Written Report 2
Written Report 2
Written Report 2
Science Case Study — “Hacking the Gut Microbiome: Could Engineered Bacteria Relieve Dysentery
Symptoms?”........................................................................................................................................................... 1
Bibliography........................................................................................................................................................... 8
Science Case Study
“Hacking the Gut Microbiome: Could Engineered Bacteria Relieve Dysentery Symptoms?”
Part 1 — Setting the Scene.
Dr. Karen Cruz felt like she hadn’t slept for a week. Running back and forth from one bed to another in the hot and arid climate
of Afghanistan had taken its toll on her. In a far-flung military outpost outside Kandahar, she had been tending to the soldiers for
several weeks after a dysentery outbreak gripped the troops. Even her nursing staff had succumbed to the illness, and she was
short staffed to begin with. Now, sitting at her desk, she began to review her notes:
January 21
and dehydration. The total count on bed rest was 56, plus these 15
Sheberghan
make 71, with only 30 beds in our medical tents. Keeping everyone Herat
Konduz
Zaranj
Kandahar
Luckily there have been no casualties, since we are well stocked
with IV fluids to keep the most gravely ill hydrated. However,
PA K I S TA N
Because it was nearly impossible for the troops at the outpost to avoid infection from the local food and water, Dr. Cruz hoped
maybe she could at least diminish the symptoms and help her patients recover more quickly. Dr. Cruz kept up to date with medical
research and noted that there has been a lot of recent interest in microbiomes — the collective genomes of all the microorganisms
living in and on an organism, including a human, and how they influence the outcome of acute and chronic illnesses. She also
remembered that one of her medical school professors was involved in research funded by Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA) to synthesize genetically engineered bacteria to combat gastrointestinal diseases like dysentery. She decided
to email her former professor to share her experience and find out more about his research. She was pleasantly surprised by his
response:
Thanks for reaching out to me and thank you for supporting our troops! The initial phases of
my research have proven quite successful and may be of use to you. Our research question is:
Can genetically engineered bacteria be used to reduce the symptoms of dysentery? We decided
to genetically engineer E. coli using transformation as a method to program the E. coli to
sense infection in the gastrointestinal tracts of mice and then stimulate the mouse’s own
immune system to fight the infection faster than it normally would—so the mice would be sick
for half the normal time. Our hypothesis is that it is possible to 1) engineer bacteria to
detect infection and 2) engineer the bacteria to induce a host immune response faster than
it would naturally occur once the engineered bacteria detected infection.
I’ve attached our initial data here with further explanation. Let me know what you think.
Sincerely,
Dr. Richardson
explorer.bio-rad.com 1
Dr. Cruz was excited to hear of the advancements in Dr. Nurse Brady: Yes, exactly. It’s true that some bacteria can
Richardson’s research. She hoped that this work would allow cause illnesses such as dysentery when they are present in
troops in the future to recover from dysentery sooner or even high numbers in the gut. They can do this in several ways.
prevent them from becoming ill. Dr. Richardson’s email made Some produce toxins that cause inflammation of the intestinal
sense, but there was still a lot Dr. Cruz did not understand lining, resulting in diarrhea. Others may cause ulcers to form
about genetically engineered bacteria: how they are made in the intestines, resulting in blood in solid waste. Some E. coli
and how they work in the mice’s intestines. Before looking strains are harmful, but other strains are not, particularly those
at the data, she decided to do a little research of her own to used in research labs like E. coli HB101, which are engineered
determine whether the engineered bacteria would be useful to so that they are not harmful. Dr. Richardson must be making
treat dysentery. She would need to understand the process of use of these harmless E. coli strains.
engineering the bacteria. She decided to consult with her head
nurse, Ms. Brady, who had a background in microbiology and Dr. Cruz: That makes sense. Can you tell me more about
genetics. microbiomes? I have read a little, but I gather that you have
been reading much more on the topic.
2
Part 2 — In Vitro Experimental Results.
Please see the latest data we gathered during trials with mice that have dysentery. We
conducted two experiments to determine 1) how the presence or absence of inducer molecules
similar to those associated with gastrointestinal infections would affect expression of the
reporter gene firefly luciferase and 2) if engineered E. coli expressing an immune-stimulating
gene could reduce the number of days mice exhibit symptoms of dysentery.
Promoter A Promoter B
Ori Ori
Fig 1. Schematic of plasmids used in transformation studies. For experiment 1, the gene of
interest is firefly luciferase gene. For experiment 2, the gene of interest is an
immune-stimulating gene.
Experiment 1:
The purpose of this experiment was to test whether the newly designed promoters are induced
by inflammatory signaling molecules and to compare the level of induced gene expression. In
order to do this we transformed gut-derived E. coli from mice with the plasmid containing
Promoter A and the firefly luciferase reporter gene (Strain A) or the plasmid containing
Promoter B and the firefly luciferase reporter gene (Strain B). We measured the amount
luciferase expressed downstream of the promoter by performing an assay to measure the amount
of light produced (measured as Relative Light Units) for each strain in the presence or
absence of the inducer. You can see our results below (Figure 2).
explorer.bio-rad.com 3
106
Strain A
Strain A + inducer
105
Relative light units (RLU)
Strain B
Strain B + inducer
104
103
102
101
0 6 12 18 24
Hours post-induction
Fig 2. Amount of gene expression in the presence or absence of inducer as measured in
Relative Light Units (RLU) over time.
Experiment 1 Questions
1. How are the plasmids Dr. Richardson’s team used in their experiments similar or different from those you used in your bacterial
transformation investigation(s)?
4. Which strain (A or B) in the presence or absence of an inducer generated the greatest amount of firefly luciferase as measured
in relative light units?
4
Part 3 — In Vivo Experimental Results.
Findings from Experiment 1 demonstrated that the promoters responded differently to the
administered inducer. In a follow-up study not shown here, we determined that the engineered
bacteria were able to survive in the mouse gut. Regulations set forth by the Institutional
Animal Care and Use Committee at our research center were followed in the humane handling of
mice in all of our experiments.
Experiment 2:
The purpose of our second experiment was to determine whether engineered bacteria would
sense infection and stimulate the immune system more rapidly, causing mice to recover more
quickly from dysentery than they would without the bacteria. Our scientists transformed gut-
derived E. coli from mice with a plasmid carrying Promoter A and the immune-stimulating gene
(Strain C) or Promoter B and the immune-stimulating gene (Strain D). Since several different
types of organisms can cause dysentery, we decided to test our engineered strains in
response to bacterial dysentery caused by E. coli O157:H7 or Shigella dysenteriae, or amoebic
dysentery caused by Entamoeba histolytica. The mice were divided into three major groups: those
that received no treatment, those that received engineered bacterial Strain C, or those
that received engineered bacterial Strain D. After three days, the mice were divided into
subgroups each receiving E. coli O157:H7, S. dysenteriae, or E. histolytica to cause dysentery.
After three days of incubation, mice began to show symptoms of dysentery (Figure 3A).
Duration of symptoms in days was tracked for each group (Figure 3B). All mice were provided
IV fluids to prevent dehydration during the course of the trial. The mice were monitored for
a period of 2 weeks. No deaths occurred during the course of the trial.
Infection and Recovery from Dysentery
A
Saline
3 days 1–3 days I.V. s
? days
Dysentery-causing Symptom-free
organisms introduced
Engineered bacteria Infection and
introduced recovery
B
Dysentery-Causing Days to Recovery
Bacteria Introduced Organism Introduced 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
explorer.bio-rad.com 5
Experiment 2 Questions
5. What conclusions can Dr. Richardson’s team draw from the data in Figure 3B?
6. What reason can you provide that explains why treatment with engineered bacteria using promoter A and immune-stimulating
gene (Strain C) was different than that using promoter B and immune-stimulating gene (Strain D)?
7. In what ways could this research be used in the future to help humans with dysentery, like those under the care of Dr. Cruz and
Nurse Brady?
8. What considerations might researchers need to make when comparing a mouse system to humans?
Given the results of Dr. Richardson’s data, Dr. Cruz and Nurse Brady felt that these findings demonstrated promise in relieving
dysentery symptoms in mice and could potentially lead to similar treatment of dysentery in humans in the future. This would
be particularly useful in cases such as the one at their military outpost where dysentery was so rampant it overwhelmed the
healthcare facility. However, more research would be necessary in order to fully understand how the engineered bacteria would
work in the human gut.
6
9. Consider what the next steps in this work may be in order to better understand how the engineered bacteria work in the mouse
gut to further reduce dysentery symptoms. Provide your ideas for the following:
a. Formulate a follow-up extension question that builds on the research findings presented in this case:
b. Why is your question useful in thinking about the process taking place in the mouse gut?
d. What data would need to be collected in order to test your hypothesis and answer your question?
e. What protocol steps would you need to take in order to test your hypothesis?
explorer.bio-rad.com 7
Bibliography
Aronson NE et al. (2006). In harm’s way: Infections in deployed American military forces. Clin Infect Dis 43, 1045−1051.
Cell Press (2015). MIT scientists hack one of the most common bacteria in the human intestines. AAAS, eurekalert.org/pub_
releases/2015-07/cp-msh070215.php, accessed May 4, 2016.
Forbush D (2016). These four companies are engineering the microbiome to do amazing things. Synbiota, synbiobeta.com/four-
companies-engineering-microbiome-amazing-things/, accessed May 4, 2016.
Kotula JW et al. (2014). Programmable bacteria detect and record an environmental signal in the mammalian gut. PNAS 111,
4838–4843.
Lawrence J (2015). Synthetic biology: Microbes made to manufacture drugs. The Pharmaceutical Journal, pharmaceutical-journal.
com/news-and-analysis/features/synthetic-biology-microbes-made-to-manufacture-drugs/20069575.article#fn_7, accessed May
4, 2016.
Mimee M et al. (2015). Programming a human commensal bacterium, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, to sense and respond to
stimuli in the murine gut microbiota. Cell Syst 1, 62–71.
Sanders JW et al. (2005). Military importance of diarrhea: Lessons from the Middle East. Curr Opin in Gastroenterol 21, 9–14.
Wyss Institute (2015). Re-booting the human gut. Wyss Institute, wyss.harvard.edu/viewpressrelease/203/rebooting-the-human-
gut, accessed May 4, 2016.
8
BIO-RAD TM