Difference between revisions of "Team:Tokyo Tech/Practices"
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
<div class="textarea"> | <div class="textarea"> | ||
<h2 id="Introduction" class="smalltitle">0. Medal Criteria</h2> | <h2 id="Introduction" class="smalltitle">0. Medal Criteria</h2> | ||
| − | <p class="text"> | + | <p class="text">We think that the following 3 processes of P&P meets both of the silver and gold medal criteria.</p> |
<h3 id="Design" class="sub5">0.1. Design and execution of prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public <br> to investigate public concerns to GMO.</h3> | <h3 id="Design" class="sub5">0.1. Design and execution of prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public <br> to investigate public concerns to GMO.</h3> | ||
<p class="text3">By receiving opinions from public, we integrated, into our project, a prisoner’s dilemma game played by the high school and undergraduate students, who are people outside of iGEM, to investigate the stereotype of concerns about gene modification. Since we received opinions from the public who concerned the sustainability, safety, and security of gene modification, we designed and executed the prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public. </p><br> | <p class="text3">By receiving opinions from public, we integrated, into our project, a prisoner’s dilemma game played by the high school and undergraduate students, who are people outside of iGEM, to investigate the stereotype of concerns about gene modification. Since we received opinions from the public who concerned the sustainability, safety, and security of gene modification, we designed and executed the prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public. </p><br> | ||
Revision as of 09:57, 14 September 2015
Policy&Practices
contents
0. Medal Criteria
0.1. Design and execution of prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public
to investigate public concerns to GMO.
0.2. Reflecting on our own conception of risks and benefits led to addressing social justice.
0.3. Our attractive project improved in accordance with comments from general public,
can strengthen the public engagement of a two-way dialogue between our team and the public
1. Introduction
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Materials and Methods
5.1. Construction
5.2. Assay Protocol
5.2.1. Protocol1
5.2.2. Protocol2
6. Reference
0. Medal Criteria
We think that the following 3 processes of P&P meets both of the silver and gold medal criteria.
0.1. Design and execution of prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public
to investigate public concerns to GMO.
By receiving opinions from public, we integrated, into our project, a prisoner’s dilemma game played by the high school and undergraduate students, who are people outside of iGEM, to investigate the stereotype of concerns about gene modification. Since we received opinions from the public who concerned the sustainability, safety, and security of gene modification, we designed and executed the prisoner’s dilemma game played by the public.
0.2. Reflecting on our own conception of risks and benefits led to addressing
social justice.
メダル要件と考えているうんだらかんだら。
0.3. Our attractive project improved in accordance with comments from general public,
can strengthen the public engagement of a two-way dialogue between our team and
the public
メダル要件と考えているうんだらかんだら。
1. Introduction
ここにコピペ。
3. Results
ここにコピペ。
4. Discussion
ここにコピペ。
5. Materials and Methods
5.1. Construction
-Strain
All the samples were DH5alpha strain.
-Plasmids
Device 1: J23101 + I13504(pSB1C3)
|
|
Fig.3-7-4-1. |
5.2. Assay Protocol
5.2.1. Protocol1
1. コピペ。
2. コピペ。
3. コピペ。
4. コピペ。
5. コピペ。
6. コピペ。
7. コピペ。
8. コピペ。
9. コピペ。
6.. Reference
ここにコピペ。