Team:Austin Texas/Safety


Revision as of 21:09, 21 August 2012 by Aurko (Talk | contribs)

Use this page to answer the questions on the safety page.

1. Would any of your project ideas raise safety issues in terms of:
a. researcher safety,
Our host organism, E. coli B, is non-pathogenic. Our project does make use of N-3-oxo-dodecanoyl-L-Homoserine lactone to induce the production of our recombinase. Exposure of this auto-inducer through skin or eyes or inhalation or ingestion can result in dizziness, drowsiness, headache nausea and vomiting.
b. public safety, or
In our model, N-3-oxo-dodecanoyl-L-Homoserine lactone works with LasR to induce CRE recombinase. Pseudomonas aeruginosa uses a similar pathway, in which the autoinducer binds to LasR, promoting the expression of various virulence factors tied to infection. Since P. aeruginosa uses this auto-inducer to gauge it's communal strength in preparation for virulence, presence of external auto-inducer would lead to premature virulence at insufficient concentrations. Excepting the immuno-compromised, hosts should be able to deal with such low levels of virulence with ease.
c. environmental safety?
Depletion of global caffeine supplies?

2. Do any of the new BioBrick parts (or devices) that you made this year raise any safety issues? If yes,
a. did you document these issues in the Registry?
b. how did you manage to handle the safety issue?
c. How could other teams learn from your experience?

3. Is there a local biosafety group, committee, or review board at your institution?
Yes, UT's Institutional Biosafety Committee reviews research involving potentially dangerous biological agents and substances.
a. If yes, what does your local biosafety group think about your project?
b. If no, which specific biosafety rules or guidelines do you have to consider in your country?

4. Do you have any other ideas how to deal with safety issues that could be useful for future iGEM competitions? How could parts, devices and systems be made even safer through biosafety engineering?