IGEM:IMPERIAL/2006/project/Oscillator/project browser/Test Sensing Predator Construct/Design: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|- | |- | ||
!height="25pt" width="80pt"|Actual Part | !height="25pt" width="80pt"|Actual Part | ||
!colspan="4"| | !colspan="4"| [[Image:J37016 logo.png|300px]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
!height="25pt" width="80pt"|Sub Parts | !height="25pt" width="80pt"|Sub Parts | ||
! [[ | ! [[Image:R0062 logo.png|40px]] | ||
! [[ | ! [[Image:B0034 logo.png|40px]] | ||
! [[ | ! [[Image:C0062 logo.png|40px]] | ||
! [[ | ! [[Image:I13504 logo.png|150px]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
<div class="tabs-blue"> | <div class="tabs-blue"> | ||
Revision as of 01:25, 22 October 2006
| Super Parts | Predator Construct | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual Part | 
| |||
| Sub Parts | 
|
|
|
|
These two parts are very similar and have the same inputs and outputs, therefore they can be analysed in exactly the same way
These designs should meet the specifications mentioned above and operate as shown in fig1
fig1
The differences are in the rates of production of GFP to LuxR. Part J37016 will produce a polycistronic strand of mRNA and the rate of GFP to LuxR translation will depend on which RBS is farthest upstream. The second design; Part J37020 produces two strands of mRNA they are produced by the same promoter, LuxpR but the seuqance surrounding luxpR differs between the two sites so there may be differing rates of transcription between the promoters controlling GFP and luxR. A more reliable method to get the luxR rates of expression would be to tag LuxR with an antigen then run an assay for it. This would however require a very large amount o lab work and the modls do not need luxR translation, simply the transfer function of HSL -> aiiA
