4.7 Article

Translational Detection of Indole by Complementary Cell-free Protein Synthesis Assay

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.900162

关键词

on-site analysis; indole; metabolites; cell-free protein synthesis; personal glucose meter

资金

  1. National Research Foundation(NRF) [2020R1A2C2013114, 2020R1A5A8017671]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2020R1A2C2013114] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gene expression can efficiently amplify DNA information into protein molecules. Cell-free protein synthesis (CFPS) offers a solution to analyze biomolecules in vitro without the problems associated with whole cell-based approaches. In this study, the authors developed a method to analyze indole using enzymatic conversion and amino acid-dependent CFPS, successfully estimating the indole concentration.
The information encoded in a single copy of DNA is processed into a plethora of protein molecules via the cascade of transcription and translation. Thus, the molecular process of gene expression can be considered an efficient biological amplifier from the viewpoint of synthetic biology. Cell-free protein synthesis (CFPS) enables the implementation of this amplification module for in vitro analysis of important biomolecules and avoids many of the problems associated with whole cell-based approaches. Here, we developed a method to analyze indole by using a combination of enzymatic conversion of indole and amino acid-dependent CFPS. In this method, indole molecules in the assay sample are used to generate tryptophan, which is incorporated into signal-generating proteins in the subsequent cell-free synthesis reaction. The activity of cell-free synthesized proteins was successfully used to estimate the indole concentration in the assay sample. In principle, the developed method could be extended to analyses of other important bioactive compounds.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据