Difference between revisions of "Team:Lethbridge/Practices"
| Line 78: | Line 78: | ||
<div><p>For the policies and practices portion of our project we focused on what the ethical implications of our project would be, whether the benefit would be worth the potential risk. We looked into current pesticide methods to survey their advantages and disadvantages. We examined off-target and non-target effects by ensuring the target sequences we selected were compared against the entire database of sequenced genomes using the NCBI BLAST program. We also spoke with various experts and had a panel discussion regarding the efficacy of our project from the lab to the field. We contacted major small molecule pesticide distributors to estimate the current cost analysis. Finally, we collaborated with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Health Canada to further explore the ethical implications of our project. </p></div> | <div><p>For the policies and practices portion of our project we focused on what the ethical implications of our project would be, whether the benefit would be worth the potential risk. We looked into current pesticide methods to survey their advantages and disadvantages. We examined off-target and non-target effects by ensuring the target sequences we selected were compared against the entire database of sequenced genomes using the NCBI BLAST program. We also spoke with various experts and had a panel discussion regarding the efficacy of our project from the lab to the field. We contacted major small molecule pesticide distributors to estimate the current cost analysis. Finally, we collaborated with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Health Canada to further explore the ethical implications of our project. </p></div> | ||
| − | <div | + | <div> |
<div style="float:left;width:400px;"> | <div style="float:left;width:400px;"> | ||
<h3 style="text-align:center;">Risks</h3> | <h3 style="text-align:center;">Risks</h3> | ||
Revision as of 02:16, 19 September 2015
Practices
For the policies and practices portion of our project we focused on what the ethical implications of our project would be, whether the benefit would be worth the potential risk. We looked into current pesticide methods to survey their advantages and disadvantages. We examined off-target and non-target effects by ensuring the target sequences we selected were compared against the entire database of sequenced genomes using the NCBI BLAST program. We also spoke with various experts and had a panel discussion regarding the efficacy of our project from the lab to the field. We contacted major small molecule pesticide distributors to estimate the current cost analysis. Finally, we collaborated with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Health Canada to further explore the ethical implications of our project.
Risks
The off-target risks of current pesticide use and our emphasis on preventing off-target effects.
Stakeholders
The cost analysis for current small molecule pesticides.
Current Problems
The issues with current pest control methods including small molecule pesticides, crop care and other pest control methods.
Public Outreach
During our project we spoke with a Fusarium research scientist, an organic farmer, and an agricultural innovator/reserach scientist about our project and what they do.
We also collaborated with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Health Canada to discuss the potential ethical implication of our project.
