Top > JACIII > Cultivation of Synthetic Biology with the iGEM Competition

single-jc.php

JACIII Vol.17 No.2 pp. 161-166
doi: 10.20965/jaciii.2013.p0161
(2013)

Review:

Views over last 60 days: 1,408

Cultivation of Synthetic Biology with the iGEM Competition

Thiprampai Thamamongood*1, Nathaniel Z. L. Lim*2,
Trevor Y.H. Ho*2, Shotaro Ayukawa*3, Daisuke Kiga*4,
and King L. Chow*2

*1Department of Biological Information, Tokyo Institute of Technology, J2-1707, 4259 Nagatsuta-cho, Midori-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa 226-8503, Japan

*2Division of Life Science, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong

*3Education Academy of Computational Life Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 4259 Nagatsuta-cho, Midori-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa 226-8501, Japan

*4Department of Computational Intelligence and Systems Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, J2-1707, 4259 Nagatsuta-cho, Midori-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa 226-8503, Japan

Received:
December 24, 2012
Accepted:
January 8, 2013
Published:
March 20, 2013
Creative Commons License
Keywords:
iGEM, synthetic biology, BioBrick
Abstract
The main goal of synthetic biology is to create new biological modules that augment or modify the behavior of living organisms in performing different tasks. These modules are useful in a wide range of applications, such as medicine, agriculture, energy and environmental remediation. The concept is simple, but a paradigm shift needs to be in place among future life scientists and engineers to embrace this new direction. The international Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition fits this purpose well as a synthetic biology competition mainly for undergraduate students. Participants design and construct biological devices using standardized and customized biological parts that are then characterized and submitted to an existing and ever expanding library. Overall, iGEM is an eye-opening learning experience for undergraduate students. It has made a strong educational impact on participating students and cultivated a future cohort of synthetic biology practitioners and ambassadors.
Cite this article as:
T. Thamamongood, N. Lim, T. Ho, S. Ayukawa, D. Kiga, and K. Chow, “Cultivation of Synthetic Biology with the iGEM Competition,” J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Inform., Vol.17 No.2, pp. 161-166, 2013.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] D. Endy, “Foundations for engineering biology,” Nature, Vol.438, pp. 449-453, 2005.
  2. [2] E. Andrianantoandro, S. Basu, D. K. Karig, and R. Weiss, “Synthetic biology: new engineering rules for an emerging discipline,” Molecular systems biology, Vol.2, 2006.0028, 2006.
  3. [3] R. Kwok, “Five hard truths for synthetic biology,” Nature, Vol.463, pp. 288-290, 2010.
  4. [4] A. Arkin, “Setting the standard in synthetic biology,” Nature biotechnology, Vol.26, Issue 7, pp. 771-774, 2008.
  5. [5] R. Shetty, D. Endy, and T. Knight, “Engineering BioBrick vectors from BioBrick parts,” J. of biological engineering, Vol.2, No.5, 2008.
  6. [6] B. Canton, A. Labno, and D. Endy, “Refinement and standardization of synthetic biological parts and devices,” Vol.26, Issue 7, pp. 787-793, 2008.
  7. [7] J. Kelly, A. Rubin, and J. Davis, “Measuring the activity of Bio-Brick promoters using an in vivo reference standard,” J. of biological engineering, Vol.3, No.4, 2009.
  8. [8] http://2011.igem.org/Team:Tokyo Tech
  9. [9] http://2012.igem.org/Team:Tokyo Tech
  10. [10] C. D. Smolke, “Building outside of the box: iGEM and the BioBricks Foundation,” Nature biotechnology, Vol.27, No.12, pp. 1099-1102, 2009.
  11. [11] M. Galdzicki, C. Rodriguez, D. Chandran, H. M. Sauro, and J. H. Gennari, “Standard biological parts knowledgebase,” PloS one, Vol.6, Issue 2, e17005, 2011.
  12. [12] T. Lu, A. Khalil, and J. Collins, “Next-generation synthetic gene networks,” Nature biotechnology, Vol.27, Issue 12, pp. 1139-1150, 2009.
  13. [13] R. Conrado, G. Wu, J. Boock, H. Xu, S. Y. Chen, T. Lebar, J. Turnšek, N. Tomšič, M. Avbelj, R. Gaber, T. Koprivnjak, J.Mori, V. Glavnik, I. Vovk, M. Benčina, V. Hodnik, G. Anderluh, J. E. Dueber, R. Jerala, and M. P. DeLisa, “DNA-guided assembly of biosynthetic pathways promotes improved catalytic efficiency,” Nucleic acids research, Vol.40, Issue 4, pp. 1879-1889, 2012.
  14. [14] S. Ayukawa, A. Kobayashi, Y. Nakashima, H. Takagi, S. Hamada, M. Uchiyama, K. Yugi, S. Murata, Y. Sakakibara, M. Hagiya, M. Yamamura, and D. Kiga, “Construction of a genetic AND gate under a new standard for assembly of genetic parts,” BMC genomics, Vol.11, Supp. 4, S16, 2010.
  15. [15] C. Lou, X. Liu, M. Ni, Y. Huang, Q. Huang, L. Huang, L. Jiang, D. Lu, M. Wang, C. Liu D. Chen, C. Chen, X. Chen, L. Yang, H. Ma, J. Chen, and Q. Ouyang, “Synthesizing a novel genetic sequential logic circuit: a push-on push-off switch,” Molecular systems biology, Vol.6, p. 350, 2010.
  16. [16] C. Liu, X. Fu, and L. Lir, “Sequential establishment of stripe patterns in an expanding cell population,” Science, Vol.334, Issue 6053, pp. 238-241, 2011.
  17. [17] R. Sekine, M. Yamamura, S. Ayukawa, K. Ishimatsu, S. Akama, M. Takinoue, M. Hagiya, and D. Kiga “Tunable synthetic phenotypic diversification on Waddington’s landscape through autonomous signaling,” Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol.108, Issue 44, pp. 17969-17973, 2011.
  18. [18] http://2010.igem.org/Team:Tokyo Tech

Creative Commons License  This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationa License.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Apr. 05, 2024