Difference between revisions of "Team:Duke/Description"

Line 22: Line 22:
 
<h2 class="head"> Project Description </h2>
 
<h2 class="head"> Project Description </h2>
  
 +
<div class="sub">Overview</div>
 +
<p>We wanted to look at applications of a phenomenon we discovered last year in dCas9 repression that when a additional binding sites are added, the repressive power of dCas9 decreases. We wanted to see what happens if we switched directions and attempted to read out the decoy itself. We plan on identifying how this effect changes with respect to plasmid copy number differences between the two landing sites. Early editions will likely use fluorescent proteins for measuring transcription levels, with hopes of making a dCas9 "IF" gate.</p>
 +
<p>But what about applications of an IF gate? One of the first rounds of ideas as a proof of concept of the system was to create an "If antibiotic is present, then trigger cell death." This is our hope for the project, but in it we found a second branch of our project: how to find a better death gene. The only gene candidate in the 2015 kit was not even a true cell death gene but a lysis gene. From there we made another of the BioBrick genes ourselves for testing but wanted to look at better alternatives for these. We are looking at a more deadly lysis gene as well as variants of the BioBrick antimicrobial peptide, Protegrin, in hopes of biobricking a gene without haemolytic effects.</p>
 
<div class="sub">What We Did</div>
 
<div class="sub">What We Did</div>
−
<p>We created adorable bunnies to terrify our foes.</p>
+
<p>We created adorable CELL DEATH GENES to terrify our ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANT BACTERIA.</p>
 
<div class="sub">Why?</div>
 
<div class="sub">Why?</div>
−
<p>Because we thought puppies were too cliché.</p>
+
<p>Because we thought ANTIBIOTICS were too 1955.</p>
 
<div class="sub">The Problem</div>
 
<div class="sub">The Problem</div>
−
<p>The lords of the kingdom were getting too big for their britches.</p>
+
<p>The MRSA were getting too big for their britches.</p>
 
<div class="sub">How We Did It</div>
 
<div class="sub">How We Did It</div>
−
<p>We took Professor McGonagall's transfiguration class.</p>
+
<p>We INFILTRATED THE PLASTICS.</p>
−
<p>Tell us about your project, describe what moves you and why this is something important for your team.</p>
+
  
  

Revision as of 13:09, 30 July 2015



Project Description

Overview

We wanted to look at applications of a phenomenon we discovered last year in dCas9 repression that when a additional binding sites are added, the repressive power of dCas9 decreases. We wanted to see what happens if we switched directions and attempted to read out the decoy itself. We plan on identifying how this effect changes with respect to plasmid copy number differences between the two landing sites. Early editions will likely use fluorescent proteins for measuring transcription levels, with hopes of making a dCas9 "IF" gate.

But what about applications of an IF gate? One of the first rounds of ideas as a proof of concept of the system was to create an "If antibiotic is present, then trigger cell death." This is our hope for the project, but in it we found a second branch of our project: how to find a better death gene. The only gene candidate in the 2015 kit was not even a true cell death gene but a lysis gene. From there we made another of the BioBrick genes ourselves for testing but wanted to look at better alternatives for these. We are looking at a more deadly lysis gene as well as variants of the BioBrick antimicrobial peptide, Protegrin, in hopes of biobricking a gene without haemolytic effects.

What We Did

We created adorable CELL DEATH GENES to terrify our ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANT BACTERIA.

Why?

Because we thought ANTIBIOTICS were too 1955.

The Problem

The MRSA were getting too big for their britches.

How We Did It

We INFILTRATED THE PLASTICS.

What should this page contain?
  • A clear and concise description of your project.
  • A detailed explanation of why your team chose to work on this particular project.
  • References and sources to document your research.
  • Use illustrations and other visual resources to explain your project.

Advice on writing your Project Description

We encourage you to put up a lot of information and content on your wiki, but we also encourage you to include summaries as much as possible. If you think of the sections in your project description as the sections in a publication, you should try to be consist, accurate and unambiguous in your achievements.

Judges like to read your wiki and know exactly what you have achieved. This is how you should think about these sections; from the point of view of the judge evaluating you at the end of the year.


References

iGEM teams are encouraged to record references you use during the course of your research. They should be posted somewhere on your wiki so that judges and other visitors can see how you though about your project and what works inspired you.

Inspiration

See how other teams have described and presented their projects: