"
Team:Brown/Obstacles learning
From 2010.igem.org
What We've Learned
We faced many obstacles this summer and learned a lot from them, both as students and as scientists.
The Team
Brown's team structure is unique to the iGEM community. Unlike the majority of teams, we are completely independent undergraduate students. We do not have a PI or graduate students to continually instruct us in what to do, nor a lab that has years of data and background on a given project. All students on the team are doing iGEM for the first time. Our advisors are available to answer specific questions, help us solve critical laboratory issues, and suggest things to look into, but the entirety of the project idea creation, evaluation, and execution is our own. Although the lack of external structure was at times frustrating, it was immeasurably valuable in teaching us independence, prioritization, and organization.
Our team is also composed purely of first- and second-year students. This means that within the six-person team, there was a wide range of background knowledge. With such a variance in the level of knowledge and practice, it was often difficult and time-consuming to bridge gaps between members. However, in working through this, we learned to be not just peers, but peer educators, and in the end we all emerged as a cohesive team with a much closer level of understanding.
The Lab
The Brown iGEM lab is maintained entirely by the undergraduate team. It is a former prep-lab in the basement of our BioMed building. The lab space is very limited, and does not have the capacity for BSL2 work (we had to seek temporary BSL2 space elsewhere). All our materials are ordered and maintained by us, and we make our own stocks, pour our own plates, deal with waste, manage a budget, and do everything else associated with the upkeep of a laboratory space that often take place behind the scenes in larger labs. Through these challenges, we learned not just how to work in a laboratory, but how to run one from the bottom up.
The challenge of keeping everything sterile and clean in such a small space meant that contamination was an issue in many of our procedures. At one point, progress on some procedures was stalled for a week while we worked out the source of yeast contamination in our plates. At another point, our XL1Blue stocks were somehow contaminated with tetracycline resistance from an unknown source. Having to repeat so many failed procedures slowed our progress, but also allowed us to learn the protocols much better.
The Projects
We began the summer with four projects in mind: a "Cell Motility" project, an "Allergen Detection Device," and a "Miraculin" project, as described below. The fourth project was the Tat-PTD project, which, as documented on its own page, went through a drastic evolution. The team decided to pursue the Light Pattern Controlled Circuit only after about a month, when it became evident that the Allergen Detection Device was likely no longer worth pursuing.
Failed projects:
Motility
This is what happened with motility (um, what DID happen with motility?)
Allergen Detection
Discovery that it recently existed, cite the specific patent war
Miraculin
Difficulty in both finding and obtaining a suitable plasmid. Difficulty obtaining a 30C incubator. Difficulty transforming Yeast.
Valuable insights
In having to design our own experiments from the bottom up, we all learned a lot about protocols and experimental design. We learned how to run a lab, not just work in one. We learned how to work as a team. We learned how to be creative, and deal with the failure of our ideas.
Compared to our courses, our other research experiences, etc, this is not the level of success we are used to nor expect. But this is also not the average challenge we face. We are unique in the iGEM world, and in the world of undergraduate research at Brown. Our pride in our work this summer is not the number of papers we publish, or even the number of parts we contribute, but how we have learned keep moving forward when you face these difficulties.
