Hi Sutapa,

Slow expression did work in my case. I had to induce with 100uM IPTG, and
grow cells at 10C for 48 hours. It left at least 50% of expressed protein
in soluble fraction.

Best,
Swarna

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:52 AM, AJV <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Sutapa,
>
> The input from other commenters has been great, so I'll stick to
> discussing only the portion of your question regarding baculovirus.
>
> In our experience, codon-optimization has resulted in little to no
> improvement of total protein yields or protein solubility in baculovirus.
> We routinely work on challenging targets (mammalian membrane proteins), and
> while we don't have mounds of data on the subject, we have expressed enough
> eukaryotic protein families to say this with some confidence. Our
> workaround to bad expressers has been to screen orthologs of the protein of
> interest, using life's natural codon diversity to our advantage.
>
> That being said, my suggestion would be to attempt baculovirus again, as
> there must have been a good reason for you to try it in the first place.
> Not knowing whether your gene is eukaryotic, specifically mammalian, or if
> post-translational modifications could be important; but if any of these
> are the case, baculovirus would be one of the best systems to pound on.
>
> We test several variables that always result in "seeing" some amount of
> protein expression with baculovirus (depending on detection method) --
> time, temperature, and MOI. Once high titer / low passage virus is obtained
> and titered (can't stress the importance of titering enough), I usually set
> up six 50mL suspension cultures of Sf9 cells and infect them at 2x10^6
> cells/mL, using MOIs of 0.2, 2.0, and 20.0, in duplicate. After 24hrs at
> 27°C, I place three of the cultures at each MOI in an identical shaking
> incubator at 20-23°C, and leave the other three at 27°C. I then remove ~5mL
> of culture at various time points (about every 12 or 24hrs depending on
> scheduling), up to ~120hrs for all six samples. Then, crack the cells and
> use your detection method of choice (GFP, Western, Coomassie) to assess
> expression. This workflow can be repeated using other insect cell types
> (Sf21, Tn5), as they all will vary in their protein expression capabilities.
>
> Hope this answers part of your question, and results in some quality
> sample.
>
> Best,
>
> Alex
> _____________________________________
> Alex J. Vecchio, Ph.D.
> Postdoctoral Fellow
> University of California, San Francisco
> Department of Biochemistry & Biophysics
> Laboratory of Robert M. Stroud, Ph.D.
>

Reply via email to