Team:ESBS-Strasbourg/Results/Modelling
From 2010.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Line 502: | Line 502: | ||
<div class="desc"> | <div class="desc"> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | To automate the process of creation of new synthetic bio-systems | + | To automate the process of creation of new synthetic bio-systems, it is interesting to develop a specific design flow like the one we use in microelectronics. One of the main assets in microelectronic design flow for digital systems is the ability to describe a system at different levels of abstraction. |
<br><br> | <br><br> | ||
- | For our system we | + | For our system, we focused the modeling on two different level of abstraction. The first one is a high-level model and the second one is a low-level model. For each model we show the simulation results and, as a conclusion, we discuss the potential of the models we proposed. |
</div> | </div> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 522: | Line 522: | ||
<div class="desc"> | <div class="desc"> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | As in digital electronics, multiple abstraction levels can be defined. The highest consists in the function of the system. This model, also called logical model, because it is based on logical equations, is a high level model. It is interesting to use high-level models, with fast simulations, to validate the concept of a bio-system. | + | As in digital electronics, multiple abstraction levels can be defined. The highest one consists in the function of the system. This model, also called logical model, because it is based on logical equations, is a high level model. It is interesting to use high-level models, with fast simulations, to validate the concept of a bio-system. |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 532: | Line 532: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | Based on these specifications, we deduce a group of logical equations. To | + | Based on these specifications, we deduce a group of logical equations. To create the model we use VHDL language, which is a hardware description language (HDL). The following VHDL code corresponds to our model: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 538: | Line 538: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | We simulate this VHDL code with Dolphin SMASH 5.12 and we obtain followings results: | + | We simulate this VHDL code with Dolphin SMASH 5.12 and we obtain the followings results: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 544: | Line 544: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | We see that when the light has a 730 nm wavelength the TAG-protein is not degraded. When the light | + | We see that when the light has a 730 nm wavelength the TAG-protein is not degraded. When the light reaches 660 nm, the TAG-protein is degraded after a 10 second delay, which corresponds to the time of the phytochrome activation and is arbitrarily fixed in the model. This delay was introduced after the low-level simulation to make this model fit the low-level ones. |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 572: | Line 572: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | The signal flow model is a low-level model. This kind of model is used to predict its behavior with accuracy and is based on equations to compute different concentrations. All biological mechanisms are based on chemical equations linking the concentration of chemical species involved. These chemical equations can be transformed into ordinary differential equations (ODEs), which are integrated to the model. | + | The signal flow model is a low-level model. This kind of model is used to predict its behavior with accuracy and is based on equations to compute different concentrations. All biological mechanisms are based on chemical equations linking the concentration of chemical species involved to each other. These chemical equations can be transformed into ordinary differential equations (ODEs), which are integrated to the model. |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | First we will see a presentation of the system and the different interactions between states. Then we will explain the biological equations used to make the model and | + | First we will see a presentation of the system and the different interactions between states. Then we will explain the biological equations used to make the model and we will show simulation results for each part of the system. |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | <div class="heading">b. | + | <div class="heading">b. System's presentation</div> |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | Our system is | + | Our system is made up of a block named Phyto (including ClpP, ClpX and the phytochrome) and an other block, the DAS_GPF_ PIF chain where GFP is the TAG protein which is used to illustrate the mechanism. This system can be boiled down to the following four states scheme: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 587: | Line 587: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | The first state is the state where Phyto and DAS_GFP_PIF are free. Then the phytochrome can form a complex with DAS, Phyto_DAS, with k<sub>1,0</sub> the coefficient of this complexation, or with PIF, Phyto_PIF, with k<sub>0,1</sub> the coefficient of this complexation. The last state is the Phyto_DAS_PIF complex which is reached from Phyto_DAS state by the complexation coefficient k<sub>0,1</sub>*c<sub>1,1</sub> or from Phyto_PIF by k<sub>1,0</sub>*c<sub>1,1</sub>, where c<sub>1,1</sub> is the the coupling factor between the two sites of complexation. | + | The first state is the state where Phyto and DAS_GFP_PIF are free. Then the phytochrome can form a complex with DAS, called Phyto_DAS, with k<sub>1,0</sub> the coefficient of this complexation, or with PIF, called Phyto_PIF, with k<sub>0,1</sub> the coefficient of this complexation. The last state is the Phyto_DAS_PIF complex which is reached from Phyto_DAS state by the complexation coefficient k<sub>0,1</sub>*c<sub>1,1</sub> or from Phyto_PIF by k<sub>1,0</sub>*c<sub>1,1</sub>, where c<sub>1,1</sub> is the the coupling factor between the two sites of complexation. |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 599: | Line 599: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | k<sub>1,0</sub> is very small so the formation of Phyto_DAS is scarce. k<sub>0,1</sub> is a coefficient which depends on the | + | k<sub>1,0</sub> is very small so the formation of Phyto_DAS is scarce. k<sub>0,1</sub> is a coefficient which depends on the light's wavelength and this variance corresponds to the different physical structures of the PIF receptor (active or passive). With a 660 nm red light, PIF receptor is active and this coefficient is high but with a 730 nm infra-red light, PIF receptor is inactive and k<sub>0,1</sub> becomes very small. So to model this coefficient we use a Gaussian function centered on 660: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 611: | Line 611: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | To find the ODEs for the different reactions of complexation brought into play, we start with a simple complexation between two species A and B: | + | To find the ODEs for the different reactions of complexation brought into play, we start with a simple complexation between two species, A and B: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 617: | Line 617: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | where k<sub>on</sub> is the coefficient of the complex’s formation and k<sub>off</sub> the coefficient of the complex’s dissociation. The ODE of this reaction which gives the concentration of the complex AB is the following: | + | where k<sub>on</sub> is the coefficient of the complex’s formation and k<sub>off</sub> the coefficient of the complex’s dissociation. The ODE of this reaction which gives the concentration of the complex AB is the following one: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 623: | Line 623: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | k<sub>degr</sub> is | + | k<sub>degr</sub> is only the constant of natural degradation of the complex. Using the same principle, we deduced the following equations for our system: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 644: | Line 644: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | where k<sub>tr</sub> is the kinetic constant of transcription, K<sub>p</sub> the Hill’s constant representing strength of the activator or repressor, n<sub>p</sub> the Hill’s coefficient (positive for an activator and negative for a repressor) and d<sub>mRNA</sub> the degradation’s coefficient of mRNA. | + | where k<sub>tr</sub> is the kinetic constant of transcription, K<sub>p</sub> the Hill’s constant representing the strength of the activator or repressor, n<sub>p</sub> the Hill’s coefficient (positive for an activator and negative for a repressor) and d<sub>mRNA</sub> the degradation’s coefficient of mRNA. |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | + | The same way, the synthesis of P protein from mRNA is defined by: | |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 662: | Line 662: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | + | where PIF_l and DAS_l are the concentrations of PIF and DAS linked to the DAS_GFP_PIF chain already complexed at the other boundary (respectively DAS and PIF). We obtain the same equation for the different species. This is because we compute separately DAS, PIF and phytochrome’s concentrations for the complexation mechanism but we do have the same DAS_GFP_PIF free chain concentration as the free phytochrome concentration. So for the simulation results we just show the phytochrome and the DAS_GFP_PIF concentration because DAS and PIF concentrations are the same: | |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 671: | Line 671: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | The last but the most important concentration to show is TAG protein | + | The last but the most important concentration to show is the TAG protein's (GFP) concentration. First we compute the concentration of GFP produced, GFP_prod, with the same mechanism introduced in the previous part. Then, the concentration of phytochrome fixed GFP (ready to be degraded), GFP_l, is given by: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 677: | Line 677: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
- | Finally we obtain the effective concentration of GFP | + | Finally we obtain the effective concentration of GFP with the following equation, including the degradation (with d<sub>GFP</sub> degradation coefficient) of the fixed GFP: |
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> |
Revision as of 19:12, 25 October 2010
{|
>