Team:ESBS-Strasbourg/Notebook/Microfluidics
From 2010.igem.org
{|
Applications
The complete potential of this technology is not yet understood, so the following list can just give a glimpse of possible applications:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Microfluidic chip creation
There are a lot of different possibilities with this method and so a lot of different ways to design an experience. The first step is to design the micro canal system wanted depending on the needs required for the experiment. After an impression, a mask of the system is realized and a mold created from this mask. Next the chip is casted by using a polymer. For the microfluidic chips used in biology there are two mains basis polymers PMMA (PolyMethyl MethAcrylate) and PDMS (PolyDiMethyl Siloxane). For chemical reactions or enzymatic reactions, droplets are usually water in an oil fluid. For the test on whole cells, the perfluorocarbon are most commonly used (Perfluorocarbons can dissolve more than 20 times the amount of O2, and three times the amount of CO2, than water. A mouse can survive one hour undamaged immerged in oxygenated perfluorocarbon)
Figure 1: A basic microfluidic chip with three different inputs and one output.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Microfluidic in our project
Unfortunately the time frame of the project and process in the summer did not allow us to use this technique; most of the preparation and experimental planning were ready. However from the beginning, we had the idea to use microfluidic as a tool to characterize our system and different promoters. We wanted to use the advantage of the system to separate the cells in single droplets where they could grow. Cells are separated at the beginning during the “load phase”. One unique cell is present which gives a very clear signal. In our scenario the tagged protein is GFP. After the cells would have been separated we could measure the GFP signal for each cell which would have given us an estimation of the protein concentration of GFP before the activation of the system. Then we would have activated the protease with a light impulse and then measure the time the GFP needs to vanish. The test could have been conducted in thousands of cells, allowing the collection of a huge amount of data and therefore obtain a very precise characterization of the system in vivo. It could have helped to determine, the pulse time and intensity needed for activation/deactivation, the delay necessary for degradation of all tagged proteins, the quantity of proteins through degradation regulation after a succession of activating and deactivating pulses. As a second application of microfluidics in our project, we wanted to use this tool to characterize the GFP expression level with different inducible promoter send with the biobrick registry pack. For this matter it is important to know the half-life and the maturation time of the GFP used. We would have used a well known promoter as referential (may be BBC_J23100)
Figure 3: Scheme representing the microfluidic channel that would have been used for the protease and promoter characterizations
We are all disappointed that the conducting of these experimentations was not possible. Microfluidics seems to be an excellent technique and it would have been much rewarding for us to handle this technology. For the next generation of iGEM teams the microfluidic is a very attractive technique for the characterization of biobrick parts as promoters as this technique can, after the set up, give thousands measured points for many different parts in a very short time. All the knowledge and the data shown are from the professor Andrew Griffiths at the “Laboratoire de Biologie Chimique – ISIS (Institut de Science et d'Ingénierie Supramoléculaires) – CNRS UMR 7006”. |