Team:Calgary/Project/Achievements

From 2010.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 135: Line 135:
<ul>
<ul>
-
<li>Through our characterization data, we showed that several of our parts worked as expected. Click <a href="http://2010.igem.org/Team:Calgary/Parts/Characterization"> here</a> for more information.
+
<li>Using various methods of characterization, we confirmed that our CpxR reporter circuit was functional. In adition, our maltose binding protein (MalE) and mutant maltose binding protein (MalE31) were shown to be functionalClick <a href="http://2010.igem.org/Team:Calgary/Parts/Characterization"> here</a> for more information.</li>
-
<p>The CpxR reporter was found  to report on  misfolding protein.  We characterized this promoter with varying concentrations of folding and misfolding proteins produced which we assumed is correlated to arabinose concentrations due to the use of AraC promoter.  We also tested this promoter with NlpE, an outer membrane lipoprotein that literature has found activates the Cpx pathway.  Finally, we tested this promoter in varying temperature to produce a heat shock response.</p></li>
+
<table>
<table>
<tr>
<tr>
Line 144: Line 143:
</table>
</table>
-
<li>Both MalE and MalE31 also worked as expected, malE folding in the periplasm and malE31 showing a misfolding response.  This was indicated  through testing with a reporter from another lab (Raivio) (for more info click here) as well as tetsing with our cpxR reporter click here.</li>
+
<li>The CpxR reporter, MalE31, and MalE were shown to be functional through characterization. Click <a href="http://2010.igem.org/Team:Calgary/Parts/Parts"> here</a> for more information.</li>
-
 
+
-
<li>We characterized the cpxR reporter, malE31, MalE and IbpAB.  See characterization data here.</li></ul>
+
<h2 style="color:#0066CC">Gold Medal Requirements</h2>
<h2 style="color:#0066CC">Gold Medal Requirements</h2>
Line 158: Line 155:
<ul>  
<ul>  
-
<li>we entered new DNA as well as new sequences for malE and malE31.</li>
+
<li>MalE and MalE31 were in the Registry of Standard Parts but were shown to have incorrect information. We submitted DNA and updated what was already present. The information can be found <a href="http://2010.igem.org/Team:Calgary/Parts/Parts_Submitted"> here</a> </li>
-
<li>we entered characterization data for the CpxR promoter.</li>
+
<li>More characterization was given to the Registry of Standard Parts on the CpxR promoter.</li>
</ul>
</ul>
Line 170: Line 167:
<ul>
<ul>
-
<li>We tested out a part for Lethbridge.  We characterized it for possible misfolding in the cytoplasm.  Results can be found here.</li>
+
<li>We tested out a part (nms6) for the University of Lethbridge.  We assayed it for possible misfolding in the cytoplasm.  Results can be found <a href="http://2010.igem.org/Team:Calgary/Parts/Characterization"> here</a>.</li>
-
 
+
-
<li>We also attended a regional workshop as well as a mock iGEM event with the University of Alberta as well as the University of Lethbridge. Here we helped each their out with our projects by practicing our presentations for each other, giving suggestions, future directions as well as troubleshooting</li>
+
-
<li>Finally our team filled out surveys for the following teams:</li>
+
<li> We attended an Alberta-wide conference where teams from the University of Calgary, the University of Lethbridge, and the University of Alberta did mock presentations, gave each other future directions, and gave possible troubleshooting methods.</li>
 +
<li>We filled out surveys for the University of Warsaw and the University of Edinburgh iGEM teams</li>
<li>This year we chose to approach ethics by making a podscasts covering a few different ethical issues pertaining to synthetic biology.  We felt tat this would be a novel way to increase awareness about the field of synthetic biology while having a discussion of important issues.  We felt that this would be a much more accessible way for the public to gain a better understanding of what the real fears in synthetic biology is as well as to dispel some of the misleading impressions given by media sources.</li>
<li>This year we chose to approach ethics by making a podscasts covering a few different ethical issues pertaining to synthetic biology.  We felt tat this would be a novel way to increase awareness about the field of synthetic biology while having a discussion of important issues.  We felt that this would be a much more accessible way for the public to gain a better understanding of what the real fears in synthetic biology is as well as to dispel some of the misleading impressions given by media sources.</li>

Revision as of 02:04, 28 October 2010

Achievements

Bronze Medal Requirements

Register the team
Successfully complete and submit a project summary form
Create a Wiki which includes all the details of the project
Present a presentation and a poster at the iGEM Jamboree

Please see our
Parts page here.
Enter information detailing at least one new standard BioBrick Part or Device in the Registry of Parts

Please see our
Parts page here.
Submit DNA for at least one new BioBrick Part or Device to the Registry of Parts

Silver Medal Requirements

Demonstrate that one of your parts works as expected

  • Using various methods of characterization, we confirmed that our CpxR reporter circuit was functional. In adition, our maltose binding protein (MalE) and mutant maltose binding protein (MalE31) were shown to be functionalClick here for more information.
  • Characterize the operation of at least one new BioBrick Part or Device and enter this information on the Parts or Device page via the Registry of Parts

  • The CpxR reporter, MalE31, and MalE were shown to be functional through characterization. Click here for more information.
  • Gold Medal Requirements

    Characterize or improve an existing BioBrick Part or Device and enter this information back on the Registry

    • MalE and MalE31 were in the Registry of Standard Parts but were shown to have incorrect information. We submitted DNA and updated what was already present. The information can be found here
    • More characterization was given to the Registry of Standard Parts on the CpxR promoter.

    Help another iGEM team by, for example, characterizing a part, debugging a construct, or modeling or simulating their system

    • We tested out a part (nms6) for the University of Lethbridge. We assayed it for possible misfolding in the cytoplasm. Results can be found here.
    • We attended an Alberta-wide conference where teams from the University of Calgary, the University of Lethbridge, and the University of Alberta did mock presentations, gave each other future directions, and gave possible troubleshooting methods.
    • We filled out surveys for the University of Warsaw and the University of Edinburgh iGEM teams
    • This year we chose to approach ethics by making a podscasts covering a few different ethical issues pertaining to synthetic biology. We felt tat this would be a novel way to increase awareness about the field of synthetic biology while having a discussion of important issues. We felt that this would be a much more accessible way for the public to gain a better understanding of what the real fears in synthetic biology is as well as to dispel some of the misleading impressions given by media sources.