Team:TU Delft/5 May 2010 content

From 2010.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Session 10)
(Session 10)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Session 10==
==Session 10==
Continuation of session 8 & 9
Continuation of session 8 & 9
-
<h4>1. Motility</h4>
+
<h5>1. Motility</h5>
Model system for motility:
Model system for motility:
* Many different proteins involved, so sensitive to mistakes
* Many different proteins involved, so sensitive to mistakes
Line 7: Line 7:
* Not realistic in time span
* Not realistic in time span
-
<h4>2. Magnetic Bacteria coupled to Styrene sensing and binding</h4>
+
<h5>2. Magnetic Bacteria coupled to Styrene sensing and binding</h5>
*Complex Mechanism
*Complex Mechanism
*Still many unknown processes, e.g. how is Fe3+ converted to Magnetite?
*Still many unknown processes, e.g. how is Fe3+ converted to Magnetite?

Revision as of 06:58, 15 July 2010

Contents

Session 10

Continuation of session 8 & 9

1. Motility

Model system for motility:

  • Many different proteins involved, so sensitive to mistakes
  • Uncertainties on how the assembly works
  • Not realistic in time span
2. Magnetic Bacteria coupled to Styrene sensing and binding
  • Complex Mechanism
  • Still many unknown processes, e.g. how is Fe3+ converted to Magnetite?
  • E.coli probably couldn’t be used
  • Model organism for magnetic bacteria, Magenetospirillum gryphiswaldense: Cannot handle oxygen and what is the growth rate?
  • Do we need the vesicle formation?
  • Styrene sensing: how sensitive is this sensor? Can styrene dissolve?
Nadine presenting the Magnetic bacteria idea

Both of these idea's were eliminated from the selection

Final idea elimination

The presentations on oil degradation and bacterial eye (the two last remaining ideas) were given once again by Hugo and Luke, and this was followed by a discussion and a vote in which everyone was allowed to vote once.

We ended up choosing for oil degradation (all of us!)

Bacterial Eye

Oil removal

Luke

N: Do or die

P: Good presentation value

N: Solubility problems

P: Break up into parts

Jelmer

N: -

P: Could also be split into parts, characterization of existing biobricks, if it’s too simple we could find more stuff to do

N: Complicated and allot of work. Does not feel qualified to judge on this

P: -

Mathias

P: Very Synthetic biology cool to combine many biobricks

N: Regulation and boring

P: All in parallel

N: Could go wrong

Kira

N: Not appealing, small

P: -

N: too large a project?

P: Great PR, money problems will be over, nice in parts

Hugo

N: No expansion opportunities

P: Biobricks are available

N: Time constraints (but we are with 9 people)

P: Money

Nadine

N: -

P: -

N: -

P: Parts that will work, even if others don’t, PR, experts in the building

Eva

N: When it goes wrong we have nothing

P: Nice project

N: Time

P: Nice project, good PR

Mia

N: Groups will be dependent on each other

P: More flexibility to try something else

N: Time, cloning problems?

P: Interesting and challenging, each group will be independent of the others

Pieter

P: Cool synthetic working with light

N: 9 people would be too much on this one project

P: Hot topic

N: Large, might not end up with a whole system, but at least a part of it

Allesandro

N: -

P: Classical synthetic biology project, opportunities for modeling

N: What are the modeling opportunities? (Aljoscha does see these: metabolic network, production of different compounds)

P: -

Aljoscha

N: -

P: -

N: -

P: Lot of experience within the university: in line with the TU technical problems Adding these different compounds make it a very round and comprehensive project

Ramon

N: Simple, small project for 9 people

P: Nice presentation in the end

N: Keeps everyone busy allot

P: Will keep everyone busy, if you finish early you could continue with “the rest”