Cornell iGEM is contributing the basic part α-amyrin synthase to the registry, as well as a composite part that adds the TDH3 promoter, a Kozak sequence, and the TPS1 terminator to the α-amyrin synthase gene . To maximize production of ursolic acid, Cornell iGEM is not only inserting the α-amyrin synthase gene into yeast, but also knocking out POR2, which encodes a mitochondrial transporter that is responsible for moving acetyl-CoA from the cytoplasm to the mitochondria. Thus, this page also details the protocol used for PCR-mediated gene knockout. Finally, the methods used for yeast transformation and the subsequent extraction of ursolic acid are also included below.
Cornell iGEM is adding to the parts registry with the new basic part of α-amyrin synthase, which is a 2,3-oxidosqualene cyclase. This cyclase enzyme produces both alpha and beta amyrin from the starting material of 2,3-oxidosqualene. Alpha amyrin synthase is being utilized by Cornell iGEM’s Oncurex project specifically for its ability to produce alpha rather than beta amyrin, which is a precursor to ursolic acid, the anti-cancer molecule of interest for the 2024 project. However, α-amyrin alone has also been indicated to have therapeutic potential, and production of α-amyrin could be used by future iGEM researchers to develop other novel small molecule products. By sharing our novel α-amyrin part with the iGEM community, we are increasing access to enzymatic parts essential for future natural product production.
Name | Type | Description | Designer | Length (BP) |
---|---|---|---|---|
BBa_K5059000 | Protein Coding Sequence | MdOSC1 | Isaac Chang | 2304 |
To increase the expression of α-amyrin synthase, Cornell iGEM is adding a composite part to the registry composed of the previously described α-amyrin synthase, as well as the TDH3 promoter (BBa_K124002), Kozak sequence (BBa_165002), and the TPS1 terminator (BBa_K2926005). We chose the TDH3 promoter since it’s a strong constitutive promoter and the TPS1 terminator is also a strong terminator naturally found in S. cerevisiae.
Name | Type | Description | Designer | Length (BP) |
---|---|---|---|---|
BBa_K5059001 | Composite | Isaac Chang | 3275 |
Purpose: Transform construct into yeast
Safety Considerations:
Disposal:
Storage:
Materials:
Preparatory Steps: Prepare Media Beforehand
Component | Volume (µL) |
---|---|
PEG 3500 (50% w/v) | 240 |
Lithium acetate 1.0 M | 36 |
Carrier ssDNA (2.0 mg/mL) | 50 |
Plasmid DNA (100ng) with ddH2O | 34 |
Total Volume | 360 |
Purpose: Perform a gene knockout in S. cerevisiae
Safety Considerations:
Disposal:
Storage:
Materials:
Preparatory Step:
Methods
Cycle Number | Denaturation | Annealing | Polymerization |
---|---|---|---|
1 cycle | 4 minutes at 94ºC | 1 | |
25 cycles | 1 minute at 94ºC | 1 minute at 55ºC | *1 minute at 72ºC |
Last cycle | 20 minutes at 72ºC |
Optimized cloning efficiency is 50–100 ng of vector with 2-3 fold molar excess of each insert. Use 5-fold molar excess of any insert(s) less than 200 bp.
An integral part of Cornell iGEM is the amalgamation of various backgrounds and ideas into a single, innovative product. One way this is demonstrated in product development occurs early in the design process. When we were first coming up with our reactor design, each subteam member came up with their own sketch independently. These sketches are listed below. Each design was created following a week of background research into CSTR reactor design. Then, we met as a subteam and took various ideas from each sketch and integrated them into the final design. Taking input from every team member allowed us to come up with new ideas for specific components for the bioreactor, preventing us from missing small details. This method also helped us come up with the integral components of the bioreactor. For instance, the idea of submerging all the reservoirs in a temperature-controlled water bath (seen in Figure 1) became a core design feature of our final reactor. Figure 6 and Figure 1 suggested use of a sealant like silicone or putty to make sure that connections between reservoirs remained airtight, which was essential when pumping liquid through the reservoirs. When a design had a feature that was different from all of the other designs, we were able to scrutinize each difference and make an executive decision on whether or not it should be integrated into the final design. For example, the design in figure 4 was the only one that incorporated the outflow of the main chamber below the main chamber. We discussed this option and came to the conclusion that our final design should not be built this way because this design idea would be more prone to leakage and might be harder to maintain or replace components.
Figure 1: The key feature of this design was the large container and water bath that encompassed the entire bioreactor, ensuring that all reservoirs were maintained at a constant temperature.
Figure 2: This design is the first to use multiple blades and external reservoirs, distinguishing it from other designs. It is the closest to our eventual industrial scale-up model.
Figure 3: This one only uses two reservoirs, but had the idea to “stick” sensors to the side of the walls to keep them out of the way of the blades.
Figure 4: This design was unique in the bottom-feeding outflow. It used a mix of sensors reading from the top and stuck to the sides.
Figure 5: This design incorporates many other elements found in other designs, but required a better explanation of the sous-vide placement.
Figure 6: This design was the first to take into consideration volumes and materials.
Eventually, after considering background research and examining our own designs, we came up with the following final design.
Figure 7: Final Reactor Design
The reservoirs were placed inside the sous vide to ensure consistent thermal regulation, which is essential for maintaining cellular activity and growth rates. Motors were strategically placed on top of the bioreactor and along the railings to ensure stability and minimize vibrations, which could otherwise disrupt the delicate culture conditions. This design innovation not only enhanced temperature uniformity and mechanical stability but also improved the overall efficiency and scalability of the bioreactor system.
Figure 8: Biosensor Design
A biosensor takes a biological recognition element, in this case ursolic acid, with a physicochemical detector to convert the biological signal into a measurable output. This technology is valuable for industries like pharmaceuticals, environment protections, and food production due to its high specificity and monitoring capabilities. In context with our team’s CSTR, we started a design of a biosensor to closely monitor the production of ursolic acid and make real time adjustments to optimize the yield of the reactor. Measuring ursolic acid with a biosensor is also useful for optimizing the growth conditions of the yeast and improving the overall yield of the CSTR. Since the CSTR operates with constant agitation and nutrient flow, real-time feedback from a biosensor can help maintain optimal environmental conditions, such as pH, temperature, and nutrient concentration. This minimizes waste and maximizes the efficiency of the production process. Additionally, continuous monitoring with a biosensor can help identify any deviations or issues early, preventing potential problems in the production cycle and ensuring the final product's consistency and purity.
In addition to the development of our bioreactor and biosensors for ursolic acid production and quantification respectively, our team has developed a sterility manual which is meant to inform users on how to ensure sterile operation and describe proper cleaning procedures. In general, ensuring sterility is of utmost importance in biomanufacturing as contamination is detrimental, even destructive, to our final product and ultimately the patients they are meant to serve. As such, the goal of this manual is not just to inform the end users’ operation of the reactor, but also to ,serve as an example for other projects as to the correct way to maintain a clean and compliant reactor. Of principal concern is the adherence to regulatory bodies, such as the FDA. The standards of these bodies emphasize the necessity of strict sterility protocols in order to prevent contamination and ensure the safety and efficacy of bio-manufactured products. The manual will demonstrate Cornell iGEM’s commitment to these regulations as well as ensuring that our final product is both standardized and efficable. Further down the line, this standardization will also facilitate the scale-up of our project as well as more easily integrate into existing systems within production chains. Beyond the scope of our project, by extending the applicability of our sterility manual to apply for general continuous stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) we can set a standard and resource for future iGEM teams to follow, allowing them to integrate essential sterility practices into their own practices as well: a sterile and pristine piece of hardware can have a great effect on accelerating the whole product development process.