Q1. Would any of your project ideas raise safety issues in terms of:
researcher safety, public safety, or: environmental safety?
|
We only used E. coli DH5α in all our experiments when required. DH5α is not pathogenic to humans nor animals and will not survive in the environment. The inserted sequences encode only plant enzymes which is necessary to made β-carotene and are highly unlikely to confer any harmful phenotype on the disabled E.coli host nor animals. Standard good lab practices were followed strictly in handling all bacterial samples, including wearing protective groves, working in lamina flow, autoclaving contaminated waste, bleaching discarded liquid cultures, and washing hands before and after experiments.
|
Q2. Do any of the new BioBrick parts (or devices) that you made this year raise any safety issues? If yes,
did you document these issues in the Registry?
how did you manage to handle the safety issue?
how could other teams learn from your experience?
|
No.
|
Q3. Is there a local biosafety group, committee, or review board at your institution?
If yes, what does your local biosafety group think about your project?
If no, which specific biosafety rules or guidelines do you have to consider in your country?
|
Yes. All bacterial or plasmid used have to obtain an approval from University's environmental and biosafety committees. Environmental and biosafety officers made regular random visit to each laboratory to ensure all laboratories are comply with environmental and biosafety regulations. So far our project has received positive responds from the committees.
|
Q4. 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?
|
Perhaps parts, devices or systems can be divided into two categories such as prokaryotes and eukaryotes and regulate under standard environmental and biosafety regulations.
|
"
