Team:TU Munich/Results/BBF RFC25

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(→The Survey: Integrating opinions and ideas from the community.)
Line 12: Line 12:
<div class="bezel mfull">
<div class="bezel mfull">
Text describing the idea.
Text describing the idea.
 +
 +
====Question 1:====
 +
Which iGEM Team do you belong to?
 +
 +
====Question 2:====
 +
 +
Do you use BioBricks from the registry for your project?
 +
 +
====Question 3:====
 +
 +
How would you describe the average quality of the part descriptions that you dealt with?
 +
 +
====Question 4:====
 +
 +
Do you think a standardization of the part descriptions could increase the usability of BioBricks in the future?
 +
 +
====Question 5:====
 +
 +
We propose to use a standardized form for the part descriptions of BioBricks in the Parts Registry similar to the following: [http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_K801999:Design].<br> Would you like to use such a standardized template providing a structure in the source code that just needs to be completed?
 +
 +
====Question 6:====
 +
 +
Do you have suggestions what kind of additional information should be included in the standardized part descriptions? So far the following information are included: * keywords, abbreviations, other versions of the BioBrick, RFC standard, deleted restriction sites, truncations of the nucleotidesequence - if coding for proteins * amino acid replacements, posttranslational modifications, enzymatic activities, cytotoxicity, source of the construct, originating organism, codonoptimization, literature references, sequence references, structure references.
 +
 +
====Question7:====
 +
 +
Do you have any other suggestions how the usability of BioBricks could be increased by better describing them?
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
</div>
</div>

Revision as of 15:11, 14 September 2012


Contents

The Idea: Its all about standardization...

Text describing the idea.

The Survey: Integrating opinions and ideas from the community.

Text describing the idea.

Question 1:

Which iGEM Team do you belong to?

Question 2:

Do you use BioBricks from the registry for your project?

Question 3:

How would you describe the average quality of the part descriptions that you dealt with?

Question 4:

Do you think a standardization of the part descriptions could increase the usability of BioBricks in the future?

Question 5:

We propose to use a standardized form for the part descriptions of BioBricks in the Parts Registry similar to the following: [http://partsregistry.org/Part:BBa_K801999:Design].
Would you like to use such a standardized template providing a structure in the source code that just needs to be completed?

Question 6:

Do you have suggestions what kind of additional information should be included in the standardized part descriptions? So far the following information are included: * keywords, abbreviations, other versions of the BioBrick, RFC standard, deleted restriction sites, truncations of the nucleotidesequence - if coding for proteins * amino acid replacements, posttranslational modifications, enzymatic activities, cytotoxicity, source of the construct, originating organism, codonoptimization, literature references, sequence references, structure references.

Question7:

Do you have any other suggestions how the usability of BioBricks could be increased by better describing them?







Retrieved from "http://2012.igem.org/Team:TU_Munich/Results/BBF_RFC25"