Experiment and Quantitative Modeling of Cell-Free Gene Expression Dynamics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Protein Tagging and Detection with Engineered Self-Assembling Fragments of Green fluorescent Protein
LETTERS Protein tagging and detection with engineered self-assembling fragments of green fluorescent protein Ste´phanie Cabantous, Thomas C Terwilliger & Geoffrey S Waldo Existing protein tagging and detection methods are powerful the same amount of refolded superfolder GFP 1–10. In addition to the but have drawbacks. Split protein tags can perturb protein folding reporter GFP mutations, GFP 1–10 OPT contains S30R, solubility1–4 or may not work in living cells5–7. Green Y145F, I171V and A206V substitutions from superfolder GFP and fluorescent protein (GFP) fusions can misfold8 or exhibit seven new mutations: N39I, T105K, E111V, I128T, K166T, I167V and altered processing9. Fluorogenic biarsenical FLaSH or S205T. This protein is B50% soluble when expressed in E. coli at ReASH10 substrates overcome many of these limitations but 37 1C (data not shown). Ultraviolet-visible spectra of 10 mg/ml require a polycysteine tag motif, a reducing environment and solutions of the nonfluorescent GFP 1–10 OPT lacked the 480 nm cell transfection or permeabilization10. An ideal protein tag absorption band of the red-shifted GFP19 (data not shown), suggest- http://www.nature.com/naturebiotechnology would be genetically encoded, would work both in vivo and ing that the addition of GFP 11 triggers a folding step required to in vitro, would provide a sensitive analytical signal and would generate the cyclized chromophore19. Purified GFP 1–10 OPT, super- not require external chemical reagents or substrates. One way folder GFP and folding reporter GFP were each studied by analytical to accomplish this might be with a split GFP11, but the GFP gel filtration loaded at 10 mg/ml. -
Como Citar Este Artigo Número Completo Mais Informações Do
Encontros Bibli: revista eletrônica de biblioteconomia e ciência da informação ISSN: 1518-2924 Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência da Informação - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina STANFORD, Jailiny Fernanda Silva; SILVA, Fábio Mascarenhas e Prêmio Nobel como fator de influência nas citações dos pesquisadores: uma análise dos laureados de Química e Física (2005 - 2015) Encontros Bibli: revista eletrônica de biblioteconomia e ciência da informação, vol. 26, e73786, 2021, Janeiro-Abril Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência da Informação - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina DOI: https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2021.e73786 Disponível em: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=14768130002 Como citar este artigo Número completo Sistema de Informação Científica Redalyc Mais informações do artigo Rede de Revistas Científicas da América Latina e do Caribe, Espanha e Portugal Site da revista em redalyc.org Sem fins lucrativos acadêmica projeto, desenvolvido no âmbito da iniciativa acesso aberto Artigo Original Prêmio Nobel como fator de influência nas citações dos pesquisadores: uma análise dos laureados de Química e Física (2005 - 2015) Nobel Prize as an influencing factor in researchers' citations: an analysis of Chemistry and Physics laureates (2005 to 2015) Jailiny Fernanda Silva STANFORD Mestre em Ciência da Informação (PPGCI/UFPE) Bibliotecária-chefe Seminário Teológico Batista do Norte do Brasil (STBNB), Recife, Brasil [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2112-6561 Fábio Mascarenhas e SILVA Doutor em Ciência da Informação (USP), Professor Associado Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Departamento de Ciência da Informação, Recife, Brasil [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5566-5120 A lista completa com informações dos autores está no final do artigo RESUMO Objetivo: Analisa a influência nos índices de citação por parte dos pesquisadores que foram contemplados pelo prêmio Nobel nas áreas da Física e Química no período de 2005 a 2015. -
Biochemistrystanford00kornrich.Pdf
University of California Berkeley Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California Program in the History of the Biosciences and Biotechnology Arthur Kornberg, M.D. BIOCHEMISTRY AT STANFORD, BIOTECHNOLOGY AT DNAX With an Introduction by Joshua Lederberg Interviews Conducted by Sally Smith Hughes, Ph.D. in 1997 Copyright 1998 by The Regents of the University of California Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of Northern California, the West, and the Nation. Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well- informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is indexed, bound with photographs and illustrative materials, and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ************************************ All uses of this manuscript are covered by a legal agreement between The Regents of the University of California and Arthur Kornberg, M.D., dated June 18, 1997. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley. -
Running with (CRISPR) Scissors: Tool Adoption and Team Assembly
Running with (CRISPR) Scissors: Tool Adoption and Team Assembly Samantha Zyontz* MIT Sloan School of Management May 2019 Abstract Research tools are essential inputs to technological progress. Yet many new tools require specialized complementary know-how to be applied effectively. Teams in any research domain face the tradeoff of either acquiring this know-how themselves or working with external tool specialists, individuals with tool know-how independent of a domain. These specialists are scarce early on and can choose domain teams to create many applications for the tool or to focus on complicated problems. Ex ante it is unclear where the match between domain teams and external tool specialists dominates. The introduction of the DNA-editing tool CRISPR enables identification of external tool specialists on research teams by exploiting natural difficulties of applying CRISPR across disease domains. Teams have a higher share of external tool specialists in difficult diseases, especially for subsequent innovations. This suggests that external tool specialists and domain teams match more often to solve complex but influential problems. As more tools like Artificial Intelligence emerge, research teams will have to also weigh the importance of their possible solutions when considering how best to attract and collaborate with external tool specialists. * Ph.D. Candidate, MIT Sloan School of Management, Technological Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Strategic Management. I am indebted to Scott Stern, Pierre Azoulay, Jeff Furman, Florenta Teodoridis, Michael Bikard, Danielle Li, and Tim Simcoe for their guidance and suggestions that immensely improved this paper. Appreciation also belongs to Joanne Kamens and her staff at Addgene, Aditya Kunjapur, Wes Greenblatt, and other CRISPR scientists for helping me to understand the science and institutions in this setting. -
Protein Expression and Purification Series
Bio-Rad Explorer™ Protein Expression and Purifi cation Series Catalog Numbers 1665040EDU Centrifugation Purifi cation Process 1665045EDU Handpacked Purifi cation Process 1665050EDU Prepacked Purifi cation Process 1665070EDU Assessment Module explorer.bio-rad.com Please see each individual module for storage conditions. Duplication of any part of this document permitted for classroom use only. Please visit explorer.bio-rad.com to access our selection of language translations for Biotechnology Explorer Kit curricula. For technical service, call your local bio-rad offi ce, or in the U.S., call 1-800-4BIORAD (1-800-424-6723) Protein Expression and Purifi cation Series Dear Educator One of the great promises of the biotechnology industry is the ability to produce biopharmaceuticals to treat human disease. Genentech pioneered the development of recombinant DNA technology to produce products with a practical application. In the mid-1970s, insulin, used to treat diabetics, was extracted from the pancreas glands of swine and cattle that were slaughtered for food. It would take approximately 8,000 pounds of animal pancreas glands to produce one pound of insulin. Rather than extract the protein from animal sources, Genentech engineered bacterial cells to produce human insulin, resulting in the world’s fi rst commercial genetically engineered product. Producing novel proteins in bacteria or other cell types is not simple. Active proteins are often comprised of multiple chains of amino acids with complex folding and strand interactions. Commandeering a particular cell to reproduce the native form presents many challenges. Considerations of cell type, plasmid construction, and purifi cation strategy are all part of the process of developing a recombinant protein. -
Regional Oral History Office University of California the Bancroft Library Berkeley, California
Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California Program in Bioscience and Biotechnology Studies RONALD E. CAPE, M.B.A., Ph. D. BIOTECH PIONEER AND CO-FOUNDER OF CETUS Interviews Conducted by Sally Smith Hughes in 2003 Copyright © 2006 by The Regents of the University of California Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of northern California, the West, and the nation. Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is indexed, bound with photographs and illustrative materials, and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ************************************ All uses of this manuscript are covered by legal agreements between The Regents of the University of California and Ronald Cape, dated December 18, 2003. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley. -
If You Want to Have Good Ideas You Must Have Many Ideas.”
“If you want to have good ideas you must have many ideas.” —Linus Pauling EVERYONE AGREES THAT IT would be troubling news if America’s rate of innovation were to decrease. But we can’t seem to agree at all about whether this is actually happening. We care about innovation so much not simply because we like new stuff, although we certainly do. As the novelist William Makepeace Thackeray observed, “Novelty has charms that our mind can hardly withstand.”1 Some of us can hardly withstand the allure of new gadgets; others are charmed by the latest fashion styles or places to see and be seen. From an economist’s perspective, satisfying these desires is great—taking care of consumer demand is usually seen as a good thing. But innovation is also the most important force that makes our society wealthier. Why Innovation is (Almost) Everything Paul Krugman speaks for many, if not most, economists when he says, “Productivity isn’t everything, but in the long run it is almost everything.” Why? Because, he explains, “A country’s ability to improve its standard of living over time depends almost entirely on its ability to raise its output per worker”—in other words, the number of hours of labor it takes to produce everything, from automobiles to zippers, that we produce.2 Most countries don’t have extensive mineral wealth or oil reserves, and thus can’t get rich by exporting them.* So the only viable way for societies to become wealthier— to improve the standard of living available to its people—is for their companies and workers to keep getting more output from the same number of inputs, in other words more goods and services from the same number of people. -
Humankind 2.0: the Technologies of the Future 6. Biotech
Humankind 2.0: The Technologies of the Future 6. Biotech Piero Scaruffi, 2017 See http://www.scaruffi.com/singular/human20.html for the full text of this discussion A brief History of Biotech 1953: Discovery of the structure of the DNA 2 A brief History of Biotech 1969: Jon Beckwith isolates a gene 1973: Stanley Cohen and Herbert Boyer create the first recombinant DNA organism 1974: Waclaw Szybalski coins the term "synthetic biology” 1975: Paul Berg organizes the Asilomar conference on recombinant DNA 3 A brief History of Biotech 1976: Genentech is founded 1977: Fred Sanger invents a method for rapid DNA sequencing and publishes the first full DNA genome of a living being Janet Rossant creates a chimera combining two mice species 1980: Genentech’s IPO, first biotech IPO 4 A brief History of Biotech 1982: The first biotech drug, Humulin, is approved for sale (Eli Lilly + Genentech) 1983: Kary Mullis invents the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for copying genes 1986: Leroy Hood invents a way to automate gene sequencing 1986: Mario Capecchi performs gene editing on a mouse 1990: William French Anderson’s gene therapy 1990: First baby born via PGD (Alan Handyside’s lab) 5 A brief History of Biotech 1994: FlavrSavr Tomato 1994: Maria Jasin’s homing endonucleases for genome editing 1996: Srinivasan Chandrasegaran’s ZFN method for genome editing 1996: Ian Wilmut clones the first mammal, the sheep Dolly 1997: Dennis Lo detects fetal DNA in the mother’s blood 2000: George Davey Smith introduces Mendelian randomization 6 A brief History of Biotech -
Front Matter (PDF)
working scientists from the graduate student level up- wards who apply PCR to problems in human, animal and plant genetics, cell biology, diagnostics, forensic science and molecular evolution. CONTENTS PERSPECTIVES James D. Watson, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Kary Mullis, La Jolla AN IN-DEPTH LOOK AT PCR Primers, Oligos and Hybridization Wojciech Rychlik, National Biosciences, Inc. Biology of DNA Polymerases Tom Kunkel, National Institutes of Health ~ ii~~ ~ PCR Automation and Genotyping Stanley Rose, The Perkin-Eimer Corporation APPLICATIONS OF PCR Human Genome Project Glen A. Evans, University of Texas A Decade of PCR Human Genetics Henry Erlich, Roche Molecular Systems Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and The Perkin- Molecular Diagnostics Elmer Corporation celebrate 10 years of amplifica- Tom Caskey, Baylor College of Medicine tion with a videotape library in which Nobel prize Forensic Analysis winners Kary Mullis and James Watson and 19 other Bruce Budowle, FBI Academy distinguished scientists review the applications and Gene Evolution/Ancient DNA evolution of the amplification technique hailed as one Svante P~i~ibo, University of Munich of the century's most important scientific tools. Agriculture and the Third World Richard Jefferson, CAMBIA In 1995, the polymerase chain reaction will be 10 Gene Expression in Single Cells years old. The technique that began as a late-night in- Jim Eberwine, University of Pennsylvania spiration by an unrenowned scientist is now the bed- In Situ PCR rock of DNA research, gene discovery, diagnostics Ashley Haase, University of Minnesota development, forensic investigation and environmen- Combinational Libraries and Rapid Evolution tal science. It has built an industry, provoked a court Andrew Ellington, Indiana University case, and spawned a dozen books, countless papers THE FUTURE OF PCR and a journal. -
Preamble This Document Compares Affinity Tools for The
1/8 Whitepaper “Affinity tools for the immunoprecipitation of GFP-fusion proteins” Preamble This document compares affinity tools for the immunoprecipitation of GFP-fusion proteins: • conventional anti-GFP antibodies, and • GFP-Trap®, a ready-to-use pulldown reagent that comprises an anti-GFP-Nanobody. What is the GFP-Trap? What are the differences between the ChromoTek GFP-Trap and conventional anti-GFP antibodies? How does the GFP-Trap have a superior performance for the immunoprecipitation of GFP-fusion proteins? Introduction of GFP as a protein-tag Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) and variants are extensively used to study protein localization, interactions, and dynamics in cell biology. In many cases, data generated from microscopy studies requires complementary assays to obtain a more comprehensive set of information. Additional aspects including posttranslational modifications, DNA binding, enzymatic activity, and protein-protein interactions are investigated: Immunoprecipitation (IP), Co-IP, Co-IP for mass spectrometry (MS) analysis, and chromatin IP (ChIP) are used to complement microscopy measurements. Researchers now can apply GFP, GFP derivatives, and other fluorescent proteins using the constructs from microscopy analysis as epitope tags for reliable and sensitive biochemistry assays rather than re-cloning the genes coding for their protein of interest into vectors with traditional epitope tags. Furthermore, the performance of GFP-Trap makes GFP a first choice for biochemistry application. What is the GFP-Trap? The GFP-Trap Agarose is an anti-GFP-Nanobody covalently bound to agarose or magnetic agarose beads (Figure 1). It is used to immunoprecipitate GFP-fusion proteins from cell extracts of various organisms like mammals, plants, bacteria, fungi, insects, etc. -
Anti-E-Tag Mab-Magnetic Beads
M198-9 Page 1 For Research Use Only. P a Not for use in diagnostic procedures. g e Smart-IP Series 1 Anti-E-tag mAb-Magnetic beads CODE No. M198-9 CLONALITY Monoclonal CLONE 21D11 ISOTYPE Mouse IgG2a QUANTITY 20 tests (Slurry: 1 mL) SOURCE Purified IgG from hybridoma supernatant IMMUNOGEN KLH conjugated synthetic peptide, GAPVPYPDPLEPR (E-tag) REACTIVITY This antibody reacts with recombinant E-tagged protein. FORMURATION Covalently antibody conjugated 10 mg magnetic beads in 1 mL PBS/0.1% BSA/0.09% NaN3 *Azide may react with copper or lead in plumbing system to form explosive metal azides. Therefore, always flush plenty of water when disposing materials containing azide into drain. STORAGE This beads suspension is stable for one year from the date of purchase when stored at 4°C. APPLICATION-CONFIRMED Immunoprecipitation 50 L of beads slurry/sample For more information, please visit our web site http://ruo.mbl.co.jp/ MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL LABORATORIES CO., LTD. URL http://ruo.mbl.co.jp/ e-mail [email protected], TEL 052-238-1904 M198-9 Page 2 P a g PM020-7 Anti-DDDDK-tag-HRP-DirecT (polyclonal) RELATED PRODUCTS e PM020-8 Anti-DDDDK-tag-Agarose (polyclonal) Smart-IP series D291-3 Anti-His-tag (OGHis) (200 L) 3190 Magnetic Rack 2 D291-3S Anti-His-tag (OGHis) (50 L) M198-9 Anti-E-tag-Magnetic beads (21D11) D291-6 Anti-His-tag-Biotin (OGHis) M185-9 Anti-DDDDK-tag-Magnetic beads (FLA-1) D291-7 Anti-His-tag-HRP-DirecT (OGHis) D291-9 Anti-His-tag-Magnetic beads (OGHis) D291-8 Anti-His-tag-Agarose (OGHis) D153-9 Anti-GFP-Magnetic beads (RQ2) D291-A48 -
Cloning Technologies for Protein Expression and Purification
Cloning technologies for protein expression and purification James L Hartley Detailed knowledge of the biochemistry and structure of expedite the manipulations that are often required to individual proteins is fundamental to biomedical research. To obtain pure, active recombinant proteins. further our understanding, however, proteins need to be purified in sufficient quantities, usually from recombinant sources. Cloning for protein expression and Although the sequences of genomes are now produced in purification automated factories purified proteins are not, because their The required amount, purity, homogeneity, and activity behavior is much more variable. The construction of plasmids of the protein of interest usually determine the choice of and viruses to overexpress proteins for their purification is often expression context, vector and host. Usually the first tedious. Alternatives to traditional methods that are faster, easier consideration is what host cell to use. Expression in and more flexible are needed and are becoming available. Escherichia coli is fast, inexpensive and scaleable, and minimal post-translational modifications make proteins Addresses Protein Expression Laboratory, Research Technology Program, purified from E. coli relatively homogeneous and highly SAIC-Frederick, Inc., NCI-Frederick, Frederick, Maryland 21702, USA desirable for structural studies. However, in our experi- ence most eukaryotic proteins larger than 30 kDa are Corresponding author: Hartley, James L ([email protected]) unlikely to be properly folded when expressed in E. coli (JL Hartley et al., unpublished). Expression in mamma- Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2006, 17:359–366 lian cells is best for activity and native structure (includ- ing post-translational modifications), but yields are much This review comes from a themed issue on lower and costs are high.