Team:British Columbia/Medal

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)

Revision as of 03:51, 2 October 2012

British Columbia - 2012.igem.org

Bronze Medal Requirements

Register the team, have a great summer, and plan to have fun at the Regional Jamboree.
Successfully complete and submit this iGEM 2012 Judging form.
Create and share a Description of the team's project using the iGEM wiki and the team's parts using the Registry of Standard Biological Parts.
Plan to present a Poster and Talk at the iGEM Jamboree.
Enter information detailing at least one new standard BioBrick Part or Device in the Registry of Standard Biological Parts. Including:
1. Primary nucleic acid sequence
2. Description of function
3. Authorship
4. Safety notes, if relevant
5. Acknowedgment of sources and references
Submit DNA for at least one new BioBrick Part or Device to the Registry.

Silver Medal Requirements

Demonstrate that at least one new BioBrick Part or Device of your own design and construction works as expected; characterize the operation of your new part/device.
Enter this information and other documentation on the part's 'Main Page' section of the Registry
Part Number(s): , , , , , , ,

Gold Medal Requirements

Help another iGEM team by characterizing their DszA biobrick part.
Outline and detail a new approach to an issue of Human Practice in synthetic biology as it relates to your project: A Guide to Patents for iGEM - Ownership, Sharing and Innovation.

Eligibility for Special Prizes

Best Human Practice Advance:

IP survey and guide: We designed and administered an intellectual property survey to gather high impact data from more than 380 members of the iGEM community. The information was useful to other iGEMers, such as Team INSA Lyon who cited the majority of our data for their human practice. Our team also engaged people outside of the iGEM community, such as a patent agent, patent lawyer, University of British Columbia University-Industry Liaison Office and technical experts. The end result, with use of feedback from experts and other iGEM teams, was an intellectual property guide geared specifically towards the iGEM competition.

Assessing the industrial relevance of our research: We went to the Chevron refinery in Burnaby, British Columbia and talked to an industry professional about the processes and costs pertinent to our project. We also communicated with Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures (AITF) and Oil Sands Leadership Initiative (OSLI) to discuss the progress of our project and obtain some industrial insights.

Best Model:

Consortia Model: To model the population dynamics of our engineered consortia, we used wet lab data to improve the accuracy. Our model improves on the two-organism consortia model found in literature by simulating the significantly more complex synthetic three-organism community, which has not yet been done to our knowledge. Furthermore, our model was designed to be easily adaptable to any consortia experiment in general.

Pathway Model: Our distributed pathway model streamlines and informs future consortia project planning. Our model explained experimental observations found in literature of synergistic pathways in consortia and demonstrated that distributed metabolisms, like the one we are engineering, occur in nature. This model helps investigators probe for possible new metabolisms derived from combining different organisms with different metabolic capacities.

Best Foundational Advance:

Team Accomplishments

Inter-Team Collaborations

Calgary

TU Munich:
We participated in TU Munich's survey on the improvement of part descriptions.

INSA Lyon:
INSA Lyon cited our Intellectual Property survey results and provided feedback on our patent guide.

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 <b>IP survey and guide:</b> We designed and administered an <a href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:British_Columbia/Patent">intellectual property survey</a> to gather high impact data from more than 380 members of the iGEM community. The information was useful to other iGEMers, such as Team INSA Lyon who cited the majority of our data for their human practice. Our team also engaged people outside of the iGEM community, such as a patent agent, patent lawyer, University of British Columbia University-Industry Liaison Office and technical experts.  The end result, with use of feedback from experts and other iGEM teams, was an <a href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:British_Columbia/Human_Practices/IP_FAQ">intellectual property guide</a> geared specifically towards the iGEM competition.</br>
 </br>
-<b>Assessing the industrial relevance of our research:</b> We went to the Chevron refinery in Burnaby, British Columbia and talked to an industry professional about the processes and costs pertinent to our project. We also communicated with Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures (AITF) and Oil Sands Leadership Initiative (OSLI) to discuss the progress of our project and obtain some industrial insights.</br></br>
+<b>Assessing the industrial relevance of our research:</b> We went to the Chevron refinery in Burnaby, British Columbia and talked to an industry professional about the processes and costs pertinent to our project. We also communicated with Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures (AITF) and Oil Sands Leadership Initiative (OSLI) to discuss the progress of our project and obtain some <a href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:British_Columbia/Industry">industrial insights</a>.</br></br>
 <font face=arial narrow size=3><b>Best Model:</b></font></br><font face=arial narrow></br>
-<b>Consortia Model:</b> To model the population dynamics of our engineered consortia, we used wet lab data to improve the accuracy.  Our model improves on the two-organism consortia model found in literature by simulating the significantly more complex synthetic three-organism community, which has not yet been done to our knowledge. Furthermore, our model was designed to be easily adaptable to any consortia experiment in general.</br>
+<b>Consortia Model:</b> To model the population dynamics of our engineered consortia, we used wet lab data to improve the accuracy.  Our <a href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:British_Columbia/Consortia">model</a> improves on the two-organism consortia model found in literature by simulating the significantly more complex synthetic three-organism community, which has not yet been done to our knowledge. Furthermore, our model was designed to be easily adaptable to any consortia experiment in general.</br>
 </br>
-<b>Pathway Model:</b> Our distributed pathway model streamlines and informs future consortia project planning. Our model explained experimental observations found in literature of synergistic pathways in consortia and demonstrated that distributed metabolisms, like the one we are engineering, occur in nature. This model helps investigators probe for possible new metabolisms derived from combining different organisms with different metabolic capacities.
+<b>Pathway Model:</b> Our <a href="https://2012.igem.org/Team:British_Columbia/Pathway">distributed pathway model</a> streamlines and informs future consortia project planning. Our model explained experimental observations found in literature of synergistic pathways in consortia and demonstrated that distributed metabolisms, like the one we are engineering, occur in nature. This model helps investigators probe for possible new metabolisms derived from combining different organisms with different metabolic capacities.
 </br></br>
 <font face=arial narrow size=3><b>Best Foundational Advance:</b></font></br>