Team:MoWestern Davidson\Sandbox

From 2009.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Survey)
 
Line 6: Line 6:
== '''SANDBOX''' ==
== '''SANDBOX''' ==
-
Psychology students of Davidson College researched public opinion of synthetic biology based on provided summaries of the field. Through paper and online surveys, these students collected and analyzed responses from two groups: '''members of academia and the general public'''.  
+
<div id="dtop">Psychology</div> students of Davidson College researched public opinion of synthetic biology based on provided summaries of the field. Through paper and online surveys, these students collected and analyzed responses from two groups: '''members of academia and the general public'''.  
There was an assessement of those in academia to see how much is presently known about synthetic biology and its implementation in course curricula.''''' Here are the results of that study:'''''
There was an assessement of those in academia to see how much is presently known about synthetic biology and its implementation in course curricula.''''' Here are the results of that study:'''''

Latest revision as of 03:14, 10 August 2009

Contents

SANDBOX

Psychology
students of Davidson College researched public opinion of synthetic biology based on provided summaries of the field. Through paper and online surveys, these students collected and analyzed responses from two groups: members of academia and the general public.

There was an assessement of those in academia to see how much is presently known about synthetic biology and its implementation in course curricula. Here are the results of that study:

caption

The open response portion of the survey revealed that fewer than the reported percentage of faculty members could display adequate knowledge of synthetic biology.

Surveys given to general public were used to study public opionion based on the influence of different descriptions of sythetic biology. Two types of surveys were disseminated, and each version included a description that catered to a creationist perspective and evolutionist perspective. The provided descriptions slightly conflicted with the prior knowledge of synthetic biology reported by the participants. Both surveys included a link for more information to clear up misconceptions concerning synthetic biology. this study show provide information concerning attitudes toward synthetic biology with citizens, and the potential of support for its addition in high school curriculum. There were also questions concerning religious preference to see if there is a correlation between public opinion and belief at the end of each survey.

Here are the descriptions provided on the surveys:

Creationist perspective- Synthetic biology uses molecular methods to create modified living organisms that have never existed before. These DNA-based devices perform new functions not found in nature. Synthetic biologists redesign and modify existing, natural biological systems. For instance, synthetic biologists can create new versions of microbes that make chemicals not naturally found in microbes. In many ways, synthetic biology allows scientists to redesign biological processes and create organisms not found in nature. Synthetic biology has the potential to develop technologies that could lead the way in the 21st century.

Evolutionist perspective- Synthetic biology uses molecular methods to construct DNA-based devices to perform novel functions. Synthetic biologists design, model and construct biological parts, devices and systems by engineering and modifying existing biological systems. For instance, synthetic biologists can produce microbes that make useful chemicals. Synthetic biology gives scientists the tools to build biological devices from smaller biological units in much the same way as an engineer constructs a building from smaller construction materials. Synthetic biology has the potential to develop technologies that could lead the way in the 21st century.


Data from the general public will be collected and anayzed at a later date.

Physical Modeling as an Educational Tool

We produced 5-base anticodon frameshift suppressor tRNA physical models intending their use as an educational tool. Because they are theoretical models and not based on NMR or X-ray crystallography data, we never intended them to be research devices. We will use our frameshift suppressor tRNA models to demonstrate how their anticodons would interact with a strand of mRNA and how, despite their modification, they maintain the structures and functions of other tRNAs. We hope to gather interest toward our models at iGEM and have the opportunity to share them with our fellow teams.

5-Base tRNA