Difference between revisions of "Team:Wageningen UR/HP/Gold"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
<li class="menu-item"> | <li class="menu-item"> | ||
| − | <a href="#overview">Our | + | <a href="#overview">Our vision</a> |
<li class="menu-item"> | <li class="menu-item"> | ||
<a href="#Conferences">Design</a> | <a href="#Conferences">Design</a> | ||
| Line 160: | Line 160: | ||
<section id="Design"> | <section id="Design"> | ||
| − | <h1><b> | + | <h1><b>Design</b></h1> |
<p> | <p> | ||
After we decided that we wanted to work on a better solution fighting Varroa destructor we turned to several stakeholders and specialist such as beekeepers from the Dutch beekeeper association, specialists from the university but also the Design Academy Eindhoven since our strategy from the beginning has been that collaboration will lead to a better and more accepted technology. After several conversations with beekeepers from the NBV or Dutch Association for Beekeepers, it became clear that an improved product would meet the following criteria: it should be effective and specific, adapted to the hobbyist character of beekeeping and it should not interfere with the beeswax or honey. In addition Bob Mulder, the communication specialist of Wageningen university pointed out that you ‘don’t change the consumer, change the technology’ technology. | After we decided that we wanted to work on a better solution fighting Varroa destructor we turned to several stakeholders and specialist such as beekeepers from the Dutch beekeeper association, specialists from the university but also the Design Academy Eindhoven since our strategy from the beginning has been that collaboration will lead to a better and more accepted technology. After several conversations with beekeepers from the NBV or Dutch Association for Beekeepers, it became clear that an improved product would meet the following criteria: it should be effective and specific, adapted to the hobbyist character of beekeeping and it should not interfere with the beeswax or honey. In addition Bob Mulder, the communication specialist of Wageningen university pointed out that you ‘don’t change the consumer, change the technology’ technology. | ||
Revision as of 09:22, 6 October 2016
Our vision
From the beginning our strategy has been that collaboration leads to a better and more accepted technology. Therefore we have turned ourselves to stakeholders and specialist such as beekeepers from the Dutch beekeeper association, specialists from the university and the Design Academy Eindhoven. They pointed out the main cause of Colony Collapse Disorder namely the mite Varroa Destructor and therefore played a role in deciding which problem we want to tackle. In addition they also provided a lot of input on the demands of our new technology, continuously shaping our project during iGEM. For a complete and concrete overview of how the Dutch beekeeper association, specialist from Wageningen University and Design Academy Eindhoven shaped our project please go to the design page. During our project we got multiple opportunities to explore the boundaries of our project in interdisciplinary fields but also to work on team building with the help of the expertise of other students from different fields of study. Our collaboration with Design Academy Eindhoven has led to other design projects and in collaboration with Synenergene and Resource Wageningen we created a magazine of the future where we illustrated the techno moral consequences of our technology.
Design
After we decided that we wanted to work on a better solution fighting Varroa destructor we turned to several stakeholders and specialist such as beekeepers from the Dutch beekeeper association, specialists from the university but also the Design Academy Eindhoven since our strategy from the beginning has been that collaboration will lead to a better and more accepted technology. After several conversations with beekeepers from the NBV or Dutch Association for Beekeepers, it became clear that an improved product would meet the following criteria: it should be effective and specific, adapted to the hobbyist character of beekeeping and it should not interfere with the beeswax or honey. In addition Bob Mulder, the communication specialist of Wageningen university pointed out that you ‘don’t change the consumer, change the technology’ technology. We have taken this into account and together with input from the Design Academy Eindhoven, we have designed a system that uses a bacteria that regulates toxin production. It is called BeeT. A Tea bag like product that beekeepers apply in the sugar water just before the start of the winter. BeeT will, via the sugar water, end up in the brood food and transported to cells where bee larvae grow and where the mite is present. Inside the cell it will ‘sense’ and kill the mite. This will result in healthy winter worker bees who live longer than their summer counterparts, strongly increasing the chance of survival of the colony. BeeT will only produce the toxin if there are enough bacteria and only if the mite is present in the hive. Reducing the chance of developing resistance and thus taking into account the hobbyist character of beekeeping. Next, a mite specific toxin is used rather than a toxin that affects humans and bees as well. The timing of Bee-T makes sure it will not interfere with the honey. The system has two safety mechanisms: a light killswitch that destroys the bacteria as soon as it is exposed to light for a longer time. And a synthetic amino acid dependence that we have build in the system. In comparison, existing technologies use for example Thymol which is a pure toxin. Pure toxins are prone to inducing resistance if beekeepers do not use the right amount or if the timing is wrong. Thymol is not only toxic for mites but for beekeepers and bees as well. It has to be applied three times a year and does interfere with honey and beewax: making it taste like mouthwash . Interestingly the ‘do not change the consumer principle’ turned out to be an important input point. Rather than requiring that beekeepers would have to change the sugar baskets that they use (since some of them are not completely dark) we decided to do light measurements and adapt the system in such a way that the system would not be killed by the light of the sugar basket. A tea-bag like product is the most ideal form since it can be applied to all sugar-water-basket systems. The synthetic amino acid should be applied to the sugar water. The initial idea was to use an synthetic amino acid spray. Beekeepers however are not always able to confine themselves to a strict time schedule.
Conferences
Throughout the year we have visited a lot of conferences with several goals: to inform different stakeholders about our project and to collect input on the BeeT system through different stages of the project, to network with companies and explore sponsor possibilities and to have fun and learn some things ourselves.
Synenergene forum
In search for the right conditions for responsible research and innovation, this conference was organized by the Rathenau institute in NEMO science museum for all relevant stakeholders when it comes to the future of synthetic biology. Scientists, business people, policymakers and civil society organizations attended, but it was also open for the general public. The promises and pitfalls of synthetic biology were considered from a societal perspective during pitches, presentations, workshops and debate. We attended a workshop about synthetic biology, culture and religion, a link we had not thought about before. During small information rounds, we had the opportunity to talk to experts in the field. We also joined a plenary discussion about freedom and security in an age of synthetic biology. We enjoyed hearing so many different opinions and having the opportunity to talk to experts from all over the world.
Multi-stakeholder dialogue: the role of synthetic biology in energy transition
To broaden our horizon and understanding of the possibilities of synthetic biology, we joined a multi-stakeholder dialogue that was organized to discuss the role of synthetic biology in energy transition, by the Athena institute and the Rathenau institute. There is a general belief that something needs to change about the current dutch energy supply, and during this dialogue we brainstormed about how synthetic biology could be of help achieving this. We received a short introduction about synthetic biology, after which we were divided into groups. In a guided way, we generated ideas about applications of synthetic biology for energy supply, starting from future society-scenario’s created the day before. The nice thing about this approach was that one got to learn about the perspectives of people with different backgrounds, ranging from scientists to business people. It felt like we all started from the same page. The ideas that were most appealing were later worked out in different groups. Lisa and I worked on a scenario, “the green human”, where humans would evolve together with plants to be able to rely on photosynthesis for energy. Of course this scenario is very futuristic, but in our opinion exposes a very important aspect of both energy transition and synthetic biology: that the public should be involved, to be more conscious about energy use and more engaged with technological advances in the field of synthetic biology.
Collaboration
DAE
We initiated contact with students from the Design Academy Eindhoven to enhance the interdisciplinarity of our project. We met up several times and discussed about both art and science, but also where those two topics overlap. Their views on our project helped a lot in designing our project and adapting it to real life demands (insert link to design page). For a concrete collaboration, we asked one of the students – Thieu – to design our end product, BeeT, in a way it could be presented to future users. Our collaboration with the DAE did not only lead to us having a positively received final product design, but also led to our project influencing the design students’ projects (link to human outreach).
Synenergene and RIVM
Synenergene is a four year program to promote the dialogue about the future of synthetic biology between relevant stakeholders, contributing to responsible research and innovation. Synenergene partners, including the Rathenau institute, are in close collaboration with several iGEM teams from all over the world. Our collaboration with Synenergene consisted of two assessments: an application scenario and a techno-moral vignette. The assessments were intended to help us evaluate the viability as well as the societal impact of our envisioned product. We chose to combine both in a “Resource from the future”. “Resource” is the magazine and news website of students and employees of Wageningen UR, and by writing a Resource from the year 2030, in a world where Bee T is available on the market and ready to modify by laymen, we aimed to bring up ethical issues around synthetic biology in a way that is fun and accessible for the public. At the same time, the magazine served to spread the word in Wageningen about our iGEM project. You can view our magazine HERE! Besides, we attended the SYNENERGENE Forum 2016 in Amsterdam. Check our list of conferences HERE. Collaboration with the RIVM In the Netherlands, the RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu) is a governmental institute that is concerned with public health and a safe living environment. They both investigate the impact of synthetic biology on these aspects of our society, and aim to bring together existing knowledge on the topic. Part of their work is about encouraging a discussion about the development of synthetic biology from a policymaker’s perspective, which includes a collaboration with all Dutch iGEM teams since 2014. For this collaboration, the teams were to depict their thoughts and concepts about safe by design in a video, podcast or other representation. Additionally, we participated in a meeting organized by the RIVM and the Rathenau institute. We decided to make a movie that shows how safe by design is implemented in our project. In contrast to many other synthetic biology applications, BeeT is intended to be used outside the lab, in beehives, which is in really close contact with nature. To get a better idea of the viability of our idea, and what it is like to request permission to use an engineered microorganism outside of the lab, we chose to look at the questions that are asked in such a request (link to website of RIVM) and discuss some that peaked our interest in the movie. Some clever questions we did not think about beforehand: for example, how can a genetically modified microorganism be recognized among natural relatives? Some things we did not understand completely. There were a number of questions about how the genetic modification was established, and we do not see the relevance of this information. We came to the conclusion that it could be useful if the reason for certain questions would be explained, because we can imagine it would be easier for researcher then to select the relevant information to send to the RIVM. Another interesting aspect of the application of synthetic biology is responsibility: if our engineered bacterium would be commercialized, who would be responsible for any adverse effects? We are of the opinion that we, the scientists, are responsible for thoroughly and objectively investigating possible risks, and also reporting them. Companies in turn should monitor whether the technology is sufficiently researched. If not, they should decide to not commercialize our technology or stimulate us, scientists, to investigate/report the risks of the technique. Companies should also make sure that user manuals are correct and clear to understand, even to people with little experience with comparable technology. Users of the product, the beekeepers in our case, are responsible for using the product in the intended way only and following the user manual provided with the product. Assuming that every party fulfilled their responsibilities, the companies are responsible in our opinion. In conclusion, we think that companies should have the most responsibility: they must make sure that technologies they commercialize are thoroughly studied and that application of the product is understandable. Only if scientists or beekeepers clearly have not fulfilled their responsibility, they can be held accountable. Finally, we included some open questions regarding safe by design, in general and within our project, like what should be done to actually realize the insights that are gained on safe by design, and whether there should be more focus on the positive aspects of using a genetically modified microorganism when judging a permission request. The complete movie can be viewed HERE (it is in dutch). Concluding our collaboration with the RIVM, some members of our team as well as the other dutch iGEM teams attended a meeting organized by the RIVM and the Rathenau institute, with the theme: “veilig verder met synthetische biologie”, or “making safe progress in synthetic biology”. During this meeting, researchers, policymakers and policy advisors brainstormed, discussed and presented their ideas about how synthetic biology should be handled in the future. We gave a short presentation about the topic of our project and how we integrated “safe by design” through toxin specificity, controlled expression of the toxin and confinement of our product to the beehive. During a short information market, we got to talk more in depth with people who were interested, presented the movie we made for the RIVM and the Resource from the future that was made in collaboration with Synenergene. There were short “break-out sessions” where safety of previous iGEM projects was discussed in small groups, and at the same time two artists made a huge and beautiful drawing of everything that was discussed during the day. We learned a lot from the interesting talks about further handling safety in synthetic biology both from a political and a societal point of view. An interesting point that comes to mind was made by Sabine Roeser (professor of Ethics, TU Delft), about how feelings of the public concerning synthetic biology can be a useful source of questions on the ethical aspects of our work. She also mentioned how art can be used to connect people to synthetic biology. In our project, we tried to achieve this through collaborating with the Design Academy Eindhoven (hyperlink). Besides, it was nice to get to know more about how the other dutch iGEM teams handled the RIVM assignment. We thank the RIVM and the Rathenau institute for inviting us, it was an inspiring day!
This is italic text
National Meetup
On 21/05/2016 we organised the meet-up of all interested Dutch iGEM teams. Four teams took part: Groningen, Leiden, Eindhoven, and we ourselves. The meeting was divided in two parts. The first part consisted of every team presenting their project ideas with a brief discussion afterwards. After lunch the second part started: a brainstorm session. Here, we divided the group in 4 random subgroups. The groups got to know eachother a bit, and then brainstormed on whatever iGEM related topic they liked. Some groups decided to talk about what team could collaborate with what other team, some teams decided to think about ways to connect in a better way, and some teams thought about how to make iGEM more popular in the Netherlands. After some small presentations of the brainstorm sessions’ results, we discussed several ideas. Things that came from this discussion included: •a list with contact details and team roles of every Dutch team member has been obtained •the notion of several collaboration possibilities •ideas about shared sponsoring and funding With the discussion the official part came to an end, but some teams ended up ordering pizza and playing board games together. All in all, we feel the day was a success not only for the progress of our projects, but also for getting to know and connecting with our fellow Dutch iGEM teams. DAE meet-ups As mentioned on the collaboration page (insert link), we designed our project with the help of students from the Design Academy Eindhoven. Apart from collaborating with them on designing the future end product of BeeT, they helped us think about our project and its connection with society. We met with them 2 times: The first time, we visited them and took part in a design workshop. During this, we talked about our ideas for projects - at that time there were still a lot of ideas on the table. The students helped us realize what other “non-science” people think about synthetic biology. After that, we designed a lab day for them to see what our everyday life in the lab looks like. It was fun sharing our knowledge with them. On this day, we especially realized what kind of prejudices a lot of people have towards GMOs. At the end of the day, we learned what things we should pay special attention to when presenting our project to the broad public. Moreover, we were able to convince the students that synthetic biology is in fact something good rather than something threatening.
Media
We have contacted various newspaper and magazines to inform the public about our project. Not only did we tried to reach out to the Wageningen community but also to alumni, beekeepers, scientist from outside Wageningen and people who are interested in synthetic biology. Partly to receive input about or project and partly because we are just very proud about how our project turned out. We also proactively kept people updated with the help of a Social Media campaign.
Resource and Wageningen World
The resource is the magazine for students and employees of Wageningen University. They have dedicated several articles to our work. They focussed on the content of our project but also about our reach out to the public to raise money with a crowdfunding platform.
- June: General article about our project.
- July: article about our crowdfunding.
- July: Blog inspired by our project.
- August: article announcing that we will go to Boston with our project.
- August: article directed at alumni of Wageningen UR with a request to help with crowdfunding.
Bionieuws
Two times has bionieuws, a Dutch magazine for Biologists, written about BeeT. First a general article about the project and what we, as students like about iGEM. Second, an article exploring all the Dutch iGEM teams.
C2W
