T1, 0 ng/ml} by minimizing J(c3, I) in (16) from the corresponding promoter-RBS library Lib and concentration range of inducer I. The green points are the experimental results, and the error bars are the standard deviations. The green line is the estimated I/O switch response based on experimental data. Obviously, the I/O response of the designed genetic switch could match the desired I/O switch response quite well.
The look-up table with different gain specifications for synthetic genetic transistors
| 120 ~ 180 | -10.00 | 0 ng/ml | ||
| 150 ~ 225 | -7.50 | 1 ng/ml | ||
| 260 ~ 460 | -2.00 | 0 ng/ml | ||
| 400 ~ 550 | -1.00 | 1 ng/ml | ||
| 460 ~ 560 | -0.75 | 0 ng/ml | ||
| 575 ~ 620 | -0.50 | 1 ng/ml | ||
| 40 ~ 140 | -0.15 | 0 mM | ||
| 40 ~ 140 | -2.50 | 0 mM | ||
Given the desired amplification gains and their input signal ranges, we could select adequate promoter-RBS component and inducer concentration from the table to achieve the minimum matching error in (9).