Visible Emotion

cover image cover image

Cell-Free Cortisol Biosensor with Gradient Readout


01 — Abstract

Psychological stress is a pervasive health concern, yet current methods for monitoring stress biomarkers require electronic devices or clinical interpretation. The exploratory question is whether stress-related biomarkers can instead be detected and displayed using purely biological computation deployable outside of labs. This project aims to develop a cell-free biosensor on a skin-proximate fibrous substrate that detects stress through sweat cortisol and translates it into a visible spatial color gradient.

The hypothesis is that cell-free genetic circuits worn on the skin can detect when sweat cortisol exceeds a threshold and display the result as a visible color change, enabling people to perceive their physiological and mental state easily. Key milestones include validating dual-color spatial patterning on a fibrous substrate using cell-free quorum sensing circuits (Aim 1), integrating a cortisol-responsive aptamer-toehold switch circuit and tuning the detection threshold (Aim 2), and deploying to wearables/skin patches and expanding to multi-analyte (Aim 3).

Methods: cell-free protein synthesis, freeze-dried cell free reactions, LuxI/LuxR quorum sensing, RBS strength tuning for threshold control, DNA aptamer coupled to a toehold switch for cortisol detection.


02 — Project Aims

Aim 1: Validate Spatial Patterning Platform

Demonstrate that cell-free quorum sensing circuits can produce a spatial color output on filter paper. A constitutive T7-LuxI sender circuit expresses LuxI (AHL synthase), which enzymatically produces AHL. AHL diffuses outward and activates two receiver constructs: a strong-RBS receiver driving one color (low activation threshold) and a weak-RBS receiver driving another color (high activation threshold). Validation includes characterizing the AHL dose-response for both receivers, confirming sender-receiver communication in cell-free, and testing spatial gradient formation on filter paper. DNA constructs were designed in Benchling and synthesized by Twist Bioscience, derived from validated Addgene plasmids (#193624, #193625, #193626).

Aim 2: Cortisol-Triggered Stress Patch

Replace the constitutive sender with a cortisol-responsive circuit. Cortisol in sweat binds a DNA aptamer, releasing a trigger strand that activates a toehold switch driving LuxI (AHL synthase) expression. This links the spatial color gradient directly to sweat cortisol concentration. This aim includes designing the aptamer-toehold-LuxI construct, tuning the detection threshold to physiologically relevant cortisol levels, and validating the full cascade from cortisol input to spatial color output in cell-free.

Aim 3: Multi-Analyte Biochemical Portrait

Deploy the system onto a wearable skin patch and expand to multiple sensor zones, each targeting a different sweat biomarker (e.g., cortisol, lactate), each producing a distinct color gradient that together creates a composite body-state readout. Long-term vision: enabling a new category of diagnostic wearable that is disposable, shelf-stable, and readable by the wearer. It addresses a major barrier in personal health monitoring. The broader concept reframes the body’s invisible biochemistry as something expressive, bridging synthetic biology, wearable design, and personal health.


03 — Background

Literature

Pardee et al. (2014, Cell) demonstrated that cell-free gene circuits can be freeze-dried onto paper and reactivated by adding water. This foundational work established that synthetic biology diagnostics could operate outside the lab on inexpensive, portable substrates without living cells. However, these systems produce binary yes/no readouts with no ability to distinguish different concentration levels of an analyte.

Basu et al. (2005, Nature) showed that AHL quorum sensing in living E. coli can generate spatial fluorescence patterns through molecular diffusion on agar plates. However, this required living cells and multi-day incubation, limiting deployment outside laboratories.

Novelty

This project combines the portability of cell-free paper platforms with the spatial computation of AHL diffusion patterning — a combination that has not been previously demonstrated. Existing cell-free biosensors produce binary measurements; by deploying quorum sensing, it enables threshold-based spatial computation with non-binary output. Different RBS strengths create concentration-dependent activation at distinct thresholds, enabling the system to convey how much of an analyte is present. The system also introduces sequential signal processing to cell-free biosensing: rather than a single receptor directly producing output, the signal passes through multiple stages, where each can be independently tuned.

Why It Matters

Chronic stress is a growing public health concern linked to cardiovascular disease, immune dysfunction, and mental health disorders, yet most people have no way to monitor their stress levels in daily life. Existing cortisol monitoring devices are either clinical lab tests or expensive electronic wearable sensors. This creates an accessibility barrier where continuous stress monitoring is available only to those with access. A paper-based biosensor that translates cortisol into a visible pattern reduces the cost and complexity of stress monitoring to the level of a disposable sticker. If the multi-analyte vision is realized, the platform could shift the paradigm of personal health monitoring from device-dependent digital readouts to material-based biological one, where the wearable itself performs the sensing, processing, and display.

Ethical Implications

This project detects a biomarker associated with emotional and physiological state, raising implications around privacy, autonomy and beneficence. The principle of autonomy requires that the wearer has full control over when to use the device and who can see the result. A visible color change on the body could unintentionally disclose stress to others, so the design must ensure the readout is private to the wearer. The system should genuinely help people understand their state, not create new anxiety. If the readout is inaccurate or misinterpreted, the device could cause harm rather than empowerment, turning a wellness tool into a source of stress itself.

To address these concerns, the sensor should be positioned where only the wearer can observe it, and accompanied by clear communication that it indicates cortisol level, not a clinical diagnosis. A key assumption that could be wrong is that sweat cortisol reliably reflects psychological stress, since cortisol also rises during exercise, illness, or normal circadian cycles. An unintended consequence is dual use: if employers or institutions require wearing the device, it shifts from a personal tool to a surveillance tool, violating the autonomy it was designed to support. Alternative approaches include pairing the readout with contextual information (time of day, activity) or framing it strictly as a reflection tool.


04 — DNA Design

Quorum Sensing Mechanism

The system uses the LuxI/LuxR quorum sensing pathway, a cell-cell communication system natively found in the marine bacterium Vibrio fischeri (Engebrecht et al., 1983, Cell). Three molecular components are needed:

ComponentRole
LuxI (AHL synthase)Enzyme that synthesizes AHL (3OC6-HSL) from substrates in the cell-free lysate
LuxR (transcription factor)Inactive alone; when AHL binds LuxR, the complex becomes an active transcription factor
pLux (promoter)Only transcribed when the LuxR-AHL complex is bound to it

Signal flow: LuxI produces AHL → AHL diffuses and binds LuxR → LuxR-AHL activates pLux → pLux drives fluorescent reporter

From Three Plasmids to Two Constructs

The original system from the Dora Tang lab (Gonzales et al. 2023, ChemSystemsChem) uses three separate plasmids:

PlasmidFunction
#193625T7 → LuxR
#193624pLux → eGFP
#193626T7 → LuxI

Their protocol adds LuxR and pLux-eGFP as two separate DNAs to the same cell-free reaction. I simplified this by combining LuxR production and the output reporter onto a single plasmid, so each receiver is self-contained: one DNA instead of two, LuxR-to-reporter ratio can also be tuned with RBS strength.

Each receiver has two transcription units on one backbone:

  1. T7 → RBS → LuxR → terminator: T7 RNAP in lysate constitutively produces LuxR.
  2. pLux → RBS → reporter → terminator: stays silent until AHL + LuxR activates pLux.

LuxR is always on; reporter only turns on when AHL is present.

 

Construct 1: Receiver — Strong RBS, mVenus (Low Threshold)

Receiver Strong RBS - mVenus Receiver Strong RBS - mVenus
PartDescription
T7 promoterConstitutive in BL21 DE3 Star lysate
Strong RBS (pET RBS)High translation rate → lots of LuxR protein
6xHis-TEV-LuxRTranscription factor, from Addgene #193625
T7 terminatorEnd of first transcription unit
pLux promoterAHL-responsive, from Addgene #193624
RBS (BBa_B0034)Standard ribosome binding site
mVenusYellow fluorescent reporter, E. coli codon optimized
T7 terminatorEnd of second transcription unit

Strong RBS → abundant LuxR → low AHL activates pLux → mVenus turns on far from source.

 

Construct 2: Receiver — Weak RBS, mScarlet3 (High Threshold)

Receiver Weak RBS - mScarlet3 Receiver Weak RBS - mScarlet3
PartDescription
T7 promoterConstitutive in BL21 DE3 Star lysate
Weak RBS (BBa_B0032)Low translation rate → less LuxR protein
6xHis-TEV-LuxRTranscription factor, from Addgene #193625
T7 terminatorEnd of first transcription unit
pLux promoterAHL-responsive, from Addgene #193624
RBS (BBa_B0034)Standard ribosome binding site
mScarlet3Red fluorescent reporter, E. coli codon optimized
T7 terminatorEnd of second transcription unit

Weak RBS → less LuxR → needs high AHL → mScarlet3 only turns on near source.

 

Construct 3: Sender — Constitutive LuxI

Sender T7-LuxI Sender T7-LuxI
PartDescription
T7 promoterConstitutive in BL21 DE3 Star lysate
RBS (pET RBS)Standard ribosome binding site
6xHis-TEV-LuxIAHL synthase, from Addgene #193626
T7 terminatorEnd transcription

Constitutively produces LuxI → synthesizes AHL → AHL diffuses outward creating a concentration gradient.

 

Expected spatial output:

ZoneAHL levelWhat turns on
Near senderHighBoth mScarlet3 (red) + mVenus (yellow)
Far from senderLowOnly mVenus (yellow)
Very farNoneNeither

05 — While Waiting for DNA… GFP Round!

Before my Twist constructs arrived, I used a constitutive GFP cell-free kit to practice and test on filter paper. The goals were to (1) test whether cell-free reactions produce detectable fluorescence gradients at different DNA concentrations, (2) test whether cell-free reactions work on filter paper without the freeze-dried approach in Pardee’s paper.

DNA Dilution

DNA serial dilution DNA serial dilution Serial dilution from 50 nM stock

TubeConcentrationHow to make
150 nMOriginal stock
225 nM100 uL of tube 1 + 100 uL water
312.5 nM100 uL of tube 2 + 100 uL water
46.25 nM100 uL of tube 3 + 100 uL water
53.1 nM100 uL of tube 4 + 100 uL water
61.6 nM100 uL of tube 5 + 100 uL water
70 nMNuclease-free water

Cell-Free Reactions

For each concentration, I prepared a 60 uL reaction in PCR tubes (kit recipe scaled 3x):

ComponentVolume
Reagent Mix30 uL
Lysate18 uL
DNA working stock6 uL
Water6 uL
Total60 uL

Cell-free reaction preparation Cell-free reaction preparation Pipetting cell-free reactions

Cell-free reactions in PCR tubes Cell-free reactions in PCR tubes Reactions ready to go

Depositing on Filter Paper

I tested three layouts on Whatman Grade 1 filter papers:

Radial gradient — dots arranged radially from center outward, highest concentration in the center. Simulates the spatial gradient expected from AHL diffusion.

Radial gradient layout Radial gradient layout

Linear gradient strips — each concentration deposited as a continuous strip, high to low.

Linear gradient strips Linear gradient strips

Linear gradient points — each concentration as a single point in a line, high to low.

Linear gradient points Linear gradient points

Humidity Chamber

A key challenge was keeping filter paper wet during incubation. Cell-free reactions require water to function, but liquid on filter paper absorbs and evaporates quickly. I built a simple humidity chamber: petri dish with water on the bottom, filter paper resting on the rim, sealed with the lid. Wet kimwipes in ziplock bags provided additional humidity.

Humidity chamber setup Humidity chamber setup Humidity chamber design

Humidity chamber in incubator Humidity chamber in incubator Into the warm room

Results — GFP

At 22 hours, faint fluorescence began appearing:

Faint fluorescence at 22 hours Faint fluorescence at 22 hours 22 hours — faint but promising

At 42 hours, results were clearly visible. The linear gradient points were the most successful because they had no direct contact with water but remained humid. The linear gradient strips also showed clear fluorescence despite partial dilution from contact with water. The radial gradient was barely visible due to insufficient volume per spot.

Successful fluorescent spot 1 Successful fluorescent spot 1

Successful fluorescent spot 2 Successful fluorescent spot 2 Successful fluorescent linear spot

Linear gradient strip Linear gradient strip Diluted linear strips

All three filter papers at 42 hours All three filter papers at 42 hours All three layouts at 42 hours

The remaining reactions in PCR tubes confirmed GFP expression across all concentrations.

GFP expression in tubes GFP expression in tubes GFP fluorescence visible across concentration series

Validated: cell-free reactions can produce visible fluorescent protein on filter paper — a preliminary proof of the core platform for cell-free circuits on a fibrous substrate.

Key takeaways: Paper-based reactions needed significantly longer incubation than tube reactions. Volume per spot is critical. The primary challenge was maintaining humidity without dilution. Protocol adjustments for the actual DNA experiments: larger deposition volumes (15-25 uL) and more careful humidity chamber design.


06 — DNA Arrived the Night Before!

Twist DNA delivery Twist DNA delivery The moment of truth

Of the three ordered constructs, only two were successfully synthesized and delivered: the weak-RBS mScarlet3 receiver (5885 ng) and the constitutive T7-LuxI sender (555 ng). The strong-RBS mVenus receiver failed Twist synthesis. This meant all experiments would use only the high-threshold receiver, and the planned dual-color gradient comparison could not be tested in this round.

Experimenting at Ginkgo Experimenting at Ginkgo

 

Preparation

DNA resuspension:

DNATotal amountWater addedFinal concentration
Receiver (weak RBS, mScarlet3)5885 ng59 uL~100 ng/uL
Sender (T7-LuxI)555 ng22 uL~25 ng/uL

AHL stock preparation: Dissolved 10 mg AHL powder (Sigma K3007, MW 213.23) in 469 uL DMSO → 100 mM main stock. Diluted to 1 mM water-based stock (10 uL stock + 990 uL water), then serial diluted into full-log and half-log working stocks:

Dissolving AHL in DMSO Dissolving AHL in DMSO AHL powder dissolving in DMSO

TubeLabelHow to make
1AHL-1mMFrom 1 mM stock
2AHL-100uM100 uL of tube 1 + 900 uL water
3AHL-10uM100 uL of tube 2 + 900 uL water
4AHL-1uM100 uL of tube 3 + 900 uL water
5AHL-100nM100 uL of tube 4 + 900 uL water
6AHL-300uM300 uL of tube 1 + 700 uL water
7AHL-30uM300 uL of tube 2 + 700 uL water
8AHL-3uM300 uL of tube 3 + 700 uL water
9AHL-300nM300 uL of tube 4 + 700 uL water
10AHL-30nM300 uL of tube 5 + 700 uL water

AHL serial dilution AHL serial dilution 10 working stocks spanning 5 orders of magnitude

 

Experiment 1: AHL Dose-Response

Purpose: Determine the AHL activation threshold for the weak-RBS mScarlet3 receiver. Expected: Sigmoidal dose-response — low AHL = no fluorescence, high AHL = saturated, inflection = threshold.

Each reaction: 30 uL. All wells identical except AHL concentration.

WellReagent MixLysateReceiver DNA (100ng/uL)AHL (3 uL)WaterTotalFinal [AHL]
A115 uL9 uL3 uLTube 1 (1mM)030 uL100 uM
A215 uL9 uL3 uLTube 6 (300uM)030 uL30 uM
A315 uL9 uL3 uLTube 2 (100uM)030 uL10 uM
A415 uL9 uL3 uLTube 7 (30uM)030 uL3 uM
A515 uL9 uL3 uLTube 3 (10uM)030 uL1 uM
A615 uL9 uL3 uLTube 8 (3uM)030 uL300 nM
A715 uL9 uL3 uLTube 4 (1uM)030 uL100 nM
A815 uL9 uL3 uLTube 9 (300nM)030 uL30 nM
A915 uL9 uL3 uLTube 5 (100nM)030 uL10 nM
A1015 uL9 uL3 uLTube 10 (30nM)030 uL3 nM
A1115 uL9 uL3 uLnone3 uL30 uL0
A1215 uL9 uL0none6 uL30 uLno DNA

 

Experiment 2: Sender + Receiver Reaction

Purpose: Test whether LuxI sender produces enough AHL to activate the receiver. Expected: B1 > B2 > B3 > B4 (dose-dependent). B5 confirms receiver works.

WellReagent MixLysateReceiver DNA (100ng/uL)Sender DNA (25ng/uL)AHLWaterTotalPurpose
B115 uL9 uL3 uL3 uL (75 ng)0030 uLHigh sender
B215 uL9 uL3 uL2 uL (50 ng)01 uL30 uLMedium sender
B315 uL9 uL3 uL1 uL (25 ng)02 uL30 uLLow sender
B415 uL9 uL3 uL003 uL30 uLNegative
B515 uL9 uL3 uL0Tube 1 → 3 uL030 uLPositive

 

All 17 reactions loaded into the same 96-well plate — Experiment 1 in row A, Experiment 2 in row B.

Well plate setup Well plate setup 17 wells loaded and ready

Plate centrifuged to remove air bubbles before reading.

Centrifuging plate Centrifuging plate

Plate reader set to 37°C, kinetic reads every 30 minutes (mScarlet3: Ex 569 nm / Em 592 nm).

Plate in plate reader Plate in plate reader 12+ hours of kinetic data collection

 

Plate Reader Results

Plate reader kinetic data Plate reader kinetic data Initial kinetic fluorescence data over ~12 hours

The initial kinetic data showed noisy, low-amplitude signals (30-200 RFU range). We suspected the plastic plate seal was causing optical interference through reflection and scattering. After 12 hours of incubation, we later removed the plate seal and re-read the plate with auto gain enabled, producing much cleaner single-timepoint data:

Plate reader data after seal removal and auto gain Plate reader data after seal removal and auto gain Single read after seal removal with auto gain — signal range now 150-5400 RFU

Experiment 1 — AHL Dose-Response:

Well[AHL]RFU
A110 (no AHL)5397 ← highest
A7100 nM2193
A230 uM1970
A51 uM1805
A910 nM1445
A1100 uM1442
A43 uM1375
A310 uM1321
A6300 nM806
A103 nM784
A830 nM744
A12no DNA261 ← baseline

Experiment 2 — Sender + Receiver:

WellConditionRFU
B3Low sender (25 ng)2382
B4Negative (no sender)2352
B2Med sender (50 ng)2304
B5Positive (AHL)2067
B1High sender (75 ng)1178 ← lowest

mScarlet3 IS being expressed. A11 = 5397 vs A12 = 261, a 20x difference confirming functional mScarlet3 production from the receiver construct.

However, no AHL dose-response was observed. The no-AHL control (A11) produced the highest signal, and AHL wells showed no sigmoidal trend. Experiment 2 showed a similar inverse pattern: B1 (most sender DNA) had the lowest signal.

Interpretation: T7 read-through + resource competition. The T7 terminator between LuxR and pLux-mScarlet3 does not fully stop T7 RNAP, which reads through and constitutively transcribes mScarlet3 regardless of AHL. This constitutive expression dominates the signal. Adding AHL (with trace DMSO) or sender DNA reduces signal through mild reaction inhibition and resource competition — more components in the reaction means fewer resources available for mScarlet3 production.

What this means: The cell-free system expresses functional fluorescent protein, but the single-plasmid design introduces T7 read-through that masks AHL-responsive behavior. This validates the original Gonzales approach of using separate plasmids for LuxR and the reporter, where T7 read-through from one plasmid cannot reach the reporter on another. Next steps: use a stronger double terminator (BBa_B0015) between the two transcription units, or separate LuxR and the reporter back onto two plasmids.

 

Experiment 3: Spatial Gradient on Filter Paper

Two papers prepared for comparison: one with pure AHL at center, one with sender cell-free mix — testing spatial communication on paper.

Receiver mix (one batch, split across both papers):

ComponentVolume
Reagent Mix50 uL
Lysate30 uL
Receiver DNA (100 ng/uL)10 uL (1000 ng)
Nuclease-free water10 uL
Total100 uL

Sender mix (for Paper 2 center):

ComponentVolume
Reagent Mix30 uL
Lysate18 uL
Sender DNA (25 ng/uL)6 uL (150 ng)
Nuclease-free water6 uL
Total60 uL

Receiver spots (15 uL each) deposited radially around a center point on two Whatman Grade 1 filter papers (110 mm).

Paper 1: AHL center with receiver spots Paper 1: AHL center with receiver spots Paper 1 — center with pure AHL

Paper 2: Sender center with receiver spots Paper 2: Sender center with receiver spots Paper 2 — center with sender cell-free mix

Both papers placed in humidity chambers, incubated at 37°C overnight.

Filter papers incubating Filter papers incubating Humidity chambers sealed and incubating

Results - Experiment 3

Results pending; filter paper experiments require extended incubation (24-42 hours based on GFP practice)


07 — References